APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 941 
No. 241. 
The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. 
{Telegraphic.] 
FOREIGN OFFICE, March 18, 1892. 
Her Majesty’s Government have had under their consideration, and 
have consulted the Governor-General of Canada in regard to, the argu- 
ments in favour of arenewal of the modus vivendi of last year, contained 
in Mr. Wharton’s note of the 8th instant, the substance of which is 
given in your telegram of that day. The necessity of reference to 
Ottawa has caused a delay in returning an answer. 
The information which has reached Her Majesty’s Government does 
not lead them to believe that, in order to prevent an undue diminution 
of the number of fur-seals, any necessity exists for the suspension of 
sealing for another year. 
Beyond this question, however, I understand that the Government of 
the United States consider that, should free sealing be permitted this 
year, and the United States claim to jurisdiction in Behring’s Sea be 
upheld by the Arbitrators, they have a right to be protected from the 
loss that they will have suffered by the sealing operations. 
160 Her Majesty’s Government do not dispute that there will be 
some foundation for this contention when the Arbitration Agree- 
ment has been ratified. 
But there is this defect in the prohibition of all sealing as a remedy, 
that if the British contention shall be upheld by the Arbitrators, there 
may be ground for complaint on the part of the British sealers who will 
have been excluded from Belring’s Sea. 
Further, no security exists that the Arbitrators will have given their 
decision before the sealing season of 1895 arrives. 
As you are aware, there has been an arbitration pending for four 
years between this country, the United States, and Portugal, which is 
not yet approaching conclusion. 
Serious damage would be caused to the sealing industry by a suspen- 
sion of hunting for a prolonged period. 
As a more equitable arrangement, might it not be agreed that sealing- 
vessels shall be at liberty to hunt in Behring’s Sea on condition that 
security is given by the owner of each vessel for satisfying the award 
of damages, if any, which the Arbitrators may eventually pronounce? 
No. 249, 
Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. 
[Telegraphic. ] 
DOWNING STREET, March 18, 1892. 
Please direct the proper port authority at all harbours on the Pacifie 
coast to inform owners who are clearing or have cleared this year for 
Behring’s Sea that her Majesty’s Government and the United States 
Government have agreed, subject to the ratification of the Senate, to 
submit to arbitration the question whether sealers have a right, with- 
out permission of the United States, to seal in the eastern half of Beh- 
ring’s Sea, east of the Russian line, and that it is possible the sentence 
