le a 
een asso. . See 
APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 947 
the prevalent belicf, that Great Britain’s refusal to preserve the status 
quo of the property, and her insistance on continuance of pelagic sealing 
during the arbitration, to the injury of the rights of the United States, 
largely defeats the object for which the Treaty was made. 
The note ends with the following words: “The President directs me 
to say, in conclusion, that the modus vivendi of last year is the least 
that this Government can accept. In reason, the restraints after a 
Treaty of Arbitration should be more absolute, not less. He does not 
desire to protract the discussion, and having now, in the most friendly 
spirit, submitted the considerations which support the just demand of 
this Government, that the property which is now the subject of 
165 = an agreed arbitration shall not be subject to spoliation pending 
the abitration, he expresses the hope that Lord Salisbury will 
give a prompt and friendly assent to the renewal of the modus vivendi. 
The President will hear with regret that Her Majesty’s Government 
continues to assert a right to deal with this Subject precisely as if no 
provision had been made tor the settlement of the dispute; and in that 
event, this Government, as has already been pointed out, will be com- 
pelled to deal with the subject upon the same basis, and to use every 
means in its power to protect from destruction or serious injury property 
and jurisdictional rights which it has long claimed and enjoyed.” 
The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. 
(Telegraphic. ] 
FOREIGN OFFICE, March 26, 1892. 
In reply to your telegram of the 25rd instant. 
Notice has been given to the owners of ships sailing for Behring’s Sea, 
that both the Agreements which are at present under discussion between 
xreat Britain and the United States—that as to Arbitration and that 
as to an intermediate arrangement—may affect the liberty of sealing in 
Behring’s Sea. They have, therefore, notice of their liability to possible 
interruption, and will sail subject to that notice. 
The question of time is not, therefore, urgent. 
Inform President that we concur in thinking that when the Treaty 
shall have been ratified there will arise a new state of things. Untilit 
is ratified our conduct is governed by the language of your note of the 
14th June, 1890. But when it is ratified both parties must admit that 
contingent rights have become vested in the other, which both desire 
to protect. 
We think that the prohibition of sealing, if it stands alone, will be 
unjust to British sealers, if the decision of the Arbitrators should be 
adverse to the United States. Weare, however, willing when the Treaty 
has been ratified, to agree to an arrangement similar to that of last year, 
if the United States will consent that the Arbitrators should, in the 
event of a decision adverse to the United States, assess the damages 
which the prohibition of sealing shall have inflicted on British sealers 
during the pendency of the Arbitration; and, in the event of a decision 
adverse to Great Britain, should assess the damages which the limita- 
tion of slaughter shall, during the pendency of the Arbitration, have 
inflicted on the United States or its lessees. 
