frat be teat tome deny’ 2 PARP MN afoot iy i uf ve | , 2 sid a y \ iss rash , 4 4 Nee } ; SIRE BEM RUD igi ahi : MG $ Wi pie Hf i 6 p 7 ats erick Vans tae DAVEE Shs ESL iene fo A Here I - EEE aE, . Aisne i Generis eee $ nae d y Aol ef Petes pas axe : wie St} PEO TeiPies Og #i 3! Al o a He PAREN, stot abe tee? Bes Moret epee, ae oe, at ea ship es aS pu Re Sa rua une eptage ie Be, nevi i i) 2S OS a ae ion a et a es ek Ea - F ‘ she | x, Be ne WH, 9,28 . oe iin ae fe ca ie eM BY or A ar amas Si Soe Ate TAP BT Nd Mates: bho ie! ri met : iit Wnty é ty pees ke 5). n : ; ever te ea eee ay ee or PLAN A ta Jo eee Se A ‘ Byniklissa rent: ie ried riot ee A SM aes 2 i tg aa 7 tens: +; pitt peer ada Sh nh, toe ee Ge Rs ca ea a ths. oe Seon ae chi iN wal a s ¢ +4 4 i 7 vi : * 4 ‘ y 4 / i * uy - ‘ j . ) y) oat * me if 1) - 4 } 7 <4 se » ti ‘f 2 ; h Jed 6 ‘ “ab _— a) ie J . J it ae Vas + See, Lone t ih a ii} ; 4 af na FUR SEAL ARBITRATION. PROCEEDINGS OF THE [4 Cay TRIBUNAL OF ARBITRATION, CONVENED AT PARIS UNDER THE TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND GREAT BRITAIN, CONCLUDED AT WASHINGTON FEBRUARY 29, 1892, FOR THE DETERMINATION OF QUESTIONS BETWEEN THE TWO GOV: ERNMENTS CONCERNING THE JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WATERS OF. BERING: SEA, VOLUME II. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFIOE. 1895. Si Uris AL amb LRA TION. THE CASE. Or ae SNe STATES BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OF ARBITRATION TO CONVENE AT PARIS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND GREAT BRITAIN, CONCLUDED FEBRUARY 29, 1892. INCLUDING THE REPORTS OF THE BERING SEA COMMISSION, WASHINGTON, D. C.: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1892, es i a A, 7 * i ‘ oe. ex, sf =y 4 * =~. “. iy Pe < 3 7 ~ ‘ a fe Gar aa viene “etary: ae A eakil miaat) ste es bah ic ee ; PPS Cet & Stake FOB o = ry Abe - 7 i 7 7 os . - ¢ . i - pa ba = / hl E von 4 FS « = i -, ae: = 4 - BECTON Aa ws ivan ateavialt ai dag im Teh On CONTENTS; INTRODUCTION. TREATY OF ARBITRATION OF 1892: nS it Ven AE RCLeSD 52a tea aes aoe a Jol sees Mise. seas ae AG aha Ques EONS SM MGhe dy a ee ees ee. Ra Ue oie Rat aya Lg A J Resnlaions Tor provechon: Of Seals. 0. 2 20 J elke 22)-22s 2 Se de ee Question of tach maya be Submis tedss ase) see sas es a acl ee ee MOAUSVAVENO Ob NSO2 oa. ser oo ine See ee EP Maoh atte aa Seek ney a ae SPE OResIGN OF GC AMACES_ ayee sagas mete ooo 2. Te NS Ne INS fee, SWE aS Emiedse ase.On GhenWmited) SuateS. 222-242. Sse nat. 2 os... eee a eee vests (hil hs ORO saree 28 6 pete teeta sere Sek own woe eae ERC AL eae MENG GEBEO VISIT Ol CEORLY . 20 oes (eee or en ao. net eoee-See edt: Lose eld aE Joint Commission to investigate seal-life....-..........-----2---2222222 02226. ERED OLUSO le OMMNSSTONEISEE oe. eae ot ata. th Seis oes San Stee See ANDI OGTICUD Cee SANS SA SSIS Aca Sees Ata ierere sks a Sen ota es Pri See eg PAR heh ie sar. RELATING TO HISTORICAL AND JURISDICTIONAL QUESTIONS, GEOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF BERING SEA: Hocavion sound ALES ands cAMenstONGe= sss esse tose ene qe: eee erie Senatias means 4 tte acs See = een oe et ae eens oe oN cease ku woe nes Paster boundaryot Bering Seas-s-225 cesses ses 42 s222 case: ee eee Northern and western boundary .--.-.-----.2----2--2/: SSB eees se OSese Southern boundary peninsula of Alaska.......-.--..-------------------- HouuMemzboundary Alentiam lislamds) ses. e255 sae- -2 eee ose eee ee eee Binlavdumahertire seas 52500 55c5 205: 022% oct fet OR PL ts Ont MAL eeMpOcuOngveryrSiallLO wees cee st tans, ale ate nats oesicia a alee city eee Population, vegetation, and commercial products.........-..------------ Page. MONI BSBAWFP Ee wWW IV CONTENTS. GEOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS: Page. TL@CRINIOYN. Seas sagSa0 coes o260 sono eoeS Sods coocSS BBES Seas. coDemSESEr ooeEoDSeC 15 (GLOMpCOUsIsus Of Tour aS ams 22. ele ete alate a lee ae ee eee 16 (Shin Jt VEN 6 e555 5565055500 soc cog20500 decsss Faasocssosess550e 16 Sis Creo Seva Sebo seece sees ode secon conc cSones Sosase ScoosoeSsse 17 (Oia? UNEHNG) Saageeseee abcess sob0 coes Hagcosescncass asbedceseo soos Sous Pl \ elias Ibi 356686 eee5 seeps sau6 oocsco Seo she sasSenssesse osSSsu oes 18 JNDEGHVCE) OR NANOS S55566q 56560 sssech bobecs cop soo couboS cedSon odessa cacC 18 (ChTEHIG, .ogadoaspebnosonEesood Sosn UseoneasSss0 do otcpbaocad sodas cece edod 18 Amana witeys 22,5652 2o. Sais oes cee ce ee eer ee wevasahe [let Se eee ee 19 JONINA SINS oeooeeoSeno Ge65eD c60d60 2aSeco cSncce seed oSa5 0905 soSsusEnSOSOE 20 \WGEGUPRMORY bo5665 coeeos ospecd coggsa cocasd sosoocseeSon ssacadbsooca USSocns 20 DISCOVERY AND OCCUPATION OF THE SHORES AND ISLANDS OF BERING SEA: Perino s first Exped biONe . --csc wicca eee = ae Nee eae eae ae eee 20 iBerime/sisecond expedition ssereseer eee ee eee a eee eee eee 21 Resources of Commander Islands made known ..-...-...--..-..---..----- 22 Discovery of Pribilof Islands; due to search for furs -.....-.....-1...-.- 23 Cook’s expedition to Bering: Seassec 2.2.2.2 ssa acs eens eta eee 24. Subsequent Russian expeditions .<-<..02 2.2526 se)- cls See ee er eee 24 Shores and islands became Russian territory as early as 1800..----.-..---- 25 CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST OF AMERICA: Early competition for possession of coast of America ...-.......-..------ 26 Russian competition. Settlement at Kadiak Island ...........-......--.- 26 HO UTUGAIN OF WSUEE a eR Sere tee ere om = ee 28 British icompetitionieasssseeee seas eee see a eee eee 29 Spanish compebibiony. 25. sr —see em cee cee = ee ale i 29 Mhe Nootka Sound Controversypececse eee see eee eee eee 30 Treaty of 1790 between Great Britain and Spain...........---....-...-.- 31 American competition sessaee esses sere leone aa ae eee eee ee 32 This competition certain to result in international conflict .......-..-.-- 33 Tur RusstAN AMERICAN COMPANY: Its political and commercial importance,-2-- <2 - ~.s oss soos eee eee ee 92 Census:of seal Life impossible: 2220255204003 Scee eee eee ee eee 93 Determination of increase or decrease of seals .-......--------------- 93 neAlaskanvseql herd S. sn2o 5552.0 Nan aeiae, i oe cc eee 94 Distinction between Alaskan herd and Russian herds .......--------- 94. Does motimminele witheRussianherdessss. 5s) ee eee ee eee 96 Classification .--ceccas fe cces actos seis aie sae ee 98 ERC DUDS ae a.dslee odie setae Meee ap Sle iat be eee ee eee ae pie eee eens 98 Bir thitasses Seecreert ts ae oe Bes SS ee eae ae ee el ee ee 98 Inability tos wits. csecesses -aceeeans eee aot ee ee aie ease 99 Aquatic birth, impOssibleres. ace aoe easel ee eee ee eee ate 102 I bh yon. kelp bedsiimpossilblerseceeeeoetse 2 epee eee eee 104 Podding iz 22 sce os See eee ee eee ae ae ee eee ere teen eter 7 0D CONTENTS. VII HABITS OF THE ALASKAN srAL—Continued. Page. PG Oie One Gh | MME ee oN ey Soe SORE Rk os elk 105 LAGE ISTAME TE OHS UIT eae create SCE OE i AO ERE FA a 106 Wepre ube tromelslandses sacs eee ee yo oe AR) es 95.0 Bia Boat wn 106 HWependencemponugis mocberr:.§ 54a 25. sca eset ei tia eR 106 WEEN st Sea 1, 5S 2p Oe eR Fed, aa ary a oe 107 PEMD URL Ss 2 ee ener Se SEAL, Ly AR eI He ay pte Ss iota die « 107 AEE Viclh, atest am Csr eee seen ene SOE Bk aah coy to Geeta Al. 108 EVI OLR E Ne COM See eee 8 ee ee 2, ir hne Sk i ead 108 Oreanizabionsofat ie. WalGMs, 5-2 s6..05. ove g oS h0d joe oe sil Sd ewsty aad 2 109 BO WOrS OF [ELLY iz mii Giieme tines ars teR Ae ac Meat Micka! 2, 109 OID Tats etal aR ae seat SS oe a ne Se a 110 LPS YN Maas Se Ss ns aE pk ei ote 9) Ne ey ann OR ee Oana eee 111 Disorsanizationof the rookeries, . =... 2022222: . 22.2 bso os5 ong ck 112 We PaEEBEOVEEOMnIslinGs reat eee eee aan Ne, a eh dn yn ek on 112 ACNE Be ope She te Re Se a ar 112 ENE DEDE) C5 See scl Si pL ee RIE Sao ea yO ee 112 INR Bois SS SE BOSD SOSA Cee eS SS Sk mtn et ge REL FLOR gt aE On OE cag 113 Tee 60 Tie es se SEG Sees ke eae ean nee eae a a 113 ING er One rnp spats Dubie ote te a ae Ee aes 113 Wiomrishes) only her Onmmn pip eee ee tee er see Sey oe Ss ol ee ee ees lid Death of cow causesideath of pup-.:.2.- -25..s2< 2 ass cee See cee Mesimonyeot Amen canwuUnriens! 22-2 2) sea. +s 58 seo n> saree eee Examination of pelagic.eateh of, 1892... = J. .2 sso cok eesnees sess Westimonycol, pelacic Seal ersreacence nc == 5S 50- es seo cise co sees cesses Hxamination o£ catch of vessels seized .--..----.--...-----------s+-- DESsTEUCHONT Om preon anti TeMalesi==saier = ale see eee jee aaa ae aoe ee Reasonipresnanbtitemales aneitakenm=-.--2-.2-s2-4-eec- sesces- sce -- Destrucnlon orgnmrsim oy tema esaase eee ae eae ees ieee ae ee ioe ee Mead ipupeoncuhe oOOkerles=s menses ten eee ee ene ee eae eee sce. INoxdendipupsiprorto, (S84 yg. s2 seer: 2 ees Aas SA eee imeLoteappeakancemledead uplps mas: see eee oa nee ee eee ee Numb erroted ead spupseinel 89 lyse sas = ee Seen ate ee eee Cauiserots Geat neo ta Ue es seca se eet SS ah ok Nia 2 el ee A acti te Pe linects Gl pelwpie sealinmeas. 2 beni). 2mc%() act s=.8 a treat ok lars oa = PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION: ISH A FORDE WIOM. OIE TNS SERN Gone. acon soca coe Soaeenaae cane deoeeese alilandulalanas nase seccc Soke eee ee poet ct ns kt ees Seas IMIG ZACELER NG! Se OSs a Scene oee to niae SES er ieee ee ee nen arse ce tne CaneomGoodeblapersessane se ctar soe cio oet yee 5 ase meee eens eee BTLIGiIShEpProOLveciionmOim@udih=Seallee qetece eo ee Sera eee oe nee eerie Newfoundland regulations ......-......-...---- 2716 er a “+ t2ee x CONTENTS. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION—Continued. Jan; Mayen regulations: - 6.222 sessecsce- see sen sc shee sos etehe ceeee Concurrence of mations: 22.5 ssos256552 se aes e oes aS eee eee Wihite Sea reoulations 2.32222: 220s. 25222 See ee ee eee Caspian Sea Teculations: (8 - soss nate soem ane ee eee Hur-seal protection by other nations == ----- + ---- eee eee eee eee Lobos Islands \ss.22- 2.028528 55.0250508558! Sten te eS tee ee Cape Hom. oatsceest csc seas ese a ates ee ener Kurile Jslands. 225s tsch cote cee oe oe ee eee Extraterritorial jurisdietion: 2.2 o2.25'2.5.cs2 pec ee os Dee See iLrish- oyster beds A222. < oeet es ace oe eee es eee oe ee UES Rie Scotchwherrme fisheriesiactweeee se eres oe. eee = eee ee eee ‘Pearl fisheriestofeCeylones cacn sae sec ee eee cece nee Oe ene Pearl ‘fisheries: of Australias ...2252- = 2 o5)..ce ec eee = ee ee Brench lepislation &: 222222222 -4ee steve. feces ee eee valiant eos acl ones ae aes eee nee ten Se ee oc Norwepian-lepislation::: 5 2552226 .226e5o2 oe oes Soe Panama desislation’. 222 4-4. ooshee este ee ee ee eee Mexican: lepislatiom= 25263 — oe sci ee ee ee Other cases of extraterritorial jurisdiction .............-....-------- Alaskan, heidi ses 2 See. a eS ee eee Unprotected"condutionz=..2--. crease esas ee eee ee ee Necessity of its’ protection =. -=---25-.-2--------2-- ras SL eee eee nee The Joint Commi ssronmeeee cree eee ee ee ee ee eee British recognition, Sess Soe Meee, ee ee eee eee ee eee Opinions"of naturalists) 322s. see ee ee eae eee eee Professor dduxleyis 2280. ae ns Sok ae ae ene ee See eae Dr. Sclater ys Oe. 5 Sree ce = eo oer ee ea Dr, Giolwold 5. eee oo ee ee ee ee ee Professors Nordenskiold and Willjeborg<---_ 22 )------- se eee eee oe Other naturalists. 22432 2228 en eee Dr Allen. ts00 ss Se ec seth Seo Bec ne oe eee Oe eee Canadian Tecoguition. 4.22222 2.-5- seen oe ee eee ioe Opinions/of Mondonfturniensps=seseeese= eee eeee eee ee eee eee Opinionsiof EPrenchfurrierss 222s e) ee ee eee eee eee eee Opinions of American fiurriers ss-— sesso eee eee eee ee Opinions of pelacie sealers ==---=-a5- 60 oe ee ee eee Opinions of indianshumbersas-.- no sees See eee eee eee Opinrons ofotherwitnessesie-ce2 eee a eee ee eee eee Conelusions: 2. \:2i.25/-2se soca. oes oak eee eee eee CONTENTS. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION—Continued. Absolute prohibition of pelagic sealing.-.--.-...-..-.---.-- Limited prohibition of pelagic sealing.......----.-..--...-. IGLOS ISCASOMe ne > Sansa ete so a Peete She eee ee eee ee COE AVClOSe ScasOn AM prachicablelsase. qseseseee See ene eee esses Prohibiionsof UseroOt Trearnmsecs sco. see eee eens see eas oae oon Prohibition of pelagic sealing in Bering Sea..-.-.----.-.----- Prohibition of pelagic sealing within a zone.-.--....---.----- @ourse ofsealimo-nwessels)ses2tes aches nach saic cevsecenese ss see OOS UN DELIMNGiSe Maeno sear erica) fen a eae doesn are eae s Absolute prohibition of pelagic sealing necessary.-....--.--- THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY: In the past SOURCCHLOL SUPP l\maea eect ta Nec ete Sees CORE See Se Manrikeis sec sm ssests soe nce . San ae cS Se oS ee ee eee oe In the present SOULCES OMS UpPPlysee nee ence ce ee eee ae met aoe eceeee ss ees Dependence onkMlaskanherdes:= s.5. 422 0n2s-92-- 22s] cs Loss if herd destroyed Noss vos Winiie Oe Suabeste sas ereeem oa ate fee mes wee Sete HEOSSaLO Ge aur balsas a ees ete eee Seema eee eee Needtolmeculan supply Os kins 224.02 a228--- asses ee a= Frvestments : Canadian investments 16OOs eas. see ee ne ce ee Senn ee ~7ann Contrast between British and Canadian investments in i630 Rmployés in’ Canada andvuondon'=2-- =----2-.2+---25-5- ---—-- Value to Canada and United States..-........-.-.----------- Employés in Canada and United States...-....--------.----- Contrast between French and Canadian investments. ...--- - Employés in Canada and in other countries.-....--..----.--- Canadian investment questionable .-..:...--.:--.----------- Pelacicisealinoe avspeculavioncesa---o-45s5--4e52 262 22 See Speculating on small supply of skins............--.-------- Occupations ot vessel OnmMerssa sees = ate ke oe ee eee oe Results of protecting seal herd -_--......-.--------- tarred Results) ai seal herdimotprovected!ss- 4-2 4-4-4224 -1--55 soe CLAIM OF THE UNITED STATES FOR DAMAGES: Article V of renewal of Modus Vivendi .........------------- ClASSUC ALON Ol Gama Pesta. a= aati == =|) else ee Government claims....... (ho AN FEE) coe res, ST SES Da aE pe cae y TE SE GovicLnMenitanUolessCeSr eine sam sims ate ear cyte tare teenie oe Basis of computation of damages to Government. .....--..-- XII CONTENTS. CLAIM OF THE UNITED STATES FOR -DAMAGES—Continued. Page. DWE O88 COS - 2.25 seneeae eee eee aoe eee 301 Prayer ford ecisione =e 3 Ss see eee a ee oe ee Se oe ee Nee gee n 301 Russia exercised exclusive right in Bering Sea........-----.----------------- 301 Great Britain assented 25-2 4:..5.04'. ose oe oe tye Belt eee eee 302 Berinoe Sea not Pacifici ceanlasee jose cece cere een ee en ee 302 Rights of Russia passed to United States... ....... .s2.2< =<2-0- 2222 225ee er 25 302 DaMaPes. 2.0 foc se eSie eS ae siete fe Sse ce i ee ee 303 Great Britain and United States should concur in regulations ......--...----- 303 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. JOINT REPORT: PLOVISIONS Of treaty 22-6 ccciend cas mccyescosseeen Bee eee CeO n eee ene 807 Reporticccd sco sec'ssic den sacecsec sh esesne eee eee eee eee 308 Sources of information.-...... Tes en RCE eS aa a EN pa 308 CONTENTS. XIII Jornt Report—Contirued. Page. MSE GTS Oly COMMISSION cleo iags ale Sea ase cise Aas = = al et Age of puberty in cows .----..----------- +--+ ++ +222 25-222 rere eee eee 328 Age at which males go in breeding grounds......------------+------ 328-329 Feeding excursions -.-.-.----------++ +--+ --- +2222 er eee re cert ee eeee 329 1 Oe (01s eee ee ee See ARS SoSSb ec Cueto Perr menrr ooreceene = 329 Departure from islands...--.---------------------++++---++---++-2---- 829 Time fur-seals remain on islands ...--.----------------------------=- 329 Length of time of migration......---.-----------.------------------ 330 Accidental births on coast .-.-..--...--.---------.------ ---- ---- ---- 330 Reasons that Pribilof Islands are the home of the fur-seal.--...----. 330-331 Alaskan fur-seals do not breed on coast of California -..-..---.-.----- 331 Subdivisions of report .-----.--------------- ------+----+------------ 331 (ONDE RIT Rep baal 0oc socio nee sub ecoseusec acs] boes See eeoeroD Sane emarGonS 332 Present conduuioniesse ee se see tas se eciee eee ee eee 332 SOUTCES Of INfOnMabIOM sae 22s e eee celle onal =i sos. 18BY) Estimates of number of seals exaggerated ......-------------------- 332-333 (1) Evidence of eyewitnesses -.-..-.---------- +--+ +--+ +222 220-022 tree 333 Decrease on Northeast Point rookery.-.----.---.---.------ ----~------- 333 Visit of Commissiomers-.---. ---- <--- + --- =~ 2-9 2 new wm ee 333-334 Native testimony as to decrease .--.----------------------- cies = stefatea 334 The great decrease....-------------------+ +--+ 222 freee cere e terres 334-335 Extracts from testimony taken .-...- Giert ti soe TA OBae eRe SRE aeS 335-338 ’ Difficulty of lessees to obtain quota ...-.---------------------------- 338 Undisputed increase ....-.-------- ---- 222+ e222 eee ee eee eee eee eee 338-339 (2) Intrinsic evidence afforded by the rookeries themselves.-...---------- 339 The yellow-grass Zone ..---. ------0+ +--+ 2-2-2 ee eee eee eee ee ree eee 339 Worn TOCks'2.cebi sce ec cee ene seme cea 6 elles ele teeter ate 309-340 Bunch-grass Z0n6 .....-.----<- ------ + +222 eee ee eee eee nes 340 Comparative size of areas ---.------------------ +--+ +--+ ++2--+e----- 340 Decrease shown by rookeries......--..--------------- ------ ---=--«= 340-341 Decrease is in female portion of herd....--..-.---------------------- 341 Difficult to notice decrease in females ..----.------------- See eee 341 Difficulty in obtaining quota after 1887 ....---.---------------------- 342 Mistaking effect for cause .-.--------------------+-++--++ +2522 +2 ---> 342-343 Decrease shown by daily killing ..--......-------------------------- 343 Report of Treasury Agent Goff -...-.-.-------- +--+ ++ rere eee reer ee 343 CONTENTS. XV P Report OF THE UNITED STATES BERING SEA COMMISSIONERS—Continued. mt Why decrease of females was not noticed............--...----.------ 344 Dimimishedisize: of; harems) sss ose as Sees eee ee aie Sis Bes 344 Effect of decrease of females on male life .----..-2.2222222......2.-. 344 COUSESi ions te sen esas seco us cemase cosas ols Pee seeds te See eg ds 345, Where decrease of seals should be sought.-....---.-----...--...----. 345 Cause; pelacie sealing? s.s25-2-ohee nase ers Sees) Hoek ONO eae. 345 FREASONMS MOL, OMIM OUeees anes s eng siae ae Soo Someta Aeneas HE tere EP yagt s - 345 WEEE ASO CAISEG, Dye MAM sorters cca mst pao meray maven Sat oe ls HERS 345 Condition ofherd untouched by man o.o2 2252682 2 ss 52 seis esse ek. 345 Diniheraveande death, Laver cases soel sa soe ae isle Sey anes ae. 346-347 Man does not necessarily increase death rate --....---.......-......- 348 Peo Mb LOn OF tli gs 35 oa aeee se Ase) alsa see esi Fe8t i Leis) eee h ie ke 348 Interference with birth rate injurious: .....-2 22.222. -222222..625--- 348 Fittecion 2 single. young a yeOarese ts. ates ved Le aeldia boos JL. 348-349 How birthrate mays be: lessened'5..2 5 jessesestetlodse scotseese i lcci 5: 349 Killing a certain number of males will not affect birthrate .......... 349 Battles on rookeries show no lack of males ..-.....-.......-........349-350 Hestimony: as to noWack of males... 2202) 4. 5S esais2sh eb oak eae. 350-351 Decrease caused by killing females ........-....--.---- motte Sous BS: 351 Naturalkcondition, of herds SAjoo steht een Soeeeesee ee eae ae eee | 351 GIGESES! Of eMales esse tes sete miro wae Pee ee oI ee ew. Pa 351 @lassesotemall este saci sacer ft aia a= 5 vrais stray - EE Bs hbo 2 Mec eee 351 Oniwhatibimihraterdependsyasccrcasecie She sees she ose o_o Se 351-352 explanation Of diaerams sosceccocw ee couwss ce eeete stl 2 LBL EE 3522858 One reason females are killed by pelagic sealers.............0........ 358 Conclusions from: diagrams 2 vee eee 22 oe 2 CU eee eel 358-359 Erect. SHOWN) DY: GLAOTAMIN cacasinaae sacs cose wa tes ene os exe SOEMESL: 359 IROssibiliiyvior mes tuietiomimees saeeceis ass 29 See ee sane a os EE * 360 Class) of seals lllede es: oe. ccie seks evel eens Spy e ERGY PIAA eee, 360 ID TivaAM Oy soe ascii o sine cots See eRe Oe ee ROD eel BE0L867 (Kalliniopups fortoodeese.o.saose Seee Go. 5 = een ee ee 361 Cridicismsron manner. of GriviIN sen ee see eee ces nee soe. sees ae ees 361 Maile-seals not) njuredibyadrivimio,===. 2 Sees ees eae, Ses ie 362 RE AMAM PINON Yea ao rnce wc ea arietee sg aca ve seks ae te oe CUE 2 362 Seal killing at sea or pelagic sealing..-.---------- ins cease dan wetaae see 5 363 Vessels and crew...-.. Reet Oe ae = Sete Se Sh see eae eRe ares eM RES 363 Manner of hunting..---- Sere ee Pee Aero cera eee as ce ages = 363 AM OVG) ORT sem ee SSIS e CeO IOE IIS eke SEE SE ote eRe aie = SDR See aaa 363 Hridiaim AUMLSTA ls eset bees ooo see e aaa teed dant S024 eee uke 363-364. REE DOT yer ee sepa ee ee aie ee en aa woul se ak Belo s 2 2 ey ead aan 364 Destruction) of female sealsteee. setmes aoe eee ne ae ee 364 elavic sealers enter Bering Seas. 2224.2 :022..22 41. siege 364 WursimefomalesJoillod ahs Asoes o Bee See ees ee SI Io. 365 Pead pups on the povkeries: i 2stit 1eh2 Wee 2s 40S we lger ise Fels. J. 365 XVI CONTENTS. REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES BERING SEA COMMISSIONERS—Continued. cava Bering Sea sealing season .--.-------------------+-----+-----+------ 365 Gatchtof sealine: vessels: 25-- -<. =ee- oe eee lowvabiscrotebitiyrs Mallbbnee 6065 Abe scoccuan seco ndoads ssascssccaps seas5005 366 Percentage of females im Cate eee eet areola el i ee 367 Tetterof C.. Me Lampson! &Coeeec as. eels oee- enna cena 367-368 Opinion of Sir George Baden-Powell .....-..---..----.------+-------- 369 Me Wuond om lerad ey Sales) cere arate tere ate tere ave eee tele 369 ANSE) bt JIB) ocean eooess senso teno csdsonSnotoguescns baSsco sco sass 369-370 (Ghysehnaenoinoysyes) OWEN) eons a8 6 Cee Sen neo scosbSescUpsobos occa sSese 370 Percentage of seals lost .......--------------------+----+----+------ 370-371 Growth of pelagic sealing. -- 2... sa. 222-22 sei os en = 371-372 Comparison of sealing on land and at sea......--.----..------------ 372-373 Decrease of herd caused by pelagic sealing...--..-...-.------------- 373-374 Prohibition of pelagic sealing necessary ...-..----------------------- 374 Limited protection inadequate -...--.2 22225-2642 - 2-2 eae se eee 374 A zone of prohibition inadequate -..--.-.-- Peck ea seee eee Bees 374-875 Discrimination by pelagic sealers impossible.-...-.-----.-------.----- 375 Impossible to maintain a zone.-.-..-----------------+---+---+-+---+---- 376 IN OOSO EERO Saa5 bebead Scoopeo besa el o55e Sneees epeecu be PASE ESObO GSC 376 Bot ip mushpracticalily, prolate seca cee ae te 376 Other remedies of no avail ....-...----- SaaS: Othe see: cee 376-377 TRON WY dale IMIONGIE soa kcoaceoeesco beesog ye5s sono Secs esSSsGsssose Ssce 377 Progress of extermination ---- ---.------+----+-+------2+----+-------- 377-378 Raldsonuthe mOOkeriesieeeee nce see ere reer e ater eae eee eee eee 378 Comparison of raids and pelagic sealing. -.---.--.-.----.------------ 378 Recommendation as to management of islands.......-.....--.--.---278-3879 SUMMATY 200-200 202s s cece veces cows ones ena a oe Se ew nin nee eae 379 Conclusions eee ce eee ee ee ee ee ee eee eee eee 379" Sealsihave decreased tees sees cetet = ete ere ete te eee ene eee 379 Decrease caused by pelagic sealing -......------------ Se eee hd 379 Suppress pelagic sealing ......-.---.---+--- +--+ +--+ 2222-2222 eee eee 380 APPENDIX A: : Seals sink when milled in the water ao. aos eens ee = aerate el 881 Hiain-sealsis= 22 site sere fas ciss eee aa oes ed samo tat 381 Wur-seals’ . 2c 6 Secsio0 be soe aewae os pee a eee Ce eee oe ee eee ee eon ieee 13 Ghhet(21. |: Ree Seren OBACe SoReae AR ReS bons Sas Acqoocs corceone as none eaes 382 Mme peels) 6 ooocucoao ose Sada cacoce cos obo dsas Sasa ueeseeSscsscoc 382 Hairseals’ << <25ie. t6--oeiziS esac cele Ce ees cate eee eo ee 382-383 Reason seals sink 2222--o a. cos. c= s cice c= siecle etek he tae at toi= lin 383 APPENDIX B: Dates of arrivals of fur-seal at Pribilof Islands 1872-1891 ...-------------- 385 First arrival of bulls, cows, and pups at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, 1872-1891, inclusive (from the official record) ......-.-.------------ 385 First arrival of bulls, cows, and pups at St. George Island, Bering Sea, 1871-1891, inclusive (from the official record).......eeeeeserseeeees 386 CONTENTS. XV APPENDIX C: Page. Young seals are born on land or ice; do not swim at first, and can not nurse in (LE CTO rg Ri RR Oh RD lc ate OD ee ek 387 ME sealsubormuont lAandkOUlCess merece es cer see cines cae peel 387 INDIESINS.tMPOSSEDIGE IN) WALED A= 2.200) e= on Soc <2 Seni shys's onesies secs 387 Vounc sealsdread: then water ss. s4-5)cc 22h oo Swne Snes neiswers 205 887-389 APPENDIX D: NOUN Oe CRON EBs amar as hele Carsten wists: acisia a a:0 1a elayn = wis’eee ee sig micrelela.ei pore oes 391 blrepkalllerswihall ev eer te tere eo ere ite cus aie a si eicicie cleial aes aleie ae 391 APPENDIX E: HHOOGLO TRU RON Ui BCMA Ue stata cael er ea ai os es ee fos Ie ai ee egalalave sieloveeeseee ses 391 Contents of stomachs of fur-seal killed at the Pribilof Islands ..-.--..------- 391 Examinationmaderon Pribilof Islands’. 2255>----5-4-2225--c0-+-sec6 393 Contents omstomachswe ssc se cee ce eee Arete con ci ore co eeve crore 3 393-394 Contents of stomachs of fur-seals killed in the North Pacific Ocean.-....------- 394 Examination made atawashino ton, We: Case com acinas a co So sales es nie 394 Comin ts OL SUOMIAC DS 5. sibs pesnice siete esac ieee cioe sone tcescecce 395 Wonclustonlasito 1oodsand fecdinG@ yess eres soe ce cacislcrs secs ss ccecce. 396 2716 Ill nal anes ae 5° abshaigie Vee aL Ay tilert te aban age y : ‘exile haiege nae = Sadism ee pfs: P _. = i m4 M aa, i . CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. LNTERO DUCTION. The United States of America and Great Treaty of Arbi- tration of 1892. Britain entered into a Treaty on February 29, 1892, ‘‘to provide for an amicable settlement of the questions which have arisen between their respective Governments concerning the jurisdic- tional rights of the United States in the waters of Behring’s Sea, and concerning also the preserva- tion of the fur-seal in, or habitually resorting to, the said sea, and the rights of the citizens and subjects of either country as regards the taking of fur-seal in, or habitually resorting to, the said waters”; and they resolved, by the Treaty, ‘“to submit to arbitration the questions involved.” The first five articles of the Treaty, which is EES EST published in full in the Appendix,! relate to the organization of the Tribunal of Arbitration and to the preparation and presentation to the Tribunal of the Cases of the respective Governments. The articles which embrace a statement of the ques- tions submitted to arbitration are as follows: —<——— Vole pad 2716—1 Questions sub- mitted INTRODUCTION. ARTICLE VI. “In deciding the matters submitted to the Arbitrators, it is agreed that the following five points shall be submitted to them, in order that their award shall embrace a distinct decision upon each of said five points, to wit: “1. What exclusive jurisdiction in the sea now known as the Behring’s Sea, and what exclusive rights in the seal fisheries therein, did Russia assert and exercise prior and up to the time of the cession of Alaska to the United States? “9. How far were these claims of jurisdiction as to the seal fisheries recognized and conceded by Great Britain? “3. Was the body of water now known as the Behring’s Sea included in the phrase ‘Pacific Ocean,’ as used in the Treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Russia; and what rights, if any, in the Behring’s Sea were held and exclusively exercised by Russia after said Treaty ? “4. Did not all the rights of Russia as to juris- diction, and as to the seal fisheries in Beliring’s Sea east of the water boundary in the Treaty between the United States and Russia of the 30th March, 1867, pass unimpaired to the United States under that Treaty ? “5, Has the United States any right, and if INTRODUCTION. 3 so, What right of protectio1 ‘property in tl Questions su b- ; ght of protection or property in the | ener fur-seals frequenting the islands of the United States in Behring’s Sea when such seals are found outside the ordinary three-mile limit?” ArticteE VII. “Tf the determination of the foregoing ques-_ Regulations for protection of seals. tions as to the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States shall leave the subject in such a position that the concurrence of Great Britain is neces- sary to the establishment of Regulations for the proper protection and preservation of the fur- seal in, or habitually resorting to, the Behring’s Sea, the Arbitrators shall then determine what concurrent Regulations outside the jurisdictional limits of the respective Governments are neces- sary, and over what waters such Regulations should extend; and to aid them in that deter- mination the report of a Joint Commission to be appointed by the respective Governments shall be laid before them, with such other evidence as either Government may submit. “The High Contracting Parties furthermore agree to codperate in securing the adhesion of other Powers to such Regulations.” Question of fact may be submitted. Modus Vivendi of 1892. INTRODUCTION. Articte VIII. “The High Contracting Parties having found themselves unable to agree upon a reference which shall include the question of the lability of each for the injuries alleged to have been sustained by the other, or by its eitizens, in connection with the claims presented and urged by it; and being solicitows that this subordinate question should not interrupt or longer delay the submission and determination of the main questions, do agree that either may submit to the Arbitrators any question of fact involved in said claims and ask for a finding thereon, the question of the liability of either Government upon the facts found to be the subject of further negotiation.” On April 18, 1892, the Governments of the United States and Great Britain celebrated an- other Treaty, known as the Modus Vivendi," whereby it was agreed that during the pendency of the Arbitration the British Government would prohibit its subjects from seal killing in the east- ern part of Bering Sea, and that the United States would limit seal killing on the Pribilof Islands to seven thousand five hundred seals; and in Article V of the Modus Vivendi the following on ‘Vol. I, p. 6. INTRODUCTION. 5 question of damages was submitted to the Arbi- trators: ARTICLE VY. “Tf the result of the Arbitration be to affirm Question of dam the right of British sealers to take seals in Behring Re Sea within the bounds claimed by the United States, under its purchase from Russia, then compensation shall be made by the United States to Great Britain (for the use of her subjects) for abstaining from the exercise of that right during the pendency of the Arbitration upon the basis of such a regulated and limited catch or catches as in the opinion of the Arbitrators might have been taken without an undue diminution of the seal herds; and, on the other hand, if the result of the Arbitration shall be to deny the right of British sealers to take seals within the said waters, then compensation shall be made by Great Britain to the United States (for itself, its citizens and lessees) for this agreement to limit the island catch to seven thousand five hundred a season, upon the basis of the difference between this number and such larger catch as in the opinion of the Arbitrators might have been taken without an undue diminution of the seal herds. “The amount awarded, if any, in either case Printed Case of United States. Division of Case. INTRODUCTION. shall be such as under all the circumstances is just and equitable, and shall be promptly paid.’ In accordance with the provisions of Article ITI of the Treaty of February 29, 1892, the Government of the United States has the honor to submit to the Arbitrators, duly appointed in virtue of Article I thereof, this Printed Case of the United States, accompanied by the docu- ments, the official correspondence, and the other evidence on which it relies. The body of the Case is divided into two parts. The first part embraces a consideration of the first four questions contained in Article VI of the Treaty, and is introduced by a brief geographical and historical review of Bering Sea and its adjoining coasts and islands. The second part relates mainly to the fifth question in Article VI and to Article VII, and involves a consideration of the right of protection and property in the fur-seals frequenting the Pribilof Islands, when outside the ordinary three-mile limit. These topics will require a somewhat detailed inquiry into the seal life and industry. There will follow a brief consideration of the question of damages submitted to the Tribunal of Arbitration. INTRODUCTION. 7 Further provision was made in the Treaty of ,Futher, pro- : vision of Treaty. February 29, 1892, as follows: ArticLE IX. “The High Contracting Parties have agreed Joint commis- e 5 D sion to investigate to appoint two Commissioners on the part of each Sl Government to make the joint investigation and report contemplated in the preceding Article VII, and to include the terms of the said agreement in the present Convention, to the end that the joint and several reports and recommendations of said Commissioners may be in due form submitted to the Arbitrators, should the contingency therefor arise, the said agreement is accordingly herein included, as follows: “Hach Government shall appoint two Com- missioners to investigate conjointly with the Commissioners of the other Government all the facts having relation to seal life in Behring’s Sea, and the measures necessary for its proper pro- tection and preservation. ‘The four Commissioners shall, so far as they may be able to agree, make a joint report to each of the two Governments, and they shall also report, either jointly or severally, to each Government on any points upon which they may be unable to agree. “These reports shall not be made public until 8 INTRODUCTION. they shall be submitted: to the Arbitrators, or it shall appear that the contingency of their being used by the Arbitrators can not arise.” Reports of Com- [he four Commissioners named by the two missioners. Governments have united in a joint report upon certain points under consideration by them; and, having failed to agree upon other points consid- ered by them in their jomt conferences, the two Commissioners on the part of the United States have united in a separate report to their own Government. The joint and separate reports are appended hereto for the information and con- sideration of the Tribunal of Arbitration. Appendix. The documents, official correspondence, and other evidence submitted with this Printed Case will be found contained in two printed Volumes and a portfolio of maps and charts, constituting together the Appendix. The Volumes will be referred to in the Case thus: ‘Vol. I, p. 1,” andthe maps and charts will be indicated by the numbers marked on them. The lithographic illustrations will be referred to by the pages of the Appendix which precede them. The Government of the United States under- stands, however, that, under the terms of the Treaty, it may hereafter present ‘additional doc- uments, correspondence, and evidence,” and. it reserves the right to do so. Ee rad a Li I Pant IiNG LO BMISTORICAL .AND JURIS- DICTIONAL QUESTIONS. ee 2716——_2 vi ries = BAPE Fi RS F-. BELA LING TO. MIstORICAL -AND JWURIS- DICTIONAL QUESTIONS. GEOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF BERING SEA. Bering Seais the body of water lying between , Location, hound- the Arctic Ocean and the North Pacific Ocean. *!°?*: It is connected with the former by Bering Strait, and with the latter chiefly by the opening which is found between the westernmost of the Aleutian Islands and the peninsula of Kamchatka. It is sometimes referred to and treated as a great land- locked sea." Generally speaking, it may be regarded -a triangle, with the vertex in Bering Strait and bounded on the east by the mainland of Alaska, on the north and west by Siberia and the peninsula of Kamchatka, while its southerly boundary is formed by the peninsula of Alaska and the line of the Aleutian Islands extended to Kamchatka. It has an area of about 873,128 square miles. 1Findlay’s North Pacific Directory, 2d ed., London, 1870, p. 517- 2Unless otherwise stated, all measurements are given in Eng- lish statute miles, of which there are 69} to a degree. : i 12 SKETCH OF BERING SEA. The distance from Bering Strait to the southern boundary of the Aleutian Chain is about 1,078 miles, and its greatest width from east to west about 1,437 miles. Bering Strait. To the north is Bering Strait, fifty-eight miles in width, but in its narrowest portion are situated the two Diomede Islands. The shores of either side of the strait are steep and rocky. Eastern bound- "The eastern boundary of the sea begins in a ary of Bering Sea. lofty hill at Cape Prince of Wales, the western limit of the continent of America and the eastern limit of Bering Strait. From Cape Prince of Wales the American coast stretches to the south- ward ina line broken mainly by the deep inlets of Norton Sound and Bristol Bay, between which are Cape Romanzof, Kuskoquim Bay, and Cape Newenham. The coast is generally low and marshy, no hills of any considerable size being visible. South of Bristol Bay it shoots out in a southwesterly direction into the long, narrow peninsula of Alaska, reaching westward almost to the longitude of Cape Prince of Wales. The chief rivers entering Bering Sea along this bound- ary are the Yukon and the Kuskokuim. Northern and The northern and western boundary is in western boundary. marked contrast with the eastern. It is rugged throughout, the mountains growing higher and SKETCH OF BERING SEA. higher as the chain, which eventually forms the backbone of the peninsula, extends south. The shore has several indentations, the chief one of which is the Gulf of Anadyr, into which flows the Anadyr’ River. The peninsula of Alaska, forming a part of the southern bound- ary. Peninsula southern boundary of Bering Sea, is four hun- of Alaska. dred and fifty-six miles long and about fifty miles wide, and consists of a more or less level tract interrupted by single mountain peaks or clusters of peaks. Between these peaks, espe- cially toward the western extremity, are low- lying, marshy gaps, which form portages, used by the natives for carrying their boats across from the Pacific Ocean to Bristol Bay.’ The chain of the Aleutian Islands, completing southern boana- the southern boundary of Bering Sea, consists of about forty principal islands and a considerable number of islets and rocks. From the peninsula of Alaska these islands sweep in a curve, convex toward the south, to the southward and west- ward for one thousand and seventy-three miles to the island of Attu, and thence north and west two hundred and five miles to the Com- mander Islands, which are regarded by some 'Reelus, Nouvelle Géographie universelle, 17 volumes, Paris, 1875-1891, vol. XV, p. 201. ary. lands. Aleutian Is- 14 SKETCH OF BERING SEA. Southern bound- geographers as a part of the same chain.’ ary. Aleutian Is- lands. From the Commander Islands to the Asiatic coast the distance is one hundred and ten miles: The largest of the Aleutian Islands are Uni- mak, Unalaska, and Umnak, the two former being about seventy-five miles long. The straits or passes separating the islands are of various widths, those in the easterly half beimg gener- ally narrow and but few of them available for navigation. The most important are Unimak Pass, eleven miles wide, and Amukta or “Seventy--two” Pass, forty-two miles wide. The entire chain is of volcanic origin, and lofty peaks rise from most of the islands. Some Alaskan or Aleutian crater is almost constantly in activity. More than thirty mountains have at various times been reported active, and new islands have been thrown up by volcanic action since the discovery of the region by the Russians.” Aaende in Bering The chief islands lying within Bering Sea are the following: St. Lawrence, St. Matthew, Nuni- vak, Karaginski, and the Pribilof Islands. Large portion A peculiar feature of Bering Sea is the exten- very shallow. sive bank of soundings which stretches off for two hundred and fifty or more miles from the 1Vivien de Saint-Martin, Nouveau Dictionnaire de Géographie universelle, Paris, 1879, vol. I, p. 416; Encyclopedia of Geog- raphy, revised ed., Philadelphia, 1838, vol. III, p. 544. ? Reclus, vol. XV, p. 202; North Pac. Dir., p. 498 et seq. SKETCH OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. 15 American coast, rendering the easterly portion ean aD ORRo of the sea very shallow. The charts show that throughout one-third of the sea the depth of the water does not, generally, exceed fifty fathoms, and they also show that the average depth of the whole sea is very considerably less than that of the adjoining ocean.” The shores of Bering Sea are but thinly popu- ,,Pepulation, ves- lated, the native inhabitants” of those now be- ™¢r!#! products. longing to the United States bemg Esquimos and Aleuts.’ The vegetation of the coasts adjacent to Bering Sea consists mainly of rank grasses and (in the more southern parts) of alder and willow. There are no agricultural products, though the interior valleys display considerable richness of vegetation.* The chief commercial products of the sea and its coasts are fur-bearing animals and codfish. GEOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. The group of islands known as the Pribilof Location, Islands is situated in the shallow part of Bering 1 See North Pacific Dir., pp. 517, 567. 2 See also Wallace’s Island Life, New York, 1881, p. 295, map. 8 Reclus, vol. XV, p. 225. +North Pacific Dir., p. 510; Encycl. of Geog., vol. III, p. 344; Wappiius, Handbuch der allgemeinen Geographie und Statistik, Leipzig, 1855, vol. I, part I, p. 298. 16 SKETCH OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. PAVED Sea, in about latitude 57° N. and longitude 170° W. It is of voleanic origin’ and far removed from other land, the nearest adjacent points being Unalaska Island, at a distance of two hundred and fourteen miles to the southward; Cape Newenham, upon the mainland of Alaska, distant three hundred and nine miles in an easterly direction; and St. Matthew Island, distant two hundred and twenty miles to the northward. of oronP, consists The group consists, in the order of their mag- nitude, of St. Paul, St. George, Otter, and Wal- rus Islands. ‘The first two are separated by forty miles of water. The last two are within six miles of St. Paul. St. PaulIsland. — The largest of these islands is St. Paul, situate in latitude 57° 10’ N. and longitude 170° 20° W. It is from northeast to southwest thirteen miles long, with a maximum width of six miles. Its area is about forty-two square miles; its shore line forty-two miles. The highest hill attains an altitude of six hundred and thirty-three feet; three others exceed five hundred feet in height. The island comprises rocky uplands, rugged hills, and broad valleys, alternating with extensive bogs of moss and heather, some of which contain fresh-water ponds. Considerable stretches of 1 Reclus, vol. XV, p. 205. SKETCH OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. beg sandy beach border some of the bays, but most St. Paul Island. yi ys; of the shores are rocky. ‘The photographs sub- mitted with this Case will enable the Tribunal to form a conception of the ruggedness of the shores and of the irregularity and confusion of the lava blocks that cover them. The average height of the upland is not over one hundred and fifty feet, but three small peaks, one of which in particular has the appearance of a crater, attain a height of nearly six hundred feet. Aboutforty miles to the southeast of St. Paul lies , St Georse Is St. George, in latitute 56° 35’ N. and longitude 169° 30’ W. Its length isten miles, whileits great- est width is about four anda half miles. It has an area of thirty-four square miles, and a coast line of thirty miles. On St. George the coast rises precipitously from the sea, and is, for the most part, a succession of cliffs, with not more than six or eight miles of low-lying shores and not over a mile of sandy beach, whereas large stretches of the shores of St. Paul are of the latter charac- ter. St. George contains two hills, more than nine hundred feet in height, and united by mod- erately high ground. Its general altitude is about hree times that of St. Paul. Otter Island lies six miles south of St. Paul. It is the only one of the group upon which are found evidences of recent volcanic action. It is 2, (Mj —— 3) Otter Island. 18 SKETCH OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. Otter Island. ~~ about three-fourths of a mile long and half as broad. Its north shore is low, with a broken, rocky beach; elsewhere its coast is marked by steep cliffs, which attain a maximum height of three hundred feet. | Walrus Island. Walrus Island lies seven miles east of St. Paul. It is a narrow ledge of lava about half a mile long, and so low that in stormy weather it is washed over by the waves. st Acca There are no harbors at any of these islands, though both at St. Paul and St. George there is anchorage for small vessels in moderately calm weather. During the prevalence, however, of winds from certain directions it is impossible to load or unload vessels of any kind in safety. Rocks or reefs are found in the neighborhood of both these islands. Climate. There are, really, but two seasons upon the Pribilof Istands. Summer may be said to begin in the latter part of April, and winter in Novem- ber, the change from the one to the other being very rapid. Throughout the summer the climate is humid and disagreeable. Dense fogs prevail and hang in heavy banks over the islands, the atmosphere is rarely clear, and the sun is seldom seen. So dense is the fog, that navigation in their vicinity is rendered extremely hazard- ous, and it is often impossible for navigators to SKETCH OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. find them. Indeed, it is probable that their dis- covery was retarded on account of the preval- ence of fog.! The summer temperature ranges between 40° and 45° F-., and is highest in August. By the end of October cold winds sweep across the islands, carrying away the moisture. These winds continue throughout a large part of the winter, rendering the climate during that time most disagreeable. The winter temperature averages between 22° and 26° F. The sur- rounding sea generally freezes over in winter, and the ice remains until the latter part of April, when it rapidly disappears. The shallowness of the eastern portion of Bering Sea prevents any icebergs from reaching the Pribilof Islands. Further details respecting their climatic condi- tion will be given later in the Case, when the habits of the fur-seals are discussed. The principal mammals inhabiting the islands are fur-seals, sea-lions, and hair-seals. Formerly sea-otters and walruses were found there in abundance, but owing to indiscriminate hunting they have been exterminated. Blue foxes are common on both islands and lemmings on St: ‘These conditions are not confined to the Pribilof Islands, but prevail throughout a great part of Bering Sea. They are matter of common knowledge. See Beechy’s Narrative of a Voyage to the Pacific Ocean and Bering Straits, London, 1831, vol. I, p. 241; North Pac. Dir., p. 534; Wappius, p. 298. Chmate. Animal life. ils) Inhabitants. Vegetation. Bering’s first ex- pedition. DISCOVERIES ABOUT BERING SEA. George. Myriads of birds breed upon the high, rocky cliffs of the islands. The group was uninhabited when first dis- covered, but was soon colonized by the intro- duction of natives from Unalaska and other islands of the Aleutian Chain. In 1890 the pop- ulation of St. Paul was two hundred and forty- four souls, of which twenty-two were white; on St. George there were ninety-three souls, of which eight were white; making the total population of the group three hundred and thirty-seven. Seal meat is the staple food of the natives to-day. The vegetation resembles that of the Aleutian Islands, in that no trees are found. It consists of numerous species of grasses of an intensely green color, and of many kinds of wild flowers, which grow in abundance. DISCOVERY AND OCCUPATION OF THE SHORES AND ISLANDS OF BERING SEA. The exploration of Bering Sea and of the coasts and islands of America which surround it fol- lowed upon, and was the direct result of, the oc- cupation’ of Hastern Siberia and the peninsula of 1 Voyage to the Pacific Ocean under the direction of Capt. Cook and others, London, 1784, vol. III, pp. 359-385; Coxe’s Russian Discoveries between Asia and America, London, i804, p. 517 et seq.; Miiller, Voyages from Asia to America, translated by Jef- fries, London 1764, 2d ed., pp. 1-44. DISCOVERIES ABOUT BERING SEA. 21 Kamchatka by the Russians in the seventeenth Se BSG century. As early as 1648 a Russian ship is re- ported to have sailed from the Arctic Ocean through Bering Strait to Kamchatka‘; but not until the reign of Peter the Great was any organized effort made to explore the unknown regions of this sea. The execution of his plans, owing to his death, devolved upon his successor, Empress Catherine. The first expedition, under Vitus Bering, sailed from Kamchatka in 1728 in a northeasterly direction. After discovering St. Lawrence Island it passed through the strait which has since been known by the name of the great navigator.” Another part of this expedition reached the continent of America in about lati- tude 65°, in the vicinity of the mouth of the Yukon River.’ In 1741 Bering started out on his second Bering’s second oe : expedition, expedition. It consisted of two parts, both of which discovered the continent of America. Upon his homeward voyage Bering landed at the Shumagin Islands, sighted a large number of the Aleutian Islands, and was finally shipwrecked 1 See map in Miiller’s Voyages; Cook, vol. III, p. 361; Burney’s History of Northeastern Voyages of Discovery and of the Early Eastern Navigations of the Russians, London, 1819, p. 60 et seq. 2 Miiller, p. 48. The name was conferred by Cook in 1778: Greenhow’s Memoir on the Northwest Coast of America, Senate Doc. No. 174, Twenty-sixth Congress, first session, p. 82. 3 Miiller, p. 55, and map (frontispiece); Burney, p. 130. 22 DISCOVERIES ABOUT BERING SEA. on the Commander Islands. He died upon the one which was subsequently named for him.* eae of This last expedition made known the valuable ands made known. fyy yegources of the Commander Islands, and brought back to Siberia large quantities of the skins of sea-otters, fur-seals, and foxes. This led to the organization of many private expe- ditions, and one adventurer, Bossof, is reported to have gathered on these islands furs to the value of at least one-half million dollars between the years 1743 and 17492 The voyages at this period were numerous and indicate great activity throughout the Aleutian Chain, island after island being discovered by private Russian adventurers.’ Discovery and subjugation to Russian rule went hand in hand with trade, the rich merchants of Moscow furnishing in .great measure the money which sustained the cost of dis- covery; and Cook, writing in 1784, says that the Russians had conquered the Aleutian Islands and made them tributary. Several navigators under Russian Imperial authority made further expe- ditions into Bering Sea and visited various parts of the coasts, but it was not until the year 1786 ' Miiller, pp. 93-97, and map (frontispiece); Cook, vol. IIT, p. 372; Burney, p. 176. ’ Berg, Chronological History of the Discovery of the Aleutian Islands, or the Achievements of Russian Merchants, and also an Historical Review of the Fur Trade, St. Petersburg, 1823, p. 1 et seq. * Burney, pp. 183-185; Coxe, pp. 86-110. 4 Cook, vol. III, p. 372. DISCOVERIES ABOUT BERING SEA. De that the most important of all the discoveries in Discovery of Pribilof Islands; this sea, that of the Pribilof Islands, was made. due te -panele ton It was brought about by the same cause which led to all the other enterprises in these regions, the search for furs. The Russians had already become acquainted with the fur-seals upon the Commander Islands. They had also noticed what is to-day known as the Pribilof herd, as it passed semiannually through the channels of the Aleutian Islands; and as the supply of sea-otters diminished, they began exerting them- selves to ascertain upon what shores these fur- seals landed. Much time was spent in following them both upon their northward and southward courses. In 1786 the final search for them was undertaken by Gerassim Pribilof, who for five years had been eniployed by one of the leading trading companies and was regarded as one of the best navigators of that region. For three weeks he cruised in the neighborhood of the Pribilof group in a dense fog without finding it. ‘“‘At last,” says Veniaminof, ‘“‘fate, as if relenting, yielded to the untiring efforts of an enterprising man and lifted the curtain of fog, revealing the eastern part of the island nearest Hes weutian Archipelago "°°." 7" "This 1Veniaminof’s Notes on the Islands of the Unalaska District, St. Petersburg, 1840, part 1, p. 271. bo ee DISCOVERIES ABOUT BERING SEA. island was named St. George. In the follow- ing year the island of St. Paul was discovered. Cook’sexpedi- Meanwhile, in the year 1778, the English nay- tion to Bering Sea. igator, Captain Cook, had appeared in Alaskan waters, in codperation with an expedition sent by the British admiralty to Baffin Bay in the hope that a northern passage might be discovered from the Pacific to the Atlantic.’ After visiting cer- tain points on the Pacific coast of Alaska, he passed into Bering Sea and sailed along the east- ern shore as far as Bering Strait, giving names to various places, among which are those of Bristol Bay and Norton Sound. At several points on the coast which he visited he found clear evidence of Russian influence and customs, and he confirmed in the strongest manner the early Russian discoveries. His visit was never followed up by settlement, and it resulted in no acquisition of territory or claim thereto by his Government. eS In 1791 an expedition, planned by Catherine I, passed from the Aleutian Islands to the northern parts of Bermg Sea, including St. Lawrence 1 Burney, pp. 219, 220. 2On the contrary, it inured largely to the benefit of the Rus- sians, of whom Cook, in his third volume, at page 373, predicts that “they will undoubtedly make a proper use of the advan- tages we have opened to them by the discovery of Cook’s River (Inlet).” See, also, Coxe, p. 206, “ DISCOVERIES ABOUT BERING SEA. 25 Island and Cape Rodney, and returned along the ae Asiatic coast. Other expeditions followed at various times, an important one being that of Korasakovsky, who, in 1818, made a thorough ex- ploration of a great part of the eastern shore of the sea and established a fort at the mouth of the Nushagak.' The great wealth to be derived from the fur- | Shores and_is- lands became Rus- bearing animals led to permanent settlements, Si# territory as early as 1800, the subjugation of the native tribes, and the es- tablishment of forts or trading posts by the Rus- sians on various of the Aleutian Islands, on the Pribilof Islands, and on the eastern mainland of Bering Sea during the latter part of the eight- eenth and early years of the nineteenth centuries. Thus, by first discovery, occupation, and perma- nent colonization, the shores and islands of Bering Sea, the Aleutian Chain, and the peninsula of Alaska became, probably as early as 1800, an undisputed part of the territory of the Russian Empire.” 1The whole of this shore, together with other territory, had already been claimed by Russia in the ukase of 1799, reference to which will behereafter more fully made. See, generally, upon the whole of the foregoing subject Vivien de Saint-Martin, vol. I, “ Alaska,” pp. 55, 56. 2 See ‘‘Russia’s Early Title to parts of the Coast of America,’ Vol. I, p. 12. 2716—4 26 CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST OF AMERICA. Early competi. While the title of Russia to the territory north ren or boesessior and west of, and including, the peninsulaof Alaska oe was universally recognized, her claim to the Northwest Coast of the American continent, by which term it is intended to designate the coast between Prince William Sound and the mouth of the Columbia River, was earnestly disputed by more than one powerful nation. During the latter part of the last century and the early years of the present, Great Britain, Spain, and the United States were competing with Russia by way of exploration, trade, and colonization for the possession of the Northwest Coast of America. Russian compe- 0 ; tition. Settlement AS early as 1741 Tcherikof, a Russian Cap- af; Radia: ilar tain under Bering’s command, visited the coast in about latitude 55° N.;' but the earliest per- manent settlement east of the Aleutian Chain was made at Kadiak Island in 1784 by Shelikof,’ an enterprising merchant, who afterwards laid the foundation for the Russian American Company. A trading post, dwelling houses, and fortifications were erected and a school established. Later, cruises were undertaken from Kadiak to the ad- 1 Miiller’s Voyages, map (frontispiece). * Coxe, p. 207 et seq. CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. joining islands and the mainland around Cook’s Inlet, Prince William Sound, and Yakutat Bay.’ The influence of the Kadiak colony in the adjoin- ing continent is told by Coxe in these words: “The settlement formed by Shelikof in the isle of Kadiak has more contributed to spread the ex- tent of the Russian trade and power in the North Pacific Ocean than any of the preceding expedi- tions. He sent out detached parties, who formed establishments on various parts of the American continent and kept the natives in due order and subjection.”” In one of these cruises, made under Shelikof’s direction, the continent was reached near Prince William Sound, and the coast was followed and carefully explored to the east and south beyond latitude 50°. Coxe says, speaking of the traders who conducted this cruise: “By comparing their accounts with the narratives of Cook, Portlock, Meares, and Vancouver, we have been able to ascertain most of the harbours and places at which they touched, and the general agreement with the accounts given by the English navigators proves the accuracy of their deserip- tion.”* At Yakutat, in June, 1788, they took formal possession of the country and received 1 Coxe, p. 232. 2 Coxe, p. 264. See also ibid., pp. 268, 269, 273. 27 Russian compe- tition. Settlement at Kadiak Island. 28 CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. tussian ecompe- from the native chief tokens of his acceptance of tition. Settlement at Kadiak Island. Russian dominion.! As further evidence of Rus- Founding of Sitka. sian occupation of the mainland of the Northwest Coast the launching of a vessel in 1794 from the shores of Prince William Sound is chronicled, this being the first ship built in Alaska.’ But the most important step taken by Russia to permanently establish her authority over the islands and adjoining shores of the Northwest Coast of the continent was the founding in the beginning of the present century of New Arch- angel (afterwards Sitka),’? which soon became a fortress, the principal trading post, and the seat of government of the Russian American posses- sions. From Kadiak, first, and from Sitka, later, the Russian merchants continued to push their traffic with the natives along down the mainland toward the Columbia River, and in 1812 they had even established a colony on the coast of California,’ called Fort Ross, a few miles north of the Bay of San Francisco. As early as 1810 Russia had gone so far as to inform the United 1 See, generally, Coxe, pp. 240-254. 2 Tikhmenief’s Historical Review of the Development of the Russian American Company and of its Operations up to the pres- ent Time, St. Petersburg, 1861, vol. I, p. 40. 5 Vivien de Saint-Martin, vol. I, p. 56. The year 1802 is gen- erally taken as the date of the founding of Sitka. 4Greenhow’s Memoir, pp. 9, 148; Vivien de Saint-Martin, vol. I, p. 56. CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. 29 States that she claimed the coast to the Columbia River." On the other hand, Great Britain early laid |, British competi: claim to portions of this same Northwest Coast. Drake is believed by some to have touched it in his discoveries in 1579.2. The famous British navigator, Captain Cook, appeared there in 1778, visited Prince William Sound and Cook’s Inlet, and (as already noticed) passed into Bering Sea. Cook’s voyages were followed by those of Port- lock, Dixon, Meares, and Vancouver. English traders, and especially the powerful Northwest Company (which in 1821 became united with the Hudson’s Bay Company), were rapidly ex- tending their enterprise to the coast between the Columbia River and latitude 56° N. and thus coming into competition and conflict with the merchants and traders of other countries, includ- ing those of Russia.” . So, also, Spain, following up the occupation Oty Seamer competi- California, soon after the middle of the eighteenth . century began laying her plans for a complete occupation of the whole of the western coast of America washed by the waters of the Pacific 1 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. V, p. 442. See, also, generally, ‘‘Russia’s Early Title to the Coast of America,” Vol. I, p. 12. 2Burney’s History of Discoveries in the South Sea, London, 1803, vol. I, p. 356. See, also, Greenhow’s Memoir, p. 37. 3 London Quarterly Review, vol. XXVI, pp. 344-347, 30 CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. banish competi- Ocean, and in doing this she was actuated largely by knowledge of the fact that the Russians had a similar object in view.’ Prior to 1768 the Spanish navigators had explored it up to latitude 43°, and in 1774, 1775, and 1779 they visited various portions of the same as far north as Prince William Sound, taking possession of much of the country on behalf of their sovereign; and an examination of the map of that region of the present day attests, in the geographical names, the early presence of the Spanish discoverers.’ As late as 1790 Spain asserted her right to the Northwest Coast to latitude 60° N’ The Nootka Some of the Spanish claims were brought to an Sound contro-, ‘ : r versy. issue in 1789 in the Nootka Sound controversy, which was the first dispute between European nations in regard to any territory lying between San Francisco and Prince William Sound. Nootka Sound is situated on the west side of Vancouver Island in about latitude 50° N44 In 1789, on being informed that Russia was intend- ing to occupy it, the Spanish Government sent out two men-of-war with orders to anticipate her and drive away all foreigners. No trouble of 1 Greenhow’s Memoir, pp. 52, 96. 2 Vivien de Saint-Martin, vol. I, p. 56; Greenhow’s Memoir, p. 57 and chap. IV. 3 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. V, p. 444. 4 It appears to have been discovered, and was named, by Cook in 1788. Greenhow’s Memoir, p. 82. CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. 31 any kind with Russia arose out of these measures,” pee Neours but the Spanish naval commander having seized versy. two vessels engaged in trade there, together with certain houses and land, all of which the British Government claimed to be the property of British subjects, the act of seizure was vigorously and successfully resented, and as a result of a heated controversy the treaty of 1790 was celebrated between Great Britain and Spain.’ Article III Treaty of 1790 between Great of that treaty is, in part, as follows: ‘It is agreed Britain and Spain. that the respective subjects shall not be disturbed or molested either in navigating or carrying on their fisheries in the Pacific Ocean, or in the South Seas, or in landing on the coasts of those seas in places not already occupied, for the pur- pose of carrying on their commerce with the natives of the country or of making settlements there; the whole subject, nevertheless, to the _restrictions specified in the three following articles.” This stipulation is of special significance, as it constituted a basis of the adjustment made by Russia with the United States in 1824 and with Great Britain in 1825, respecting the navigation of the Pacific Ocean and the conflicting claims to the territory on the Northwest Coast. ' American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. V, p. 445. 2Vol. I, p. 32. See Greenhow’s Memoir, chap. VI. 32 American com- petition. CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. The partial navigation of the Columbia River by the American navigator, Captain Gray, in 1792, the expedition of Lewisand Clarke across the Rocky Mountains in the years 1803 to 1805,’ and the establishment of the Pacific Fur Company on the Pacific coast in the early years of the present century, gave to the United States a permanent lodgment on the Northwest Coast and constituted the basis of an active competition on the part of that nation for the sovereignty and trade of a considerable part of the shores and waters of the Pacific.” The troubles which early in this cen- tury arose between the United States and Great Britain as to ownership of these coasts were left undetermined by the treaty of Ghent, following the war of 1812; and in 1818, being still unable to adjust the respective claims, the two powers agreed that all territory in dispute claimed by either of them between the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific Ocean should, with its harbors, bays, and rivers be open and free for ten years to the vessels and citizens of both nations,® and not until 1846 were their respective territorial rights on the Northwest Coast permanently settled by treaty. 1Greenhow’s Memoir, p. 126 et seq., p. 149. 2Greenhow’s Memoir, pp. 152-158. 3'Treaty of 1818 between the United States and Great Britain, Vol. I; p. 34. CLAIMS TO THE NORTHWEST COAST. jeu) Qo The claims of Spain to this region were trans- ferred to the United States by the treaty of 1819.' It thus appears from the foregoing historical This competi- : ; : : tion certain to re- review that, while the claim of Russia to the sult iu interna- tional conflict. territory embracing the Aleutian Islands, the peninsula of Alaska, and the coasts and islands of Bering Sea was undisputed, the shores and the adjacent islands of the American continent south of latitude 60° as far as California were during the latter part of the eighteenth and the first quarter of the present century the subject of conflicting claims on the part of Russia, Great Britain, Spain, and the United States. Thiscondition of affairs in- dicated that an international conflict was likely to ~ come sooner or later, and it was foreshadowed in an article printed in the London Quarterly Review of 1814, in which it was said: ‘“ How long the continent of America will afford a sup- ply of furs and peltry to the contending traders of England, Russia, and the United States, we pretend not to determine, but we believe they have each of them lately experienced some diffi- culty in supplying the usual demand for those of the most valuable description. An increasing scarcity can not fail to produce a collision of in- terests and disputes, which at one time or other will probably terminate in a war.” 1Vol.I, p. 34. 2 London Quarterly Review, Vol. XI, p. 292, 2716 —)d Its political and commercial iinpor- tance. The outgrowth of trading associ- ations. THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. Having thus presented a brief sketch of the political condition of affairs in the early part of this century in the territory surrounding Bering Sea and on the Northwest Coast of America, it is proper, before entering upon a consideration of the events of international importance which follow, to refer to the organization and early history of the Russian American Company, an association which for a period of over sixty years carried on trade and administered public affairs throughout a great part of these regions. In_ the extent and variety of its operations it oc- cupies a position similar to that held by the East India and the Hudson’s Bay Companies; and its history is also the history of that portion of the globe to which the attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration is directed. The Russian American Company was the outgrowth of the numerous trading associations,’ which, soon after the discoveries of 1741, began to develop the lucrative fur trade in the Aleutian Islands and Bering Sea. The rivalry and com- petition which grew up between them proved in many ways disastrous’ and resulted eventually ‘For a detailed account of same, see Berg, p. 1 et seq. ?Tikhmenief, vol, I, p. 61, THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 35 in placing the fur trade of the Colonies under the control of a single powerful organization.’ This was accomplished in 1799, in which year Chartered in a ukase was issued, creating the “Russian Amer- if isan Company” and containing its first charter.’ This ukase invested it with special and exclu-_ Its tights and privileges under sive privileges for a period of twenty years on "st charter. the shores of northwestern America between latitude 55° N. and Bering Strait, on the Aleutian Islands, the Kurile Islands, and the islands of the Northeastern or Bering Sea. To it was reserved the exclusive right to all products of the chase and of commerce in those regions; and it was specially authorized to take possession on behalf of the Imperial Government of newly discovered countries, both to the north and to the south of latitude 55° on the coast of America. It was authorized to establish agencies within and without the empire, and to use a seal and and.a flag bearing the Imperial coat of arms. Its chief place of business, which was originally at Irkutsk, was soon transferred to St. Petersburg, where its shareholders, none of whom were allowed to be foreigners, embraced members of the Imperial family and the high nobility. 1 Vivien de Saint-Martin, vol. I, p. 56, ?Vol. I, p. 14. 36 THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. While the privileges conferred by this charter were very great, the Company was, on the other hand, burdened with some heavy obligations. Its obligations. Tf was compelled at its own expense to carry on the government of the region over which its priv- ileges extended, to maintain courts, the church, and a small military force, and, at a later period, to hold ready at various points on the coast provisions and stores for the use, in cases of emergency, of the naval vessels or troops of the Russian Government. pened ofgov- For the purposes of administration the Impe- | rial Government and the directors of the Com- pany jointly appomted a chief manager, who resided at Sitka, and who at an early date was required to be an officer of the navy of high rank. His powers were absolute within the ter- ritory over which the Company exercised juris- diction. Under him were sub-managers, over- seers, and other agents. Reports of the Com- pany’s transactions were submitted originally to the Minister of the Interior, and later to the Minister of Finance. Officersof Impe- Dating from the year 1802 officers of the ln- iaaaaniee : perial navy were constantly in the employ of the Company. As long as it maintained a mili- tary and naval force in the Colonies at its own expense, such forces were entirely at the dis- THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. posal of the chief manager, who had the privi- 37 Officers of Impe- ‘ial navy engaged lege of selecting the soldiers and sailors from any ' #8 service. force stationed within the boundaries of Siberia. Even the officers of those naval vessels which were not maintained at the expense of the Com- pany, and which were sent out to the Colonies by the Imperial Government, were generally en- joined to obey the orders of the chief manager, and it will be made to appear from papers which will be hereafter cited that such orders were freely given. Under its charter the Company paid no roy- alty or rent to the Government, but as its trade consisted chiefly in the exchange of furs for teas on the Chinese frontier, the Government received large sums through the duty collected on such teas. In short, the Company administered both gov- ernment and trade throughout the whole of the territory over which it was given control? 1 See in reference to all that has been said regarding the rights, obligations, and government of the Russian American Company: Regulations of the United American Company, 'Tikhmenief, vol. I, app., pp. 1-19; Charter of 1799, Vol. I, p. 14; ukase and charter of 1821, vol. I, pp. 16 and 24; “‘Additional Facts relating to the Russian American Company,” Vol. I, p. 9; Tikhmenief, vol. Il, —app., pp. 17-63. Paid no royalty. Summary. 38 Ukase of 1821 andsecond charter of the Company. Purpose of the ukase, THE UKASE OF 1821. THE UKASE OF 1821. On the 4th of September, 1821, this famous ukase was made public, and nine days later, on the 13th of September, 1821, the Emperor renewed with certain additions for another term of twenty years the charter and _ privi- leges granted in 1799 to the Russian Amer- ican Company. Both the ukase and the new charter appear in full in the Appendix." The objects which were sought to be obtained by the promulgation of the ukase appear from the recital prefixed to it, which is as follows: “Observing from Reports submitted to us that the trade of our subjects on the Aleutian Islands and on the North West Coast of America apper- taining unto Russia is subjected, because of secret and illicit Traffic, to oppression and imped- iments; and finding that the principal cause of these difficulties is the want of Rules establish- ing the Boundaries for Navigation along these Coasts, and the order of Naval Communication as well in these places as on the whole of the Kastern Coast of Siberia and the Kurile Islands, we have deemed it necessary to determine these Communications by specific Regulations which are hereto attached.” 1Vol. I, pp. 16, 24. THE UKASE OF 1821. Its title and first two sections are as follows: “Rules established for the Limits of Naviga- tion and order of Communication along the Coast of Eastern Siberia, the Northwest Coast of America, and the Aleutian, Kurile, and other Islands. “$1. The pursuits of Commerce, whaling, and fishery, and of all other Industry on all Islands, Ports, and Gulfs, including the whole of the Northwest Coast of America, beginning from Bering’s Straits to the 51° of Northern Latitude, also from the Aleutian Islands to the Eastern Coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands, from Bering’s Straits to the South Cape of the Island of Urup, viz, to the 45° 50’ North- ern Latitude, is exclusively granted to Russian subjects. “\ 2. It is, therefore, prohibited to all For- eign Vessels, not only to land on the Coasts and Islands belonging to Russia as stated above; but also to approach them within less than a Hundred Italian. Miles... The Transgressor’s Vessel is subject to confiscation along with the whole Cargo.” 39 its title and first two sections. The reason why the limit of one hundred miles_ Reason why P i limit of 100 miles was chosen appears from a letter written by Mr. chosen. 1An Italian mile is the equivalent of a geographical mile, of which there are sixty to a degree. AO THE UKASE OF 1821. _Reason why Middleton, United States Minister at St. Peters- limit of 100 miles , cuosel: burg, to the Secretary of State, dated August 8, 1822, giving an account of an interview with the Governor-General of Siberia, who had been one of the committee originating this measure. The Governor-General said it was sought to es- tablish ‘limits to the marine jurisdiction on their coasts, such as should secure to the Russian American I'ur Company the monopoly of the very lucrative profit they carry on. In order to do this they sought a precedent, and found the distance of thirty leagues, named inthe Treaty of Utrecht, and which may be calculated at about one hundred Htalian miles, sufficient for all pur- ”1 Asa similar and more recent prece- poses. dent, though not for so great an extent of sea jurisdiction, might have been cited the fourth article of the Nootka Sound convention between Great Britain and Spain, already referred to, whereby the former conceded to the latter ex- clusive jurisdiction of the sea for ten leagues from any part of the coasts already occupied by _ Spain.’ This limit en- The Pribilof Islands, the home of the Alaskan abled Russia to protect seal herd ga, - aan toe : ae 2 z eel oben seal herd, are situated less than two hundred Italian miles from the Aleutian Chain on the south, and thus a sufficient portion of the eastern 1 Mr. Middleton to Mr. Adams, August 8, 1822, Vol. I, p. 135. 2 VO patos THE UKASE OF 1821. half of Bering Sea was covered by the ukase to enable Russia to protect the herd while there. In so far as it affected that sea and its shores, 41 Ukase declara- tory of existing Russia regarded the ukase as merely declaratory rights. of existing rights. The board of administration of the Russian American Company, writing from St. Petersburg to the chief manager of the Russian American Colonies at Sitka on Septem- ber 20, 1821, says: “With this precious act in your hand you will be enabled to assume a new position and to stand firmly opposed to all attempts on the part of foreigners to infringe upon our rights and privileges. In accordance with the will of His Imperial Majesty we will not be left to protect unaided the land and waters embraced in our exclusive privileges. A squad- ron of naval vessels is under orders to prepare for a cruise to the coasts of northeastern Asia and northwestern America. . . . We ean now stand upon our rights, and drive from our waters and ports the intruders who threaten to neutralize the benefits and gifts most graciously bestowed upon our Company by His Imperial Majesty.”? 'Vol. I, p. 59. This and other documents hereinafter cited, re- lating to the affairs of the Russian American Company, belong to the official records or archives of the territory which was ceded to the United States by Russia by the treaty of 1867. They came into the possession of the United States by virtue of the second article of that treaty and are now in the archives of the Depart- ment of State at Washington. Fac-similes of all the original documents referred to herein will be found at the end of Vol. I. 2716 6 Under ukase of 1799 foreign ves- THE UKASE OF 1821, In a letter dated February 28, 1822, from the board to the chief manager of the Colonies, we find the following statement: “As to fur-seals, however, since our Gracious Sovereign has been pleased to strengthen our claims of jurisdiction and exclusive rights in these waters with his strong hand, we can well afford to reduce the number of seals killed annuaily, and to patiently await the natural increase resulting therefrom, which will yield us an abundant harvest in the future.” The official Russian records show that after sels not permittedthe ukase or charter of 1799, granting to the to hunt or trade in Bering Sea. Russian American Company certain exclusive control of trade and colonization, its authorities, acting under the sanction of the Russian Govern- ment, did not permit foreign vessels to visit Bering Sea. The trading and hunting rights of the Company were jealously guarded there prior and up to 1821, as will appear from the docu- ments about to be cited; and whatever creation or extension of exclusive Russian jurisdiction was intended to be effected by the promulgation of the ukase of that year applied to the Pacific Ocean proper, and to the coasts and islands east and south of the peninsula of Alaska. The only effect which could have been intended by that 1Vol. I, p. 61. THE UKASE OF 1821. A3 edict upon the coasts and waters of Bering Sea ,_Under ukase of c=) 1799 foreign ves- d sels not permitted to hunt or trade in Bering Sea. and the Aleutian Islands was to strengthen an confirm the jurisdiction theretofore exercised by Russia, and this is made clearly to appear from the official! documents of that period. On April 9, 1820, the Russian Imperial Min- — Request of Min- ister of Finance in ister of Finance, upon a report of a committee of 1820 and 1821 that cruisers be dis- ministers appointed by the Emperor to obtain patched to protect Company’s inter- information respecting the Russian American ¢ts im Bering Sea. Colonies, from which report it appeared that illicit visits of foreign vessels to Alaskan waters were being made, addressed an official commu- nication to the Imperial Minister of Marine, in which, after referring to this report, he states that “it appears of the most imperative necessity for the preservation of our sovereignty in the northwestern part of America and on the islands and waters situated between them, to maintain there continuously two ships of the Imperial fleet.” He suggests that these two vessels should be dispatched during that year, one to cruise from Sitka westward and northward, and after “ hav- ing thoroughly examined the shores of the Aleu- tian Islands, the coast of Kamchatka, the Kurile Islands and the intervening waters,” to winter in Petropavlovsk on the Asiatic coast. ‘The other ship, however, (sailing from Petropavlovsk), hay- ing examined the eastern coast of the Kamchatka 44 THE UKASE OF 1821. y] ister of Finance in 1820 and 1821 that —., ps tee is a. Oe = ceiaus be di West coast of America from this latitude to ake Decne poe tisland of Unalaska, and the intervening waters ests in Bering 8° (Bering Sea), should proceed to Kadiak and from there to Sitka for the winter. The object of the cruising of two of our armed vessels in the localities above mentioned is the protection of our Colonies and the exclusion of foreign vessels engaged in traffic or industry injurious to the interests of the Russian Company as well as to those of the native inhabitants of those regions.” In the following year, 1821, two similar ships were to be dispatched, and in “this manner two ships of war would always be present in the Colonies and the Company would be assured of their protection.”? Killing of fur- "he board of administration of the Russian seals at sea to be Prevented. American Company, writing March 15, 1821, from St. Petersburg to the chief manager of the Colonies at Sitka, with full knowledge of the report of the committee of ministers and the action of the Ministers of Finance and of Marine ‘of the year previous, clearly intimates the duty these war ships were to perform. In giving in- structions as to the management of the fur-seals on the Pribilof Islands; it says: ‘We must 1 Vol. I, p. 49. THE UKASE OF 1821. A5 suppose that a total suspension of killing every , Killing of fur. fifth year will effectually stop the diminution Prevented. of the fur-seals, and that it will be safe at the expiration of the close season to resume killing at the rate mentioned above (fifty thousand annu- ally). Byastrict observance of such rules, and a prohibition of all killing of fur-seals at sea or in the passes of the Aleutian Islands, we may hope to make this industry a permanent and reliable source of income to the Company, without disturbing the price of these valuable skins in the market.” } In 1819 Riecord, the then commander of Kam- Peel cen te Jertain contracts chatka, acting under advice-of one Dobello, a With foreigners annulled. Control exercised over Ber- ing Sea prior to 1S21. foreigner in the employ of the Russian Govern- ment, granted to an Englishman named Pigott the right for ten years to hunt whales on the coast of Eastern Siberia? This erant was at once repudiated by the Government. Report No. 623, House of Representatives, Forty-fourth Con- gress, first session, p. 30; Report No. 3883, House of Representa- tives, Fiftieth Congress, second session., pp. 31, 32. Report No. 623, House of Representatives, Forty-fourth Con- gress, first session, pp. 30, 33; Report No. 3883, House of Represen- tatives, Fiftieth Congress, second session, p. 31. 4Report No. 628, House of Representatives, Forty-fourth Con- gress, first session, p. 30, No. 3883, House of Representatives, Tiftieth Congress, second session, p. 32. 6 Same report, p. 30. 6 6 6 p; 31. ef iG Wi p. 32. CONDITION OF THE NATIVES. 14] from the management of these islands under the system adopted in 1870 by the Congress of the United States. When the United States Government assumed ores control of the territory of Alaska the condition of these natives was wretched in the extreme, the Russian American Company having neglected their welfare and forced them into practical slavery. Capt. Bryant, who had an opportunity to observe their condition prior to active occupa- tion of the islands by the United States, de- scribes and compares the situation of the natives under Russian management and under the system inaugurated by the United States. His testi- mony on this point is as follows: “When I first visited the seal islands, in 1869, the natives were living in semisubterranean houses built of turf and such pieces of driftwood and whalebones as they were able to secure on the beach. Their food had been prior to that time insufficient in variety and was comprised of seal meat and a few other articles furnished in meager quantity by the Russian Fur Company. They had no fuel and depended for heat upon the crowding together in their turf houses, sleep- ing in the dried grasses secured upon the islands. “Forced to live under these conditions, they 142 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Under the Rus- could not of course make progress toward civili- sian Company. zation. ‘There were no facilities for transporting skins; they were carried on the backs of the natives, entailing great labor and hardship. cout American“ Very soon after the islands came into the pos- session of the American Government all this was changed. Their underground earthen lodges were replaced by warm, comfortable wooden cot- tages for each family;' fuel, food, and clothing were furnished them at prices twenty-five per cent above the wholesale price of San Francisco; churches were built and schoolhouses maintained for their benefit, and everything done that would insure their constant advancement in the way of civilization and natural progress. Instead of being mere creatures of the whims of their rulers they were placed on an equal footing with white men and received by law a stipulated sum for each skin taken, so that about forty thousand dollars was annually divided among the inhab- itants of the two islands. In place of the skin- clad natives living in turf lodges, which I found on arriving on the island in 1869, I left them in 1877 as well fed, as well clothed, and as well 1See photograph, Vol. II, p. 95, showing Village of St. Paul in 1870 and in 1891; and photographs of natives, Vol. II, pp. 8, 70, 133. Letter from Chief Manager Furuhelm to the Board of Admin- istration of the Russian American Company, dated July 16, 1863; Vol, I, p. 88. CONDITION OF THE NATIVES. housed as the people of some of our New Eng- land villages. They had school facilities, and on Sunday they went to service in their pretty Greek church, with its tastefully arranged inte- rior; they wore the clothing of civilized men and had polish on their boots. All these results are directly traceable to the seal fisheries and their improved management.”? In this comparison of condition and in the marked improvement following the American occupation, Dr. H. H. McIntyre also gives a eraphic account, which is substantially the same as the one above quoted.” Mr. Samuel Falconer, who reached the islands in 1870, and remained. until 1877, gives an account of the condition in which he found the natives and the great change which took place while he was located at the islands. He says: “When I came there they were partially dressed in skins, living in filthy, unwholesome turf huts, which were heated by fires with blubber as fuel; they were ignorant and extremely dirty. When I left they had exchanged their skin garments for well-made, warm woolen clothes; they lived in substantial frame houses heated by coal stoves; they had become cleanly, and the children were attending school eight . 1 Vol, Ul, p. 8. 2Vol. II p. 599. 148 Under American control, Improvement, 144 Improvement. MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. months of the year.’ They were then as well off as well-to-do workingmen in the United States, but received much larger wages. No man was compelled to work, but received pay through his chief for the work accomplished by him. A na- tive could at any time leave the islands, but their easy life and love for their home detained them. When I first went there (1870) the women did a good share of manual labor, but when I came away (1877) the hard work was done by the men. I do not recall a single instance in history where there has been such a marked change for the better by any people in such a short time as there has been in the Pribilof Islanders since the United States Government took control of these islands.”* Evidence might be multiplied on this point, but the foregoing testimony of eye-witnesses of the relative conditions of the natives under the Russian Company and again under that of the American Government is sufficient to show that the management of the Pribilof Islands by the United States has raised the inhabitants in a few years from a state of ignorance, wretchedness, and semibarbarism, which seventy years of the Russian Company’s occupation had failed to alleviate, to a condition of liberty and civiliza- 1See photograph of school, Vol. II, pp. 9, 163. * Vol. II, p. 162, AMERICAN MANAGEMENT. 145 tion, which Europe and America need not feel Improvement. ashamed to find among their citizens. * The civil government of the islands is provided eccreTnmene for by sections 1973-1976 of the Revised Stat- ~ utes of the United States,’ under which the agent and his assistants are practically the governors of the islands. ‘They have the entire control of the natives, protect them from the impositions of the lessees’ agents, if such are attempted, and see that the supplies required by law for their sustenance are provided. The handling of the seals on the islands, being entirely done by the natives, is directly under the supervision of the Government agents. With the expiration of the Alaska Commercial Lease of 1890. Company’s lease the United States Treasury De- partment again advertised for and received ten formal bids, which were carefully considered, and in 1890 the Government leased the seal islands for another period of twenty years to the present lessees, The North American Commer- cial Company, which was decided to be the most advantageous bidder for the Government. * N. B.—It should be observed that the affidavits of natives on the Pribilof Islands are signed by them, and that they have not simply ‘‘made their cross,” as would be the method employed by many citizens of the civilized nations of the world. 1 Vol. I, p. 98. 2716——19 146 Comparison leases. MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. of An examination of the lease now in foree will show that it is not only more favorable to the Government, but also to the inhabitants of the islands than the former lease’ in the following respects: (1) The rental is $60,000, instead of $55,000; (2) the tax per skin is $9.624, instead of $2.624; (3) 80 tons of coal are to be fur- nished. the natives, instead of 60 cords of wood; (4) the quantity of salmon, salt, and other pro- visions to be furnished to them can be fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury; (5) the company is to furnish to the natives free dwellings, a church, physicians, medicines, employment, and_ care for the sick, aged, widows, and children; (6) instead of 100,000 seals per year, the company can take only 60,000 during the first year of the lease, and thereafter the catch is to be subject to the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury. Under this lease it is difficult to see how the United States could have a more complete con- trol over the seal industry on the islands, even if it took the entire management of the business. Leasing under such terms gives the Government absolute power in fixing the quota according to the condition of the herd, and at the same time avoids the details of management and disposing 1 Lease to North American Commercial Company; Vol. J, p. 106. THE SEALS. 147 of the skins, which are the especial difficulties in, Comparison of the way of the United States working the rook- eries itself. The course thus adopted by the United States seems as free from criticism or improvement as any that can be suggested. THE SEALS. Having reviewed the general management of the Pribilof Islands as it pertains to the United States Government and the native islanders, the next point for consideration is the management of the seal herd, the methods employed in taking the seals, and the results of these practices upon the number and condition of the herd. The peculiar nature and fixed habits of the eT Be. seal make it an animal most easy of control and management. A herd of seals is as capable of being driven, separated, and counted as a herd of cattle on the plains.” In fact, they much resemble these latter in the timidity of the females and the ferocity of the males. One example of the ease with which they can be controlled is mentioned by Mr. Falconer, who speaks of a herd of three thousand bachelor seals being left in charge of a boy after they 1 See favorable criticism of the methods employed in “‘ Handbook of the Fishes of New Zealand,” page 235, 2H. N. Clark, Vol. II, p. 159; ‘‘ Handbook of the Fishes of New Zealand,” page 235, 148 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Control and do-had been driven a short distance from the hauling mestication. grounds.’ Mr. Henry N. Clark, who was for six years (1884-1889) in the employ of the Alaska Commercial Company and in charge of the “sealing gang” on St. George Island, and who is therefore especially competent to speak of the possibilities of driving and handling the seals, says: “I was reared on a farm and have been familiar from boyhood with the breeding of domestic animals, and particularly with the rear- ing and management of young animals, hence the comparison of the young seals with the young of our common domestic species is most natural. From my experience with both I am able to declare positively that it is easier to manage and handle young seals than calves or lambs.? Large numbers of the former are customarily driven up in the fall by the natives to kill a certain number for food, and all could be ‘rounded up’ as the prairie cattle are if there was any need for doing so.’ All the herd so driven are lifted up one by one and examined as to sex, and while in this position each could be branded or marked if necessary. If the seal 1Vol. II, p. 162. See also J. C. Redpath, Vol. II, p. 152. 2 See also John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 109. 3 See also Watson C. Allis, Vol. II, p. 98. THE SEALS. 149 rookeries were my personal property I should Control and do- : os mesticaiton. regard the task of branding all the young as no more difficult or onerous than the branding of all my calves if I were engaged in breeding cattle upon the prairies.”? The foregoing state- ment as to the possibility of branding the young seals is supported by others equally experienced in seal life in the islands.” Dr. McIntyre, so long experienced in the handling of seals, says that ‘they are as controllable and amenable to good management upon the islands as sheep and cattle,”*® and several other witnesses make like affirmations.* Chief Anton Melovedoff, already mentioned, states that “it is usually supposed that seals are like wild animals. That is not so. They are used to the natives and will not run from them. ‘The little pups will come to them, and even in the fall, when they are older, we can take them up in our hands and see whether they are males or females. We can drive the seals about in little or large bands just as we want them to go, and they are easy to manage.”° 1Vol. Il, p. 159. Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p.5; 8. M. Washburn, Vol. II, p. 156; H. V. Fletcher, Vol. II, p. 105; George H. Temple, Vol. II, p. 153. 2 Viol. LL, p.53. 4J.M. Morton, Vol. II, p. 69; Leon Sloss, Vol. II, p. 91; H. V, Fletcher, Vol. H, p. 106; George H. Temple, Vol. I, p. 153; Gus- tave Niebaum, Vol. II, p. 77; John Armstrong, Vol. II, p. 2. ®Vol. II, p. 145. 150 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Control and do- Several other Pribilof islanders and white men mestication. long resident there make similar statements.’ This peculiar susceptibility to control has also been and is recognized by such a well-known scientist as Dr. EK. von Middendorff, of Russia, who, in a letter dated May 6/18, 1892, says: “This animal is of commercial importance and was created for a domestic animal, as I pointed out many years ago. (See my ‘Siberian Jour- ney,’ Vol. 1v, Part 1, p. 846.) It is, in fact, the most useful of all domestic animals, since it re- quires no care and no expense and consequently yields the largest net profit.”* eae ial for ‘This power of domestication has made it pos- sible to discriminate most carefully between the classes of seals killed and to enforce rules and regulations for the general management of the herd. Rear-Admiral Sir M. Culver-Seymour, in a dispatch to the British Admiralty, says: ‘The seals killed by the Alaska Commercial Company are all clubbed on land, where the difference of sex can easily be seen.”* Protection of The first regulation enforced by the Govern- females. ment of the United States was that no female 1 John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 109; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 182; J. C. Redpath, Vol. Il, p. 152; Simeon Melovedoff, Vol, I, p. 147. 2Letter of Dr. E. von Middendorff, Vol. I, p. 451. ’ British Blue Book, U.S. No.2 (1890), C-6151, p. 4. THE SEALS. 151 seals should be killed." Capt. Moulton, for eight , ER ORI emales, years assistant Treasury agent on the islands, says: “‘No female is ever killed, and it is very ”2 Samuel Falconer seldom a female is driven. assistant Treasury agent on the islands from 1870 to 1876, states that not more than two female seals a season were driven on St. George Island, and that he believed those were barren cows which had hauled up with the bachelors.’ If a female seal was killed either intentionally or accidentally, the employé was fined*+ This regu- lation preserves the producing sex, is not only observed by the native sealers on the Pribilof Islands, but the need of strictly conforming thereto is fully realized as a means of preservation of the species. Karp Buterin, the chief of the natives on St. Paul Island, who was born on the islands, and is the most intelligent of the natives,° says: ‘I know, and we all know, if we kill cows the seals soon die out and we would have no meat to eat; and if anyone told me to kill cows I would say no! IfTI or any of my people knew of any- one killing a cow, we would go and tell the 1 Louis Kimmel, Vol. II, p. 173; George Wardman, Vol. II, p. 1783 H. G. Otis, Vol. II, p. 86; Anton Melovedoff, Vol. II, p. 142. 2Vol. Il, p. 72; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 181. J. C. Redpath, Vol. II, p. 149. 3Vol. II, p. 162. 4Anton Melovedoff, Vol. II, p. 139. 5’Milton Barnes, Vol. II, p. 102. 152 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Protection of Government officer.” And Mr. C. L. Fowler, females. The killable class. Disturbance of breeding seals. who has been employed on the islands since 1879, says that nothing offends the natives quicker than to have a female killed.” With the codperation of the natives, who alone do the driving and kill- ing, violation of this regulation is impossible. Another evidence of the strictness with which this rule is enforced is the testimony of furriers to the fact that the skins of female seals are never seen among those taken on the Pribilof Islands. The class of seals allowed to be killed are the nonbreeding males from one to five years of age which “haul out upon the hauling grounds remote from the breeding grounds.”* The handling of this class of seals because of their separation from the ‘breeders” causes the least possible disturbance to the seals on the breeding erounds.’ Besides this the most stringent rules have been and are enforced by the Government to prevent any disturbance of the breeding seals. Capt. W. C. Coulson, of the United States TViol Sty ps 0S: 2 Viol SU pa2o: 3G. C. Lampson, Vol. II, p.565. See also favorable comment on the wisdom of this regulation in ‘‘ Handbook of the Fisheries of New Zealand,” p. 236. 4 J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 16; T. F. Morgan, Vol. II, p. 62. 5 J. Stanley Brown, Vol. I, p.16; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 183. 6Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p. 8; 8. N. Buynitsky, Vol. IT, p. 22. THE SEALS. 153 Revenue Marine Service, who visited the islands Disturbance of ; breeding seals. me1890 and 1891,, says: “All firearms were forbidden and never have been used on these islands in the killing and taking of seals; in fact, unusual noise, even on the ships at anchor near these islands, is avoided. Visitmg the rookeries is not permitted only on certain conditions, and anything that might frighten the seals is avoided. The seals are never killed in or near the rook- -eries, but are driven a short distance inland to grounds especially set apart for this work. I do not see how it is possible to conduct the sealing process with greater care or judgment.” Fire- arms are not permitted to be used on the islands from the time the first seal lands until the close of the season.” The number of seals allowed to be killed Number killed. annually by the lessees was, from 1871 to 1889 inclusive, one hundred thousand,’ but this num- ber is variable and entirely within the control of the Treasury Department of the United States.* In 1889 Charles J. Goff, then the Government agent on the islands, reported to the Department that he considered it necessary to reduce the 1'Vol. II, p. 414. 2 J. C. Redpath, Vol. II, p. 150. 3 J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 18; H. G. Otis, Vol. II, p. 85. 4 J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 16. 2716 20 154 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Numberkilled. quota of skins to be taken in 1890." The Gov- ernment at once reduced the number to sixty thousand and ordered the killing of seals to cease on July 20.° The 20th of July was fixed upon because in former years the taking of seals had practically ceased at that time, the breeding grounds and hauling grounds beme up to that time entirely distinct and separate, and because during the period from June 1 to July 20 the skins were in the most marketable condition.’ The killing of a portion of the surplus male life is undoubtedly a benefit to the herd, as it is with other domestic and polygamous animals. For it has always been found that such an act increases the number of the progeny. The American Commissioners also demonstrate by the diagrams attached to their report, which are explained in the body of the document, that a large portion of the young male seals can be killed without reduc- ing or affecting the normal birth rate* The United States Government formerly allowed the natives to kill a few thousand male pups for food, but such killing has been prohibited.’ W\VO LG IOI Fo), IE 2H. G. Otis, Vol. II, p. 86. 3 Leon Sloss, Vol. Il, p. 92; Gustave Niebaum, Vol. II, p. 77; J. C. Redpath, Vol. II, p. 152. 4 Report of American Bering Sea Commissioners. post, p. 356. J. Stanley Brown, Vol. Il, p. 18; see Regulations, Vol. I, pe 103. THE SEALS. 155 The manner of taking seals on the islands is) Manner of tak- conducted with the greatest care and precau- ~ tions' and is directly under the supervision of the Government agents.” The methods employed have been the same for twenty years,’ without variation,* and it is the universal testimony of all acquainted with the methods employed that they can not be improved upon.’ ‘The natives, who are the only persons who ever drive or handle the seals,° start out between 2 and 6 o’clock in the morning when the weather is cool and there is the least liability of overheating the seals; separating a small herd of bachelors from those occupying a hauling ground they drive them inland.’ A hauling ground after a drive is given several days of rest and as a seal let go from the killing grounds always returns to the same hauling grounds, it has plenty of time to recuperate before being driven again.° The herd is then driven as slowly as possible Driving. while still keeping the animals in motion.’ Ag- ! Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p. 8; M. C. Erskine, Vol. II, p. 422; W. C. Coulson, Vol. II, p. 414. 2B. F. Scribner, Vol. II, p. 89; J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 72. 3W.S. Hereford, Vol. II, p. 36. 4H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 45. 58. Falconer, Vol. II, p. 161. 6 W. C. Coulson, Vol. II, p. 414; Samuel Falconer, Vol. II, p. 161; Simeon Melavidoff, Vol. II, p. 209. 7™W.B. Taylor, Vol. I, p. 176. 8S8.N. Buynitsky, Vol. II, p. 21. ® Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 182. 156 Diiving. MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. eie Kushin, native priest on St. Paul Island, says: “The seals are never driven at a greater speed than one mile in three hours; and the men who do the driving have to relieve each other on the road because they travel so slow they get very cold.”* Other native seal drivers and officials on the islands also speak of the slow- ness of the driving. At suitable intervals the herd is halted and seals of the unmarketable age are allowed to separate themselves from the rest and return to the water.’ The greatest care has always been taken not to overheat the animals during a “drive,” because the effect is very injurious* Louis Kimmel, assistant Treasury agent in 1882 and 1883, says: “In every case of a seal being killed on the ‘drive” I, as Government agent, imposed a fine in order that they might be more careful in the future.® I'requent stops are made to allow the seals to rest and cool off.° A drive is never undertaken while the sun is shining,’ and if the sun unex- pectedly comes out the drive is immediately aban- IVol se Misap. lao: 2 J. C. Redpath, Vol. 11, p. 150. 3’ Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p. 8. 4 Samuel Falconer, Vol. II, p.162; J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 72. 5 Viol Wp lias 6 J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 72. 7 J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 72; A. P. Loud, Vol. II, p.38; John TVratis, Vol. I, p.107; Watson C. Allis, Vol. II, p. 97. THE SEALS. doned and the seals allowed to return to the water.! The natives understand how much fatigue can be endured by the seals and the kind of weather suitable for ‘‘driving,”’ therefore the number of seals killed by overdriving or by smothering was very inconsiderable at all times? J.C. Redpath, who has since 1875 been one of the lessees’ agents on the islands, says: ‘As the regulations require the lessees to pay for every skin taken from seals killed by the orders of their local agents, and as the skin of an overheated seal is. valueless, it is only reasonable to suppose that they would be the last men living to encourage _or allow their employés to overdrive or in any manner injure the seals.”* Mr. Wardman says: “Seals are rarely killed by overdriving”” Mr. Buynitsky says he never saw a single seal killed by overdriving,® and Capt. Moulton states that ‘fa very few seals die during a ‘drive’, amount- ing to a very small fraction of one per cent of those driven. And in nine cases out of ten of those accidentally killed by smothering, the skins 1 Samuel Falconer, Vol. II, p. 162; J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 723 B. F. Seribner, Vol. II, p.80; John Fratis, Vol. LH, p. 107. 2 W.C. Coulson, Vol. II, p. 414. 3 H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 45. S Vole trp: 150: > Vol. 11, p. 178. 6 Vol. II, p. 21. Driving. 158 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Driving. are saved.” The same statement as to the re- moval of the skins is stated by others, the skins being counted in the quota allowed to the lessees.’ In fact it may be questioned whether any seals are ever killed on a ‘“drive,” except now and then one by smothering.’ The effects of overdriving and redriving (that is, the repeated driving of the same animal several times during the season) upon the seals Overdriving and é aK aed redriving. which from age or condition are unfit for killing, is of little or no importance in relation to seal life on the islands. After a “drive” the hauling ground is unmolested for several days and the seals let go from the killing grounds, returning to the same hauling grounds as is their habit, have, therefore, several days to rest and recu- perate before undergoing whatever extra exertion is connected with being driven.* Certainly no male seal thus driven was ever seriously injured or his virility affected by such redriving.’ Mr. John Armstrong, who from 1877 to 1886 was the lessees’ agent on St. Paul Island, says: ‘The driving gave them, with rare exceptions, very 1 Vol. II, p.72. See also A. P. Loud, Vol. II, p. 38. 2 George Wardman, Vol. II, p. 178; Samuel Falconer, Vol. HU, p. 162; John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 107. 3 John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 107. 4Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 182. 5A. P. Loud, Vol.. Il, p. 38; Charles Bryant Vol. II, p. 83 George Wardman, Vol. I, p. 179; Daniel Webster, Vol. H, p. 182. THE SEALS. 159 little more exercise than they appeared to take pGreutwingand when left to themselves.”* Anton Melovedoff, 2 an educated native of St. Paul Island, and for seven years First Chief on the island, after stating the fact that before the American occupation the seals were driven sometimes twelve and one-half miles, says, ‘‘ No one ever said in those days that seals were made impotent by driving, although long drives had been made for at least fifty years.”” Mr. Samuel Falconer, in speaking of this question of redriving, says: “‘ Whenwe con- sider that the bulls, while battling on the rooker- ies to maintain their positions, cut great gashes in the flesh of their necks and bodies, are covered with gaping wounds, lose great quantities of blood, fast on the islands for three or four months, and then leave the islands, lean and covered with scars, to return the following season fat, healthy, and full of vigor to go through again the same mutilation, and repeating this year after year, the idea that driving or redriving, which can not possibly be as severe as their exertions during a combat, can affect such unequal vigor and virility is utterly preposterous and ridiculous.”* Capt. Moulton, after eight years’ experience on the 1Vol. IL, p. 1. 2Vol. I, p. 142. $Vol. HU, p.162. See also Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 183. 160 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. _ eps a islands, states it as his opinion that even if a seal ” was driven twelve successive days for the aver- age distance between a hauling ground and a kil- ling ground, its virility would not be at all impaired.* Mr. Taylor says in relation to injury to the reproductive powers of the male seals ‘‘it would at once be noticeable, for the impotent bull would certainly haul up with the bachelors, having no inclination and vigor to maintain him- ”2 The same methods of self on the rookeries. driving are employed on the Commander Islands, and the rookeries are smaller, necessitating more redriving and the drive on Copper Island takes often a day going over a ridge seven hundred feet high; and yet this driving, so much more severe than on the Pribilof Islands, has been carried on for over fifty years is sufficient evidence that redriving does not injure the reproductive force of the male seal.*?- All the drives on the Com- mander Islands are rougher and more severe than on the Pribilof Islands.“ That this injury to the male portion of the herd has not occurred is evidenced by the testimony of many on the islands in later years,’ and Mr. Redpath, resident Viole Wipe. 2 Viole alle wen lidias 8C. F. Emil Krebs, Vol. II, p.196. 4N. B. Miller, Vol. II, p. 200. 6H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 45; J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 18; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 182; J. C. Redpath, Vol. II, p. 151; C. L. Fowler, Vol. II, p. 25. THE SEALS. 161 for seventeen years on the island, adds: ‘The a care at man is not alive who ever saw a six or seven on year old bull impotent.”* The killing grounds are located near the water, so that those seals whose skins are unmarketable can readily and with little exertion return to that element; they are also established as near the hauling grounds as is possible without having the odor from the carcasses disturb the breeding seals.’ If it were not for this unavoidable cause of disturbance attendant upon the killmg and skinning of the animals, driving in any form would not be necessary, but as it is, the killing must take place at some distance from the hauling and breeding grounds, which compels a certain amount of driving. The improvement over the Russian methods is, provement marked in this particular, for in 1873° horses and °¢s of ins: mules were introduced by the lessees to transport the skins to the salt houses, previous to which time all this labor had been done by the natives, who were the sole beasts of burden on the islands;* and, therefore, the killing grounds were located much nearer to the hauling grounds than Vole UE spe Lol. 2J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 72; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 182. 3Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p. 8. 4Letter from Chief Manager Furnhelm to the Board of Adminis- tration of the Russian American Company, dated July 16, 1863. 2716—2] 162 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Improvement over Russian meth- ods of taking. before this means of transportation was pro- vided.t. Anton Melovedoff states that ‘in the Russian times, before 1868, the seals were always driven across the island of St. Paul from North East Point (the largest of the rookeries) to the village salt house, a distance of twelve and one- half miles, but when the Alaska Commercial Company leased the islands they stopped long driving and built salt houses near to the hauling erounds, so that by 1879 no seals were driven more than two miles.”’ Other natives who were on the islands under both American and Russian control also speak of the shortening of the drives by the American lessees.? Under these improve- ments the killing season was reduced from three or four months under the Russian occupation to thirty or forty days,* showing how much Ameri- can management has facilitated the taking of seals and reduced the number of days of disturb- ance to the herd. Kerrick Artomanoff, a native born on St. Paul Island sixty-seven years ago, and who has driven seals for fifty years and was chief for seventeen years, says: ‘The methods 1J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 72; Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p. 9; H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 45. 2Vol. II, p. 142. S3Aggie Kushin, Vol. II, p.129; Karp Buterin, Vol. II, p. 104; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 182; J. C. Redpath, Vol. II, p. 150; Kerrick Artomanoff, Vol. II, p. 99. 4J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 18, THE SEALS. used by the Alaska Commercial Company and 163 Improvement over Russian meth- the American Government for the care and pres- ods of taking. ervation of the seals were much better than those used by the Russian Government.”? When a “drive” arrives at the killing grounds the animals are allowed to rest and cool off; then they are divided into groups or “pods” of from twenty to thirty;° the killable seals are carefully selected, those of three and four years being pre- ferred; * the killing gang then club those selected, allowing the remainder to return to the water. The skins are removed from the carcasses, counted by the Government agent, salted and packed in ‘‘kenches” at the salt houses. The flesh of the seals is taken by the natives for food. Under the Russian management many skins were lost through the drying process, and also from the glutted condition of the Chinese market, where the greatest number of the skins were disposed of by barter. Bishop Veniaminof says (Vol. I, p. 296) that “in 1803 eight hundred thou- DViOle Tp. 99. 2 Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 182. 3H. H. McIntyre, Vol. I, p.57; J. Stanley Brown, Vol. Ii, p. 16. 4 Letter of Chief Manager Furnhelm to the Board of Adminis- tration of the Russian American Company, dated July 16, 1863, Vol. 1, p. 88. A full account of the method of drying, salting, and packing the skins is given by Dr. H. H. McIntyre, Vol. I, p. 57. Killing. Salting and kenching, Improvement in treating the skins. 164 MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ROOKERIES. Improvement in sand skins had accumulated, there being no prof- treating the skins. Increase. itable sale for them at Kiakhta (the Chinese market town), and besides a large proportion of the skins became spoiled, and more than seven hundred thousand were burned or thrown into the sea.” But under American control all skins are salted, as will be seen by an examination of the London Trade Sales, and there is no waste. Under this careful management of the United States Government the seal herd on the Pribilof Islands increased in numbers, at least up to the year 1881. This increase was readily recognized by those located on the islands.t Capt. Bryant says that in 1877 the breeding seals had increased to such an extent that they spread out on the sand beaches, while in 1870 they had been confined to the shores covered with broken rocks.” Mr. Fal- coner mentions the fact that in 1871 passages or lanes were left by the bulls through the breeding erounds to the hauling grounds, which he ob- served to be entirely closed up by breeding seals in 1876,’ and in this statement he is borne out by the testimony of Dr. McIntyre.* It must be remembered also in this connection that two 1 Gustave Niebaum, Vol. I, p. 77; H. W. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 138; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 181; J. C. Redpath, Vol. I, p. 151. 2 Viole ie spende $Vol. I, p. 161. Vol, I, p. 44. EVIDENCE OF DECREASE. 165 hundred and forty thousand male seals had been Increase. destroyed in 1868, and that this increase took place in spite of that slaughter and although one hundred thousand male seals were taken annu- ally upon the islands.’ How this increase could be recognized has been already mentioned in con- nection with the question of estimating the number of seals, and is best shown by the charts marked A to K,’ which have been verified by those most familiar with seal life during that period (1870 to 1881).* That this increase in the seal herd was undoubtedly the result of the methods and man- agement employed by the American Government is a fact asserted ard clearly proved.* DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. EVIDENCE OF DECREASE. From the year 1880 to the year 188485 Period of stag- nation. the condition of the rookeries showed neither increase nor decrease in the number of seals on the islands.” In 1884, however, there was a 1London Trade Sales, Vol. II, p. 585; tables of seals taken, Vol. Il, pp. 127 and 172. 2 See portfolio of maps and charts and explanatory affidavits of H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 30; Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p. 3, and J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 20. 3H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p.44; Charles Bryant, Vol. II, p.7; T. F. Morgan, Vol. IJ, p. 64; Samuel Falconer, Vol. II, p. 167. 4J. C. Cantwell, Vol. II, p. 408; H. G. Otis, Vol. II, p. 87. 5 J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 18; J. H. Moulton, Vol. I, p. 71; Hi. A. Glidden, Vol. II, p. 109. 166 DECREASE UF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. Period of stag- perceptible decrease noticed in the seal herd at aie the islands,’ and in 1885 the decrease was marked in the migrating herd as it passed up along the American coast, both by the Indian hunters along the coast? and by white seal hunters at sea.® Since that time the decrease has become more evident from year to year, both at the rookeries * and in the waters of the Pacifie Ocean and Bering Sea. The Bering Sea Com- missioners of both Great Britain and the United States, in their joint report, affirm that a decrease has taken place in the number of the seal herd;° so that the simple fact is accepted by both parties to this controversy. But the time when the seals commenced decreasing, the extent of such decrease, and its cause are matters for con- sideration. On Pribilof Isl: The American Bering Sea Commissioners, ci after an exhaustive examination of the condition of the rookeries, as to the evidence of their former limits, and of individual witnesses who had observed the rookeries for several years 1. H. Moulton, Vol. IT, p. 71; M. C. Erskine, Vol. H, p. 422; Anton Melovedoff, Vol. IT, p. 139. 2 Alfred Irving, Vol. II, p. 387; Bowachup, Vol. Il, p. 376; N. Gregarotf, Vol. IT, p. 284. 3K. W. Littlejohn, Vol. II, p. 457; A. McLean, Vol. II, p. 487. 4 J. H. Douglass, Vol. II, p. 419; M. C. Erskine, Vol. II, p. 422; N. Mandregin, Vol. I, p. 140. 6 James Kennedy, Vol. Il, p. 449; Charles Lutjens, Vol. IT, p. 459. 6 Joint Report of Bering Sea Commissioners, post, p. 309. EVIDENCE OF DECREASE. state that the spaces now covered by seals are much less in area than formerly, and that a marked yearly decrease is shown to have taken i place during the last five or six years.’ Karp 167 On Pribilof Isl- ands, Buterin, native chief of the St. Paul Islanders, - who has lived on the island all his life, says: “Plenty schooners came first about eight or nine years ago and more and more every year since; and the seals get less ever since schoon- ers came; and my people kept saying, ‘No cows! no cows!”? Dr. William 8. Hereford, who was resident physician on the Pribilof Islands from 1880 to 1891, inclusive, says: ‘It is an indisputable fact that large portions of the breeding rookeries and hauling grounds are bare, where but a few years ago nothing but the happy, noisy, and snarling seal families could be seen;”* and Mr. A. P. Loud, assistant ‘Treasury agent on the islands from 1885 to 1889, says there was a very marked decrease in the size of the breeding grounds from 1885 to 1889.4 Capt. Coulson, of the United States Revenue Marine, who cruised in Bering Sea in 1870, 1890, and 1891, also mentions the fact that the decrease in one year (1890-91) was 1 Report of American Bering Sea Commissioners, post, p. 340. 2 Karp Buterin, Vol. II, p. 103; See also C. L. Fowler, Vol. II, p. 25, $ Vol. II, p. 36. 4Vol. II, p. 38. 168 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. pote epllo’ As ery: noticeable. Commander Turner, Royal Navy, in a dispatch to Rear-Admiral Hotham, dated on the Nymphie at Esquimault, October 8, 1891, states that ‘‘on the largest rookery, a great tract of land, which afew years ago had been covered with seals, and the bowlders and rocks which had been worn smooth by them, was now totally deserted, and no increase had been observed on other rookeries to compensate for this deficiency.” ? How great has been the decrease in the num- ber of seals is most plainly shown by the charts marked A to K. The areas covered by breed- ing seals in 1891, which were carefully platted by the Government surveyor from observations and measurements made by him during his sur- vey, should be compared with the lines of increase heretofore mentioned.? M. C. Erskine, a sea cap- tain of twenty-four years’ experience in Alaskan waters, speaks of the scarcity of seals in Bering Sea in 1890 as compared with the numbers seen in former years? Treasury Agent Goff, who was in charge of the islands in 1889 and 1890, and who had reported the decrease of seals to the Government, in consequence of which report the 1Vol. II, p. 415. 2 British Blue Book, U.S. No.3 (1892) C-6635, p. 113. 3 Ante, p. 165. 4 Vol. II, p. 422. EVIDENCE OF DECREASE. 169 number of seals to be taken had been reduced eR Eh to sixty thousand, and the time for killing limited ; to July 20,’ says: “As a result of the entforce- ment of these regulations the lessees were unable to take more than twenty-one thousand two hun- dred and thirty-eight seals of the killable age, of from one to five years, during the season of 1890, so great had been the decrease of seal life in one year, and it would have been impossible to obtain sixty thousand skins even if the time had been unrestricted.” He further adds that the weather in 1890 was as favorable to seal driving as in 1889 (when one hundred thousand skins were taken) and the driving was conducted as dili- gently in the latter year as in the former.’ Besides the foregoing testimony, the natives and Evidence. white residents on the islands state that the seals began to decrease in 1885 or 1886, and that the decrease has been the most rapid in the last three years.’ Thomas Gibson, a seal hunter since 1881, says Along the coast. there has been a great decrease in the number of seals in the North Pacific and Bering Sea since VY Anite, p. 153. BeVol Ui ps tt. 3 Anton Melovedoff, Vol. II, p.143;"Aggie Kushin, Vol. IT, p. 128; Nicoli Krukoff, Vol. I, p. 132; John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 108; Alexander Hansson, Vol. I, p. 116; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 181; C. L. Fow- ler, Vol. II, p. 141; Edward Hughes, Vol. II, p. 37. 2716 22 170 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. Along the coast. he began hunting,’ and he is supported in this statement by James L. Carthcut, captain of a sealing vessel from 1877 to 1887, Alexander McLean, a captain of a sealing schooner for eleven years, Daniel McLean, also with eleven years’ experience, and many others.” Peter Brown, chief of the Makah Indians at Neah Bay, in the State of Washington, a tribe who from time immemorial have been expert seal hunters and have through their industry acquired much property® and are among the few civilized aborig- inal tribes of North America, testifies to the decrease in the seal herd. Hastings Yethow, an old Indian residing at Nicholas Bay, Prince of Wales Island, who has hunted seals from boy- hood, says: ‘Since the white men with schooners began to hunt seal off Prince of Wales Island, the seals have become very scarce and unless they are stopped from hunting seal they will soon be all gone. If the white men are permit- ted to hunt seal much longer the fur-seal will become as scarce as the sea-otter, which were quite plenty around Dixon Entrance when I was a boy. The Indians are obliged to go a 1 Vol. II, p. 432. 2G. Fogel, Vol. Il, p. 424; G. Isaacson, Vol. II, p. 440; James Sloan, Vol. I, p. 477; J. D. McDonald, Vol. II, p. 266; Louis Culler, Vol. II, p. 321. 4 Tbid., pp. 377, 378. EVIDENCE OF DECREASE. ala long way for seal now, and often return after two Along the coast. or three days’ hunt without any.” George Skultka, chief of the Hyda Indians at How- kan, says: ‘There are no seals left now; they are most all killed off.” Chief Frank, Second Chief of the Kaskan Indians, states that ‘‘fur seal are not as plenty as they used to be and it is hard for the Indians to catch any,” and closes his testimony with the words, ‘‘there is one thing certain, seals are getting scarce.”* ‘Thomas Lowe, a seal hunter belonging to the Clallam tribe, Vassili Feodor, a native hunter of the vil- lage of Soldovoi in Cooks Inlet, and many other Indians living along the coast from the Straits of Juan de Fuca to Cooks Inlet, make the same assertion.” That this decrease, in respect to which the evidence is so unanimous from every point of observation, was not caused by any change in the methods employed on the islands has already been shown by the testimony of numerous reliable witnesses, who prove that 1 Vol. II, p. 803. See also Chief Thomas Skowl, Vol. II, p. 300; Smith Natch, Vol. Ll, p. 299; Nashtou, Vol. Il, p. 298; Robert Kooko, Vol. II, p. 296. 2Vol. II. p. 290. 3 Vol. II, p. 280. 4 Alfred Irving, Vol. II, p. 387; Circus Jim (Neah Bay), Vol. II, p. 380, 381; Weckenunesch (Barclay Sound), Vol. II, p. 311; Martin Singay (Sitka Bay), Vol. II, p. 268; Kinkooga (Yakutat Bay), Vol. II, p. 240; Mike Kethusduck (Sitka Bay), Vol. II, p. 262; Echon (Shakan) Vol. II, p. 280; Simeon Chin-koo-tin (Sitka Bay), Vol. IL, p. 257. Ae, DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. Along the coast. Lack of male life not the cause. there was no change in the manner of handling and taking the seals in the last decade from that employed in former years, during which the seal herd materially increased.* CAUSE. Nor was this marked decrease chargeable to | the fact that there were not sufficient males to serve the females resorting to the islands.” Mr. J.C. Redpath, already quoted as one thoroughly familiar with seal life on the islands, says: ‘A dearth of bulls on the breeding rookeries was a pet theory of one or two transient visitors, but it only needed a thorough investigation of the rook- eries to convince the most skeptical that there were plenty of bulls and to spare, and that hardly a cow could be found on the rookeries without a pup at her side.” Karp Buterin, Head Chief of the natives of St. Paul Island, says: ‘Plenty of bulls all the time on the rookeries, and plenty bulls have no cows. I never seen athree-year- old cow without apup in July; only two-year- olds have no pups.” Agent Goff particularly testifies that although the lessees had much diffi- 1 Ante, p. 164. 2J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p.18; Anton Melovedoff, Vol. II, p. 142; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p.181. 3 Vol. I, p. 151. 4Vol. II, p. 104. CAUSE. 173 culty to procure their quota in 1889, a sufficient, Lack of male life net the cause. number of males were reserved for breeding purposes.’ Col. Joseph Murray, assistant agent on the islands in 1890, and still holding that position, says: “I saw nearly every cow with a pup by her side and hundreds of vigorous bulls without any cows.” And this statement is sup- ported by Mr. J. Stanley Brown, who was on the islands in 1891.° Maj. W. H. Williams, the pres- ent agent of the United States Government on the Pribilof Islands, and who held that position in 1891, says: ‘During the season of 1891 nearly every mature female coming upon the rookeries gave birth to a young seal, and there was a great abundance of males of sufficient age to again go upon the breeding grounds that year, as was shown by the inability of large numbers of them to secure more than one to five cows each, while quite a number could secure none at all* Aggie Kushin, for several years assistant priest in the Greek Catholic Church, and resident on St. Paul Island since 1867, says: ‘‘We noticed idle, vigor- ous bulls on the breeding rookeries because of the scarcity of cows, and | have noticed that the cows have decreased steadily every year since 1886, 1 Vol. II, p. 122. 2V ol. II, p. 74. 2 Vol. I, p. 14: 4Vol. II, p. 94, 174 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. meno ale but more particularly so in 1888, 1889, 1890, and 1891.”' And the fact that the conflicts took place between the bulls on the rookeries in 1890 and 1891 is sufficient to show that virile males were not lacking.’ It has also been shown that the decrease in the seals took place primarily among the female portion of the herd. Raids on rook- Raids upon the rookeries, or the unlawful eries not the cause. . killing of seals on the islands by unauthorized persons, though injurious to seal life,’ have played no important part in the history of the rookeries, and the few thousand skins thus secured never affected the number of the seal herd to any extent.* The American Commis- sioners, after asserting that the number of seals killed by raiders is very inconsiderable, continue: “It is also difficult for one familiar with the rookeries and the habits of the seal to conceive of a raid beimg made without its becoming known to the officers in charge of the operations upon the islands. The ‘raid theory,’ therefore, may be dismissed as unworthy, in our judgment, of serious consideration.”®> Mr. Stanley 1Vol. Il, p. 128, pee ae John Fr atis, Vol. II, p. 109; H. N. Clark, Vol. II, p. 159; Daniel Webster, Vol. II, p. 181. 2Report of Arneneae Bering Sea Cominisionees post, p. 349. 3H. H. McIntyre, Vol. Il, p. 46; T. F. Morgan, Vol. IT, p. 65. 4W. B. Taylor, Vol. II, p.177; J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p. 72; H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 46; Aggie Kushin, Vol. II, p. 128; John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 108. ® Report of American Bering Sea Cominissioners, post, p. 378. CAUSE. LTS Brown, in considering this question, and after a Raids on rook- i ‘ J or 5y : eries not the cause. careful examination of the statistics relating thereto, says: ‘The inhospitable shores, the exposure of the islands to surf, the unfavorable climatic conditions, as well as the presence of the natives and white men, will always prevent raids upon the islands from ever being frequent 71 A further evidence of the infre- or effective. quency of such marauding is clearly shown by the affidavit ot Mr. Max Heilbronner, Secretary of the Alaska Commercial Company, as compiled from the records of said company,’ and the state- ment compiled by the Treasury Department from the reports of their agents during Ameri- can occupation, there being but sixteen such invasions reported.’ If other raids had taken place besides these, the fact would have certainly have been known on the islands, as their effect would have been seen en the breeding grounds in the shape of dead carcasses of pups and other seals. The difficulty of landing upon the rook- eries without being discovered is also made evident from the ineffectual efforts of predatory vessels to land men on the islands, which are 1J, Stanley Brown, Vol. II, p. 18. 2Max Heilbronner’s statement, Vol. II, pp. 112-127. 3’Treasury Department, statement of raids, Vol. II, p. 519. 4Anton Melovedoff, Vol. II, p. 143. 176 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. Raids on rook-described by members of the crew of such eries not the cause. i vessels. Management of If, then, this marked decrease in the Alaskan rookeries not the cause. seal herd has not been caused by the way the seals are handled or killed upon the islands, nor by a lack of male life resulting from excessive destruction of bachelor seals by the lessees of the seal rookeries with the consent of the Gov- ernment of the United States, nor by the depre- dations of marauding parties upon the islands, another cause of destruction must be sought. Excessive kill. It is admitted by all parties to this controversy ing the admitted : cause. that a decrease has taken place in the Alaskan seal herd which has been ‘‘the result of excessive killing by man.”* The acts of man in destroy- ing seal life can be performed either upon the islands which the seals have chosen for their home or in the waters of the Pacific Ocean or Bering Sea, while the herd is performing its annual migration or during its stay at the islands. That such destruction of the species on the Pelagic sealing islands has not caused the great decrease in the the sole cause. number of seals has already been shown; there remains, therefore, but one other possible cause, namely, the killmge of seals during their migra- ! Joseph Grymes, Vol. II, p. 484; Peter Duffy, Vol. II, p. 421. 2 Joint Report of the American and British Commissioners, post, p. 309, CAUSE. tion or in the waters adjacent to the islands; in other words, the sole cause of the present depleted condition of the Alaskan seal herd is the result of open-sea sealing. This is shown particularly from the fact that the decrease has been prin- cipally in the female portion of the seal herd," which will be shown later to form from eighty to ninety per cent of the pelagic catch. That such is the cause of decrease is the concurrent opinion of a great number of witnesses, Indians and whites, of many occupations and of varied experience. The American Bering Sea Commis- sioners, after a careful and exhaustive examina- tion into the question of decrease, report the cause to be pelagic sealing? Dr. J. A. Allen, after examining and duly weighing the sources of information, American, British, and Canadian, declares it to be his opinion that pelagic sealing has been the sole cause of the great decrease in the Alaskan seal herd.* Such witnesses as Thomas F. Morgan, H. H. McIntyre, and others, of twenty years’ experience with the Alaskan herd and thoroughly conversant with all the conditions and phases of seal life, state 1Report of American Bering Sea Commissioners and the wit- nesses examined by them, post, p. 341; Karp Buterin, Vol. II, p. 108. 2Report of American Bering Sea Commissionets, post, p. 367. 3’ Report of the American Bering Sea Commissioners, post, p. 379, 4 Article by Dr. Allen, Part III, Vol. I, p. 410, 2716 23 17? Pelagic sealing the sole cause, Opinions. American com- missioners. Dr. Allen, Experts, t78 Experts. DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. the sole cause of the decrease to be pelagic seal- ing.’ Capt. Daniel Webster, already mentioned, and one of the most, if not the most, expe- rienced white man in seal habits and life, after mentioning. the increase of seals from 1870 to 1880 and the rapid decrease from 1884 to 1891, says: ‘‘In my judgment there is but one cause for that decline and the present condition of the rookeries, and that is the shotgun and rifle of the pelagic hunter, and it is my opinion that if the lessees had not taken a seal on the islands for the last ten years we would still find the breeding grounds in about the same condition as they are to-day, so destructive to seal life are the methods adopted by these hunters.”? Dr. W.S. Hereford, with eleven years’ experience on the seal islands, says: ‘‘I made the conditions of seal life a careful study for years, and I am firmly of the opinion their decrease in number on the Pribilof Islands is due wholly and entirely to hunting and killing them in the open sea.” Charles IF’. Wagner, who was _ located at Unalaska in 1871, and has been a fur trader since 1874 to the present time, says: ‘I am 1T. F. Morgan, Vol. II, p. 65; H. H. McIntyre, Vol. I, p. 46; Gus- tave Niebaum, Vol. II, p. 203. 2Vol. II, p. 184. $Vol. II, p. 36. CAUSE. sure the decrease is caused by the killing of females in the open sea.”* (it will be shown later in discussing the method and. catch of open- sea sealing vessels that a large percentage of the seals thus taken are females.)” Prof. W. H. Dall, the well known scientist and author, says: “It is evident that the injury to the herd from the kill- ing of a single female, that is, the producer, is far greater than from the death of a male, as the seal is polygamous in habit; the destruction to the herd, therefore, is just in proportion to the de- struction of female life. Killme in the open waters is peculiarly destructive to this animal.” ? A large number of Indians along the Pacific coast from Oregon to the passes of the Aleutian Islands, whose depositions are appended hereto, are unanimous in declaring the cause of decrease in the seal herd to be open-sea sealing as it has been conducted for the past six or seven years. Evan Alexandroff, priest at Soldovoi in Cook’s Inlet, unites with several native seal hunters of that locality in stating that ‘‘fur-seals were for- merly much more plentiful, but of late years are becoming constantly scarcer. This is, we think, owing to the number of vessels engaged in hunt- 1Vol. HH, p. 212. 2 Post p. 196. $W. H., Dall, Vol. U, p. 24. 179 Experts. Indian hunters. 180 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. Indian hunters. ing them at sea.”' Nicoli Apokche, a native fur trader at Fort Alexander, Cook’s Inlet, says: “Fur seals were formerly observed in this neigh- borhood in great numbers, but of late years they have been constantly diminishing, owing to the large numbers of sealing vessels engaged in killing them,”? and his affidavit is signed by several other natives of that region engaged m seal hunting. Peter Brown, the old chief of the Makah Indians, already quoted, says: ‘‘ White hunters came here about five or six years ago and commenced shooting the seals with guns, since which time they have been rapidly decreas- ing and are becoming very wild.” Ellabash, another Indian of the same tribe, confirms this statement in the following words: ‘Seals are not so plentiful now as they were a few years ago. They began to decrease about five or six years ago. A good many years ago I used to capture seals in the Straits of Juan de Fuca. but of late years, since so many schooners and white men have come around here shooting with guns, that only a few come in here and we do not hunt in the Straits any more. I used to catch forty or fifty seals in one day, and now if I get 1 Vol. II, p. 229. 2Vol. II, p. 224. 3 Peter Brown, Vol. II, p. 378. CAUSE. six or seven I would have great luck. I have to go a long distance to get seals now. Seals are wild and afraid of an Indian. They have become so since the white man and the trader began to shoot them with shotguns and rifles. In a short time there will be no seals left for the Indian to kill with the spear.”* Watkins, also a a Makah Indian, who has hunted seals for forty years in a canoe off Cape Flattery, after men- tioning the decrease in the seals, says: ‘So many schooners and white men are hunting them with guns all along the coast that they are get- ting all killed off.”* Many other members of the same and other tribes also add their testimony that the cause of decrease in the migrating herd is due to pelagic sealing by white men. * Numerous pelagic sealers also, in spite of their interest being contrary to such a conclusion, ad- mit, not only the decrease in the number of seals, but that such decrease has been caused by those engaged in their occupation. Frank Johnson, for ten years a seal hunter, on being asked the ques- tion to what he attributed the decrease, replied: “The increase of the fleet and killing of all the 1Vol. II, p. 385. 2Vol. II, p. 395. 3Ishka, Vol. II, p.388; Wispoo, Vol. II, p. 397; George LaCheek, Vol. II, p. 265; Jim Kasooh, Vol. I, p. 296; King Kaskwa, Vol. Il, p. 295; Perey Kahiktday, Vol. I, p. 261. 181 Indian hunters. White sealers, 182 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. White sealers. females,” adding that if continued the seal herd would soon be exterminated.’ Alexander Mc- Lean, the well known sealing captain, accounts for the decrease as being the result of killing the female seals in the water, and there is no chance for the seals to increase because so many vessels are going into the sealing business.” Daniel McLean attributes the decrease to ‘killing off ”° He is supported in this statement the females. by H. Harmsen, a seal hunter of many years’ experience;* Niles Nelson,’ Adolphus Sayers,° and others engaged in the same occupation.’ William Hermann, who has been a seal hunter for more than a decade, says: ‘I think they (the seals) are decreasing on account of their being hunted so much.’ William Mclsaac says: “I think there are so many boats and hunters out after them that they are being killed off; they are hunted too much.”® William H. Long, a captain of a sealing vessel, takes the same view of the 1Vol. I, p. 441. 2Vol. II, p. 487. 3 Vol. II, p. 444. 4Vol. II, pp. 442, 445. 5Vol. II, p. 470. 6Vol. I, p. 475. 7 Peter Collins, Vol. IT, p. 418; James Kiernan, Vol. II, p. 450; Gus- tave Isaacson, Vol. II, p. 440. 8 Vol. II, p. 446. ®Vol. II, p. 461. CAUSE. 183 matter,’ as also many other sealers do.” Others White sealers. less intimately acquainted with the business of open-sea sealing, but from experience and know!l- edge of seal life qualified to judge as to the cause of decrease unite in casting the entire blame upon the pelagic sealing industry. Agent Goff, in speaking of pelagic sealing, says: “If con- tinued as it is to-day, even if killing on the islands was absolutely forbidden, the herd will in a few years be exterminated.”* This unanimity of opinion, as expressed by every class and condi- tion of witnesses, scientists, sealers, both Indian and white, those who have watched the seals upon the islands and those who have seen the animals during their migration up the coast, is further supported by the statistics of the sealing fleet, its catch and number, as compared with the years when no increase was observable on the islands and when decrease was noted. The period of so-called stagnation in the num- peureae cca ber of the seal herd has been shown to be from ~ 1880 to 1884~85.° According to the table of the sealing fleet, prepared from all available 1Vol. I, p. 458. 2K. P. Porter, Vol. II, p.347; James E. Lennan, Vol. II, p. 370; Michael White, Vol.II, pp. 490, 491; J. D. McDonald, Vol. II, pp. 266, 267. 8’ Joseph Murray, Vol. II, p.74; H. H. McIntyre, Vol. I, p. 46; Charles J. Goff, Vol. II, p.112; J. Stanley Brown, Vol. II, pp. 17, 18, 19, 20. “Vol. If, p. 113: 5 Ante, p. 165. 184 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. Increase of seal- sources,’ the vessels had increased from two in ing fleet. 1879 to sixteen in 1880; up to 1885 the number of vessels varied from eleven to sixteen annually. Besides this it will be shown, subsequently, that the hunters employed on these vessels during the period from 1880 to 1885 were principally Indians, and that their method of taking seals, though injurious, is not nearly as destructive of life as that employed by other hunters. In 1886, the year when the decrease in the seal herd was first noticed along the coast, the fleet increased from fifteen vessels to thirty-four, and over thirty-eight thousand skins were known to have been secured that year.” In 1887 there were forty-six vessels engaged in sealing, but a less number of skins were taken. In 1888, owing to the seizure of several schooners in Bering Sea by the United States Government, the fleet fell off to thirty-nine vessels, the catch being about thirty-seven thousand.’ No seizures being made in 1888, the fleet increased again in 1889, numbering sixty-nine vessels, with a total catch of over forty thousand.* Vessels having been seized in 1889, the number again fell off in 1890 to sixty, but the catch increased to nearly ! Table of sealing fleet, Vol. I, p. 591. 2 Report of American Bering Sea Commissioners, post, p. 366. ® Report of American Bering Sea Commissioners, post, p. 366. * Tbid., post, p. 366. CAUSE. fifty thousand.’ In 1890 the sealers were unmo- | lested, and so in 1891 the number of vessels was nearly doubled, reaching the enormous figure of one hundred and fifteen,” but the catch, because of the ever-increasing scarcity of the seals, reached but sixty-two thousand five hundred.** The agreement between Great Britain and the United States in relation to pelagic sealing in Bering Sea in 1892, and the orders to naval vessels pursuant thereto, have not been of such a nature as to invite investment in the sealing fleet, and yet, in spite of the restrictions imposed and dangers incurred, the fleet of sealing vessels for 1892 is known to contain at least one hun- dred and twenty-three,’ which is below the actual number, as undoubtedly vessels have been en- gaged of which the United States Government has received no reports. The decrease in the seal herd has thus been proportionate to the increase of the sealing fleet. Another significant fact in this connection is that, until the period of decrease began, the sealing vessels did not, as a 1 Report of American Bering Sea Commissioners, post, p. 366. 2 Tbhid., post p. 371. 3 Table of sealing fleet, Vol. I, p. 591. 4 J. C. Redpath, Vol. II, p. 141; Alexander C. Shyha, Vol. II, p. 226. *It is probable that the various annual catches given are much too small, as it has been most difficult to obtain data and statis- tics in this respect. 2716——24 185 Tnerease of seal - ing fleet. 186 DECREASE OF THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. Increase of seal-rule, enter Bering Sea. William Parker, for ing fleet. ten years engaged in the sealing business, says : “There was hardly ever a sealing schooner that went to Bering Sea during these years (1881- 1884) or prior to 1885.”’ John Morris, a mate of a sealing vessel for several years, says: ‘Prior to this (1885) I had never been in the Bering Sea, and with but few exceptions sealing vessels n3 did not visit those waters. These two facts, Comparison ofthen, are plainly shown, that when the sealing sealing fleet and decrease, fleet consisted of a small number of vessels, carrying Indian hunters, and the sealing was confined to the Pacific coast, no decrease took place in the number of seals; but all increase ceased when the sealing fleet increased in num- bers. The vessels being outfitted with white hunters, using firearms, and the hunting grounds extended so as to include Bering Sea, the de- crease in the seal herd became marked and rapid, constantly becoming greater as the fleet of seal- ing vessels increased. 1 Andrew Laing, Vol. II, p. 335; Charles Peterson, Vol. II, p. 346. 2Vol. II, p. 344. 3 Vol. LI, p. 340. HISTORY. PELAGIC SEALING. HISTORY. Open-sea sealing, the sole cause of the enor- ,, mous decrease noted in the Alaskan seal herd in the last few years, and which threatens its exter- mination in the near future, was carried on by the Pacific coast natives in their canoes for many years previous to the introduction of sealing schooners. The catch was small, ranging from three to eight thousand annually,’ and there was little or no waste of life from the loss of seals killed and not secured, as will be seen when the means and manner of hunting employed by the Indians is considered. Kiven after vessels were employed in the in- dustry, which, according to Mr. Morris Moss, vice- president of the Sealers’ Association of Victoria, British Columbia, was about the year 1872,” the fleet was small, not numbering over half a dozen vessels.” Indians only were employed as hunters, and the seals were killed with spears.’ With the introduction of schooners to carry the canoes out into the ocean, the sealing grounds were extended 1C.M.Scammon, Vol. II, p. 475. 2Morris Moss, Vol. I, p. 341. 187 Sealing by Coast dians. Vessels used. 188 Vessels used. Introduction of firearms. PELAGIC SEALING. from the area covered by a canoe trip of twenty miles from a given point on the coast’ to the waters frequented by the migrating herd from the Columbia River to Kadiak Island In 1883 the schooner San Diego entered Bering Sea and returned to Victoria with upwards of two thou- sand skins. This gave impetus to the trade, and new vessels embarked in the enterprise.’ About 1885 a new method of hunting was introduced, which has been the great cause of making pelagic seal hunting so destructive and wasteful of life—the use of firearms.* White men now became the principal hunters, and where previously the number of skilled and available sealers had necessarily been limited to a few hundred coast natives, the possibility of large rewards for their labors induced many whites to enter the service of those engaged in the business of seal destruction. From that time forward the sealing fleet rapidly imereased in number,’ until it now threatens the total extinc- tion of the northern fur-seal. 1 Peter Brown, Vol. TI, p. 377; Alfred Irving, Vol. II, p. 3886; Wil- son Parker, Vol. I, p. 392; Hish Yulla, Vol. I, p. 397. 2 Peter Brown, Vol. II, p. 377. Morris Moss, Vol. Il, p. 341. 4 Charlie, Vol. II, p.304; Moses, Vol. II, p.809; Wispoo, Vol. LI, p. 396. 5 Ante, p.183; Gistave Niebaum, Vol. II, p. 78. METHOD. METHOD. 189 The vessel commonly used in sealing is a Vessels, outfit, and fifty tons burden; the average tonnage per vessel for the Victoria fleet in 1890 being 63.2 tons." The number of hunters and canoes or boats carried by a sealer depends upon the size of the vessel, but the average number of canoes is between ten and sixteen, each manned by two Indians,” and when the hunters are whites the boats generally number five or six. In some cases both Indians and whites are employed on the same vessel.4 The average number of men to a vessel in 1890 was twenty-two." The Indian hunter almost invariably uses a spear, and though in the last two or three years firearms have been carried in the canoe,° the principal weapon used by him is still the spear.’ A full description of the spear, canoe, and man- ner of hunting is given by Lieut. J. H. Quinnan, who accompanied some of the Indians in their canoe during a hunting excursion.’ The most 1 Canadian Fisheries Report, 1890, page 183. 2 Niels Bonde, Vol. II, p. 315-316; Moses, Vol. I, p. 310. 3 Patrick Maroney, Vol. II, p. 464; J. Jamieson, Vol. II, p. 329- 330; Niels Bonde, Vol. II, p. 316. 4James Dalgarduo, Vol. II, p. 364. 5 Peter Brown, Vol. I, p. 377; Morris Moss, Vol. II, p. 341. 6 Peter Brown, Vol. II, p. 377; Moses, Vol. II, p. 309. 7 Report of Lieut. J. H. Quinan, Vol. I, p. 504. See also A. B, Alexander, Vol. II, p. 352. x“ 4 ete. schooner ranging from twenty to one hundred Indian hunters. 190 Indian hunters. White hunters. Waste of life, PELAGIC SEALING. expert spearsmen are the Makah Indians of Neah Bay, Washington.’ The Indian, from his method of hunting, loses very few seals that he strikes, securing nearly all. The white hunter, on the contrary, loses a great many seals which he kills or wounds. ° Each boat contains a hunter, a boat-steerer, and a boat-puller ;* the hunter uses a rifle,® a shot- gun, or both,’ the shotgun being loaded with buckshot.2 A minute description of the methods employed by both white and Indian hunters is given by Capt. C. L. Hooper, commander of the United States revenue steamer Corwin, who was many years in the waters of the North Pacific and Bering Sea, and makes his statements from personal observation.® RESULTS. There are two ways in which a seal may be destroyed by this method of hunting without 1A, B. Alexander, Vol. II, p. 352. 2 Thomas Zolnoks, Vol. II, p. 399; Osly, Vol. II, p. 391; Watkins. Vol. I, p. 395. 3 James Kiernan, Vol. II, p. 450; James Kennedy, Vol. II, p. 449, 4Thomas Lyons, Vol. II, p. 460; James Moloy, Vol. I, p. 463; James Kennedy, Vol. II, p. 449. 5 James Kennedy, Vol. II, p. 449; Eddie Morehead, Vol. II, p. 467; George Zammitt, Vol. I, p. 507. 61.. G. Shepard, Vol. II, p. 188; Adolphus Sayers, Vol. I, p. 473. 7Patrick Maroney, Vol. II, p.464; Peter Collins, Vol. II, p. 415. 8 Charles Lutjens, Vol. II, p. 459. ®Report of Capt. C. L. Hooper to the Treasury Department, dated June 14, 1892; Vol. I, p. 498. See also as to white hunters, William Brennan, Vol. II, p. 360, 361. RESULTS. being secured; one is by wounding it so that, though it still retains vitality enough to escape from the hunter, it subsequently dies of its in- juries; the other is by the sinking of the seal, killed outright, before the boat can be brought alongside and the carcass seized by the hunter. Of the first of these means of loss Dr. Allen says: ‘Those only wounded, whether fatally or otherwise, dive and escape capture. The less severely wounded may, and in many cases doubt- less do, recover from their wounds, but in the nature of things many others must die of their injuries. There is a wide range of chances between an instantaneously fatal or disabling shot and a slight wound from which the victim may readily recover, with obviously a large proportion of them on the fatal side of the divid- %1 This is self-evident when the fact is ing line. taken into consideration that the boat is in almost constant motion, and the mark is the small head of a seal among the waves thirty, forty, fifty, or, when ai rifle is used, even a hundred yards? from the hunter. Four other conditions also modify this possibility of loss; first, the state of the weather, for if the water is rough the boat and 1 Article by Dr. Allen, Part III, Vol. I, p. 409. 27. T. Williams, Vol. II, p. 494. 3T.T. Williams, Vol. II, p. 503. 15t Waste of life, Wounding. 192 Woanding, PELAGIC SEALING. the seal having more motion the percentage of those killed or stunned by the shot is much less than when the sea is smooth;* second, the con- dition of the seal shot at, for if breeching, the shot being at the body is not as liable to paralyze the animal, though it may be as fatal as when the seal is asleep on the water with only a portion of its head exposed as a mark;” third, the skill of the hunter is also to be considered;* and fourth, whether or not the seals are wild and hard to approach, in which case the hunter is from necessity compelled to fire at long range. The Indian hunters, with their spears, who are forced to approach much nearer the game than a white hunter armed with rifle or shotgun, speak particularly of the increased timidity of the seals since. firearms have been used in taking them. They also state that many seals taken by them have shot imbedded in their bodies,’ and some are badly wounded.® This, besides being evidence of the great number wounded and lost, naturally tends to making the seals fearful of the approach of man. Not only has the increase in the num- 1 John H. Dalton, Vol. II, p. 418; James Kiernan, Vol. I, p. 450; William MeIsaac, Vol. II, p. 461. 2T, T. Williams, Vol. I, p.494, 504; Niles Nelson, Vol. II, p. 469. 3 Daniel Claussen, Vol. II, p. 412; Luther T. Franklin, Vol. IT, p.425; James Kiernan, Vol. II, p. 450; James Kean, Vol. II, p. 448. 4 James Lighthouse, Vol. II, p. 389; Watkins, Vol. I, p. 395. 5 Wispoo, Vol. II, p. 397; James Lighthouse, Vol. II, p. 390. § James Lighthouse, Vol. II, p. 390. SS ee RESULTS. ber of white hunters in the last few years made Wounding. the seals much wilder than before firearms were used, but it has also added largely to the number of inexperienced hunters engaged in sealing. It is only necessary, in order to show how much the unskillful outnumber the skillful hunters, to refer to the agreement entered into by the mem- bers of the Sealers’ Association of Victoria, British Columbia, for the season of 1891; the portion of the agreement referring to this matter is as follows: ‘“We also bind ourselves not to take more than three experienced hunters in the seal- ing business on each vessel represented by us, said hunters to be engaged at the scale or lay adopted by this Association, as hereinbefore par- ticularly described; and we also agree that all hunters required in excess of the three hunters above mentioned for each vessel shall be new men at the business of seal hunting, and shall be engaged at the same scale or lay hereinbefore mentioned, and this clause shall apply to all ves- sels owned or controlled by the members of this Association, whether clearing from the port of Victoria or other ports in Canada or the United States, or any port where any vessel owned or controlled by any member of this Association may be fitting out for sealing on this coast.” 1 See British Blue Book, U. S. No. 1 (1891), C-6253, p. 82. DiG—9h to 2 3) 194 Wounding. See _ Sinking. PELAGIC SEALING. The number of hunters thus allowed to a vessel is therefore about one-half the number of those actually taken on a vessel employing white hunters. Besides those lost by wounding, in many cases, others killed outright are not taken, because the specific gravity of the seal being greater than water? it sinks before it can be secured.” In order to save as many of the sinking seals as is possible, each boat carries a gaff,’ with a handle from four to six feet long, with which to grapple the carcass, if the point where it sank can be reached in time to do so. Of course in securing a sinking seal much depends on the distance from which the seal was shot, the condition of the water, whether rough or smooth, and whether or not darkened by the blood of the animal,’ as also the skill of the hunter in marking with his eye the place where the seal sank. It can, therefore, be seen that the range of possible and probable loss in case the seal is killed outright is certainly large, though not so great as when the seal is wounded. 1 Article by Dr. Allen, Part m1, Vol. I, p. 409. 2 Thomas Brown (No. 1), Vol. II, p. 319; Bernhardt Bleidner, Vol. II, p. 315; John W. Smith, Vol. I, p. 283; John Woodruff, Vol. IT, p. 506. 3T. T. Williams, Vol. II, p. 504; L. G. Shepard, Vol. II, p. 188. 4T. T. Williams, Vol. II, p. 504; Henry Mason, Vol. II, p. 465; James Laflin, Vol. II, p. 451. 5Henry Brown, Vol. II, p. 318. RESULTS. Under the circumstances, it is most difficult to fix the actual number of seals destroyed and not secured by hunters using fire arms; but it is a conservative estimate to say that such hunters lose at least two out of every three seals shot by them. Charles Chalall, a seal hunter, says: ‘The average hunter would get one out of every three seals shot; a poor hunter "1 Thomas Gibson, a seal not nearly so many. hunter, or engaged in the sealing business, since 1881, says: ‘An ordinary hunter would not get more than one out of every three or four that he killed.”* Daniel McLean states ‘that about one- third are taken;”’ and Capt. Martin Benson, of the sealing schooner James G. Swan, says about sixty-six per cent. are lost.*| These men are all hunters of long experience, and their statements are not only supported by many others,’ but numerous witnesses give the number lost at a much larger figure. E. W. Soron, mate of sealing vessel in 1888, says: “We only got about one out of every five killed.”* Thomas Brown (No. 1), a boat-puller for three years, 1 Vol. Il, p. 411. 2Vol. Il, p. 432. 3°Vol. Il, p. 445. 4Vol. II, p. 405. 5Thomas Lyons, Vol. II, p. 460; Beeniardt Bleidner, Vol. II, p. 315; M. L.Washburne, Vol. II, p. 489; Martin Hannon, vole II, p. 445. anol: Mp. 479: 195 Percentage lost of those killed. 196 PELAGIC SEALING. of ecentage lost states: “I don’t think we got more than one seal out of six that we killed.”* Caleb Lindahl, a seal hunter, says: “On an average a hunter gets one seal out of four. I have known of poor hunters loosing nine out of ten.”” Henry Mason, also a seal hunter, says: ‘I do not think they would get more than one seal out of every six or seven they shot, and sometimes only one out of ten.”* To these statements are added many others by competent and experienced witnesses, which may be found in the Appendix hereto annexed.‘ When the estimate, therefore, is placed at sixty- six seals unsecured out of every hundred killed with fire arms, the probability is that the per- centage lost is even more Certainly this per- centage is constantly increasing, for the rapid erowth of the sealing fleet in the last two years has increased the number of unskillful hunters, and the constant hunting of the herd has made the seals wilder each year than the year before.’ Destruction of female seals. Besides the great waste of life caused by the present method of sealing, another feature of pelagic hunting adds greatly to its destructive effect upon the Alaskan sealherd, namely, the 1(No. 1), Vol. II, p. 319. 2Vol. II, p. 456. SVol. II, p. 465. 4;William Parker, Vol. II, p. 844; Olaf'T. Kvam, Vol. II, p. 236; William Melsaac, Vol. II, p. 461; George Usher, Vol. II, p. 291. ’Thomas Brown (No. 1), Vol. II, p. 319. : RESULTS, 197 fact that from eighty to ninety per cent of the Destruction of female seals, seals killed in the open sea are females, the majority of which are either pregnant, or having been delivered of their pups, are the sole means of sustenance for their offspring. The sex of a seal can not be told when itis in the water, except an old bull seal, who can be recognized by his size.’ Under these circumstances it is impossible to discriminate as to sex,” and no effort is made to do so, the hunters shooting or spearing every seal that approaches the boat.’ On this point there is a large array of testimony to be found in the Appendix. Rear-Admiral Sir M. Culme- Seymour, in a communication to the British Ad- miralty, says, in relation to this matter: “I may mention that female seals can not be distinguished from males when killed asleep on the water at nA sea.”* As has already been shown, the destruc- tion of the females of the herd is the principal cause of the decrease,’ and the full extent of the pernicious effects of pelagic sealing is clearly shown on examination of the sex of the seals taken by the sealing vessels. 1J. A. Bradley, Vol. II, p. 227; Chickinoff et al., Vol. II, p. 219; F. F. Feeney, Vol. II, p. 220. 2K. W. Soron, Vol. Il, p.479; Charles Peterson, Vol. II, p. 345. 3Gregaroff, et al., Vol. II, p.234; N. Hodgson, Vol. II, p. 367; E. Morehead, Vol. II, p. 467. *Inclosure 3 in No. 3, British Blue Book, U. S. No. 2 (1890), C-6131, p. 4. 5 Ante, p. 177. 198 PELAGIC SEALING. a Re peaor oe The first witnesses to receive consideration on this point are those who have handled and sorted the “Northwest” or pelagic catch. The skins of males and females can be readily distinguished from each other by those at all experienced in the fur trade. * Sir George Curtis Lampson, head of the firm of C. M. Lampson & Co., one of the oldest and largest of the London fur houses, states that ‘the skins of the Northwest catch are largely the skins of female seals.”’ Mr. H. 8. Bevington, head of the London firm of Bevington & Morris, fur dealers, which was organized in 1726, says: ‘The skins of the Northwest catch are at least eighty per cent of them the skins of the female animal,” and that prior to and in preparation of his deposi- tion “he carefully looked through two large lots of skins now in his Warehouse for the especial purpose of estimating the percentage of female skins found among the Northwest catch.”* Mr. Walter Edward Martin, head of the English firm of C. W. Martin & Sons, the largest dressing and dyeing house of fur-seal skins in London, and successors of Martin & Teichmann, gives the percentage of females in the pelagic catch at 1 George Liebes, Vol. II, p. 511; B. H. Sternfels, Vol. I, p. 522. *'Vol. I, p. 565. $Vol. II, p. 552. RESULTS. 199 seventy-five to eighty per cent.’ Mr. Emil Teich- = een mann, of the firm of C. M. Lampson & Co., and formerly a member of the firm of Martin & Teich- mann, mentioned above, states “that practically the whole of the adult, Northwest catch, seals were the skins of female seals.” Mr. Henry Poland, head of the London fur firm of P. R. Poland & Son, says that a very large proportion of the adult skins of the Northwest catch are “obviously the skins of female animals.”? Mr. George Rice, engaged for twenty-seven years in the dressing and dyeing of seal skins in the city of London, and who has handled a large proportion of the Northwest skins, says: “That in the North- west catch from eighty-five to ninety per cent of the skins are of the female animal.”* And Mr. William C. B. Stamp, who has been a London fur merchant for thirty years, estimates the percent- age of females in the catch of sealing vessels to be ‘“‘at least seventy-five per cent” and probably more.’ All the above prominent English furriers are subjects of Her Britannic Majesty. George Bantle, who has been a sorter and packer of raw seal skins for twenty years, gives the principal characteristics by which the skins of the two 1Vol. II, p. 569. DVO ps Dols SVoOlatl p. oil. 4Vol. II, p. 573. See also Isaac Liebes, Vol. II, p. 453. “Vol, IL polo: 200 PELAGIC SEALING. lee Een fsexes can be determined,’ as do also Mr. John J. Phelan? and Mr. William Wiepert,’ both experienced furriers. Mr. Alfred Fraser, a sub- ject of Her Britannic Majesty, and a member of the London firm of C. M. Lampson & Co., says: “That he would have no difficulty whatever in separating the skins of the ‘Northwest’ catch from the skins of the ‘Alaska’ catch by reason of the fact that they are the skins almost exclu- sively of females.” ‘This fact that the Northwest skins are so largely the skins of females is further evidenced by the fact that in many of the early sales of such skins they are classified in deponent’s books as the skins of ‘‘females.”* aera Sir George Baden-Powell, one of the British Bering Sea Commissioners, addressed a letter to the London Times, which appeared in that paper November 30, 1889, in which he says: “Their (the Canadian sealers’) catch is made far out at sea, and is almost entirely composed of females.” On the 29th day of April, 1891, Mr. C. Haw- kins, a subject of Her Britannic Majesty, addressed a letter to the Marquis of Salisbury, in which he states that “since about the year 1885 we have received in this country (England) large numbers of seal skins known in the trade 1 Vol. II, p. 508. 2 Vol. II, p. 519. SHVOl VUE pr ooo. {Viola iL) pi o58: RESULTS. as Northwest skins, the same having been taken in the open sea, and, from appearances that are unmistakable to the initiated, are exclusively the skins of female seals pregnant.”* And the Canadian Minister of Marine and Canadian testi- mony. Fisheries, to whom the letter was referred, states “that the testimony produced by Mr. Hawkins in this connection is quite in accord with the information hitherto obtained.” 2 In the Cana- dian Fisheries Report of 1886 the following statement appears: ‘There were killed this year so far from forty to fifty thousand fur-seals, which have been taken by schooners from San Francisco and Victoria. The greatest number were killed in Bering Sea, and were nearly all cows or female seals.” ? And again in the said report for 1888 appears the statement that the fact can not be denied ‘that over sixty per cent of the entire catch of Bering Sea is made up of female seals.”* Rear-Admiral Hotham, Royal Navy, in a dispatch to the British Admiralty, dated September 10, 1890, states that he per- sonally saw Capt. C. Cox, of the schooner Sap- phire, Captain Petit, of the schooner Mary Taylor, Captain Hackett, of the schooner Annie Seymour, 1 British Blue Book. U. S. No.3 (1892), C-6635, p. 5. 2 British Blue Book, U. S. No.3 (1892), C-6635, p. 75. 8 Page 267. 4Report of the Department of Fisheries, Dominion of Canada (1888), p. 240 2716——26 Other British 202 PELAGIC SEALING. Canadian testi-and Capt. W. Cox, of the schooner Triumph, “= and that “they also mentioned (among other things) that two-thirds of their catch consisted of female seals, but that after the Ist July very few indeed were captured ‘in pup.’”* peeumony oe Herman Liebes for thirty-five years engaged in the seal-skin industry, and the largest purchaser of the skins brought -into Victoria, British Co- lumbia, by sealing vessels,’ says that he “has frequently requested the captains of poaching vessels sailing from the port of Victoria and other ports, to obtain the skins of male seals, and stated that he would give twice as much money, or even more, for such skins than he would pay for the skins of female seals. Each and all of the cap- tains so approached laughed at the idea of catch- ing male seals in the open sea, and said that it was impossible to do it, and that they could not catch male seals unless they could get upon the islands, which, except once in a long while, they were unable to do in consequence of the restric- tions imposed by the United States Government; because, they said, the males were more active, and could outswim any boat which their several vessels had, and that it was only the female seals who were heavy with young which could be caught.”® 1 British Blue Book, U. S. No.1 (1891), C-6253, p. 17. 2Vol. II, p. 513; British Blue Book, U. S. No. 1 (1891), C-6253, p. 80; Vol. II, p. 564. 8 Vol. II, p. 512. RESULTS. 203 Besides the testimony of the witnesses above fore of stated, 3,550 seal skins were shipped this year 18%. from Victoria, British Columbia, to Treadwell & Co., of Albany, New York, being a portion of the ‘spring catch,” so called, of 1892, taken by the sealing fleet along the Pacific coast. At the request and under the direction of the Govern- ment of the United States, these skins were examined by an expert in handling seal skins, Mr. John J. Phelan, for twenty-four years engaged in the fur business, for the purpose of determining the sex of the seals from which they were taken. Such examinations resulted in showing that of the 3,550 skins, 2,167 were taken from female seals, 395 from male seals, and the remainder, 988, from pups, seals under two years of age,’ whose sex could not easily be determined, which shows that the proportion of females in the catch of a sealing vessel is to the males as 11 to 2, or 844 per cent. The examiner of these skins also shows how the difference in the sex can be readily determined.? Mr. Charles Behlow, for thirty-four years engaged in the handling and sorting of seal skins, at the request of the Government of the United States, examined, in June, 1892, four lots ‘Vol. IL, p. 520. 204 PELAGIC SEALING. Examination ofof skins landed at San Francisco from sealing pelagic catch of {892. vessels, being the ‘‘spring catch” for 1892 of said vessels. These lots aggregated 813 skins, which on examination proved to consist of 681 skins of adult female seals, 49 skins of adult male seals, and 95 skins of pup seals less than one year old... The proportion of cows in these lots is shown to be to the males as about 14 to 1, or 93 per cent. The increased proportion of females in this examination over the examination made in New York is explainable from the fact that the New York examiner did not extend his examination to seals under two years of age, while the San Francisco examiner classed as pups only the seals less than one year old On the 13th of July, 1892, the same expert examined the catch of the schooner Emma and Louise, consisting of 1,342 skins, taken this spring along the Northwest coast. Ofthe number, 1,112 were the skins of. females, 132 of males, and 98 of gray pups less than one year old.’ The propor- tion of female seals taken by this vessel as compared with the males is thus shown to be 89 per cent. George Liebes, a furrier, who has handled many thousands of the Northwest skins, in connection with his deposition attaches 1 Vol. II, p. 402. RESULTS. 205 exhibits showing plainly how, even in the Examination of re) pelagic catch of a eS EE ee ee eee ee ee —7 ae dressed and dyed skins, the sex of the animal!* can be readily determined,’ and also, in the cases of the female, whether the animal was in a state of virginity, pregnancy, or maternity, the comparative size of the nipples being the test, which in the case of the two skins of males (bachelor and bull) are scarcely observable. Added to this testimony of experienced fur- riers, a large number of those engaged in seal hunting: e, whose depositions are appended hereto, affirm that the seals taken by them are princi- pally females. Luther T. Franklin, a seal hunter of three years’ experience, states that about ninety or ninety-five per cent of those secured are females.” Daniel McLean, an experienced sealer, says that about ten in a hundred of the seals taken are males.? Alexander McLean, on being asked the percentage of females in a catch, replied: ‘Say I would bring two thousand seals in here, | may have probably about a hundred males; that is a large average.”* Charles Lut- jens, also a seal hunter, places the average of females taken at ninety per cent,’ and in this he 1Vol. II, p. 512. 2V ol, I, p. 425. 3 Daniel McLean, Vol. II, p. 444. 4Vol. IL, p. 487. ' Charles Lutjens, Vol. II, p. 458, Testimony pelagic sealers. of 206 PELAGIC SEALING. Testimony ofis supported by many others of the same .profes- palagic sealers. Examination of eatch seized. sion.’ Other sealers, without fixing a percentage, state that the seals taken are “ principally”? or ‘most all”? females. The skins also upon vessels seized by United States officers in Bering Sea, which were subse- quently examined, also show a similar ratio of destruction of female life. Captain Shepard says that over twelve thousand skins taken from seal- ing vessels seized in 1887 and 1889 were exam- ined, and at least two-thirds or three-fourths were the skins of females.t Mr. A. P. Loud, assistant Treasury agent, who in 1887 captured the sealing schooner Angel Dolly, personally examined the skins found on board, and he states that ‘‘about eighty per cent were the skins of females.”> Capt. A. W. Lavender, assistant Treasury agent on St. George Island, in Sep- tember, 1891, made a personal examination of one hundred and seventy-two skins, the catch of the schooner Challenge in Bering Sea, and of the whole number only three were the skins of male seals.” It is only necessary to examine such an 1 William Short, Vol. II, p. 348; F. Johnson, Vol. II, p. 441; H. Harmsen, Vol. II, p. 442; A. J. Hoffman, Vol. II, p. 446. 2William H. Long, Vol. II, p. 457; James Kean, Vol. II, p. 448; James Kennedy, Vol. II, p. 449. 3 George Zammitt, Vol. II, p.507; Adolph Sayers, Vol. I, p. 473; Thomas Brown (No. 1), Vol. I, p. 319. 4Vol. II, p. 189. S Vol; LL, ip. a9. 6Vol. II, p. 265. RESULTS. 207 array of testimony as the foregoing to determine ee the cause of the rapid decrease in the Alaskan seized. seal herd. But in addition to this great slaughter of the ea eeaie producing sex, another waste of life is caused, as already stated, through the pregnancy or mater- nity of a large proportion of these female seals. As long ago as 1869 Capt. C. M. Scammon, of the United States Revenue Service, and author of “The Marine Animals of the Northwestern Coast of North America” (published in 1874), observed that nearly all the seals taken by the Indians near Vancouver Island were pregnant females, and August 30, 1869, he addressed a letter on the subject of the double slaughter resulting to the Secretary of the Treasury? Bowachup, a Makah Indian hunter, says: “I never killed any full-grown cows on the coast that did not have pups in them.”’ Daniel McLean says: ‘The females are mostly all with pup.” P.S. Weittenhiller, owner of the sealing schooner Clara, states that of sixty seals taken this season (1892) forty-six were pregnant females.* James Kiernan, a sealer, states that 1Vol. II, p. 474. 2Vol. II, p. 376. 3 Vol. II, p. 444. 4Vol. II, p. 274. 208 PELAGIC SEALING. Destruction ofthe seals killed in the North Pacific are mostly pregnant females. Reason preg- nant females are taken. females carrying their young.’ James Jamieson, a sealer of five years’ experience, makes the same statement.2 Frank Morreau, with five or six years’ experience as a seal hunter, says that about seventy-five per cent of the cows taken are ‘in pup,” * and many others make similar state- ments.* One reason why such a large proportion of pregnant female seals are taken along the coast is clearly stated by Andrew Laing in his exam- ination before Collector Milne, of the port of Victoria, British Columbia, the deponent being recognized by the collector as one of the most experienced seal hunters. On being questioned as to whether he noticed ‘‘any marked difference in the manner the females carrying their young travel as compared with the males,” he replied: “The only difference I could see is that they will travel very fast fora little distance, and then turn up and rest.” And again being asked whether he thought the pregnant female more shy than the male, he answered, “No, I think 1Vol. I, p. 450. 2Vol. Il, p. 329. 3Vol. IL, p. 468. 4William Short, Vol, II, p. 348; Ellabash, Vol. II, p. 385; Peter Simes, Vol. II, p. 476; Thomas Brown (No. 1), Vol. I, p. 319; Thomas Lyons, Vol. II, p. 460; John A. Swain, Vol. II, p. 350; James Nuata- jim, Vol. II, p. 272; Rondtus, Vol. I, p. 242; Amos Mill, Vol. II, p. 285; Simeon Chin-koo-tin, Vol. I, p. 256; Henry Brown, Vol TI, p. 317. RESULTS. 209 they are not more shy. The female is always Reason preg- Pi , nant females are inclined to be sleepy. The male is always on taken. the watch.”? Capt. J. D. McDonald, owner and commander of the sealing schooner Adventure, who hunts from San Francisco to Kadiak, says: “Most of the seals taken by me have been females with pup;” giving as a reason that the female seals are easier to kill than the males.” It is evident, therefore, that the female seal, when pregnant, is much more exposed to danger than the male,’ and this fact is also noted by the Indian hunters along the coast.* Destruction of nursing females. After the 1st of July the cows are nearly all at the rookeries, and having given birth to their young they go into the water in search of food, in order that they may be able to,supply their offspring with nourishment.’ And as has been shown, they often go from one hundred to two hundred miles from the islands on these excur- sions.” It is while absent from the rookeries feeding that they fall a prey to the pelagic seal hunter.’ Rear-Admiral Sir M. Culme-Seymour, 1 British Blue Book, U. 8S. No. 8 (1892), C-6635, p. 184. See also James Sloan, Vol. II, p.477; Isaac Liebes, Vol. II. p. 454. 2 Vol. II, p. 266. 3 British Blue Book, U. 8. No. 8, 1892, C-6635, p. 184. 4Charlie Wank, Vol. II, p. 273; James Unatajim, Vol. IT, p. 272; Simeon Chin-koo-tin, Vol. II, p. 256. 5 Ante, p. 115. 6 Ante, p. 116. 7Charles Chalall, Vol. II, p.411; Peter Brown, Vol. II, p. 377-378; Jobn Fyfe, Vol. I, p. 429; Henry Brown, Vol. I, p. 317-318, 2716—27 210 PELAGIC SEALING. Destruction ofin a dispatch to the British Admiralty, dated nursing females, at Victoria, August 24, 1886, states that three British Columbian sealing schooners had been seized by the United States revenue cruiser Corwin, seaward seventy miles from off the land, killing female seals... Edward Shields, of Sooke District, Vancouver Island, a hunter on the British schooner Carolina, which was seized in Bering Sea in 1886, states that they were during the whole cruise out of sight of land, adding, “The seals we obtained were chiefly females.”? The sealers, who have given testimony on this point in behalf of the United States, agree that nearly all the seals taken in Bering Sea are mothers in milk.® Moses, a Nitnat Indian hunter from Vancouver Island, in speaking of a voyage he made to Bering Sea, says: “We caught nineteen hundred seals, all of which were captured in the sea close to Unalaska; most all of them were cows in milk; but when we first entered the sea we killed a few cows that had pups in them.”* Charles Peterson, a sealer with four years’ experience, after stating that most all the seals taken in Bering Sea were cows in milk, adds: ‘“‘I have seen the deck almost flooded 1 British Blue Book, U.S. No. 2 (1890), C-6131, p. 1. 2 British Blue Book, U. 8S. No. 2 (1890), C-6131, p. 8. 3 William H. Long, Vol. II, p. 458; Henry Mason, Vol. II, p. 465; E. P. Porter, Vol. II, p. 347. 4 Moses, Vol. II, p. 310. RESULTS. with milk while we were skinning the seals.’” Richard Dolan, a seal hunter who was in Bering Sea in 1885, says: “I saw the milk flowing on the deck when we skinned them.”? Capt. L. G. Shepard, of the United States Revenue Marine Service, who seized several vessels in Bering Sea in 1887 while they were engaged in sealing, states that he saw milk flowing from the dead carcasses of seals lying on the decks of vessels a hundred or more miles from the Pribilof Islands.’ Mr. Robert H. McManus, a British subject and resident of Victoria, British Columbia, made a sealing voyage in 1891 in Bering Sea on the Canadian schooner Offo as a newspaper corre- spondent. During the voyage he kept a journal of events, which he has embodied in his deposi- tion, hereto appended, which contains his views of the matters which took place.* In an entry made August 29, he states the total catch of the day was seventeen seals, greater proportion cows in milk; horrid sight, could not stay the ordeal out till all were flayed.”* He subsequently adds: “It may be safely asserted that over three-fourths of the catch of forty-eight were cows in milk; 1Vol. I, p. 345. 2Vol. I, p. 419. $Vol. I, p. 189. 4Vol. Il, p. 337. 211 Destruction of nursing females. 212 PELAGIC SEALING. Destruction ofthis at a distance of two hundred miles from the nursing females. f . = Pe he rookeries.”! And Mr. Francis R. King-Hall, son of Sir William Kine-Hall, K. C. B., Admiral in the British Navy, who also was on the Ofto dur- ing this voyage, makes substantially the same statements.2 That a pup is entirely dependent upon its mother for the first three or four months of its life, and also that a female will not suckle any pup save her own, has already been stated. Dead pups on Ag a result it is evident that if the mother is the rookeries. killed her pup will die of starvation; and of this fact the evidence presented is unquestionable. When sealing vessels began to enter Bering Sea in pursuit of the seal herd (1884~85) at that same period dead pup seals on the rookeries first drew the attention of the residents of the Pribilof Islands. ° Professor Dall, who visited the rookeries in No dead pups 1830, asa ys. Deres were Ounce em ciie prior to 1884, cient dead pups scattered over the rookeries to attract attention, or form a feature on the 4 rookery.”* Captain Bryant, who was on the islands from 1870 to 1877, says, ‘A dead pup 2Viol Mp yoos- 3Nicoli Krukoff, Vol. II, p. 182, 4Vol. Il, p. 238. SVolMU ipso. RESULTS. on St. George Island from 1877 to 1881, says: “There were practically no dead pups on the rookeries. I do not think I saw during any one season more than a dozen.”' Mr. H. G. Otis, Treasury agent on the islands from 1879 to 1881, states that “it was a rare thing to find a dead pup.”” Mr. H. A. Glidden, the Govern- ment agent from 1882 to 1885, says: “ During the time I was on the islands I only saw a very few dead pups on the rookeries, but the num- ber in 1884 was slightly more than in former years.” * From this time (1884) forward dead pups on the rookeries increased in numbers annually. ‘Mr. T. F. Morgan says: “From the vear 1884 down to the present period when I left St. George Island, there was a marked increase in the number of dead pup seals.”* Mr. A. P. Loud, assistant Treasury agent on the islands from 1885 to 1889, says that he can not make a statement as to the number of dead pups on the rookeries in 1885, as he was not present that fall; but in 1886 he saw a large number of dead pups lying about, and that these pups were very much emaciated, 1Vol. Il, p. 71. 2Vol. LI, p. 87. 5Vol.II,p.110. See also John Armstrong, Vol. II, p. 2. 4Vol. II, p. 64. 213 No dead pups prior to 1884. Time of appear- ance of dead pups. 214 PELAGIC SEALING. Time of appear-and had evidently been starved to death. He ance of dead pups. Nuniber of dead pups in 1891. further states that the number of dead pups in 1887 was much larger than in 1886. In 1888 there was a less number than in 1887 or in 1889, owing, he believes, to a decrease of seals killed in Bering Sea that year; but that in 1889 the increase again showed itself! Dr. W. S. Here- ford, already mentioned as the resident physician on the islands from 1880 to 1891, says: ‘The loss of pup seals on the rookeries up to about 1884 or 1885 was comparatively slight, and was generally attributed to the death of the mother seal from natural causes. Coincident with the increase of hunting seals in the sea, there was an increase in the death rate of pup seals on the rookeries.”* Mr. Stanley Brown, in examining the rookeries in 1891, fixed the number of dead pups at be- tween fifteen and thirty thousand.’ Captain Coulson, who was on the islands the same year, says: “Thousands of dead and dying pups were scattered over the rookeries.”* And Colonel Mur- ray fixes the number of dead that year at ‘not less than thirty thousand.”? Other witnesses support 1Vol. IL, p. 39. *Vol. Il, p. 32. SViol. Ly plo) 4Vol. II, p. 415. 5 Vol. II, p. 74. RESULTS. 215 these statements.’ The rookeries, strewn with Number of dead dead and dying pups, were also in 1891 inspected by the British Bering Sea Commissioners.” And Kerrick Artomanoff, the old chief of the St. Paul natives, in speaking of their appearance on the rookeries during the last six years,says: ‘In my sixty-seven years’ residence on the island, I never before saw anything like it.”* At the request of Mr. Stanley Brown,* Dr. J.C. S. Akerly, then physician on St. Paul Island, examined a large number of the dead bodies, and after a careful and minute examination, which is fully detailed by him in his deposition,’ gives it as his opinion ‘that the great mortality during 1891 amongst the young seals on St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, was caused by the deprivation of mothers’ milk.” He sums up this opinion with eight reasons why he believes the young seals died of starvation.® His opinion as to the cause of their death is shared by many others who had an opportunity to examine the dead and dying pups on the rookeries.’ The nativeson the islands, 1 Anton Melovedoff, Vol. II, p. 148; H. H. McIntyre, Vol, II, p.51; Charles W. Price, Vol. II, p. 521; Aggie Kushin, Vol. I, p. 128; John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 108; H. N. Clark, Vol. II, p. 159. 2? Milton Barnes, Vol. II, p. 101. 3 Vol. II, p. 100. =Vole ily p: 19: EViole Up. 9a: 6 Vol. I, p- 96. 7™W. H. Williams, Vol. II, p.94; J. Stanley Brown, Vol. IJ, p. 19; Charles W. Price, Vol. II p.521; Aggie Kushin, Vol. II, p. 130; John Fratis, Vol. II, p. 109. pups in 1891. Cause of death of pups. 216 Cause of death of pups. Effects of pelag- ic sealing. PELAGIC SEALING, who have lived there for many years, testify that although they have eaten seal meat all their lives they never knew of a sick seal and never heard from the old residents of sickness among seals... This great mortality, therefore, was not caused by an epidemic among the animals, for no dead adult seals were seen.” The injurious and destructive effects of open- sea sealing, as demonstrated above, can be sum- med up as follows: Between eighty and ninety per cent of the seals taken are females; of these at least seventy-five per cent are either pregnant or nursing; that the destruction of these females causes the death of the unborn pup seals or those on the rookeries dependent on their mothers for nourishment; and, finally, that at least sixty-six per cent of the seals killed by white hunters are never secured. Besides this, the females taken in Bering Sea have certainly in the majority of cases been impregnated,’ and their death means not only the destruction of the pups on the island, but also of the fetus. Hence, if 10,000 females are killed in one season, this fact means not only the depletion of the Bee by a at Jeast 17,500 that yen Meloy edoff, Vol. IT, p. 143. crys also Daniel Weleien Vol. II, p. 183; Edw acd Hughes, Vol. II, p. 37. 2 Aggie Kushin, Vol. II, p. 128; Nicoli Krukoff, Vol. II, p. 183; Karp Buterin, Vol. II, p. 103; John Fratis, Vol. I, p. 107. 3 Ante, p. 115. RESULTS. 217 year, but also the reduction of the annual birth- ti Riffecte of pelag- rate by 7,500 each following year for probably Sees fifteen years, besides the added loss of the young born to the female portion of the pups destroyed, which would be an ever-increasing quantity. But disregarding these last two important points, the enormous destruction of seal life can be readily seen if we take the figures supplied by the Cana- dian Fisheries Report for 1890." In that year there were sold in Victoria alone about 55,000 skins taken by pelagic sealers; allowing that 20,000 of these were secured by Indian hunters and only 35,000 by white hunters, the number of seals actually killed would be at least 125,000; of these 80 per cent, or 100,000, would be females and 75 per cent pregnant or mothers, allowing one-half of these 75,000 pups thus destroyed by the death of the females to be of that sex, the total number of the producing sex killed would be 137,500, and the total loss to the herd of 200,000 seals, for which the sealers show but 55,000 skins. It must be remembered that 55,000 represented only the number of skins sold in Victoria, which is undoubtedly 10,000 short of the actual number secured by both the British and American sealing fleet. Hach year also adds to the destructiveness of the fleet, for 1 Page 183. 2716—28 218 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Effects of pelag-the captains in command becoming more and ic sealing. | Destruction. more familiar with the habits, track, and feeding grounds of the migrating herd, are able to reach the various points off the coast at the time when the main body are at these localities, and harass them incessantly on their way from the Faral- lones to Bering Sea. The effect of pelagic seal- ing is briefly and truly summarized by Karp Buterin, the native chief of St. Paul Island, in these words: ‘“Schooners kill cows, pups die, and seals are gone.” With such wasteful destruction the Alaskan seal herd must either be soon exterminated, or else a sufficient and full protection given from the pernicious methods employed by open-sea seal hunters. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. OTHER SEAL HERDS. The indiscriminate slaughter of seals in the waters of the Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea can not fail to produce a result similar to that observed in the southern hemisphere, where the fur-seals have, except at a few localities, become, 1 Report of Capt. C. L. Hooper to the Treasury Department, dated June 14, 1892, Vol. I, p. 499. 2 WVioliiyp 03: OTHER SEAL HERDS. 219 from a commercial point of view, practically Destruction. extinct. A full account of the distribution and the destruction of the antartic seal herds is given by Dr. Allen in his article found in the Appendix.’ Captain Budington, who for over twenty years has sealed about Cape Horn and the islands of the South Atlantic, making his last trip to these regions in the winter of 189192, says: ‘ From hundred of thousands of seals resorting to these islands and coasts the numbers have been reduced to a few hundred, which seek the land in scat- tered bands and rush to sea on the approach of man.” He further adds: ‘Seals in the antarctic regions are practically extinct, and I have given up the business as being unprofitable.”* In speaking of the cause of this extermination, he says: “The seals in all these localities have been destroyed by the indiscriminate killing of old and young, male and female. If the seals in these regions had been protected and only a certain number of ‘ dogs” (young males unable to hold their position on the beaches) allowed to be killed, these islands and coasts would be again populous with seal life. The seals would certainly not have decreased and would have 1 Article by Dr. Allen, Parts Iand II, Vol. I, pp. 365, 393. 2Vol. Il, p. 595. See also Isaac Liebes, Vol. II, p. 515. 3 Vol. Il, p:. 595. ; 220 Destruction. The Russran herd. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. produced an annual supply of skins for all times” James Kiernan, who about 1843 visited on a sealing voyage the east coast of Patagonia and the Falkland Islands, says: “These rookeries have since been destroyed through the constant hunting of seals.”’ Caleb Lindahl, also experi- enced in sealing in southern latitudes, in speaking of the destruction of seals at the South Shetland Islands, says: “If the seals on the South Shet- land Islands had been protected I think they would have been there by the million, because in one year they took three hundred thousand seals from the Shetland Islands.” The same hunter also, in telling of a sealing expedition he made in 1891 to the south seas, says: ‘The seals are nearly all killed off down there, so that we got only about twenty skins. It is no use for vessels to go there sealing any more.” The pelagic sealers of the North Pacific have not confined their operations to the eastern side of the Pacific Ocean, but have invaded the Russian waters, and the slaughter has already been carried on to such an extent in that locality that the Commander herd has begun to decrease in the same manner as the Alaskan herd.* 1 Vol. IL, p. 595. 2Vol. IL, p. 450. 3Caleb Lindahl, Vol. IT, p. 456. 4 Gustave Niebaum, Vol. IT, p. 203. OTHER SEAL HERDS 22k The necessity of protection to seal life from | British protec- tion of the seal. unlimited destruction, in order that the species may be preserved, is not only evidenced by the examples above cited, but has been recognized by a number of nations, especially by Great Britain and her colonies. In fact, it may be said that wherever fur-seals breed in territory over which Great Britain has control the species has received particular protection from indis- criminate slaughter. At the Falkland Islands, fe aend Te British dependency, formerly so productive of the fur seal species, the Government of the Islands in 1881 issued a decree,’ the preamble of which is as follows: ‘Whereas the Seal Fish- eries of these Islands, which was at one time a source of profit and advantage to the colonists, has been exhausted by indiscriminate and waste- ful fishing, and it is desirable to revive and pro- tect this industry by the establishment of a Close Time during which it shall be unlawful to kill or capture seals within the limits of this Colony and its dependencies.” The ordinance proceeds to enact stringent regulations prohibiting seal hunting “within the limits of this Colony and its dependencies.” Capt. Budington, an ex- perienced navigator and seal hunter in southern ‘Falkland Islands Seal Fishery Ordinance, Vol. I, p. 435. 222 ands. New Zealand. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Falkland Isl- waters, visited that region in January, 1892, and he states, under oath, that the ordinance of 1881 is enforced in the sea surrounding those islands outside the three-mile limit, and that it would be deemed a violation of the law to take seals during the close season between the Falkland Islands and Beauchene Island, twenty-eight miles dis- tant.? During the. past fifteen years a series of laws and orders in council have been enacted for the protection of seals in the Colony of New Zealand, which not only established a close season, but have at times entirely prohibited the taking of seals for a consecutive period of eight years. The New Zealand Seal Fisheries Act of 1878 established a close season for seals extending from October 1 to June 1.2 Section 4 empowers the Governor, by Order in Council, to extend or vary the close season as to ‘the whole Colony or only in particular parts thereof.” And this provision has been substantially reénacted in all subsequent legislation. The area designated as “the Colony” is taken to mean the area 1 James W. Budington, Vol. II, p. 593. 2New Zealand Act, 1878, Vol. I, p. 437. See also Reports, Department of Marine (1880-1890), Regulations by the Governor of New Zealand in Council, January 10, 1888. 2 EE OTHER SEAL HERDS. specified in the act’ creating the colony, which New Zealand. defines its boundaries as coincident with paral- lels 33° and 53° south latitude, and 162° east and 173° west longitude.” The Fisheries Act of 1884° empowers the Governor in Council “to make, alter, and revoke regulations which shall have force and effect only in waters or places ’ and almost unlimited author- specified therein; ’ ity is thus conferred upon the executive to establish close seasons, and to make regulations respecting the purchase or sale of fish, including seals, and punishment for violation of the law and orders. ‘The definition in the act of the term “waters” indicates that it applies to the entire area of the Colony, of which the southeastern corner is over seven hundred miles from the coast of New Zealand, although a few smaller islands intervene. The Amendment Act of 1887,‘ making the penalties more stringent, provides (See. 6) that the commander of any public vessel may seize, search, and take any offending vessel 126 and 27 Vic. c. 23 Sec. 2, Vol. I, p. 486; Extract. . . . ‘‘The Government purpose leasing the right to seal within the Colony of New Zealand, which extends within the area comprised be- tween 162° east longitude and 173° west longitude, and between 33° and 53° of south latitude.” From ‘ Handbook of the Fishes of New Zealand.” Prepared under the instructions of the Commis- sioner of Trade and Customs, by R. A. A. Sherrin. Auckland, 1886,” p. 254. 2Map of Colony of New Zealand, Vol. I, p. 487. 3 New Zealand Act, 1884, Vol. I, p. 487. 4New Zealand Act, 1887, Vol. I, p. 440. 224 New Zealand. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. “within the jurisdiction of the Government of the Colony of New Zealand.” The “Handbook of the Fishes of New Zealand,” already cited, a book “prepared under the instructions of the Commissioner of Trade and Customs,” reviews at some length the seal life and industry of the Colony, and in advocating stringent protection states that ‘‘seals are property the State should zealously guard.” In pursuance of the foregoing cited laws and regulations the Government of New Zealand has kept a cruiser in service for some years for the purpose of patrolling the waters of the Colony and enforcing the law.' It is now proposed to lease the exclusive right to take seals within the limits of the Colony to a Cape of Gooacompany.” In the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope. Hope sealing is prohibited at the rookeries and in the waters adjacent thereto, except under stringent regulations.’ The laws and regulations of the British colonies just cited have reference to the fur-seals of the South Seas, similar in their habits to the seal herd of the Pribilof Islands, 1 Reports, Marine Department of New Zealand, 1882, 1883, 1887 1888. 2“ Handbook of the Fishes of New Zealand,” p. 254. 4George Comer, Vol. II, p. 597; William C. B. Stamp, Vol. II, p. 576. , OTHER SEAL HERDS. 925 having fixed habitations on the land, to which peape of Good they regularly resort.’ oo But Great Britain and its dependencies do not British _protec- tion of hair-seal. limit their governmental protection to the fur-seal ; it is extended to all varieties of seals, wherever they resort to British territorial waters, and they have thrown about them upon the high seas the guardianship of British statutes. In certain of the waters of the North Atlantic are found the hair- seal, of much less commercial value than the fur- seal, and to whose existence the land is not a neces- sity, as the young may be, and usually are, born and reared onthe ice; and yet these seals are under the special protection of British laws. Canadian statutes prohibit all persons, without prescribing any marine limit, from disturbing or injuring all sedentary seal fisheries during the time of fishing for seals, or from hindering or frightening the shoals of seals as they enter the fishery. They also forbid the use of explosives to kill seals.’ The most important hair-seal region of the eee es : world is found on the ice floes to the eastward of Newfoundland, often several hundred miles from the coast. This region has been for many years 1 An examination of the “Handbook of the Fishes of New Zea- land” (pp. 230-233) will show that the fur-seal frequenting those islands is similarin habits to the Alaskan fur-seal in nearly every particular. ' 2 Revised Statutes of Canada, ¢.95,Secs. 6and7; Vol.I,pp.441, 454, 3 ANen, ‘‘Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” page 234, 2716-99 226 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Newfoundland past under the protection of the Newfoundland regulations, Colonial Government, which has enforced a close season, not allowing sail vessels-to leave port on sealing voyages before March 1, and steam ves_ sels before March 10, and prohibiting seal killing before March 12, under a penalty of from four hundred dollars to two thousand dollars, and has enacted other stringent regulations.’ But even these laws have not proved sufficiently effica- cious, and in April, 1892, a new act “‘to regulate the prosecution of the seal fisheries” was passed.” This act defers the date of leaving port two days later, and prohibits the killing of seals at all sea- sons of the year except between March 14 and April 20, inclusive. It is further made an offense to bring any seal killed out of season into any port of the Colony under a penalty of tour thou- sand dollars, and all steamers are prohibited from proceeding on a second trip to the seal waters in any one year. It will be seen from the deposi- tions of Richard Pike, a master mariner of forty- four years’ experience in hair-seal hunting, and of James G. Joy, master mariner of twenty-four years’ experience in seal hunting, that the law prohibiting the second sealing trip was enacted because it tended to the extermination of the hair- seals, as at least seventy-five per cent of those 5] ie roo) 1 Newfoundland Seal Act, 1879, Vol. I, p. 442. 2Newfoundland Seal Act, 1892, Vol. I, p. 444. OTHER SEAL HERDS. Papa | killed on the second trip are females, and many “i eercanl vena at that time are shot in the water and sink before they can be recovered." Next in importance to the Newfoundland hair- Jan Mayen res- seal region is that in the Atlantic Ocean east of Greenland, and known as the Jan Mayen Seal Fishery. This region in the open sea is em- braced in the area lying between the parallels of 67° and 75° north latitude and the meridians of 5° east and 17° west longitude from Green- wich. ‘These fisheries were made the subject of legislative regulation, applicable to their own subjects, by the Governments of Great Britain, Sweden and Norway, Russia, Germany, and Holland, by a series of statutes passed by these several countries during the years 1875, 1876, 1877, and 1878.2. The 8d of April is established as the earliest date each year on which the seals could be legally captured, and penalties are fixed for a violation of the prohibition. It will thus be seen that not only Great Britain pC onenrenees ot and her colonies have found it necessary to pro- tect by legislation the hair-seal of the North 1 James G. Joy, Vol. II, p. 591; Richard Pike, Vol. II, p. 592. 2 “The Seal Fishery Act, 1875,” 38 Vict., c. 18; British Order in Council of Nov. 28, 1876; Law of Sweden and Norway of May 18, 1876; Ordinance of Norway of Oct. 28, 1876; Ordinance of Sweden of Nov. 30, 1876; Law of Germany of Dec. 4, 1876; Ordi- nance of Germany of Mar. 29, 1877; Law of the Netherlands of Dec. 31, 1876; Decree of the Netherlands of Feb. 5, 1877; Law of Russia of Dec. 1878: Sec. 223 of Russian Code of Laws, 1886. 228 Concurrence of nations. White Sea regu- lations. Caspian Sea reg- ulations. Fur-seal protec- tion by other na- tions, PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Atlantic from extermination, but that other na- tions have united and concurred in the same protection. Stringent regulations have also been adopted by Russia for the protection of the hair-seals in the Gulf of Mezen, a part of the White Sea, the greater portion of which is beyond the three- mile limit. All sealing is subject to the super- vision of public overseers, who have authority to determine the time at which the annual catch is to begin at certain designated places, and to preserve order during the continuance of sealing operations, as to which the law contains certain prohibitions.* The sealeries in that portion of the Caspian Sea which belongs to Russia are under the con- trol of a ‘Bureau of Fishing and Sealing Indus- tries,” which is charged with a general supervision of the sealeries, and the enforcement of the law, which contains regulations for a close season, a license fee, and prohibition of killing or disturb- ance during the breeding time.* Similar enactments protect the fur-seal in other portions of the world, as other nations have recognized how indispensable to the preservation of the fur-seal species is the prohibition of un- licensed and unlimited sealing The Lobos ‘Code of Russian Laws, 1886, and map of area, Vol. I, p. 445. ee FISHERIES. 229 Island rookeries have for over sixty years been _ Fur-seal protec- tion by other na- protected by the Government of Uruguay, and tions. the right of sealing leased to a company under certain restrictions;’ and asa consequence of this governmental protection Lobos Islands have for Lobos Islands. many years past been the chief source of supply from the southern seas. The Governments of Cape Horn. Chile and the Argentine Republic have also recently given protection to the fur-seals resort- ing to their coasts in the hope of restoring their almost exterminated rookeries.2. The Japanese Kurile Islands. Government has taken steps toward the restora- tion and preservation of the fur-seals at the Kurile Islands,’ and the history of Russian pro- tection on the Commander Islands and Robben ,, Commander and Robben Islands. Island is too well known to need further citation. FISHERIES. The foregoing review of the legislation of various nations shows that they have deemed it necessary to adopt stringent regulations, not only in waters adjacent to, but also at great distances from, their respective land boundaries, in order to protect from extermination the fur and the hair-seal. But it will be interesting, and profit- - 1Summary of Uruguay laws, in letter of April 2, 1892, by the Custodian of Archives at Montevideo, Vol. I, p. 448; Article by Dr. Allen, Part II, Vol. I, p. 397. 2 George Comer, Vol. II, p. 597. ®Statutes of Japan, Vol. I, p. 449. ee 30 Game laws. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. able for the purposes of this Arbitration, to carry the investigation of national legislation a step further and to examine how far Governments have gone in the protection of other forms of animal life in the water, and to what extent ex- traterritorial jurisdiction is exercised for the preservation of national interests. All nations and races in all ages have recog- nized the necessity of affording sufficient pro- tection for the reproduction and continued ex- istence of all animal life useful to the human race. Even the savage recognizes and enferces this humanitarian and economic principle, but it is most fully recognized and enforced among civilized nations. An examination of the legis- lation of the countries of Europe and America shows that the protection of the Government is everywhere extended to animals fere nature during the breeding season, and that especially the mother, when heavy with young or while her offspring is dependent upon her, is under the guardianship of the law. The wild animal on the land and the fish in the sea are both pre- served by a close season and stringent rules, having particular reference to the reproduction and undiminished existence of the species. As indicating the character of this legislation, the attention of the Arbitrators is directed toa paper FISHERIES. 231 in the Appendix, giving a brief review of the Game laws. game and fishery laws of Great Britain and Canada." Game and fishery laws are usually limited in _ Extraterritorial jurisdiction. their effects to the land and territorial waters of the country which enacts them. But instances are many wherein nations have not hesitated to extend the effects of their laws to the waters contiguous to their shores, beyond the ordinary three-mile limit. Citations have already been made of the laws for the protection of seals of quite a number of nations, which, so far as their own subjects are concerned, apply to large areas of the high seas, and it has been shown that Great Britain and Russia extend their exclusive jurisdiction for the protection of seals, frequent- ing waters contiguous to their shores, far beyond the marine league. But further instances may be cited where nations have exercised extrater- ritorial jurisdiction on the ocean for the protec- tion of other species of marine life besides the seal. In fact, it may be laid down as a principle, established by international usage, that any nation which has a peculiar interest in the con- tinued existence of any valuable marine product, located in the high seas adjacent to its coasts or 1Game and Fishery Laws of Great Britain and Canada, Vol. I, p. 450. 232 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. _ Extraterritorial territorial waters, may adopt such measures as ee are essential to the preservation of the species, without limitation as to the distance from land at which such necessary measures may be enforced. eh oyster ‘This principle is well illustrated by two recent statutes enacted by the Parliament of Great Britain. By the British ‘Sea Fisheries Act” of 1868" provision is made for the regulation of oyster dredging on any oyster bed within twenty miles of a straight line drawn from the eastern end of Lambay Island to Carnsore Point on the eastern coast of Ireland. The law states in terms that it is to be enforced “ outside of the exclusive fishery limits of the British Isles,” and that every order issued in pursuance of it shall be binding not only on British sea-fishing boats, but also ‘‘on any other sea-fishing boats in that behalf specified in the order and on the crews of such boats.” In other words, jurisdiction may be asserted over foreigners as well as British subjects at a distance of twenty miles from land. Pee een The Scotch Herring Fishery Act of 1889? fur- nishes another illustration in point. That aet provides that certain destructive methods of fish- ing may be prohibited by the fishery board in 1 Statute of British Parliament, 31 and 32 Vict., ¢.45, Sec. 67; map of area defined in the statute, Vol. I, p. 457. * Statute, 52 and 53 Vict. c. 23, and map, Sec. 7, Vol. I, p. 458. FISHERIES. 233 any part of an area of the open sea, two thousand SY ols RES _ Fishery Act. seven hundred square miles in extent, lying off the northeast coast of Scotland, within a line drawn from Duncansby Head, in Caithness, to Rattray Point, in Aberdeenshire.” The act is not confined in its operations to British subjects, but provides that ‘“‘any person” offending against its provisions shall be liable to a fine and the forfeiture of his fishing apparatus. The legislation of several of the colonies of, Great Britain also abounds in instances of the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction upon the high seas for the protection of different species of marine life. The pearl fisheries of Ceylon extend into the open sea for a distance of twenty miles, and they have been the subject of a series of ordinances and regulations from 1811 down to the present time, which for certain purposes define the limit of marine jurisdiction to be twelve miles, and for other purposes a distance which varies from six to twenty miles." The pearl fisheries of Queensland and Western Australia were, in the years 1888 and 1889, made the subject. of regulation by two statutes enacted by the Federal Council, of Australasia.’ These statutes extended the local regulations of 1 Ordinances of Ceylon, and map, Vol. I, p. 461. ? Statutes of Australasia, and map, Vol. I, p. 467. — 2716 30 Pea eylon. rl fisheries of Pearl fisheries of Australia. 234 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. fe eiherteaot the two countries mentioned to defined areas of the open sea, of which the most remote points are about two hundred and fifty miles from the coast of Queensland, and about six hundred miles from the coast of Western Australia. These acts are, by their terms, limited in their operation to British subjects, but as Sir George Baden-Powell has pointed out, in a recent address delivered before the Association of the Codification of the Law of Nations,’ the remoteness of these waters renders it practically impossible for foreign vessels to participate in the pearl fisheries with- out entering an Australian port, and thereby rendering themselves amenable to Australian law. Pecaucresielas The fishery legislation of France also recog- nizes the same principle. A commission, ap- pointed by the French Government in 1849 to investigate the fisheries of that country and to make recommendations, reported that they deemed it inexpedient to assign any precise limit to territorial waters beyond which the laws recommended should cease to be operative.” Accordingly the laws passed in pursuance of this report were so framed as to leaye this ques- tion open, and the Decree of May 10, 1862, See. 2, 1 Delivered at Liverpool, Aug. 29, 1890; see page 9. 2Rapport de la Commission du 25 juin, 1849, pour ’examen d’un projet de loi sur la péche maritime cétiere, p. 25. FISHERIES. 235 went so far as to provide in terms that wader cer- French legisla- tain circumstances fishing might be prohibited over areas of the sea beyond three miles from shore... Numerous laws have also been enacted by France to protect and regulate the coral fisheries of Algeria, both as to natives and for- eigners, and the coral beds so regulated extend at some points as far as seven miles into the sea.” tion. The coral beds surrounding the island of Sar- _ Italian legisla. dinia and lying off the southwest coast of Sicily have been made the subject of elaborate regu- lations by the Government of Italy. The Sar- dinian coral beds are situated at distances from land which vary from three to fifteen miles.’ The principal coral beds of Sicily are three in number, and are respectively distant from the coast fourteen, twenty-one, and thirty-two miles. At present all coral fishing is prohibited on these banks by Royal Decree, for a designated period, 1French Decree and map, Vol. I, p. 469. 2Map, Vol. I, p. 469. ‘‘Les Péches Maritimes en Algérie et en Tunisie.” Rapport au ministre de la marine, par M. M. Bouchon Brandely, Inspecteur général des péches maritimes, et A. Ber- thoule, Secrétaire général de la Société national d’acclimatation, membre (lu Comité consultatif des péches maritimes. 3Map, Vol. I, p. 470. British admiralty chart No. 281. “Tl Carallo in Sardegna, Relazione presentata 4S. E. il ministro di Agricoltura, Industria e Commercio, dal Professore Parona Cor- rado, dell’ Universita di Cagliari.” ‘Annali dell’ Industria e de] Comniercio, 1882.” 10n. 236 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. = legisla-at- the close of which the previous restrictive regulations will be again enforced.’ norwegian legis” This principle is also recognized in the legis- lation of Norway in the statute of 1880 for the protection of whales, during an annual close season, in Varanger Fidrd, an arm of the open sea about thirty-two marine miles in width, lying off the northeast coast of Norway.” pcremalesiel- “dhe Govermment of Panama, in the Republic of Colombia, has recently enacted a law prohibit- ing the use of diving machines for the collection of pearls within an area of the sea over sixty marine miles in length, and extending outward about thirty marine miles from the coast.° peloxiran legisla- The Mexican pearl fisheries lying off the coast of Lower California have been made the subject of special exclusive grants to private individuals. Along part of the coast the pearl beds have been divided for this purpose into two belts, of which the inner belt extends seaward a distance of five kilometers (about three miles), and the outer belt is bounded by lines drawn parallel to the coast at distances of five and ten kilometers. It is ob- 1 Statutes of Italy, and maps, Vol. I, pp. 470,472. ‘“‘Relazione del Professore Giovanni Canestrini al Ministro di Agricoltura, Indus- tria e Commereio Sulle ricerche fatte nel Mare di Sciacca intorno ai Banehi Corallini.” ‘‘Annali dell’ Industria e del Commercio, 1882.” 2Statutes of Norway, Vol. I, p. 482. 3 Statutes of Panama, and map, Vol. I, p. 484. ALASKAN HERD. vious that the greater portion of this outside ivelt > Moxie legisla- lies beyond the three-mile limit.’ Maps will be found in the Appendix, as cited, Other cases of ex- showing the extent of marine territory over which risdiction. jurisdiction is exercised by the different Govern- ments named. Reference may also be made to the British Hovering Acts,’ the St. Helena Act of 1815,° and the Quarantine Act of 1825,* as well as various international conventions for the pro- tection and regulation of fisheries on the high Seas. ALASKAN HERD. This hasty review of the legislation of near a score of nations clearly establishes the principle announced that any nation, having a peculiar interest in the continued existence of animal life in the high seas adjacent to its coasts or territo- rial waters, may adopt such measures as are essential to its preservation, without limit as to the distance from land at which such measures may be enforced. It is a remarkable fact, how- unprotectea ever, in view of the legislation just cited, that the Alaskan seal herd, so valuable to the human 1Statutes of Mexico, and map, Vol. I, p. 486. 29 Geo. II, c. 35, Sec. 23, statute repealed in 1825, but partially reenacted as to the limit of four leagues as recently as 1845, 8 and 9 Vict., ce. 86, Sec. 2. 356 Geo. III, c. 23, Sec. 4, Vol. I, p. 495. 46 Geo. IV, c, 78, Secs. 8, 9, Vol. I, p. 496. 238 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Unprotectedrace, stands almost alone in the animal life of condition. Necessity of its protection. the world in being denied protection during the necessary period of the reproduction of its spe- cies. The review of the habits of the Alaskan seal and of the practices of the pelagic hunters has shown that for at least nine months of the year this herd is exposed to the relentless and untiring pursuit of the pelagic hunter, and that during the remaining three months his hand is only stayed by the inclemency of the weather which renders pursuit impossible. And it has been further shown that this pursuit is most active and destructive at the time when the female seal is approaching the season of the delivery of her young, or when she is nursing the pup which is entirely dependent upon the mother’s milk for sustenance. | The necessity of protection of this particular herd is affirmed by numerous witnesses of every degree of experience and knowledge, including leading naturalists of America and of many European nations, those engaged in the sealskin industry, both in the United States, Great Brit- ain, and France, experienced sealers, and many others conversant with seal life and the present condition of the Alaskan herd. ALASKAN HERD. The British and American Bering Sea Com- missioners, although they do not assert in their joint report that protection is necessary, give, as a conclusion reached, the following: ‘We are in thorough agreement that for industrial as well as for other obvious reasons, it is incumbent upon all nations, and particularly upon those having direct commercial interests in fur-seals, to provide for their proper protection and preservation.”? The British Government also has recognized the necessity of protecting this seal herd from destruction, in its correspondence with the Gov- ernment of the United States, and has advocated certain methods of preservation through a close season and prohibition of sealing within certain limits.” Lord Salisbury, in 1888, so far recog- nized the need of protection to the seal herd as to suggest that a close season from April 15 to October 1 be established in the whole of Bering Sea and those portions of the Sea of Okhotsk and of the Pacific Ocean north of north latitude 47°, and that this limitation should be enforced by international agreement between the United 1 Joint Report of British and American Bering Sea Com- missioners. Post, p. 309. 2 Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine, April, 1890; Marquis of Salis- bury to Sir L. West, April 16, 1891; Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Wharton, June 11, 1891. 239 The Joint Com- mission. British recogni- tion. 240) British recogni- tion. Opinions of nat- uralists. Professor Hux- ley. Dr. Sclater, PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. States, Great Britain, Russia, and other nations interested." Professor T. H. Huxley, in considering this ques- tion of the decline of the Alaskan herd and the need of protecting it, says: ‘That the best course would be to prohibit the taking of fur-seals any- where except on the Pribilof Islands.”? Dr. Sclater, secretary of the Zoological Society of London, says ‘that in his opinion as a naturalist, unless proper measures are taken to restrict the indiscriminate capture of the fur-seal in the North Pacific he is of the opinion that the exter- mination of this species will take place im a few years, as it already has done in the case of other species of the same group in other parts of the Dr. Merriam’s world.”* Dr. C. Hart Merriam, one of the Ameri- letter. can Bering Sea Commissioners, sent out a letter to a number of the principal zodlogists and scientists of the world, stating briefly the results of his investigations as to the condition of the Pribilof rookeries and the cause of the decrease; the letter closes with the following conclusions: “Tt seems to be a fair inference, therefore, that the only way to restore the depleted rookeries to their former condition is to stop taking seals at sea, 'Mr. White to Mr. Bayard, April 20, 1888; Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West, April 16, 1888, 2Vol. I,p. 412. 3Vol.I, p. 413, ALASKAN HERD. and not only in Bering Sea, but in the North Pacific as well.”* In replying to this com- munication, Dr. Raphael Blanchard, of France, says: “‘By reason of tlfe massacres of which it is a victim, this species is advancing rapidly to- mand) its total “and “amal“destruction, »..~. . and there is for our generation an imperious duty to prevent the destruction of the fur-seal, to regulate strictly its capture, in a word, to per- petuate this source of wealth and to bequeath it to our descendants.”? Dr. Henry H. Giglioli, of Italy, in his reply, says: ‘It is both as a nat- uralist and as anold Commissioner of Fisheries, that [beg to say . . . that I most entirely and most emphatically agree with you in the conclusions and recommendations you come to in your report on the present condition of the fur-seal industry in the Bering Sea, with special reference to the causes of decrease and the meas- ures necessary for the restoration and permanent preservation of that industry, which conclusions and recommendations are fully supported and jus- tified by the facts in the case.”* Professors A. K. 241 Dr. Merriam’s letter. Dr. Blanchard. Dr. Giglioli. Professors Nor- denskioid and Nordenskiold and W. Lilljeborg, of Sweden, unit- Liljeborg. ing in a reply to Dr. Merriam’s letter, say: ‘As to the pelagic sealing it is evident that a systematic Vol. I, p. 417. ; 2 Vol. I, p. 427. 3 Letter of Dr. Henry H. Giglioli, Vol, I, p, 425, 2716 3h 242 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. cess Nor- hunting of the seals in the open sea on the way Lilljeborg. to and from or around the rookeries will very soon cause the complete extinction of this val- uable, and, from scientific point of view, so extremely interesting and important animal.”? Besides these declarations above quoted, other die aed scientists, of France, Italy, Sweden, Russia, Ger- many, Austria, Norway, and Argentine Republic, to whom Dr. Merriam’s letter was sent, unite in commending the conclusions set forth and affirm the need of protection to the seal herd.’ Dr. Allen. Dr. Allen shows plainly the need of protecting the Alaskan herd, in a brief summary of the results of pelagic sealing.’ nigetin recog- “In the Canadian Fisheries Report for 1886, already adverted to, Thomas Mowatt, esq., In- spector of Fisheries for British Columbia, in his report, after giving the catch for the year by sealing vessels, and stating the fact that it was composed almost entirely of female seals, adds: “'This enormous catch, with the increase which will take place when other vessels fitting up every year are ready will, I am afraid, soon deplete our fur-seal fishery, and it is a great pity 1 Letter of Professors Nordenskiold and Lilljeborg, Vol. I, p. 429. 2 Letters of Dr. A. V. Middendorf, Dr. Emil Horub, Dr. R. Collett, Dr. Leopold Van Schranck, and others, Vol. I, pp. 418-433. 3 Article by Dr. Allen, Part III, Vol. I, p. 410. ALASKAN HERD. 243 such a valuable industry could not in some way Canadian recog- be protected.” Mr. Walter E. Martin, head of the firm of C. W. Martin & Sons, already quoted, says “that the preservation of the seal herds found in the North Pacific regions is necessary to the contin- uance of the fur-seal business, as those herds are the principal sources of supply of sealskins left in the world, and from his general knowledge of the customs of that business deponent feels jus- tified in expressing the opinion that stringent regulations of some kind are necessary in order o like to) to prevent those herds from disappearin herds which formerly existed in large numbers in the South Pacific seas.” ? Sir George Curtis Lampson, already men- tioned as the senior member of the house of C. M. Lampson & Co., says that he “has no doubt that it is necessary in order to maintain the industry that steps should be taken to preserve the existence of the seal herd in the North Pacific Ocean and Berimge Sea from the fate which has overtaken the herds in the south seas.”” The said firm of Lampson & Co., in a leiter to the Earl of Iddesleigh, First Lord of Her Majesty’s Treasury, dated at London, 1 Walter E. Martin, Vol. I, p.570. 2Sir George C. Lan:pson, Vol. II, p. 566, nition. Opinions of Lon- don furriers. QAA ke PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Opinion of Lon- November 12, 1886, in relation, among other don furriers. things, to the preservation of the Alaskan herd, states that “should Great Britain deny the right of the United States Government to protect the (seal) fishery in an effectual manner there can be no doubt that the Alaska fur-seals, which furnish by far the most important part of the world’s supply of sealskins, will be exterminated in a very few years, just as in the South Atlan- tic, the Shetland and Georgia fur-seals, which used to furnish even finer pelts than the Alas- kas, have already been.”* Again, in September, 1890, Lampson & Co. wrote to the Foreign Office that ‘unless a close season can be arranged immediately the animal will undoubt- edly become extinct within a very short time.” ? Mr. C. Hawkins, a British subject, in a letter already mentioned, addressed to the Marquis of Salisbury, states that ‘this wholesale slaughter of the females will, in a short time, bring about the extermination of the seal in that district if not arrested.”? Opinions of M. Léon Reévillon, a member of the well French furriers. known Parisian firm of Révillon fréres, which has been engaged in the manufacture of sealskin gar- ments for over twenty years, in speaking for his 1 British Blue Book, U. 8. No. 2 (1890), C-6131, p. 24. 2 British Blue Book, U. 8. No. 1 (1891), C-6253, p. 11, 3 British Blue Book, U. 8S, No, 3 (1892), C-6635, p. 5. ALASKAN HERD. 245 company, says: ‘We firmly believe that if the onan graer slaughter of the Northwest Coast fur-seals is not stopped or regulated, the Alaska fur-seals will disappear entirely, as is the case with the seals of the Shetland Islands.”!~ The same belief is also stated by M. Emin Hertz, head of the fur firm of Emin Hertz & Cie., which is located in the city of Paris. He says: “If this pursuit in the open sea continues as in the past two years, the said firm firmly believes that in a short time. the seal will exist only as a souvenir and will be completely exterminated.”” Mr. Elkan Wasserman, of San Francisco, who Opinions of : has been a furrier for thirty years, says: “From Pave se eis my knowledge of the sealing business, I am satis- fied that the seals will be entirely exterminated unless protected from the indiscriminate pursuit in the waters that has been going on for the last few years.”*? Mr. C. A. Williams, one of the original members of the Alaska Commercial Com- pany, formerly lessees of the Pribilof Islands» but no longer interested in those rookeries, says that if open-sea sealing continues the seals of Bering Sea will within five years be as extinct as the seals of the South Sea Islands. And Mr, a< 1 Vol. Il, p. 590. 2 Vols 11, p- 588. 3 Vol. Il, p. 534. = Wall, LOG jo. sie OTE Vive) WE AY . 246 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION Opinions of Herman Liebes, already spoken of as being the American furriers. 2 largest purchaser of the Northwest catch at Victoria, British Columbia, places the time of ex- termination at three years unless the herd is pro- tected from the depredations of pelagic sealers." ee a eet pe ='Turning now to those still more conversant with the wasteful destruction of life through open-sea sealing, the resulting depletion of the Alaskan herd, and the probable effect of contin- uing pelagic hunting, the opinions already given are still further sustained. A great number of these men, sealers with more or less experience, unite in declaring the necessity of protecting the herd in order to preserve it from certain exter- mination in the near future. Alexander McLean was asked the question: ‘If sealing continues as heretofore, is there any danger of exterminating them [the seals]?” He replied: “If they con- tinue as they have been since I have been in the business, I will give them ten years. After that the sealing business will be about: finished.”? Mr. Morris Moss, vice-president of the Sealers’ Association of Victoria, British Columbia, says: “Tt is very important that if the fur seal is to be preserved, it must be protected from indiscrim- inate slaughter in the open sea or it will soon be 1Vol, II, p. 514. -2 Vol. II, p. 438. ALASKAN HERD. 247 exhausted.” John Morris, a sealer of experi- een oe Lee ence, already mentioned, says: ‘With the pres- * ent increasing fleet of sealing vessels the seal herd will soon become exterminated unless some restrictions are placed upon pelagic sealing.”? William H. Long, who has been a hunter, a mate, and a captain on sealing vessels, says: ‘IT think if something is not done to protect seals in the North Pacific and Bering Sea they will become exter- minated in a very few years.”* Caleb Lindahl, who has séaled both in arctic and antarctic seas, says: “If they keep on hunting them in the Bering Sea and the North Pacific, in the same way they have done in the last few years, they will exterminate them in the same way [as in the southern seas], because most all the seals killed are females.” * ‘To these statements might be added many others of those experienced in open-sea sealing.° The certainty of extermination of the herd if opinions of In not protected is also set forth by many of the Po aaere Indian hunters, whose long experience and care- ful observation of the condition of the migrating 1Vol. II, p. 342. 2 Vol. Il, p. 340. 3 Vol. II, p. 458. SWoletl ip. 456: *Thomas Gibson, Vol. IT, p. 432; A. J. Hoffman, Vol. II, p. 447; F, F. Feeney, Vol. II, p. 220; Luther T. Franklin, Vol. I, p. 426; O. Holm, Vol. II, p. 368; Martin Benson, Vol. I, p. 406. 248 Opinions of In- dian hunters. Opinions of other witnesses. PROTECTION AND PRESERVANION. herd from year to year make them fully compe- tent to give an opinion of value and weight. Alfred Irving, a Makah Indian hunter, says: “Tf they keep on killing them with guns there will be none left in a little whilet Selwish Johnson, of the same tribe, says: “If hunted with guns ” Gonastut, an they wili all soon be destroyed. Indian belonging to the Yakutat tribe, after stat- ing that seals are becoming very scarce, gives as a reason that too many schooners are hunting them, adding ‘“ Seals will soon be no more unless the Great Father stops the schooners from hunt- 3 ing.’ Anda great many more Indians make like statements.‘ Other witnesses, who are thoroughly familiar with the habits and nature of the Alaskan fur seals, or who. have had ample opportunity to ex- amine the constant decrease and compare it with the known facts and figures of pelagic sealing and its increase, give like opinions as to the need of protection if the seals are to be preserved.’ Mr. Maxwell Cohen says: ‘After twenty-two rears’ experience in Alaska in the fur business, I i ) 1Vol. IL, p. 387. 2Vol. Il, p. 389. 3 Vol. II, p. 238. 4Peter Brown, Vol. II, p. 378; Thomas Zolnoks, Vol. II, p. 399; Charles Martin, Vol. II, p. 297. 5Samuel Falconer, Vol.II, p. 162; M. A. Healy, Vol. II, p. 28; A. P. Loud, Vol. 11, p. 395 Ei Ge Otis) Vol: Il, p. sss) Wine ewe liams, Vol. II, p. 94; Aggie Kushin, Vol. II, p. 1380; C. M. Scam- mon, Vol. II, pp. 475, 476. ALASKAN HERD. 2A have no hesitation in saying that if the fur-seal Opinions of other witnesses. species is to be saved from extinction, all pelagic sealing must cease.”’ Dr. H. H. McIntyre, after twenty years of careful study of the habits and condition of the seal herd, necessitated by his position as resident superintendent of the Alaska Commercial Company on the Pribilof Islands, says: “IT am fully convinced, from my knowl- edge of seal matters, that if this indiscriminate and reckless destruction of the Pribilof seal herd continues as it has done in the past six years in Bering Sea and the North Pacific, the seals will be practically exterminated in a very few years, even if the United States Government should not allow any seals to be taken on the Pribilof Islands, for the destruction of females in the water has reached a number that can not be met by the annual increase.” * The facts thus submitted are, that the Alaskan Conclusions. seal herd has decreased to a great extent in the last few years; that the sole cause of such decrease has been the indiscriminate and waste- ful slaughter of seals in the open seas, particu- larly pregnant and nursing females; that if such destruction continues the northern fur-seal will be practically exterminated; and that both from 1Vol--LE-p.- 225. 2Vol. Il, p. 46. 2716—532 250 Conclusions. Means neces- sary. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. a scientific point of view and from actual experi- ence it is necessary to protect the seal herd from this means of slaughter in order to preserve the species. Upon the question what are the restrictions or prohibitions needful to accomplish the desired results, it is only necessary to consider those applicable to open-sea sealing, for it has already been shown that regulations can be enforced upon the Pribilof Islands so that a certain num- ber of young male seals can be taken annually on the islands for an indefinite period without decreasing or impairing the normal condition of the herd, and this is particularly shown by the American Commissioners and various witnesses.’ As to what restrictions are necessary to be enforced in relation to pelagic sealing, the opin- ions naturally vary according to the knowledge, prejudice, or conclusions of the individual. These opinions may be placed in two classes, absolute prohibition and limited prohibition. Naturally, the majority of those whose interests would be affected by an absolute prohibition of open-sea sealing in all waters frequented by the Alaskan herd, will be found affirming the need of a 1Report of American Bering Sea Commissioners, post, p. 352; H. H. McIntyre, Vol. Il, p. 45; William H. Williams, vol. II, p. 94; George Wardman, vol. II, p. 179; W. H. Dall, vol. IT, p. 24. — ALASKAN HERD. . 251 limited prohibition, while those who are unbiased Means neces: ‘ : : : sary. by interest or who desire the preservation of the seal declare that absolute prohibition can only accomplish its preservation. Mr. Phillip Lutley Sclater, Ph. D., secretary Absolute prohi- of the Zoological Society of London, says that, Gane aes in his opinion as a naturalist, “unless proper measures are taken to restrict the indiscriminate capture of the fur seal in the North Pacific the extermination of this species will take place in a few years, as it has already done in the case of other species of the same group in other parts of the world;” that “it seems to him that the proper way of proceeding would be to stop the killing of females and young of the fur-seal altogether, or as far as possible, and to restrict the killing of the males to a certain number in ’ and that “the only way he can each year;’ imagine by which these rules could be carried out is by killing the seals only on the islands at the breeding time (at which time it appears that the young males keep apart from the females and old males), and by preventing altogether, as far as possible, the destruction of the fur-seals at M1 all other times and in other places.”* Professor Dall, whose opinion must necessarily be con- 1p, L. Selater, Vol. I, p. 418. See also quotation from Prof. T. H. Huxley, ante, p. 240. 252 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Absolute prohi- sidered as entirely unbiased, unless a_ scientific bition of pelagic | ; sealing. interest can be regarded as a bias, says: ‘Upon the amount of protection depends the safety of - the seal herd in the future. If protected only upon the Pribilof Islands, extermination will be rapid; if they are protected upon the islands and in the waters of Bering sea also, the decrease will be slower, but ultimate extinction will prob- ably follow. ‘To preserve them completely it is necessary that they should be protected in all waters which they frequent at all times.” Mr. C. A. Williams, whose long experience in the fur business has made him thoroughly competent to speak on this question, and whose interest is no longer affected by the preservation of the seal herd, says that he “regards it as important that the seal herd should be protected * * * in the North Pacific, as otherwise they will be exterminated, even if sealing be prohibited in the Bering Sea.”? Dr. H. H. McIntyre says: “In my judgment the seals should be protected in Bering Sea and the North Pacific, and that pelagic sealing should be entirely prohibited in sdid waters.”* Mr. Alfred Fraser, already men- tioned as a British subject, whose interests are entirely with the continuance of the sealskin IViol: LI, p: 9 2Vol. Il, p. 538. 3Vol. Il, p. 46. ALASKAN HERD. 25s industry in London, says “that, in his judgment, Absolute prohi- the absolute prohibition of pelagic sealing, 7. ¢., sealing. ce the killing of seals in the open sea, whether in the North Pacific or the Bering Sea, is necessary to the preservation of the seal herds now surviv- ”! Besides the statements given above, many ing. other witnesses express the same opinion.’ Those asserting the need of only a limited pro- nee ee hibition are divided in their views as to the se@izs. means necessary, some advocating a close season, in which all killing of seals should be prohib- ited, others that the use of firearms in taking seals should be forbidden, others that the seal herd should not be molested in the waters of Bering Sea, and still others who believe that a zone about the islands of from thirty to fifty miles would be sufficient. The first of these propositions is supported by 4 close season. a number of sealers, but the period of time in which pelagic sealing should be prohibited varies: Daniel Claussen advocates a close season from July 1 to the last of October;’ Arthur Griffin, from April to September 1, inclusive ;* Joshua 1Vol. II, p. 557. 2wW. ©. Coulson, Vol. Il, p.416; T. F. Ryan, Vol. Il, p.175; J. H. Moulton, Vol. II, p.73; W. B. Taylor, Vol. II, p. 177; B. F. Scribner, Vol. II, p. 90; T.F. Morgan, Vol. II, p. 65; Gustave Isaacson, Vol. II, p. 440; J. A. Bradley, Vol. IL, p. 227; H. W. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. if $ Vol. I, p. 412. 4Vol, II, p. 326, 254 A close season. A close season impracticable. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Stickland, from May 1 to September 15 ;? Frank Johnson from the Ist of July to the end of the year;” G. EH. Miner, from January 1 to August 15.2. James Kiernan says the seals should be protected from February until October,* and Isaac M. Lenard, from February to November.? Thomas Brown (No. 1.) says that in order to prevent the extermination of seals the hunting of them should be prohibited until after the mother 6 seals give birth to their young ;° which opinion is also advanced by Capt. Victor Jackobson.” William Short says that sealing should be pro-. hibited in the North Pacific before the middle of June.2 And Charles Peterson says: ‘The prac- tice of taking seals in the water betore they give birth to their young is destructive to seal life and should be prohibited.” ® A glance at the above opinions of those who have been or are engaged in pelagic sealing is sufficient to show that a close season can not accomplish the preservation of the seal, for, taken 1'Vol. II, p. 350. 2Vol. II, p. 441. ; 3 Vol. I, p.467. See also George Dishow, Vol. II, p. 323. 4Vol. Il, p. 451. i 6Vol. I, p. 217. 6 Vol. II, p. 319. 7Vol. Il, p. 328. 8 Vol, II, p. 348. ®Vol. LI, p. 346. ALASKAN HERD. 250 collectively, every month in the year is comprised | A close season impracticable. in the statement of one sealer or another, evidently showing that in every month the seal herd needs protection. Dr. George Dawson, one of the British Bering Sea Commissioners, in an article entitled ‘“Note on the Question of Protection of the Fur Seal in the North Pacific,” which was inclosed in a communication from Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine, dated March 9, 1890, says: ‘The circumstance that the female fur- seal becomes pregnant within a few days after the birth of its young, and that the period of gestation is nearly twelve months, with the fact that the skins are at all times fit for market (though for a few weeks, extending from the middle of August to the end of September, during the progress of shedding and renewal of the longer hair, they are of less value), show that there is no natural basis for a close season generally applicable.”* And Sir George Baden-Powell, the other British Berme Sea Commissioner, in a letter to the London Times, published Saturday, November 30, 1889, opposes a close season for all mouths excepting July, August, and Septem- ber, on the ground that “the Canadian sealers commence sealing in December and seal contin- 1Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine, March 9, 1890, inclosure No, 4. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. A close season uously from then till August.” Professor Huxley inpracticable. Prohibition’ use of firearms. Prohibition pelagic sealing in Bering Sea. also says: “In sucha case as this I do not believe that the enforcement of a close time, either in Bering Sea or on the Northwest Coast, would be of any practical utility, unless the fishing is absolutely prohibited.”* of ‘The second means of protection, the prohibition of the use of firearms, is naturally advanced by 2 the Indian hunters.” It is but necessary to recall the fact that with less than twenty vessels engaged in sealing during the years from 1880 to 1885, when spears were practically the sole weapon used in the chase, the seals ceased to increase.? If, then, the present fleet of over a hundred ves- sels carried only Indian hunters it is evident the seals would still decrease, for the catch of the Indian, like that of the white man, is composed of the same proportion of female seals and is entirely indiscriminate.* The third proposition is to close Bering Sea from the invasion of sealing vessels.? The same suggestion made on the last point stated, that the seals ceased to increase from 1880 to 1885, with 1Statement of Prof. T. J. Huxley, Vol. I, p. 412. 2Twongkwak, Vol. LU, p. 246; King Kooga, Vol. II, p. 240. See also F. R. King-Hall, Vol. IL, p. 334. 3 Ante, p. 165. 4Michael Wooskoot, Vol. II, p. 275; Robert Kooko, Vol. II, p. 296; Jack Shueky, Vol. II, p. 289; Charlie Tlaksatan, Vol. IT, p. 270. 6 William H, Smith, Vol. I, p. 478. ALASKAN HERD. 257 less than twenty vessels in the business, is appli- Prohibition of cable to this method of protection; for, as has Boring Bele! already been stated, the sealing vessels at that time seldom entered Bering Sea, confining their operations almost entirely to the North Pacifie,! and therefore a large increase in the fleet, even though excluded from that sea, would ultimately cause the practical extinction of the herd. The British Government, through its Minister to the United States, Sir Julian Pauncefote, in April, 1890, submitted proposals for a convention, in relation to the sealing industry in Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk, in which Great Britain, Russia, and the United States should join. In these proposals the area suggested to be closed included not only Bering Sea, but a considerable portion of the Pacific Ocean south of the Alaska Peninsula and the eastern Aleutian Passes.’ And in the earlier correspondence Great Britain even proposed to extend the legislative protec- tion as far south as the forty-seventh parallel.’ Sir George Baden-Powell, one of the British Bering Sea Commissioners, mm an article which was published in ‘The New Review,” February, 1 Ante, p. 166. 2Letter of Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine, dated April —, 1890, inclosure 1. ' 3Mr. White to Mr. Bayard, April 20, 1888; Marquis of Salis- bury to Sir L. West, April 16, 1888, See also Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr, Wharton, June 11, 1891, 271633 258 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Prohibition of 1891, says: ‘Effectively to protect the industry pelagic sealing in Bering Sea. one would have to include all the Pacific Ocean and coasts thereof to north of, say, latitude 50 deg." Great Britain has therefore conceded that the seal herd needs protection outside Bering Sea during the greater portion of its migration. ees es The fourth and last means of a limited prohi- within a zone. — hition proposed is to draw an imaginary line about the islands within which open-sea sealing should be prohibited. The distance suggested as a radius for such a zone about the Pribilof Islands varies from twenty-five’ or thirty’ to fifty miles.‘ ene: seal- 'T'o show how ineffective such a means of pro- tection would be it is but necessary to examine the charts showing the courses of sealing schooners seized in Bering Sea in 1887, which have been platted, from the original log books of the vessels in the possession of the United States Government, by the Bureau of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey and which have been 1 “The Bering Sea Dispute: A Settlement,” by Sir George Baden-Powell, Vol. I, p. 589. ?Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford, Feb. 28. 1892, 3ritish Blue Book, U. S. No. 1 (1892) C-6633, No. 5, p. 2. 8’ Henry Poland, Vol. I, p. 572; Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury, Feb. 26, 1892, British Blue Book, U. 8. No, 1 (1892), C-6633, No. 8, p. 3. 4Morris Moss, Vol, II, p. 342. ALASKAN HERD. 259 certified to by the Chief of that Bureau. An _ Courses of seal- examination of the course of the British schooner Ada, of Victoria, British Columbia, will at once prove the inefficacy of a zone as a means of protection, for it is there shown that within a given area the nearest point of which is one hundred and thirty-seven miles from the islands the catch for thirteen days was seven hundred and forty-seven seals, while in a given area nearly one hundred miles nearer the Pribilof Islands the catch for eighteen days was but five hundred and fifty-six; and, further, that at no time was the vessel within forty-five miles of the seal rook- eries.. The course of the British schooner Alfred Adams shows the nearest point to the islands where seals were taken by her in 1887 was about sixty miles south of St. George Island, and that the majority of her catch was made one hundred and twenty-five miles from the islands.” The schooner Hillen never came within one hundred and sixteen miles of the rookeries on the islands,’ and the schooner Annic’s nearest approach to the islands was seventy-seven miles, her usual distance being over one hundred and fifty miles therefrom.* Hdward Shield, of Sooke ee 1 Chart of course of schooner Ada, Vol. I, p. 574. * Chart of course of schooner Alfred Adams, Vol. I, p. 543. 3 Chart of course of schooner Ellen, Vol. I, p. 525. ‘Chart of course of schooner Annie, Vol. I, p. 531, ing vessels, 260 PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Courses of seal- District, Vancouver Island, one of the hunters ing vessels. on board the British schooner Carolina, seized by Captain Abbey, United States Revenue Marine, in 1886, says: “During the time while we were cruising about we were in the open sea out of sight of land.”* Much other testimony of the same nature might be advanced, but it will be sufficient to mention only the declarations of James Douglas Warren as to the places of seizure in the cases of the W. P. Sayward, Grace, Anna Beck, Dolphin, Alfred Adams, and Ada, vessels seized by the United States Government in 1887, the distance given shows how the seals wander many miles from land, for in all cases Mr.- Warren states the vessel was engaged in sealing at the distances given: the W. P. Sayward about fifty-eight miles from Unalaska, the nearest land;’ the Grace about ninety-two miles from Unalaska, th enearest land;’ the Anna Beck about sixty-six miles from the nearest land;* the Dolphin about forty-two miles from Unalaska Island, the nearest land;° the Alfred Adams about sixty-two miles from Unalaska Island, the nearest land,® and the Ada about fifteen miles 1 British Blue Book, U. 8, No. 2 (1880), C-6131, p. 8. 2 Tbid., p. 145. 3 Tbid., p. 148. 4Tbid., p. 152. 5 Ibid. p. 156. 6 [bid., p. 160, ALASKAN HERD. 261 northward from Unalaska Island, which said _ Courses of seall- ing vessels, island was the nearest land.” Sir George Baden-Powell, in the article pub- lished in the ‘‘London Times,” already referred to, says: “As a matter of fact the Canadian sealers take very few, if any, seals close to these (the Pribilof) islands.” The American Commissioners in their report, Renocer im Berke after speaking of the absurdity of such a pro- posed method of protection, say: ‘There is almost constant cloudiness and dense fog, and it is difficult for a vessel to know her own location within reasonable limits after having cruised about for ashort time. A margin of uncertainty would be nearly as wide as the zone itself. . . . In most cases it would be difficult to prove that the sealer was actually within the forbidden area.”? Captain Shepard, of the United States Revenue Marine, who seized anumber of vessels in 1887 and 1889, while engaged in sealing in Bering Sea, says: “It is my opinion that should pelagic sealing be prohibited in a zone thirty, forty, or fifty miles about the Probilof Islands, it would be utterly useless as a protection to seal life, because female seals go much farther than that 1 British Blue Book, U.S. No. 2 (1890), C-6131, p. 161. See also William H. Smith, Vol. II, p. 478; Fred Smith, Vol. II, p. 349. ?Report of American Beriug Sea Commissioners, post, p. 376. 262 Sea. PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION. Fogs in Beringin search of food, and because fogs are so preva- lent about those islands that it would be impos- sible to enforce any such prohibition.” Captain Abbey, also of the United States Revenue Marine, who seized several sealing vessels in 1886 in Bering Sea, says: ‘“ Foes are almost constant in Bering Sea in the summer time. During the fifty-eight days I cruised in those waters fifty- - four days were foggy and rainy, the other four days partly clear. On this account it is most difficult to seize vessels in Bering Sea. ‘The re- ports of the guns of the hunters might often be heard when no vessel could be seen. For fifteen or twenty days at a time I did not see the sun, and never while in Bering Sea did I see a star, the nights bemg continually overcast and foggy.” Captain Bryant, already mentioned as the Government agent on the Pribilof Islands from 1870 to 1877, and who prior to that time had been captain of a whaling vessel which for several years had been in Bering Sea, says: “A zone thirty, forty, or fifty miles about the island in which sealing is prohibited would be of little or no protection, as the females, during the breeding season after their pups are born, wan- der at intervals over Bering Sea in search of food. But, to suppose an impossibility, even if 1Vol. II, p. 189. 2Vol. II, p. 186. ALASKAN HERD. such a zone could protect seal life, it would be , impossible, on account of the atmosphere being so constantly foggy and misty, to prevent ves- sels from crossing an imaginary line drawn at such a distance from and about the Pribilof Islands." Others also consider this question of a protecting zone and give the same opinion as the witnesses quoted above.” Commander Charles J. Turner, of Her Majesty’s cruiser Nymphie, which was in Bering Sea in 1891, states that “the weather experienced on the whole was very foggy and rainy, and the fogs greatly aided the sealing schooners in escaping observation.”* And Lord Salisbury, in discussing the possibility of limiting sealing to one side of a line drawn through the sea, says ‘‘that if seal hunting be prohibited on one side of a purely imaginary line drawn in the open ocean, while it is permitted on the other side of the line, it will be impossible in many cases to prove unlawful sealing, or to infer it from the possession of skins or fishing tackle.” And the soundness of this statement is still more evident when such an imaginary line is almost continually enveloped in fogs and mists. EVol: Ti, ps 9. 7H. H. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 46; A. P. Loud, Vol. II, p. 39; George Wardman, Vol. II, p. 179; H. W. McIntyre, Vol. II, p. 138; ee Clark Viol. 11, p. 160: * British Blue Book, United States No. 3 (1892), C-6635, p. 115, ‘Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr Wharton, June 6, 1891 (In- closure), 263 Fogs in Bering ea. 264 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY aes After a careful consideration of the four sealing necessary. methods of limited protection proposed above, it is evident that none of these can preserve the Alaskan seal herd from certain destruction in the near future, no matter how stringently they may be enforced. The result, therefore, of this con- sideration is, that, if it is deemed necessary or expedient from a practical and commercial point of view to preserve the seal herds of the North Pacific and Bering Sea, pelagic sealing in every form and in all waters must be absolutely pro- hibited at all times. 4 THE SEAL-SKIN INDUSTRY. IN THE PAST. The commercial value of the Alaskan seal herd, which needs the protection already shown in order to preserve it from practical extinction, is evident on an examination of the seal-skin industry as it formerly existed and as it is at the present time. oe of sup- Formerly—that is, prior to the American oc- cupation of Alaska and Bering Sea, the great sources of supply for fur-seal skins were in both the southern and northern hemispheres. Among those located in the antarctic regions, and from IN THE PAST. 265 which hundreds of thousands of skins were _Souress of sup- taken in the early part of this century were’ c Sandwichland, South Shetland Islands, Desola- tion Island, Goughs Island, Kerguelen Island, Massafuero Island, San Juan Fernandez Island, the Falkland Islands, Tierra del Fuego, Pata- gonia, Cape Horn, South Georgia Islands, the Crozets,' the Cape of Good Hope, New Zealand, and other localities described by Dr. Allen.’ It has already been shown how completely these antarctic rookeries have been depleted,’ but an instance of the enormous numbers taken by sealers in a short time, which shows how populous these southern coasts and islands had once been in seal life, is found in the case of the South Shetlands, where three hundred and twenty thousand skins were taken in two years (1821-1823),* and also in the case of Massafuero, from which island there were shipped to Canton in seven years over three million fur-seal skins.‘ Besides the antarctic sources of seal skins there were those which may be called subtropical, consisting of the Guadalupe and Galapagos 1Emil Teichmann, Vol. II, p. 577; James W. Budington, Vol. II, pp. 593-594; George Fogel, Vol. I, p. 424; C. A. Williams, Vol. II, p. 5386; George Comer, Vol. II, p. 596; Alfred Fraser, Vol. II, p. 555. 2 Article by Dr. Allen, Parts I and II; Vol. I, pp. 375, 394. 3 Ante, p. 218. 4C, A. Williams, Vol. II, p. 541. 2716 J4 266 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY Sources of sup- islands, Lobos Islands,’ St. Felix and St. Ambrose ply. Markets. islands,” the depleted condition of all which is well known, except Lobos Island, which, as before shown, has been long protected by the Uruguayan Government.’ The arctic supply was, as now, the Pribilof Islands, the Commander Islands, Robben Reef, and the Kurile Islands, all these except the last mentioned being directly under the control and management of the Russian American Company. Prior to 1870 all the fur-seal skins save a few thousand were marketed and sold in China, where the skins were plucked,‘ the commercial value being about five dollars in that country and something less in Europe ;* but the supply being so irregular the market price fluctuated so that a cargo of skins was sometimes sold as low as fifty cents per skin.” Russia also received a portion of the supply obtained by the Russian American Company.® A few skins, however, 1¢. A. Williams, Vol. II, p. 542. 2 Article by Dr. Allen, Parts [and II, Vol. I, pp. 371, 393; Gaffney, Vol. II, p. 430. 3 Emil Teichmann, Vol. II, p. 578; Alfred Frazer, Vol. II, p. 556; Uruguayan documents, Vol. I, p. 448. 4Emil Teichmann, Vol. II, p.577; C. A. Williams, Vol. II, p. 541; Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company to General Manager Baranof, dated April 6 (18), 1817, Vol. I, p. 80. 5 Ibid, Vol. I, p. 542. 6 Letter from Board of Administration of Russian American Com- pany to Captain Rudakof, dated April 22 (May 4), 1853, Vol. I, p. 82. IN THE PRESENT. were purchased in England by J. M. Oppenheim Markets. & Company,' and in the fifties New York’ also re- ceived a supply from the Russian American Com- pany, but it was not until the lease of the Pribilof Islands to the Alaska Commercial Company in 1870, and through the united efforts of that Company with C. M. Lampson & Company that the sealskin industry received the impetus which has built it up to its present condition.’ At the same time the methods of dyeing and dressing the skins were perfected through the same agency, and sealskins made an article of fashion in general use in Europe and America, and became much more valuable as merchandise + IN THE PRESENT. Asaresult of these endeavors and the increased prices, London has become practically the sole market in which the skins of the fur-seal are sold, and buyers gather there semiannually from from different countries to purchase the skins,° which, to the number of one hundred and fifty thousand or more, are sold at public auction. 1 Walter E. Martin, Vol. II, p. 567. 2 Letter to the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company from the chief manager of the Russian American Colo- nies, dated November 8 (20), 1854, Vol. I, p. 83. 3 Emil Teichmann, Vol. II, p. 582. 4C. A. Williams, Vol. II, p. 546. ® Ibid., Vol. II, p. 546; G. C. Lampson, Vol. II, p. 564. 6 H.S. Bevington, Vol. II, p. 552. 267 268 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. = aes of sup- ‘The principal sources of supply for seal skins at the present time are, first, the Pribilof Islands ; second, the Commander Islands; third, the North- west or Victoria catch. A small supply is also received from Lobos Islands, Cape Horn, the Falklands,’ and Australasia.’ Fee eendence on The tables attached to the affidavit of Mr. Emil Teichmann, of the firm of C. M. Lampson & Company, show that the Pribilof Islands have, since their lease to the Alaska Commercial Com- pany, and until the year 1890, supplied on an aver- age over one-half of the skins sold annually in London; that, including the Northwest catch, the Alaskan herd has produced over sixty per cent of the world’s supply, and that the two great herds of the North Pacific and Bering Sea, which are both threatened with extermination by pelagic sealing, are the source of over eighty per cent of the skins annually offered for sale at London. In 1889, the last year in which one hundred thousand seals were taken on the Prib- ilof Islands, the number of skins derived from these two herds was ninety-four per cent of the whole supply, not twelve thousand skins being obtained from other sources. From the fore- going it is evident that the destruction of the 1 Emil Teichmann, Vol. II, p. 579. 2H.S. Bevington, Vol. IT, p. 551. 4Kmil Teichmann, Vol. II, p. 585. oe LOSS IF HERD DESTROYED. Alaskan herd means practically the annihilation of the seal-skin industry of the world. There- fore, the extent and value of this industry, the consequent loss in case pelagic sealing is not prohibited, besides the loss to the United States Government by destruction of the seal herd, are matters for consideration in this connection. LOSS IF HERD DESTROYED. Under the present lease of the Pribilof Islands the United States Government derives a revenue on each raw skin taken on the islands of over ten dollars; and under the same conditions which existed prior to the introduction of pelagic seal- ing, as it is now carried on, 100,000 seals could be annually taken upon the Pribilof Islands, as has been shown, without impairment of the seal herd The annual revenue from this source to the United States would, therefore, be over $1,000,000. Besides this profit the United States Government received a further revenue from Alaskan seals reshipped to America from Eng- land. At least seventy per cent of the Alaska skins are imported into the United States after being dressed and dyed in the city of London. 1 Lease to North American Commercial Company, Vol. I, p. 106, 269 Dependence on Alaskan herd. Loss to United tates. 270 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. Loss to United, M. Lampson & Company, in a letter to the States. British Foreign Office dated December 30, 1890, state: “For many years past no less than 75 per cent have been bought for American account and reshipped to the United States after having been manufactured in London.”? This statement is corroborated by seven of the principal fur mer- chants in the United States, who place the number of ‘“Alaskas” imported at from 65,000 to 75,000. The value of these skins before paying custom duty to the United States is shown to average for a series of years about $25 per skin” On these importations the Government of the United States received a duty of 20 per cent advalorem, or an annual revenue from duties on dressed and dyed Alaskan skins amounting to the sum of $375,000, which makes the total annuity of the United States Government, derived from the Alaskan seal herd, at least $1,375,000, provided the usual quota of skins are taken by the lessees of the Pribilof Islands. In the United States these imported dressed and dyed skins are re- modeled and manufactured into seal-skin articles, for which the people so employed receive on an average $7 a skin, or for the 70,000 skins so 1 British Blue Book, U. 8. No. 1 (1891), C-6253, p. 11. 2Statement of American industry by furriers, Vol. IL, p. 526. LOSS IF HERD DESTROYED. imported annually the sum of $490,000.21. When. to this is added the profits to the wholesale and retail furriers and merchants engaged in the seal- skin industries in the United States, which, accord- ing to the American furriers quoted above, are about $30 a skin, or on the 70,000 skins annually imported $2,100,000,' the total amount received each year in the United States from the man- ufacture and sale of Alaska skins aggregates 2,590,000. The average price per skin for ‘“Alaskas” in the London market for the last ten years, when the lease to the Alaska Commercial Company was in force (1880-1889) and when 100,000 seals were taken annually, was 68s. 8d.? or (allowing 24.3 cents to the shilling) about $16.50. The present lessees, under a normal condition of affairs, might expect a similar price. In procuring the skins they pay the United States $9.624 on each secured, and the $60,000 rent adds 60 cents more on each skin; allowing $3 per skin for wages of employés, transporta- tion, etc., the cost of a raw Alaska skin deliv- ered in London would be about $13.25, which selling at the average price of $16.50 would make a profit to the lessees of the islands of $3.25 per 1 Statement of American industry by furriers, Vol. II, p. 526. 2Tables of prices prepared by Mr, A, Fraser, Vol. I, p. 561. 271 Loss to United ates, 272 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. Loss to Unitedskin, and on 100,000 skins the profits ‘would be States. Loss to Great Britain. $325,000. The natives who drive and kill the seals on the Pribilof Islands also receive 40 cents for each skin, or for 100,000 the sum of $40,000. Therefore the destruction of the Alaska seal herd would mean an annual loss to the Government and people of the United States of $4,330,000. The sealskin industry in Great Britain, which, as has been shown; is entirely dependent upon the Alaska seal herd for its existence, has alone in the city of London invested capital to the amount of £1,000,000,' and employs between two” and three thousand’ persons, many of whom are skilled workmen with families dependent on them,* who would be compelled to learn some other trade in case the industry was destroyed. The fur brokers in London up to 1889 received 6 per cent of the price for which they sold the sealskins,° which on 100,000 Alaska skins, at $16 per skin, would amount to $96,000. The next expense put upon the skins is dressing and dye- ing them, which is about 16s. a skin,’ making in u Emil Teichmann, Vol. II, p. 582; George C. Lampson, Vol. II, p. 565. 2 Emil Teichmann, Vol, IT, p. 582; Walter E. Martin, Vol. I1,p.568; G. C. Lampson, Vol. II, p. 565; George Rice, Vol. II, p. 574; Arthur Hirschel, Vol. I, p. 563. %’ Henry Poland, Vol. I, p. 571; H. S. Bevington, Vol. II, p. 552. 4 Henry Poland, Vol. II, p.571; Walter E. Martin, Vol. I, p. 568; G. C. Lampson, Vol, II, p. 565; George Rice, Vol, I, p. 573. 6,8. Bevington, Vol, I, p. 553, «ee Ree ee LOSS IF HERD DESTROYED. Zo all for the 100,000 the sum of $368,000. This press to Great makes an annual loss to Great Britain, in case the Alaskan herd is commercially exterminated, of $464,000; but this is only a partial statement of the actual damage sustained, for the depriva- tion of eight-tenths of the seal-skin supply must necessarily reduce the industry in Great Britain: to a condition which will lead capital to abandon it; and a permanent plant-valued at £80,000 would become entirely useless if the seal-skin industry were to come to an end. The French Republic will also suffer a serious 108s to France, loss from the destruction of this valuable herd of ‘fur-bearing animals, on which the sealskin indus- try so largely depends. The Paris firmof Révillon Fréres has alone in the last twenty years bought upwards of 400,000 sealskins, the majority of which have been made up into garments by said firm, the sales of which have amounted to about 4,000,000 francs annually for the period of twenty years. This firm employs about three hundred persons, who are skilled laborers, and who would be thrown out of employment by the withdrawal of the supply of skins furnished by the Alaskan herd; and it is safe to say from five to six hundred persons are dependent upon the sealskin industry in France” If the 20,000 1 Arthur Hirschel, Vol. I, p. 563. ?Leon Réyillon, Vol. I, p.590. 35 2716 274 Loss to France. Loss to the world. Need of regular supply of skins. THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. skins annually purchased by this firm cost $25 per skin in London,’ the total cost would be about 2,500,000 frances; and the annual loss to France through this firm’s business being affected by the destruction of the Alaskan seal herd would be about 1,500,000 franes; as there are other fur companies in France also dealing in sealskins the loss would undoubtedly be much more than the figures given. Simply relying, however, upon the actual loss sustained, as hereinbefore demonstrated, and adding the $3.00 per skin allowed as expenses paid the employés of the lessees of the Pribolof Islands, transportation, etc., amounting on 100,000 skins to $300,000, the total annual loss to the world from the destruction of this great seal herd would amount to over $5,000,000. Besides this a laree number of persons employed by furriers and fur houses would be thrown out of employ- ment, and the three hundred natives of the Pribilof Islands would be deprived of their sole means of sustenance, and become a charge upon the United States Government. It is the further testimony of all those engaged in the sealskin business that in order to main- tain the industry it is necessary that the supply 1Statement of American furriers, Vol. II, p. 526. INVESTMENTS. 275 of skins should be constant and regular,' other- Need of reguar supply of skins, wise there is great danger of loss to the buyers or sellers through fiuctuation in prices, and the business of buying and selling becomes specula- tive. That this has been the result upon the market, through pelagic sealing in the last few years, is clearly shown by Mr. H. 8. Bevington,’ and his statement is supported by the American furriers and others engaged in the fur trade? It is therefore evident that even in case open-sea sealing could be carried on without insuring the destruction of the herd, the results would demor- alize and practically ruin the sealskin industry, now so firmly established. INVESTMENTS. Having reviewed the general loss to the world Canadian invest. D ment, in 1890. by the destruction of the Alaskan seal herd, it should now be compared with the Canadian industry in the pelagic sealing fleet, which would necessarily be abandoned in case open-sea hunt- ing is prohibited. According to the Canadian Fishery Reports for 1890, the total valuation of the twenty-nine vessels engaged in sealing, 1Walter E. Martin, Vol. II, p. 568; Emil Teichmann, Vol. II, p. 582; G. C. Lampson, Vol. II, p. 566. 2 Violen pa pD3. 3Statement made by American furriers. (Seeaffidavitsof S. Ull- mann, Vol. II, p. 527; Alfred Harris, Vol. II, p. 529; Henry Tread- well, Vol. II, p. 529; and Hugo Jaeckel, Vol. I, p. 531, attached.) 276 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. Canadian invest-inclusive of canoes and boats, was $265,985." ment, in 1890. By this valuation the value per ton, exclusive of outfit, is $121.54, which is undoubtedly exces- sive. Mr. T. T. Williams, who made a careful examination into the Canadian sealing industry — in 1889, on behalf of the Alaska Commercial Company preparatory to the said Company’s bidding for a new lease of the Pribilof Islands in 1890, states that it costs to build these sealing vessels and outfit them in Victoria $80 per ton, and in the United States $1002 An examina- tion of the Canadian Fisheries Reports for the years 1887 and 1890 shows that twelve of the twenty-nine vessels engaged in sealing from Victoria in 1890 were so engaged in 1887, and that some of them were very old and of very little value. Thus, the Mary Taylor and Mary Ellen have both been built thirty-five years; the Lilly has seen forty-six years’ service; the Black Diamond (called the Catherine in 1890), Juniata, Wanderer, Letitia, and Mountain Chief are all unseaworthy and have been taken out of the coast trade as being unsafe? A. R. Milne, esq., collector of the port of Victoria, reported to the Dominion Government that the total value of the fleet of twenty-four vessels, with an — 1Canadian Fisheries Report (1890), p. 183. 2Vol. 11, p. 500. 37. T. Williams, Vol. II, p. 500. te tl Bes 6 De i ee ee ile Ae INVESTMENTS. Dae ageregate tonnage of 1,464 tons, in 1889 was Canadian invest- ment, in 1890. $200,500,' or $83.50 per ton, which is $38.04 per ton less than the valuation given in 1890. It is difficult to see how the wear and tear on a vessel can appreciate its value, but such seems to be the case with the Victoria sealing fleet, according to the reports of Canadian officials. But admitting the Canadian valuation to be, Contrast be- tween British and eorrect, the British capital 1,000,000) invested Canadian invest- ments in 1890. in the sealskin industry, which latter must be abandoned if pelagic sealing continues, exceeds the investment of Canada by over $4,600,000; in other words, the Canadian capital imvested is less than 6 per cent of the British investment. Canadian in- : . (ee eR ee The value of the Victoria fleet of forty-nine , cient, in 1891. vessels and outfit in 1891 is given by the Cana- dian Fisheries Report for that year as $425,150, which is also excessive.” According to the Cana- dian valuation of 1890 the average value per ton for the fleet, including outfit, is $130.20; in 1891 the same authority gives the valuation per ton for vessels and outfit as $132.73, or $2.53 per ton over and above the inflated valuation of 1890. Levi W. Myers, esq., United States con- sul at Victoria, had a careful estimate made of the value of the vessels engaged in the sealing business in Victoria, by two experts, both resi- 17, T. Williams, Vol. II, p. 499-500. ?Canadian Fisheries Report (1891) p. LXxxv. 278 Canadian in- vestment, in 1891. Contrast be- tween British and Canadian invest- ments in 1891. Employés in Canada and Lon- don. THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. dents of Victoria, and one especially, Mr. W. J. Stevens, being recognized as authority on such matters, often having been employed by the Dominion Government in examining and report- ing on vessels.' According to such estimate the value of the vessels in 1891 was $203,200. Con- sul Myers also obtained from the custom-house records at Victoria the approximate age of the vessels, which shows that seven of them are “very old,” two are “old,” and thirty-three have seen over six years of service.” In consideration of this last fact stated, it is evident that the Ca- nadian valuation is far above the true figure. However, assuming the value of the fleet of 1891 as given in the Canadian reports to be ac- curate, namely, $425,150, the Canadian capital is even then less than 12 per cent of the British investment in the sealskin industry; and Great Britain, through the necessary abandonment of her permanent plant used in the industry, would lose more in this item alone than the entire Ca- nadian investment. According to the same ‘sources of information, Canada employed in 1890, 678 white men and Indians in seal hunting,’ and in 1891, 439 Indians 1 Vol.'1, p. 507. 2 Consul Meyer’s Report (No. 156), Vol, I, p. 511. 3 Canadian Fisheries Report (1890), p. 183. INVESTMENTS. 279 and 643 whitest In London, as has been shown, Employés in Canada and Lon- from two to three thousand persons are employed don. in the sealskin industry; it is safe, therefore, to say that nearly three times as many people are dependent upon the sealskin industry in Lon- don alone as are employed in the pelagic seal- hunting business in Canada. The average wages per week paid to those employed in the British industry are about 30s.,” or £190,000 ($947,700) per annum to the 2,500 employés. According to the Canadian Report for 1890, above cited, the gross receipts derived from the sealskins taken by the Victoria fleet were $492,261, the catch being sold at inflated prices because of the small number of skins obtained on the Pribilof Islands, the average price per skin in 1889, for the Northwest catch, in London, being only 39s. 5d? ($9.58). It is evident, therefore, that the annual gross receipts of Canada from pelagic sealing are only about half of the sum annually paid out for wages by London houses engaged in the sealskin industry. In comparing the Canadian venture with the , Vaie te Canada United States industry the contrast is even more striking. It has already been shown that the furriers, manufacturers, and merchants of the PRUs (soll). ps LXE. 2Emil Teichmann, Vol. 11, p.582; W. E. Martin, Vol. IT, p. 568.. 3 Alfred Fraser, Vol. II, p. 562. 280 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. Value to Canada United States realize annually on Alaskan skins and United States. 2 - . consumed in the United States the sum of ©2,L100,000; the aggregate amount annually paid as wages to those employed in the American manufactories to be $490,000; the receipts of the Pribilof Islands natives to be $40,000 annually; and the profits of the lessees of said islands, when 100,000 skins are taken, to be $325,000. The gross amount thus received by citizens of the United States each year from the Alaskan eatch is about $3,000,000. The value of the Victoria pelagic catch for 1891 has not been published in the Canadian Fisheries Reports, but assuming the value of the Victoria pelagic catch to be $492,261, as given by the Canadian report for 1890, which has been shown to be abnormal, the gross Canadian receipts per annum from the sealing fleet are less than 164 per cent of the total profits to the citizens of the United States from the Alaskan eatch. If the annual receipts to the United States Government be also included, the gross sum received by Canada from her sealskin catch is 115 per cent of the annual profits to the Government and people of the United States on “Alaska” sealskins. ckmployés in The number of persons employed in the United States. manufacture of sealskins in the United States is INVESTMENTS. 281 3,360,' which is over three times as many as Employés in : Canada and were engaged in the Victoria sealing industry in United States. 1891, according to the Canadian officials, and five times as many as were so engaged in 1890. The receipts of France from her sealskin in-, Contrast be- tween French and dustry has been shown to be over $300,000 Canadian invest- (1,500,000 frances), which is at least 66 per cent of the gross receipts of Canada from pelagic -sealing in a year when the prices of Northwest skins were abnormal. Under natural conditions, as in 1888 or 1890, the French receipts from her industry would more than equal the gross re- ceipts of Canada from the sealing fleet’s catch. The number of men also employed in France is about the same in number as those employed in pelagic sealing in Canada in 1890. : = eration = _ Employés in The number of persons engaged in the hand- ,.7 iP oyes iP ling and manufacture of sealskins in the United CURES ITER States, England, and France is, therefore, about 6,400, or over nine times as many as are reported to have been engaged in pelagic sealing in 1890 in Canada, and about six and a half times as many as were so engaged in 1891. It is very questionable, however, whether there Canadian invest- ment questiona- is any real investment in Canada in pelagic seal- ble. ing. The vessels are all common vessels, the euns common guns, and the boats common 1Statement of furriers, Vol. I, p. 586. 2716——36 282 Canadian invest- ment questiona- ble. Pelagic sealing a speculation. THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. boats, which can all be used in some other in- dustry,’ excepting, perhaps, the old and unsea- worthy vessels. But admitting the validity of the investment, it can be questioned whether those embarking therein as a rule pay the expenses incurred out of the sum realized on the catch. An examina- tion of the tablé of sealing vessels and their respective catches, as given by the Canadian | Fishery Reports, shows that the number of seals taken by a vessel varies to a great extent. Thus in 1889 several vessels took less than three hundred seals each; one schooner, with a crew of twenty-nine men, took but one hundred and sixty-four seals, while another, with a crew of twenty-two men, took over three thousand.” In 1890 the same variation may be seen.’ In 1889 the average selling price of skins in Victoria was $7.65.4 On the catch of one hundred and sixty-four seals, therefore, the total received would be $1,254.60, of which at least $400 would have to be paid to the hunters, leaving $854.60 to pay the entire expense of the voyage of at least four months. If the men were paid $30 a month on an average, the cost of the 1T. T. Williams, Vol. IT, p. 500. 2 Canadian Fisheries Report, 1889, p. 253. 3 [bid., 1890, p. 183. 4T. T. Williams, Vol. IJ, p. 499. INVESTMENTS. 283 cruise, outside the expense of outfitting, would). Velevie senting be at least $3,000. The loss, therefore, to the owner or charterer of the vessel would be cer- tainly $2,000 on his investment. If one thousand seals were taken, it is also evident that there would be a very close margin on the recovery of the money expended, and the investor would probably lose or certainly not receive one per cent on the capital invested. It is, therefore, the possibility of a large catch which leads persons to venture their money in pelagic seal- ing, and the business is a speculation of the most uncertain character. Those engaged in Speculating on small supply of the industry also find the possibility of a small skins. supply of skins from all sources to be a fertile field for speculation, the price per skin being advanced as the number of skins on the market diminishes. It may be said, therefore, that the interests of the pelagic sealing speculators is to deplete the herd and thereby increase prices, unmindful of the ultimate result, which is sure to be the extermination of the Alaskan fur-seal. This phase of the speculation is referred to in a letter from the British Colonial Office to Sir Charles Tupper, dated June 13, 1891, which reads as follows: ‘That as the total cessation of sealing in Bering Sea will greatly enhance the 'T, T. Williams, Vol. I, p. 501. 284 THE SEALSKIN INDUSTRY. Speculating onvalue of the produce of the coast fishery, Her small supply of skins. Majesty’s Government do not anticipate that British sealers will suffer to any great extent by exclusion from Bering Sea.”* This statement also met with the views of Lord Salisbury.’ The cessation of sealing and the decrease of the seal herd would bring about the same result, an increase in the price of sealskins. It is more profitable, therefore, for those interested in the sealing venture to have prices raised even if the seal herd is depleted, for they will thereby derive larger returns from the investment. Very few of the owners or part owners of the Victoria sealing fleet are dependent upon pelagic sealing for a livelihood, so that it is not particularly to their interest to preserve the herd, their principal object being to get large profits, whatever may be the result. Occupations of Consul Myers, in a report to the State Depart- vessel owners. ment, gives the occupation of seventy-one own- ers or part owners of sealing vessels hailing from the port of Victoria. Of these only fourteen may be said to be dependent on sealing, and twelve others who are employed in maritime enterprises. The remainder are compesed of individuals en- gaged in various pursuits. Among the list may 1 British Blue Book, U. S.No.3 (1892), C-6635, p. 29. 2 Tbid., No. 30, p. 16. INVESTMENTS. 285 be found several public officials, seven grocers, Occupations of vessel owners. a druggist, an auctioneer, a farmer, three saloon keepers, a plasterer, an insurance agent, two iron founders, three real estate agents, a carriage manufacturer, a tanner, two women, a machinist, and others of different pursuits.’ It is evident that the people who undertake this venture are as varied in their occupations as the purchasers of lottery tickets, and the same spirit which in- duces persons to risk their money in the latter has persuaded them to take their chances in the sealing business. Under the present state of affairs the increase Peden of the sealing fleet, the decrease of the seal herd, Se ae and its certain extinction in a few years if pelagic sealing is continued, the insignificant invest- ment of Canada for a few years compared with the sealskin industry of the world for an indef- inite future seems infinitesimal and unworthy of notice in considering, from an economic point of view, the advisability of protecting and preseryv- ing the world’s chief supply of fur-seal skins. Prohibition of pelagic sealing means the employ- ment of thousands of people in England and the United States for generations, and the invest- ment of millions of capital. Nonprohibition means the employment of a Results if not . ; protected. few hundred persons for four or five years, the 1 Report of U. S. ConsulL. W. Myers, April 29, 1892, Vol. I, p. 514. 286 Results if not protected. CLAIM OF THE UNITED STATES investment of one or two hundred thousand dol- lars in a speculative and losing business, and the final destruction of the Alaskan seal herd, a never- ending source of wealth to the world, if properly protected and preserved. CLAIM OF THE UNITED STATES FOR DAMAGES. Article V of Article V of the Convention of April 18, 1892, renewal of Modus Vivendi. for the renewal of the Modus Vivendi in Bering Sea, provides that ‘if the result of the Arbitration shall be to deny the right of British sealers to take seals within the said waters, then compen- ‘ation shall be made by Great Britain to the United States (for itself, its citizens, and lessees) for this agreement to limit the island catch to seven thousand five hundred a season, upon the basis of the difference between this number and such larger catch as in the opinion of the Arbi- trators might have been taken without an undue diminution of the seal herds.” Classification of | Any damages to which the United States may damages. become entitled under this Convention must be by way of compensation, first, to the Govern- ment for the loss of revenue sustained through the diminution of the number of seals caught ; and, second, to the North American Commercial Company for the loss of profits incurred through the same cause. E——E————— FOR DAMAGES. 287 I. The Claim of the Government.—By the lease Government made in 1890, the North American Commercial Company agreed to pay to the Government for - the exclusive right to catch seals in the Pribilof Islands an annual rent of $60,000, the legal tax of $2 for each seal caught, and a bonus on each seal of $7.624. Owing to the fact that the catch during 1891 was so restricted by Treasury Reg- ulations, connected with the Modus Vivendi of last year, as to amount to only 13,482 seals in- stead of the 100,000 seals prescribed by statute, the Secretary of the Treasury agreed on June 27, 1892," to accept from the lessees for the year ending April 1, 1892, in lieu of the above rents and taxes, the followme sums, viz: Tax on 13,482 tam CW GUunn aa oeIeeoon.ce-SbSc ce sateneant $26, 964. 00 Rental (i596 999 % 860, i) irs eet ce earn 8, 089, 20 251 Bonus on 12,251 good skins (ee 000 X $7. 624) X 12,251 11, 444.13 siecle: oi Sujet 3 Se ae Nc Sa 46, 497. 33 It will be observed that in the above computa- tion, the first item, viz, the tax, remains the same as before. The second item, viz, the rental, which in the lease is $60,000, is reduced in the proportion which the actual catch of 13,482 bears to the maximum catch of 100,000. The third, 1 Letter, Vol. I, p.521. claim, 288 CLAIM OF THE UNITED STATES mores nmentyiz, the bonus per sealskin, has been reduced on the same principle. 1 overnment and No definite arrangement has as yet been made aa between the Treasury and the lessees as to the amount to be paid by the latter for their fran- chises for the current year, but if, as is almost certain, the above-mentioned arrangement will be continued, then the loss sustained by the Government, for which it is entitled to indemnity from the Arbitrators, can be estimated by substi- tuting for the number 13,482 in the above com- putation, such a number as the Arbitrators shall find might safely have been taken in excess of the 7,500 provided for in the Convention. Si or Goines For example, if it is determined that 40,000 to Government. seals might have been taken over and above the 7,500, then the Government will be entitled to an Ste of $226,000, obtained as follows: Taxon 0;O00ISe nls iat paemmecier casera ee ee eee nee $80, 000 40, 000 = Rentz ul Gao" 000 > $60, 000 ) ewe «wesc cela ocle anicle «.s10,0 «seem 24, 000 ie 7. 624) 40,900 122, 000 Bonus (00: 000 x $ z X 4 ) MPD DODO OSS ISO CDV DIG SOD de tg Total. jc -ts Be saninae cence ts coset eee ais jarsie oe se ce epee OmUUU The Government is entitled to damages in this amount because this sum represents the excess which it would receive from the lessees if the catch, instead of being limited to 7,500 were limited to the number of seals which could be FOR DAMAGES. 289 taken without an undue diminution of the seal Basis of compu- tation of damages herd, provided the Arbitrators found that number te Government, to be 47,500. If they actually determine upon a different number, then the result given above, by way of illustration, must be increased or diminished accordingly Il. The Claim of the Lessees—Under the Con- vention of April 18, 1892, the North American Commercial Company are entitled, as the lessees of the Government, to such an indemnity as shall compensate them for the loss of profits incurred through the forced diminution in the catch of seals. When the Arbitrators have determined the number of seals which might safely have been taken during the present season over and above the 7,500 allowed by the Convention, 1t will be for them to determine next the amount of profit which the lessees would probably have derived from this increased catch over and above that which will be actually realized from the catch of 7,500 prescribed by the Convention. The balance of profits so obtained will constitute the sum to which the lessees are entitled as an indemnity under the section of the Convention above cited. The lessecs’ claim. In determining the amount of profit obtained | Basis of compn, tation of lessees’ from each seal, some information may be der ived 4 damages. 2716-317 290 Basis of compu- tation of lessees’ damages. Determination of possible catch. Opinion of Sir George Baden- Powell. CLAIM OF THE UNITED STATES from a claim for damages which the lessees have filed in the United States Treasury Department, for the years 1890 and 1891, a copy of which is found in the Appendix.t. It may be added that this claim was adjusted on June 27, 1892,” by the remission by the Treasury Department, as stated above, of the greater part of the rental and bonus due for the year 1891 under the lease. As the high prices for sealskins in the London market in 1890 and 1891 still continue, the esti- mate of profits in the above-mentioned claim would probably be as correct at the present time as in the years for which they were made.’ The Arbitrators will derive aid in determining how large a catch might have safely been made during the present season by reference to the following affidavits, viz, those on pages 73, 98, and 111, m Vol. II of Appendix. It is important to observe also the language | of Sir George Baden-Powell, one of the Com- missioners sent by Great Brita in 1891 to examine into the condition of the seal industry. In his dispatch of March 9, 1892, to Lord Salis- bury, he said: ‘‘ With reference to the modus ‘North American Commercial Company to the Secretary of the Treasury, April 12, 1892, Vol. I, p 520. ° The Secretary of the Treasury to North American Commercial Company, June, 27, 1892, Vol. I, p. 521 *The price of a sealskinin London in 1890 rose as high as 146s., and in 1891 as high as 125s, See Alfred Fraser, Vol, II, p. 561, — FOR DAMAGES. 291 vivendi, I am of the opinion that the taking of | Opinion of Sir George Badea- one season’s limited crop can not injure the seal Powell. herd, but although not necessary the renewal of last year’s prohibition and the 7,500 limitation would be beneficial.” He then suggests the arrangement afterwards adopted, viz, that 7,500 “instead of 30,000” be taken on the islands, evi- dently employing the latter number, viz, 30,000, to designate the quantity of seals which might safely be taken by the United States, which is the same number as that suggested by Sir Julian Pauncefote in his letter to Mr. Blaine of February 29, 1892.1. In view of these cireum- stances, it is submitted that 30,000 seals is the minimum number which the Arbitrators can reasonably assign as a safe catch during the present season. \British Blue Book, U.S. No. 3 (1892), C-6635, p. 155. — 7 iT ane . = oS a or ee ‘ i een a Ne 7 on } ~~ "i Fee. ra: M0 Baye Shatin ee whe? a. Ber Te are + bss ie ; Hee fea ap ret seis deay ierenam pan. | His ere Fes A oan The ne i a heitlalnigeit BOM BM GAY Rinse 2} eRe oe . Ss Fite! WR tera ges oe Ss tia Be. Goat tear xt Satoha areas oe bee ? we .* F - ark eee ea A eae ln Ze : a a ov ‘ gine bean! Te ute ah AP dee, v SU ico rane hagas ee Kare 2 at eae ae ie Fo el ae: oun pe 3 my . maa Eh ee bahay yl, wall F a P 3 | 8 CONCLUSION. af {)) o S GO = 5 ny QO s Cae CONGEUSION: The United States, upon the evidence here- with submitted and referred to, claim that the following propositions of fact have been fully established : First. That the Alaskan fur-seal, begotten, q_naracteris tics born, and reared on the Pribilof Islands, within herd. . the territory of the United States, is essentially a land animal, which resorts to the water only for food and to avoid the rigor of winter, and can not propagate its species or live except in a fixed home upon land of a peculiar and unusual formation, suitable climate and surroundings, a residence of several months on shore being necessary for propagation; that it is domestic in its habits and readily controlled by man while on the land; that it is an animal of great value to the United States and to mankind, is the principal source from which the world’s supply of fur-seal skins is derived, and is the basis of an industry and commerce very important to the United States and to Great Britain; that the only home of the Alaskan seal herd is on the Pribilof Islands; that it resorts to no other land; 295 296 CONCLUSION. Characteristics that its course when absent from these islands is of the Alaskan herd, Increase. Decrease. uniform and confined principally to waters adja- cent to the coast of the United States; that it never mingles with any other herd, and if driven from these islands would probably perish; that at all times, when in the water, the identity of each individual can be established with certainty, and that at all times, whether during its short excursions from the islands in search of food or its longer winter migration, it hasa fixed intention, or instinct, which induces it to return thereto. Second. That under the judicious legislation and management of the United States, this seal herd increased in numbers and in value; that the present existence of the herd is due wholly to the care and protection exercised by the United States and by Russia, the former owner of these islands ; but that the killing of seals in the water, which is necessarily indiscriminate and wasteful, and whereby mostly female seals are taken while pregnant or nursing, has so reduced the birth-rate that this herd is now rapidly decreasing in. num- bers ; that this decrease began with the increase of such pelagic sealing, and that the extermina- tion of this seal herd will certainly take place in the near future, as it already has with other herds, unless such slaughter be discontinued. CONCLUSION. 297 Third. That pelagic sealing is an illegiti- Pelagic sealing. mate, improper, and wasteful method of killing, is barbarous and inhuman in its immense destruc- tion of the pregnant and nursing female, and of the helpless young thereby left to perish; that it is wholly destructive of the seal property and of the industries and commerce founded upon it; and that the only way in which these can be preserved to the world and to the governments to which they belong is by prohibiting pelagic sealing in the waters frequented by the herd. Fourth. That prior to the treaty of 1825 Russian control in Bering Sea, between Great Britain and Russia, and. from a date as early as 1799, down to the cession to the United States in 1867, Russia prohibited the kill- ing of seals in any of the waters of Bering Sea, and exercised such control therein as was neces- sary to enforce such prohibition. Fifth. That Bering Sea was not included in, Bering Sea not the phrase “‘ Pacific Ocean” as used in the treaty of 1825, and that said treaty recognized the right- fulness of the control exercised by Russia in Bering Sea for the protection of the seals. Sixth. That all the rights of Russia as to the , United States protection of the Alaskan seal herd passed un- impaired to the United States by the treaty of 1867, and that since the cession, the United States have regulated by law and by govern- 2716 —— 38 298 CONCLUSION. copnited States mental supervision the killing of seals upon the Pribilof Islands, have prohibited such killing in any of the waters of Bering Sea within the limits of the cession, and up to the present time have insisted upon their right to enforce such prohi- bition, but, moved by apprehensions of a dis- turbance of the peace between themselves and Great Britain by the opposition of the latter, they ceased to some extent to enforce it. cdcaniescence of Seventh. That Great Britain acquiesced in the exercise of this right by Russia in Bering Sea and in the continued exercise of the same right by the United States up to the year 1886. Rightof control Highth. That this right and the necessity and unquestioned. duty of such prohibition have never been ques- tioned, until the excessive slaughter of these ani- mals, now complained of, was commenced by in- dividual adventurers about the year 1885. splonpstmnentscnn Ninth. That the investment of these adven- turers in pelagic sealing is speculative, generally unprofitable, and, when compared with the seal- skin industry of Great Britain, France, and the United States, which is dependent upon this seal herd, very insignificant; and that the profits, ‘f any, resulting from pelagic sealing are out of all proportion to the destruction that it produces. CONCLUSION. 299 Upon the foregoing propositions, if they shall pgrestions for ribunal, be found to be established, the material questions for the determination of this high Tribunal would appear to be: First. Whether individuals, not subjects of the _Must United States submit to United States, have a right as against that Gov- destruction of herd? ernment and to which it must submit, to engage in the devastation complained of, which it for- bids to its own citizens, and which must result in the speedy destruction of the entire property, industry, and interests involved in the preserva- tion of this seal herd. Second. If any such right can be discovered, , Should not in- 5 ? ternational regu- which the United States confidently deny, !*tions be made? whether the United States and Great Britain ought not in justice toeach other, in sound policy, for the common interest of mankind, and in the exer- cise of the humanity which all civilized nations accord to wild creatures, harmless and valuable, to enter into such reasonable arrangement by concurrent regulations or convention, in which the participation of other Governments may be properly invited, to prevent the extermination of this séal herd, and to preserve it for themselves and for the benefit of the world. Upon the first of the questions thus stated the gq” of United United States Government will claim: 300 Property in and right to protect. Such interest as justifies protec- tion. As trustee, right aud duty to pro- tect. CONCLUSION. First. That, in view of the facts and circum- stances established by the evidence, it has such a property in the Alaskan seal herd as the natu- ral product of its soil, made chiefly available by its protection and expenditure, highly valuable to its people and a considerable source of reve- nue, as entitles it to preserve the herd from de- struction, in the manner complained of, by an em- ployment of such reasonable force as may be necessary. Second. That, irrespective of the distinct right of property in this seal herd, the United States Government has for itself, and for for its people, an interest, an industry, and a commerce derived from the legitimate and proper use of the prod- uce of the seal herd on its territory, which it is entitled, upon all principles applicable to the case, to protect against wanton destruction by individuals tor the sake of the small and casual profits in that way to be gained; and that no part of the high sea is, or ought to be, open to individuals for the purpose of accomplishing the destruction of national interests of such a char- acter and importance. Third. That the United States, possessing, as they alone possess, the power of preserving and cherishing this valuable interest, are in a most just sense the trustee thereof for the benefit of CONCLUSION. 301 mankind and should be permitted to discharge As trustee, right and duty to pro- their trust without hindrance. tect. In respect to the second question heretofore iy ho peas stated, it will be claimed by the United States, ee that the extermination of this seal herd can only be prevented by the practical prohibition of pelagic sealing in all the waters to which it resorts. The United States Government defers argu-,,A7sument de- meut in support of the propositions above an- nounced until a later stage of these proceedings. In respect to the jurisdiction conferred by _ Ttbunal may sanction conduct ) ; : . Oh a ee of United States the treaty, it conceives it to be within the prov-(, prescribe resw ince of this high Tribunal to sanction by its de-"%°" cision any course of executive conduct in respect ‘to the subject in dispute, which either nation would, in thejudgment of this Tribunal, be deemed justified in adopting, under the circumstances of the case; or to prescribe for the high contracting parties any agreement or regulations in respect to it, which in equity, justice, humanity, and en- lightened policy the case appears to require. In conclusion the United States invoke the , T7yerft dec judgement of this high Tribunal to the effect: * ° . ssia exercised First. That prior and up to the time of the ee oe Bering Sea. cession of Alaska to the United States Russia 302 CONCLUSION. Russia exercised asserted and exercised an exclusive right to, the exclusive right in Bering Sea. Great Britain as- sented, Bering Sea not “6 Pacitic Ocean.” Rights of Russia passed to United States. seal fisheries in the waters of Bering Sea, and also asserted and exercised throughout that sea the right to prevent by the employment, when necessary, of reasonable force any invasion of such exclusive right. That Great Britain, not having at any time resisted or objected to such assertions of exclu- sive right, or to such exercise of power, is to be deemed as having recognized and assented to the same. That the body of water now known as Bering Sea was not included in the phrase ‘Pacific Ocean,” as used in the treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Russia, and that after said treaty, and down to the time of the cession to the United States, Russia continued to assert the same exclusive rights and to exercise the same ex- clusive power and authority as above mentioned. That all the rights of Russia in respect to the seal fisheries in Bering Sea east of the water boundary established by the treaty of March 30, 1867, between that nation and the United States, and all the power and authority possessed and asserted by Russia to protect said rights passed unimpaired to the United States under the treaty last mentioned. CONCLUSION. 303 That the United States have such a property United States have property in and interest in the Alaskan seal herd as to justify and felt to PEe: the employment by that nation, upon the high seas, of such means as are reasonably necessary to prevent the destruction of such herd, and to secure the possession and benefit of the same to the United States; and that all the acts and pro- ceedings of the United States done and had for the purpose of protecting such property and interest were justifiable and stand justified; and that compensation should, in pursuance of Article Damages. V of the Convention of April 18, 1892, be made to the United States by Great Britain by the payment by the latter of the aggregate sum hereinbefore stated as the amount of the losses of the United States, or such other sum as may be deemed by. this high Tribunal to be just; or, Second. That should it be considered that the Or Great Britain and United States United States have not the full property or prop- should concur in regulations, erty interest asserted by them, it be then de- clared and decreed to be the international duty of Great Britain to concur with the United States in the adoption and enforcement against the citi- zens of either nation of such regulations, to be designed and prescribed by this high Tribunal, as will effectually prohibit and prevent the cap- ture, anywhere upon the high seas, of any seals belonging to the said herd. a Sag oet aa ; ie a : ij Wi " } ee - . + ee >! + =“. REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. 2716——39 BERING SEA COMMISSION. JOINT REPORT. An agreement having been entered into be- tween the Governments of the United States and Great Britain to the effect that— “Hach Government shall appoint two Com- Ra eae ais uA missioners to investigate conjointly with the Commissioners of the other Government all the facts having relation to seal life in Bering Sea, and the measures necessary for its proper protec- tion and preservation. “The four Commissioners shall, so far as they may be able to agree, make a joint report to each of the two Governments, and they shall also report, either jointly or severally, to each Gov- ernment on any points upon which they may be unable to agree. ‘These reports shall not be made public until they shall be submitted to the Arbitrators, or it shall appear that the contingency of their being used by the Arbitrators can not arise.” 307 308 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Report. And we, in accordance with the above agree- ment, having been duly commissioned by our respective Governments and having communi- cated to each other our respective powers, found in good and due form, have agreed to the follow- ing report: Sources of infor. 1. The joint investigation has been carried out ee by us, and we have utilized all sources of infor- ° mation available. 2. The several breeding places on the Pribilof Islands have been examined, and the general management and method for taking the seals upon the islands have been investigated. 3. In regard to the distribution and habits of the fur-seal when seen at sea, information based on the observations recorded by the cruisers of the United States and Great Britain, engaged in carrying out the modus vivendi of 1891, has been exchanged for the purpose of enabling general conclusions to be arrived at on these points. pete AS 8 LOA ae Meetings of the Joint Commission were held in Washington beginning on Monday, February 8, 1892, and continuing until Friday, March 4, 1892. As a result of these meetings we find ourselves in accord on the following propositions: JOINT REPORT. 309 5. We are in thorough agreement that for in- Je eer dustrial as well as for other obvious reasons it is incumbent upon all nations, and particularly upon those having direct commercial interests in fur- seals, to provide for their proper protection and preservation. 6. Our joint and several investigations have led Conclusions us to certain conclusions, in the first place, in npeete regard to the facts of seal life, including both the existing conditions and their causes; and in the second place, in regard to such remedies as may be necessary to secure the fur-seal against depletion or commercial extermination. 7. We find that since the Alaska purchase a, Decrease of seal marked diminution in the number of seals on and habitually resorting to the Pribilof Islands has taken place; that it has been cumulative in effect, and that it is the result of excessive kill- ing by man. « 8. Finding that considerable difference of opin-_ Further joint report impossible. ion exists on certain fundamental propositions, which renders it impossible, in a satisfactory manner, to express our views in a joint report, we have agreed that we can most conveniently state our respective conclusions on these matters in the ‘several reports” which it is provided may be submitted to our respective Governments. 310 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Further joint Signed in duplicate at the city of Washing- report impossible. ton, this 4th day of March, 1892. Tuomas Corwin MENDENHALL. Cuimnton Hart Merriam. GEORGE SmytH BapENn-PowELL. Grorce Mercer Dawson. JOSEPH STANLEY Brown, Asutry AntTHony FRoups, Joint Secretaries. Ra ORT OF THE UNITED STATES BERING SEA COMMISSIONERS. The HonorasLe SECRETARY OF STATE: Siz: In your letter of July 10, 1891, received Appointment. by us in San Francisco on the 16th, after referring to the diplomatic controversy pending between the United States and Great Britain in respect to the killing of fur-seals by British sub- jects and vessels, to the causes which led up to this controversy, and to some of the propositions which had at that date been mutually agreed upon, you inform us that the President has been pleased to appoint us to proceed to the Pribilof Islands and to make certain investigations of the facts relative to seal life with a view to ascer- taining what permanent measures are necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal in Bering Sea and the North Pacific Ocean. You further inform us that in accordance with ,, Appointment of the provisions of the fourth clause of the modus Siene?s: vivendi agreed upon at Washington on the 15th of June, 1891, the Queen had appointed Sir George Baden-Powell, M.P., and Professor Daw- 311 312 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Appointment of son’ to visit the Pribilof Islands for the same pur- British Commis- sioners. Object of Com- mission. pose and as representing the British Government. After explaining the use to which this informa- tion may in the end be put, namely, that it may be laid before arbitrators who would probably be selected to consider and adjust the differences be- tween the two Governments, you add that the President proposed, in reference to the appoint- ment of a Joimt Commission, the agreement for which is to be made contemporaneously with the terms of arbitration, the following terms of agree- ment: Provisions of ‘Hach Government shall appoint two Commis- agreement. sioners to investigate conjointly with the Com- missioners of the other Government all the facts having relation to seal life in Bering Sea and the measures necessary for its proper protection and preservation. The four Commissioners shall, so far as they may be able to agree, make a joint re- port to each of the two Governments, and they shall also report, either jointly or severally, to each Government on any points upon which they may be unable to agree. These reports shall not be made public until they shall be submitted to the Arbitrators or it shall appear that the contin- gency of their being used by the Arbitrators can not arise.” 1 Dr. George M. Dawson, Asst. Director, Geological Survey of Canada. REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 313 And further, that while it was desirable that conduct of in- our investigation should, even before the conclu- ce sion of a formal agreement as to the duties and functions of a Joint Commission, be made con- currently with those of the British agents, yet until the agreement for the Commission shall have been concluded we were not authorized to discuss with them the subject of a joint report or to make any interchange of views on the subject of perma- nent regulations for the preservation of the seal. In accordance with these instructions, we alin F Hoeeed stor Ber, once proceeded to Bering Sea on the Fish — Commission steamer Albatross, Lieutenant-Com- mander Tanner, which had been placed at our disposal for the purpose. We met the British Commissioners first at: . Joint Sestak, Unalaska, and afterwards at the Pribilof Islands. Several of the principal rookeries were visited in their company and our observations were made under similar circumstances and conditions. In addition to noting such facts as were clearly , Sources of in- established by the physical aspect of the rook- eries themselves we sought information and obtained much of value from those who have resided long upon the islands, including both Aleuts and whites, all engaged exclusively in the sealing industry. At San Francisco and at Unalaska on our way to the Pribilof Islands, 2716——40 314 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Be cee ce ot dor: and at Port Townsend, Tacoma, and elsewhere on our return, we availed ourselves of the testi- mony of ‘any person whose connection with this industry was such as to render his statements of real value. Return. We returned to Washington before the 1st of October and were ready at any time after that to take up the discussion of the subject with the representatives of Her Majesty’s Government. meen appoint- The formal agreement to the creation of a Joint Commission had not been entered into, however, and it was not until the 4th of Feb- ruary, 1892, that we were formally designated ‘as Commissioners on the part of the Government of the United States. escnae’ as We immediately called upon Sir George Joint Commission. Baden-Powell and Dr. George M. Dawson, who had been similarly designated by the British Government, and who had come to Washington for the Conference, informing them of our readi- ness to begin the joint consideration and discus- sion of the subject at such a time as might suit their convenience. We also stated that as it was our understanding that the official existence of the Joint Commission depended upon the mutual agreement of the two Governments to the articles of arbitration, and as the articles had not yet been signed, only an informal conference REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS, aL could be entered upon. It was believed, how- ever, that quite as rapid progress could be made in this way as in any other. ‘To this proposition the Commissioners on the part of Great Britain offered no objection at the time, but on the following day they informed us that they were unable to enter into a conference which was informal in its nature. Desiring to remove every obstacle in the way of the immediate consideration of this subject, the question of the formality of the Conference was waived on our side and the formal meetings of the Commissioners in Joint Conference began on the afternoon of February 11, at the Depart- ment of State. Mr. Joseph Stanley-Brown was selected as the secretary of the Joint Commission on the part of the United States, and Mr. Ashley Froude on the part of Great Britam. In determining the nature of the Conference it was agreed that in order to allow of the freest possible discussion and presentation of views, no formal record of the proceedings should be kept and that none but the four members of the Commission should be present during its deliberations. In further at- tempt to remove all restrictions upon the fullest expression of opinions during the Conference, it was agreed that in our several reports no refer- Arrangement as to meetings of Joint Commission. Meetings of Joint Commission. . a Meetings held without formal records. 316 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Mvetings held ence to persons, as related to views or opinions without formal records. Meetings con- tinued. Disagreement. Article IX of treaty. expressed by members of the Commission dur- ing the Conference, should be made. Meetings of the Joint Commission were held almost daily from the 11th of February until the Ath of March, on which day the jomt report was sioned and the Conference adjourned sine die. Karly in the progress of the Conference it be- came evident that there were wide differences of opinion, not only as to conclusions, but also as to facts. It seems proper here to refer briefly to the attitude of the Commissioners on the part of the United States or to the standpoint from which they endeavored to consider the questions involved. The instructions under which we acted are contained in Article IX of the Arbitration Con- vention, and, as far as relates to the nature of the inquiry, are as follows: “Kach Government shall appoint two Com- missioners to investigate conjointly with the Commissioners of the other Government all the facts having relation to seal life in Bering Sea, and the measures necessary for its proper pro- tection and preservation.” Application of "This sentence appears to be simple in its char- Article IX. acter and entirely clear as to its meaning. The measures to be recommended were such as in i aaa dalle REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. =) i our judgment were necessary and sufficient to pote oF secure the proper protection and preservation of ‘ seal life. With questions of international rights, treaty provisions, commercial interests, or polit- ical relations we had nothing to do. It was our opinion that the considerations of the Joint Commission ought to have been restricted to this phase of the question, so clearly put forth in the agreement under which the Commission was organized, and so evidently the original intent of both Governments when the investiga- tion was in contemplation. Had the preservation and perpetuation of seal or aacee Snub life alone been considered, as was urged by us, there is little doubt that the joint report would have been of a much more satisfactory nature, and that it would have included much more than a mere reiteration of the now universally admitted fact that the number of seals on and frequenting the Pribilof Islands is now less than in former years, and that the hand of man is responsible for this diminution. That our own view of the nature of the task Article IX inter- preted differently before us was not shared by our colleagues rep->y_ British Com- missioners. resenting the other side was soon manifest, and it became clear that no sort of an agreement sufficiently comprehensive to be worthy of con- sideration and at the same time definite enough 318 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Article IX inter-to allow its consequences to be thought out, preted differently i ee by British Com-could be reached by the Joint Commission missioners, Mind unless we were willing to surrender absolutely our opinions as to the effect of pelagic sealing on the life of the seal herd, which opinions were founded upon a careful and impartial study of the whole question, involving the results of our own observations and those of many others. Disagreement as Foaplcation: Under such circumstances the only course open to us was to decline to accede to any prop- osition which failed to offer a reasonable chance for the preservation and protection of seal life, or which, although apparently looking in the right direction, was, by reason of the vagueness and ambiguity of its terms, incapable of def- inite interpretation and generally uncertain as to ceepert of Jomt meaning. In obedience to the requirements of the Arbitration Convention that “the four Com- missioners shall, so far as they may be able to agree, make a joint report to each of the two Governments,” the final output of the Joint Commission assumed the form of the joint report submitted on March 4, it being found impossible in the end for the Commissioners to agree upon more than a single general proposition relating to the decadence of seal life on the Pribilof Necessity of alslands. It therefore becomes necessary, in separate report. accordance with the further provision of said REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 319 Convention, for us to submit in this, our separate Pula inte a report, a tolerably full discussion of the whole question, as we view it from the standpoint re- ferred to above as being the only method of treatment which insures entire independence of thought-or permits a logical interpretation of the facts. In order that this discussion may be more readily understood it is thought desirable to pre- face it by a brief account of the natural history of the fur-seal. THE BERING SEA FUR-SEAL. Callorhinus ursinus (Linneeus). The carnivorous mammals are divided by ,,Pivisions of naturalists into two principal groups, one com- prising the terrestrial wolves, cats, weasels, and bears; the other, the amphibious eared-seals and walruses, and the aquatic seals. The second divi- sion (suborder Pinnipedia) is in turn sub-divided into three groups called families, namely, the eared-seals, comprising the sea-lions and sea- bears, or fur-seals (Otariide), the walruses (Odobenide), and the true seals (Phocide). The fur-seals and sea-lions form the connecting link between the terrestrial carnivores and the true seals, as recognized by all! naturalists. The dis- tinguished director of the British Museum, Pro- 320 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Freee eer fessor Flower, says: ‘The fur-seals or sea-bears 5) form a transition from the Fissiped [terrestrial] Carnivora to the seals When on land the hind feet are turned forward under the body, and aid in supporting and mov- ing the trunk as in ordinary mammals As might be inferred from their power of walk- ing on all fours, they spend more of their time on shore, and range inland to greater distances, than the true seals, especially at the breeding time, though they are always obliged to return to the water to seek their food. They are gre- garious and polygamous, and the males are usually much larger than the females.”* He states further: “The resemblance between the skull and other parts of the body of the fur-seals and the Ursoid [%. e., bear-like] Carnivora is sug- gestive of some genetic relationship between the two groups, and Professor Mivart expresses the opinion that the one group is the direct descend- Distinetvion besant of ie other.” All the fur-seals have con- tween fur-sea and hair seals. — syicuous external ears, similar to those of most terrestrial mammals, except that they are folded lengthwise to keep out the water. The hair seals have no external ears. It may be added that *Article Mammalia, in the Encyclopedia Britannica (1883, p. 442); and again in his most recent work on Mammals (Flower and Lydekker, Introduction to the Study of Mammals, London, 1891, pp. 593, 594), REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 321 the fur-seals, owing to the greater length and | Distinction be- mobility of their flippers and to their structural and hair seals. peculiarities, travel on land with considerable facility and speed, the body being lifted high above the ground and the gait suggesting the ambling pace of the bear. he true hair seals (family Phocide) on the contrary are wholly unfitted for progression on land. From the natural history standpoint they represent the extreme of differentiation or departure from the ancestral stock among the terrestrial carnivorous mammals. In accordance with their aquatic habits the fore legs have been so modified that they are little more than stiff paddles, like those of the whale; the hind flippers stick out behind and can not be turned forward for use in terrestrial locomotion or in climbing over rocks, and their bodies drag heavily over the ground. Their movements on land or ice are awkward and laborious, and consist of a series of vertical curvatures and extensions of the spine, suggest- ing the method of locomotion of the measure worm. The amphibious fur-seals are not only inter- Furseals. mediate between the hair seals and terrestrial carnivorous mammals in structure and means of locomotion, but also in habits, for they spend 27161 322 Fur-seals. Homes of the fur-seal, REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. fully half of their lives on land; they climb steep and high hills with comparative ease, and have been known to travel inland fully three miles. The hair seals are strictly aquatic, spending most of the time in water, and some species hardly visit the shore at all. PRINCIPAL FACTS IN THE LIFE HISTORY OF THE FUR-SEAL. 1. The Northern fur-seal (Callorhinus ursinus) is an inhabitant of Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk, where it breeds on rocky islands. Only four breeding colonies are known, namely, (1) on the Pribilof-Islands, belonging to the United Statés; (2) on the Commander Islands, belonging to Russia; (3) on Robben Reef, belonging to Russia, and (4) on the Kurile Islands, belonging to Japan. The Pribilof and Commander Islands are in Bering Sea; Robben Reef is in the Sea of Okhotsk near the island of Saghalien, and the Kurile Islands are between Yezo and Kam- chatka. The species is not known to breed in any other part of the world. The fur-seals of Lobos Island and the south seas, and also those of the Galapagos Islands and the islands off Oo Lb REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. Lower California, belong to widely different — of the ur-Sea. species and are placed in different genera from the Northern fur-seal. 2. Inwinterthefur-seals migrates into the North Pe ale mai Pacific Ocean. The herds from the Commander Islands, Robben Reef, and the Kurile Islands move south along the Japan coast, while the herd belonging to the Pribilof Islands leaves Bering Sea by the eastern passes of the Aleutian chain. 3. The fur-seals of the Pribilof Islands do not are ot we mix with those of the Commander and Kurile do not mingle. islands at any time of the year. In summer the two herds remain entirely distinct, separated by a water interval of several hundred miles; and in their winter migrations those from the Pribilof Islands follow the American coast in a southeast- erly direction, while those from the Commander and Kurile islands follow the Siberian and Japan coasts in a southwesterly direction, the two herds being separated in winter by a water interval of several thousand miles. This regularity in the movements of the different herds is in obedience to the well known law that migratory animals follow definite routes in migration and return year after year to the same places to breed. Were it not for this law there would be no such thing as stability of species, for interbreeding and exist- 324 REPORT OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Pribilof andence under diverse physiographic conditions Commander herds p donot mingle. would destroy all specific characters.* Difference of ‘The pelage of the Pribilof fur-seals differs so pelage of Alaskan 5 and Russian fur markedly from that of the Commander Islands fur-seals that the two are readily distinguished by experts, and have very different values, the former commanding much higher prices than the latter at the regular London sales. teem ormis"* ~— 4. The old breeding males of the Pribilof herd are not known to range much south of the Aleu- tian Islands, but the females and young appear along the American coast as far south as north- ern California. Returning, the herds of females ward migration, I0VE northward along the coasts of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia in January, February, and March, occurring at varying dis- tances from shore. Following the Alaska coast northward and westward they leave the North Pacific Ocean in June, traverse the eastern passes in the Aleutian chain, and proceed at once to the Pribilof Islands. * The home of a species is the area over which it breeds. It is well known to naturalists that migratory animals, whether maim- mals, birds, fishes, or members of other groups, leave their homes for a part of the year because the climatic conditions or the food supply become unsuited to their needs; and that wherever the home of a species is so situated as to provide a suitable climate and food supply throughout the year such species do not migrate This is the explanation of the fact that the Northern fur-seals are migrants, while the fur-seals of tropical and warm temperate lati- tudes do not migrate, REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 325 5. The old (breeding) males reach the islands _ Arrival of breed- ing males at is- much earlier, the first coming the last week in lands. April or early in May. ‘They at once land and take stands on the rookeries, where they await the arrival of the females. Each male (called a bull) selects a large rock on or near which he re- mains until August, unless driven off by stronger bulls, never leaving for a single instant night or day, and taking neither food nor water. Both before and for sometime after the arrival of the Battles on the females (called cows) the bulls fight savagely ,ooieries, among themselves for positions on the rookeries and for possession of the cows, and many are severely wounded. All the bulls are located by June 20. 90 1 ‘ Vala Ses ee ac Arrival and de- 6. The bachelor seals (holluschickie) begin to, fire of bach. wrrive early in May, and large numbers are on 8! the hauling grounds by the end of May or first week of June. They begin to leave the islands in November, but many remain into December or January, and sometimes into February. 7. The cows begin arriving early in June, and Attival of cows. soon appear in large schools or droves, immense numbers taking their places on the rookeries each day between the middle and end of the month, the precise dates varying with the weather. They assemble about the old bulls in compact groups called harems. ‘The harems are complete early 326 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Arrival of cows. in July, at which time the breeding rookeries attain their maximum size and compactness. Birth of the 8. The cows give birth to their young soon ae. after taking their places on the harems in the latter part of June and in July, but a few are delayed until August. The period of gestation is between eleven and twelve months. att FPS 69, A single young is born in each instance. The young at birth are about equally divided as to sex. Dependence of 10, The act of nursing is performed on land, pup upon its mother, never in the water. It is necessary, therefore, for the cows to remain at the islands until the young are weaned, which is not until they are no, ast four or five months old. Each mother knows her own pup and will not permit any other to nurse. This is the reason so many thousand pups starve to death on the rookeries when their mothers are killed at sea. We have repeatedly seen nursing cows come out of the water and search for their young, often traveling consider- able distances and visiting group after group of pups before finding their own. On reaching an assemblage of pups, some of which are awake and others asleep, she rapidly moves about among them, sniffing at each, and then gallops off to the next. Those that are awake advance toward her with the evident purpose of nursing, but she REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. g20 repels them with a snarl and passes.on. When ne org ales she finds her own she fondles it a moment, turns partly over on her side so as to present her nipples, and it promptly begins to suck. In one instance we saw a mother carry her pup back a distance of fifteen meters (fifty feet) before allowing it to nurse. It is said that the cows sometimes recognize their young by their cry, a sort of bleat. 11. Soon after birth the pups move away from ‘Podding.’ the harems and huddle together in small groups, ealled ‘pods,’ along the borders of the breeding rookeries and at some distance from the water. The small groups gradually unite to form larger groups, which move slowly down to the water’s edge. When six or eight weeks old the pups begin to learn to swim. Not only are the young, Aquatic _ birth : impossible. not born at sea, but if soon after birth they are washed into the sea they are drowned. 12. The fur-seal is polygamous, and the male Comparative is at least five times as large as the female. As°™ a rule each male serves about fifteen or twenty The harem. females, but in some cases as many as fifty or more. 13. The act of copulation takes place on land, Copulation. and lasts from five to ten minutes. Most of the cows are served by the middle of July, or soon 028 Copulation. REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. after the birth of their pups. They then take the water, and come and go for food while nursing. Fertilization of 14, Many young bulls sueceed in securing a young Cows. few cows behind or away from the breeding harems, particularly late in the season (after the middle of July, at which time the regular harems begin to break up). It is almost certain that many, if not most, of the young cows are served for the first time by these young bulls, either on the hauling grounds or along the water front. These bulls may be distinguished at a glance from those on the regular harems by the circum- stance that they are fat and in excellent condi- tion, while those that have fasted for three months on the breeding rookeries are much emaciated and exhausted. The young bulls, even when they have succeeded in capturing a number of cows, can be driven from their stands with little difficulty, while (as is well known) the old bulls on the harems will die in their tracks rather than leave. Age of puberty 15. The cows are believed to take the bull first in cows. when two years old, and deliver their first pup when three years old. Age at which 16, Bulls first take stands on the breeding males goin breed- ing grounds. rookeries when six or seven years old. Before REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 329 ‘ : : Age at which this they are not powerful enough to fight the | 48 are older bulls for positions on the harems. Be Sevan: 17. Cows when nursing regularly travel liiriges, Peet a distances to feed. They are frequently found one hundred or one hundred and fifty miles from the islands, and sometimes at greater distances. 18. The food of the fur-seal consists of fish, '°°4 squids, crustaceans, and probably other forms of marine life also. (See Appendix E.) 19. The great majority of cows, pups, and such a Dene frou of the breeding bulls as have not already gone, leave the islands about the middle of November, the date varying considerably with the season. 20. Part of the non-breeding male seals (hol- luschickie), together with a few old bulls, remain until January, and in rare instances until Feb- ruary, or even later. 21. The fur-seal as a species is present at the Time f-seals Pribilof Islands eight or nine months of the year, or from two-thirds to three-fourths of the time, and in mild winters sometimes during the entire year. The breeding bulls arrive earliest and remain continuously on the islands about four months; the breeding cows remain about six months, and part of the non-breeding male seals about eight or nine months, and sometimes throughout the entire year. 2716 42 330 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. eee at. time 22. Durine the northward migration, as has been stated, the last of the body or herd of fur- seals leave the North Pacific and enter Bering Sea in the latter part of June. A few scattered individuals, however, are seen during the sum- mer at various points along the Northwest Coast; these are probably seals that were so badly wounded by pelagic sealers that they could not travel with the rest of the herd to the Pribilof bie nent Islands. It has been alleged that young fur- seals have been found in early summer on several occasions along the coasts of British Columbia and southeastern Alaska. While no authentic case of the kind has come to our notice, it would be expected from the large num- ber of cows that are wounded each winter and spring along these coasts and are thereby ren- dered unable to reach the breeding rookeries and must perforce give birth to their young— perhaps prematurely—wherever they may be at the time. pepcasons | jhat 23. The reason the Northern fur-seal inhabits are the heme °F the Pribilof Islands to the exclusion of all other islands and coasts is that it here finds the climatic and physical conditions necessary to its life wants. This species requires a uniformly low temperature and overcast sky and a foggy ~ ary 8 REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. Jor atmosphere to prevent the sun’s rays from injur-_ Reasons that Pribilof Islands ing it during the long summer season when itare the home of remains upon the rookeries. It requires also rocky beaches on which to bring forth its young. No islands to the northward or southward of the Pribilof Islands, with the possible exception of limited areas on the Aleutian chain, are known to possess the requisite combination of climate and physical conditions. | All statements to the effect that fur-seals of Alaskan fur seals do not breed this species formerly bred on the coasts and oD coast of Cali- islands of California and Mexico are erroneous, the seals remaining there belonging to widely different species. In the general discussion of the question sub-, Sehdivisions of mitted to the Commission it will be convenient to consider the subject under three heads, namely: Conditions of seal life in the region under consideration at the present time. Causes, the operation of which lead to existing conditions. Remedies, which if applied would result in the restoration of seal life to its normal state, and to its continued preservation in that state. ©3 O39 bo REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION, CONDITIONS. Saga eondi- Jn considering the condition of seal life on the Pribilof Islands at the present time, it is impor- tant to inquire, first, is there any marked decrease in the number of seals frequenting thege islands during the past few years; and, second, if such decrease has taken place, among what class or classes of seals is it most notable? Sources or ine Although an affirmative answer to the first formation. ; 5 . a question is generally agreed to, it is worth while to consider for a moment the evidence on which such an opinion is founded, especially as it is all more or less related to questions concerning the amount of decrease and the period over which it extended, about which considerable differences of opinion are known to exist. This evidence easily resolves itself into two kinds: (1) the evidence of eyewitnesses or human testimony in which observations of several individuals cover the last quarter of a century ; and (2) what may be called the internal evidence of the rookeries themselves as they appear to-day Estimates of tis proper to remark that in our judgement er Ned: sae most, if not all, of the published estimates of the number of seals hitherto found on these islands are exaggerated. From the very nature of the case an estimate of numbers is extremely diffi- [16g1 ‘S ysnony usye} ‘Wea, Pe DS “1 q’ RerydesSozoyd eB Wwol4] ‘WIS ONIYSE ‘GNVISI INWd “LS “AYJXOOYN LNIOd LSVIHLYON REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. aa0 cult. In short, one can say with much more Estimates of . number of seals certainty that there are fewer seals here now exaggerated. than five years ago than he could attempt a com- parison by means of an actual or rather an assumed census. (1) EVIDENCE OF EYEWITNESSES. The universal testimony of all who saw the rookeries a few years ago, and again in 1890 or or 1891, is that they have suffered a great and alarming decrease within the past six or seven Decrease on ortheast Point Rookery. years. In the case of Northeast Point Rookery, y the largest single rookery known, and one from the hauling grounds of which about twenty to thirty-five thousand nonbreeding male fur- seals were taken annually for twenty years, the evidence is unequivocal and conclusive. This great rookery is several miles in length, and its former boundaries can be distinctly seen, as will be described in detail presently. (See also accompanying photograph.) The area occupied by breeding seals in 1891 was a narrow strip along shore, with a small area in the rear used as ‘hauling grounds’; while the zone of former occupancy varies from one hundred to five Visit of Com- : missioners, hundred feet in width. Mr. C. H. Townsend, resident naturalist of the United States Fish Commission steamer Albatross, visited Northeast 354 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Visit of Com- Point Rookery in company with the British and United States Bering Sea Commissioners, August 5, 1891, and stated that when he visited the same rookery in the latter part of June, 1885, the broad zone here referred to ‘was covered solid with seals.” Lieut. John C. Cantwell, of the Revenue Steamer Rush, Dr. H. H. McIntyre, Capt. Daniel .Webster, Mr. J. C. Redpath, and Mr. George R. Tingel, corroborate Mr. 'Townsend’s statement that the yellow-grass zone, or zone of former occupancy, was densely covered with seals in 1885. Native testi- ‘The testimony of natives and others in regard mony as to de- crease. to other rookeries agrees very well with the above, or places the time of abandonment at a still later date, some of the natives maintaining that the yellow-grass zone was covered with seals as recently as 1887. It is evident, therefore, that the extensive area here described as the yellow- grass zone, behind the narrow strip at present occupied by the seals on the various rookeries, was thickly covered not longer ago than 1885 or 1886, and in some cases perhaps as late as 1887. Se ee In our examination of many persons who had i long resided upon the islands, there was univer- sal agreement that there had been a great decrease in the number of seals within a few years. Although the testimony gathered by us on this vA ( Ag (a 7a Nh i> f ie el + Ti, ‘ n ye ig . . : ['16g1 ‘S ysnSny uaye, ‘Weiay WeH ‘9 4G Aq ydesdozoud & wol4) ‘WAS ONIYSE ‘GNVISI WNVd “LS ‘AYFXOOYN LNIOd LSVIHLYON REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 335 and other points was not given under oath, its {thei erent) de: value, in our judgment, is not in the least lessened by that fact. In nearly all cases the witneses were examined separately. No ‘leading ques- tions’ were asked, and especial care was taken to prevent the examination from indicating in anyway what was desired to be proved. Full notes of answers and statements were made, and in all cases of special importance the question was repeated and the answer read in order to be sure that the opinion of the witness had been properly given. In short, the investigation was conducted precisely as it would have been had the question been one of scientific rather than diplomatic importance. | A few extracts from the evidence relating to, forcs rom diminution in numbers will indicate its general character. Anton Melovedoff, native of the island of St- Paul. His father had been chief of the natives on the island, and he had served in the same capacity until recently, when he had been deposed because, as he himself expressed it, he was “‘ work- ing in the interests of the Company rather than that of the Government.” In his opinion the number of seals had greatly diminished during the last few years. Dry. A, A. Lutz, physician on the island of St. 336 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Extracts from George since 1884: ‘There has been a great testimony taken. ; falling off during the past few years.” Mr. Emmons, collector of the port at Una- laska: gets his information from the officers and men of the schooners and other craft engaged in pelagic sealing; thinks that if the present state of affairs is allowed to continue the herd of seals will soon be destroyed. Nicoli Krukof, born in Sitka, came to the island of St. Paul two or three years before the time of the Alaska purchase; is now second chief on the island; speaks English very well. Seals began to decrease in number about seven years avo and have diminished rapidly since. It is his opinion that not more than one-fourth as many seals are now on the rookeries as were to be found ten years ago. Kerrick Artomanoff, aged sixty-seven years, bornin St. Paul; his father was a sealer under the Russian régime, as was he also up to the time of the Alaska purchase. In all he has been em- ployed in seal killmg for forty-five years. His testimony is interpreted by Nicoli, the second chief. The number of seals has diminished very greatly within the last few years. He has seen the rookeries so full that a cow could not get ashore in time for the birth of her young, in oe ik tah ‘> REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. oot which case the pup was born in the water and Extracts from testimony taken, drowned. Mr. J. C. Redpath, resident agent of the North American Commercial Company, and previously agent of the Alaska Commercial Company dur- ing a period of fifteen years. Mr. Redpath has enjoyed unusual opportuni- ties for the intelligent study of seal life. That he has made good use of them may be attributed to the fact that the best interests of the compa- nies which he has represented on the islands demanded that no one should be better informed than he, especially in the matter of increase or decrease in the number of killable seals and the causes to which changes are to be attributed. He said: “Not more than one-half as many females are on the rookeries this year as were to be found there ten years ago. There is the same loss in the holluschikie, about.” Captain Webster, agent of the North American Commercial Company on the island of St. George, has been on the seal islands for twenty- two years; was a whaler and sealer in these waters before coming to the islands; has been in the employ of the sealing companies from the beginning of the management by the United States. Captain Webster had a wide experience as a sealer in other parts of the world before 2716——_43 338 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. epee ofrom entering the service of the Alaska Sealing Company. Few persons have as much knowl- edge of seals and the sealing industry as he. His statement was that the falling off last year at St. George was very great, and this year the number is considerably less than last. “There are not over one-third as many seals on this island as were here a few years ago.” copiftculty of les- Evidence of this character might be multiplied serous: to almost any extent were it thought necessary. It is well known that during the last few years the operating Company had experienced difficulty in finding a sufficient number of high-class skins to fill the quota permitted by the Government, and that finally that quota was greatly reduced by order of the representatives of the Govern- orundisputed de- ment on the islands. It may therefore be accepted as an undisputed fact that the seal population of the islands is greatly below what it was for many years and there is little doubt that if the causes which brought about this reduction are permitted to continue in operation, commercial extinction of the herd within a few years will be the inevi- table result. But, fortunately, we are not obliged to accept this conclusion solely on the basis of such testi- mony as that given above, reliable and convine- REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. joo ing as it is believed to be. The evidence offered [Un mayited de: by the physical condition of the rookeries them- selves would alone be sufficient to satisfy any- one that at some previous time the seal popula- tion had been vastly greater than at present. (IL) INTRINSIC EVIDENCE AFFORDED BY THE ROOK- ERIES THEMSELVES. Theyellow-grass Behind each rookery is a more or less sharply ,,..¢° defined strip or belt varying from one hundred to five hundred feet in width, which differs conspic- uously in appearance from the ground on either side. It is covered with a short and rather fine grass of a yellowish-green color (Glyceria angus- tata), more or less mixed with tufts of a coarser species (Deschampsia cespitosa), both differing strikingly from the tall and rank rye grass (Elymus mollis) usually growing immediately behind. In many places the ground between the tussocks and hummocks of grass is covered with a thin layer of felting, composed of the shed hairs of the seals matted down and mixed with excrement, urine, and surface soil. This felting could not have been formed otherwise than by the movements of seals back and forth over the ground for many years. In the same zone the Worn rocks, rough upper surfaces and angular projection of the rocks have been rounded off and polished by 340 Worn rocks. REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. the former movements of the seals. This pol- ishing, though now partly hidden by weathering and the growth of lichens, is still conspicuous, and can be attributed to no other cause than to the movements of the seals on the rookeries during a long period of years. The fact that the ‘sides of these same rocks remain in their original rough condition is_ sufficient proof that the smooth upper surfaces could not have been pro- duced by sand-polish. Bunch-grass In some of the rookeries another zone may be Zone, discerned behind the yellow-grass zone, indi- cating the extent of the rookery at some still more remote period. The grass on this area is bunch grass (Deschampsia cespitosa); the lichen growth on the rocks is heavier than on the one just described, and the polished surfaces of the rocks show more weathering. This latter zone abuts against the more elevated turf bearing the char- acteristic tall grass of the islands, and marks the period of maximum abundance of the seals. Comparative The aggregate size of the areas formerly occu- size of areas. pied is at least four times as great as that of the present rookeries. Decrease shown In short, the characteristics of a region long by rookeries. occupied by seals are so marked as to be unmis- takable, and while it is possible to explain the existence of a small part of the unoccupied —" * REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 341 ground on the supposition that the seals Prove: 1 Demied 0 more or less, occupying this field at one time and that at another, no one who studies the islands as they now are can fail to see that the space now covered by seals is only a fringe compared with the areas that were once alive with them. Having answered the first of the two queries ie eee am relating to conditions of seal life at the present her time, the second becomes important. It is, Has the decrease in numbers been confined to any particular class of seals, or is it most notable in any class or classes? In answer to this it is our opinion that .the diminution in numbers began and continues to be most notable in female seals. It is quite likely, in fact almost certain, that -pimicuit to no- : tice decrease in the decrease would not be first discovered or females. remarked in this class. The Government officers and Company’s agents on the islands are principally concerned with the ‘holluschickie,’ in which class the kill- able seals are found, and the first signs of deca- dence would probably appear in the fact that more seals had to be driven in order to obtain a given number of merchantable skins. 342 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Difficulty in ob- taining quotaafter 1887. Mistaking effect for cause. For eighteen years after the Alaska purchase about one hundred thousand bachelor seals were secured annually without difficulty and without impairing the productiveness of the breeding rookeries, but the decrease brought about by pelagic sealing made it extremely difficult to obtain this number after 1887, and the standard of size was lowered several times in order to obtain the full quota. In 1890 the rookeries and hauling grounds had fallen off to such an alarming extent that the Treasury agent in charge ordered the killing to stop on July 20, at which date only twenty-one thousand seals had been secured, and it may be added that this number was taken only after the greatest exer- tion on the part of the Company’s agents. The percentage of seals of killable size was so small (fifteen to twenty percent) compared with the percentage of yearlings, that it is not sur- prising that the Treasury agents on the islands were impressed with the scarcity of young males, and being new men, inexperienced in matters relating to seal life, were easily led to mistake effect for cause and attributed the decrease to the killing of too many young males at the islands in previous years, instead of to the destruction of the mothers and young by REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 343 pelagic sealers, an error they were quick to cor- a Mistaine ape Or Cause. rect after another year’s experience. The number of seals killed each day during he Ane eee the killing season may be taken as a rough index to the rapidity of the decline of the rookeries in the past few years. Treasury Agent Charles J. Goff, in charge of the seal islands in 1889-90, states in his official report that the average daily killing in 1890 was five hundred and twenty-two, while in 1889 it was one thousand nine hundred and seventy-four for the same period. In his report for 1889 Treasury Agent Goff age oe states: ‘The alarming decrease in the deily, weekly, and monthly receipts of [skins by] the Alaska Commercial Company, and as a dernier resort by said Company to secure their one hun- dred thousand skins, the killing of smaller seals than was customary attest conclusively that .. . there is a scarcity of seals, and that within the last year or so they are from some cause decreas- ing far beyond the increase.” He states further: “T regard it absolutely essential, for the future of the rookeries, that prompt action be taken by the Department for the suppression of illegal killing of seals in Bering Sea, and that the utmost econ- omy be observed in taking the seals allowed by law.” (3) Why decrease of females was not noticed. Diminished size of harems. Effect of de- crease of females on male life. 344 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. A considerable decrease in the number of female seals upon the breeding rookeries might not be noticed at first where the total number is so large, but in two or three years the effect of this loss would be felt in the class of killable seals, and might there be quite evident. The loss in one class would thus follow surely but some- what behind the other in time. When the dimi- nution in the number of killable seals became notable, attention was at once drawn to the breeding rookeries, and it was found that they were being depleted. Thus Captain Webster de- clared: ‘The great destruction has been among females. Formerly there would be, on an aver- age, thirty cows to one bull; now they will not average fifteen.” And Mr. Redpath (already quoted) stated: “Not more than one-half as many females are on the rookeries this year as were found there ten years ago.” The reaction of a considerable reduction in the number of females upon the number of young male seals would be immediate and certain, while a reduction in males must reach such a point as to lessen the supply of bulls for the breeding rookeries before the birth-rate can be affected. There is no evidence to show that this limit has been reached in recent years, and it seems clear, ait bs REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 345 therefore, that the reduction in numbers origi- Effect of de- 2 . ~ crease of females nated in and is to be attributed to the loss of on male life. female seals. CAUSES. If the above representation of the conditions of Where decrease of seals should he seal life at the present time be accepted as correct, seusht. the determination of causes is practically limited to the’ discovery of the origin of the increased mortality among female seals. It is our belief that the decadence of seal life Aa pelagic on the Pribilof Islands is due to the destructive a effects of pelagic sealing. As widely different opinions are held on this peeous for point we will present at some length the principal reasons upon which our belief is founded. In the joint report of the Commission it is as caused agreed that the diminution in the number of ; seals is to be attributed to the operations of man. As man comes in contact with the fur-seal in only two ways, that is, in pelagic sealing and seal- ing upon the islands, it follows that in one or the other or in both of these operations the injury must be inflicted. In order to enjoy a clearer view of the problem Condition _ of . : : c 2 herd untouched by it will be desirable to consider for a moment the man. conditions under which a herd of seals assumes its normal dimensions, uninfluenced by the pres- ence of man. 2 16———$—=4 346 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Birth-rate and In the case of the seal or any other animal the death-rate. condition of the species as to number must always depend upon the relation of the birthrate to the deathrate. As long as these two are equal the number remains constant, provided, of course, the distribution of deaths among the various ages remains the same. Change the distribution, and there will be a temporary increase or decrease in the total number of the species, according as the deaths are shifted toward the later or earlier part of the animal’s existence. Thus, suppose twenty years to be the normal age of the seal: if all deaths occur at the end of twenty years, the total number alive at any one time would be much greater than if the mortality was distrib- uted throughout the whole period. When a cer- tain distribution of this mortality is determined upon, however, the number of individuals living at one time will adjust itself to this distribution and will then remain constant, provided, always, that the distribution of mortality is such as not to affect the number of births. If, m any species, it could be determined that no deaths should occur until sometime after the reproductive age had been reached, such a species would increase with great rapidity. With equal certainty, if it were fixed that all deaths should occur before the reproductive age, the species would be shortly REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 347 annihilated; and if more than a certain number Birth-rate and , death-rate. of deaths occur at that early period, the destruc- tion of the species is only a question of time. Given, therefore, a species comprising a certain number of individuals, that number will tend upward or downward or will remain constant, according to the relation of births to deaths. In nature, where the conditions for a certain species are favorable, the usual course is that the num- bers increase until by the increase of their nat- ural enemies, or the less favorable character of the conditions (usually less favorable by reason of insufficient food supply resulting from increase in numbers), the birthrate and deathrate become equal, after which the number will remain con- stant until some new influence makes its appear- ance to affect them favorably or unfavorably. This is the condition which the seals would unquestionably reach in time, if not interfered with by man, and which, undoubtedly, they have reached at various times in their history. Under this condition certain numbers of seals are born every year and the same number die every year, the total number alive at any one time depending on the distribution of the deaths among seals of various ages. 548 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Man does not Now, let man enter upon the scene, and let him necessaril ye to crease death-rate. destroy annually a certain number of seals. The deathrate is not necessarily increased, the time of dying only may be changed, seals being killed at the age of four years which would otherwise have lived to the age of fifteen or twenty. The total number of seals living at one time may be much reduced while the number of births may remain the same. Regulation of If man is benefited by killing seals, in order ee that his gain may be as great as possible, it is evidently important to so conduct the killing that the dimensions of the herd may be main- tained at a maximum. The larger the herd the more he can take annually for his own uses. This maximum number is secured, and is secured only by bringing to and maintaining the number of births per annum at the highest possible limit. Interference We have gone thus into the details of this with birth-rate in- = 5 : jurious. argument in order that there might remain no doubt as to its effect, and to emphasize the simple but most important proposition that what ever interferes with the birth-rate is injurious to the seal herd. Effect of a sin~ It may be well at this point to invite attention gle young a year. bs to the fact that the fur-seal as a species is very sensitive to influences which tend to disturb the balance between births and deaths. Unlike REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 349 many animals, the number of offspring thrown _ itfeccofa single upon the world to take their chance in the i struggle for existence is small, each fertile animal giving birth to only a single young each year. The life of the seal herd, then, depending as it How birth-rate may be lessened. unquestionably does on the constancy of the number of births, can be endangered from two directions: First, from the killing of fertile females; and, second, from the excessive killing of males, carried to such an extent as to prevent the presence of the necessary number of virile males on the breeding rookeries. To one or the other of these causes must be charged the great change that has come upon the rookeries within recent years, and the commercial destruction with which the sealing industry is now seri- ously threatened. We are firmly of the opinion that an impartial , Killing 2 cer. ain number of examination of all the facts in the case will show males | will not affect birth-rate. conclusively that the latter of the two possible causes has had no appreciable part in the de- structive work that has been accomplished. The polygamous habits of the fur-seal have Battles on rook- : eries show no lack already been described, as well as the separation °f males. in hauling out of the ‘holluschickie’ or younger males from the breeding rookeries. The battles among the older males for places upon the breed- 350 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Battles on rook-ing grounds have long been described as one of eries show no lack of males. the peculiar characteristics of the species. A younger male is obliged to win his right to a harem by conflict with his older brethren already in possession. Many thousands of virile young males lie at a convenient distance on the hauling erounds, ready to engage in a struggle for a place in the affections of the female seal should a favorable opportunity occur. Notwithstanding the depleted condition of the rookeries, these conflicts and struggles still go on. They went on last year and also in 1890. This condition of things is utterly incompatible with any theory which assumes a scarcity of virile Testimony as tomales. The evidence of the most reliable and no lack of males. : credible observers goes to prove the same thing. Mr. Redpath and Captain Webster have already been quoted as declaring that it is among female seals that the great scarcity exists, but it is worth while here to repeat the statement of the latter, that “formerly there would be on an average thirty cows to one bull; now they will not aver- age fifteen.” Several of the native observers placed the number of cows formerly served by one bull at a much higher figure than thirty. These facts rather tend to show that males are relatively in excess on the breeding rookeries at the present time. Our own observations REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 351 convinced us that at least there could be no Testimony as to no lack of males. deficiency and that it was a practical impossi- bility for any breeding cow to escape service on account of paucity of virile males. The unavoidable conclusion is, then, that the Decrease caused by killing females. deterioration of the herd must be attributed to the destruction of female seals. If a herd of seals be taken in its natural con- Natural condi- tion of herd. dition, that is, as not interfered with by man, males and females will be found practically equal in number, as the number of births in a year of both sexes is the same, and we have no reason to believe there is any great difference in the natural mortality of the sexes. The total num- ber of females may be divided into two classes, cae ee ' the breeding and the nonbreeding, the former being probably a large proportion of the whole. The nonbreeding females include those that have not yet reached the reproductive age and the few which from old age or other causes are barren. The male seals may likewise be divided into Classes of males. two classes, the virile and the nonvirile, the lat- ter including those below the age of virility and those impotent on account of old age. The reproductive power of the herd, therefore, lies in the breeding females and the virile males. The maintenance of the birthrate, the vitaland essen- On what bdirth- s 5 i é rate depends. tial element in the preservation and perpetuation 352 EPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. On what birth- of the herd, requires the preservation of the whole rate depends. of the class of breeding females, while only a small number of virile males are necessary or at all concerned in the matter. This is the great essential difference between the importance of the life of the female and that of the male to the conservation of the herd, and it is the fundamental proposition on which hangs the solution of the whole problem. Explanation of | We have ventured to illustrate this by means “ase of a graphic exhibition of a hypothetical herd of eighty thousand seals, in tne accompanying dia- grams, in which the effect of killing males is shown to be harmless, if kept within certain limits. In these diagrams the age of the seals is shown on the horizontal line at the base of the figure and the number of seals at any given age is proportional to the length of the vertical line on the diagram at the point representing the age. Unfortunately we have no ‘tables of mortality’ for seals; we know only approximately their maximum age and we have little knowledge as to the distribution of their deathrate. Based on the best information available, we have assumed the normal age 1o be twenty years, and, to be on the safe side, have further assumed that one-half of the seals born die during the first year after birth. The outer curve of the diagram, showing 1s ; Py f 52 ae is i om ae co) =) fo.) 4000 1000 20 YEARS 16 16 big f Fi AD “Bet2e Re BLS CED Sata ie OB vet? So on ele sane te ratte bt te ‘eR ORBeRe 2E8BR av SManiweEn é erie 2. 2 8 ae373¢8e8 a 4 £arétsawei Lee ee JaVecerzeveers sesgate a8 4+GERBeEeC Oe aGeee 2 @9RDe 4e908 68 ‘ 22YUC AMET BOBEBOH ©A2eanr se@aeeere ; 4atas (ER ROSES VA aS Re et hE Si Reap CPDKPBEA MEAS [2h 72 eae Paka Ane eZee eRAao Se cS FO ONS SERLZ ASS LSS SRS SSMU BAS TIT ETi LE ag@ 7 EAGER ESEYSTSVORRGR 4 SHaSe Cun ear £e4BRaSR . BAOREATIHRSEKREE LSA! ae : vie 2 MN FRBPLSESCT HCAS SHe OSB Se NVI ABW SCHRAKS 4&KESCEEAOSE SCBA (Ser aes SPEHS CHAROYE EEHRARSVSY fair au y UMHS SeEBRRALS Verevar2eseeaes atre iy ae HP EIR EXER ZC RwLVS BEAAN y LPO SOERE CDA RASA ASRSOAA Li OARS KAOEH PARR RAASRA SCRBORIDORSCREOTZERERARS ; : MSeeteteeeesanscsasaece i y *» SSK SOERET RAAB ECASRS IRUOPRSBESC CERES A ZEOSSVES 72 eee “SP Ces4eneReerae so. 4 “= ¢ *Seueeen Resta a asa 2an AR ta ae = ee Se er ee ae ee ee ere SRR RS OSB LE BERRREUASAAEKRA 2a a Oe he 8 ok S22 Oe ol te + He CARES SLSR oC KeS SURE U se ade ee SO SOC ARCOGSERRAEKE KHER EH 26 DKS CASEY RREHENGMeE OA Perri etrtitrritirLittuiitiy sti) ) HA Reehont ve eA ARR OBES See a Hea x 2 7TeaveGaee a 7 ©raressee?s CERN TES er = o caw ae & is io % Re2ae* ook. oo pi te Se ORES BERR R RAKES BEES REE Hex oe 'S6 PSS SGRUERES AueGes HESS hoes a i - 2. tH es 9000 8000 MALE SEALS Natural Condition 7000 6000 | 40025 Male Seals G49 Killable Males 10 000 born annually (5 Bulls (breeding ) Loss from natural causes only HG) Barren 5000 GS) Young 4000 3000 2000 1000 Soo Te) RTE O YEARS HHIBESS srs cetis Bae SusSeSeneneunane Ssssatesceiteassiiitict GUS EE SERBS sieeritesttasttest 1 a a ia 2 1s] i a Ss & Ue BERR CRA eee SeeeseeeeeeEe OWRE Sen ba] Baan i BLIGLSRBEN AS 20 YEARS KEPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. goo the distribution of ages from this time on pre- jezblanation of tends only to be an approximation, asit is impos- ~ Ca sible to obtain the accurate information necessary for a better representation. We maintain, how- ever, that the fullest knowledge would necessitate no change which would materially affect the force of our argument based on these diagrams. The longest vertical line at the left represents the number of births annually, which, for con- venience, is assumed to be ten thousand of each sex. At the end of one year the vertical line is reduced one-half in length, as half the seals born the year before are assumed to be dead. At the end of the second year it is still further short- ened, and so on until the end of the twentieth year. ‘There can thus be traced the history of a eroup of ten thousand seals from birth to final extinction, the area bounded by lines vertical at the beginning and end of any year showing the number alive at any age, as between ten and eleven years of age, and the total area of the diagram is proportional to the total number of seals in the herd. Diagrams A and B represent the males and females of such a herd in its natural condition, that is, not interfered with by man. It is ina condition of practical stability, the males and females are equal in number, and the diagrams are identical, except as to the coloring of the 2716—45 10 000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 B. FEMALE SEALS Natural Condition 40025 Male Seals Breeding Females 10 000 born annually Gi Barren Loss from natural causes only a ee 19 20 YEARS —s 354 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Explanation of diagrams. different parts, by means of which it is attempted to represent the numbers of the different classes of seals. We can fix the ages for ‘killable seals’ with certainty, and all included under that head are represented in the diagram by that portion colored red. Male seals not killable and not old enough to take a place on the breeding rookeries are shown in green, while those of the breeding age are shown in yellow. The lines of demarcation up to this point are quite accurately known and the diagram may be regarded as correct, but we do not know certainly at what age the male becomes impotent and is driven off the rookery. The best estimate based on analogies of other animals, places this period at about the age of seventeen years, and the dia- gram so represents it. In the classification of female seals there is some difficulty, for while we are tolerably certain that the young female goes on the breeding rookeries at least at the age of three years, we know little about the age at which she becomes barren. The assumption that this period is reached, on the average, at the age of eighteen years, 1s, perhaps, not very far from the truth. The younger females under the breeding age ave presented in green, the breeding females in yellow, and the barren in brown. ? vmaaucnane, Th : ae q ee ; ? iaiienaiak teabenaa nant oe . bnden mayen yom Ct. file exeSze ? ee SOet & SEES WER See z = are , Sarr r cr - -— : cos ; > wf ‘e : rt rt “TT 24 "7 “Ta cs i +4 T eESEESSSRES B Zs : ] PeRSERES SPE RE: -t 74 ber : = - ‘ —T7 ~—* a fe : ' 7 . - > t 4 - +4 - yr ee . ORs esas eee € Sut . ae ), ” eT! tI Tart 1 OS a A CS A Sw | v1 04 Av ima ein ni S@SRAT Van | 10 000 9000 f 7000 Et 6000} 5000 HEH 4000F 3.000 PEE SeaeaeocG HH 4 mu i if [| (| a ein fia 2000 1000 } £ ae. 1 td as Ea et] EN FE A] el a a 20 YEARS REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 355 Thus the diagrams give, it is believed, a fair Explanation of representation of the condition of a herd of about 80,000 seals, 10,000 males and the same number of females being born each year, showing the breeding and the nonbreeding of both males and females; the breeding males, it must be remem- bered, including those not only found at the head of harems, but all of those that in virtue of their age and condition are capable of filling a place on the breeding rookeries. The killable males include only those not under two or over four years of age, which furnish skins of the finest quality and greatest value. It is important to remark here that everyone ‘of the breeding females is necessary to insure the annual birth of 20,000 pups. If this were not the case and the herd were undisturbed it would increase in numbers, which is contrary to the hypothesis that it has already reached its normal condition of stability. Diagram C shows the male portion of the same herd when judiciously worked by man. No females under the breeding age can be killed, for that would very shortly reduce the number of breeding females, and none of these can be spared without reducing the number of births. The only females available for killmg without injury to the herd are the barren females, Were their diagrams. 10 000 9000 MALE SEALS 8000 Normal condition under 7000 properly regulated killing ‘6000 23 568 Male Seals Killable Males 10 000 born annually [5 Bulls (breeding ) 5000 2100 killed iy QRA8 HAGE BSSeS GRRE RARE och aeee SERGE ZOSES CSS SACRE Cease sae BOER aS Lt | a 4000 Shae s Rea ee Seeee Baa Sie ee ai 3000 1000 + a a eee oa SAR ea r SR@@E jae m al ea on 4 0 eT as 10008 ie Tig aan . ‘ hie via! R. rm, 306 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Explanation ofskins not inferior and of less value than those of diagrams. the young males it would be impossible, under the most favorable circumstances, to certainly distin- euish them from their more fruitful sisters. With males, however, the case is entirely different. It is only necessary with those of the killable age given above to allow enough to escape the club to supply the annual deficit of virile males on the breeding rookeries. In other words, if 100,000 breeding females were required to maintain a given herd, rigorously speaking, and assuming as a moderate estimate twenty females in each harem, only 5,000 breeding males would be required and it would only be necessary to spare enough to keep up this number. The diagram assumes a much more liberal supply of males, however, the ratio being assumed at twelve to one. The diagram shows that the total number of males in the herd would be greatly diminished and the census of the whole herd correspond- ingly lessened. But when once reached, the new condition would be constant and self-sus- taining; the same number of seals might be killed annually forever without danger of diminution, except from other causes. The calculation on which the diagram is constructed shows that the number of male seals would be REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS, SO reduced to. nearly one-half of what it would be Be aaanot in the undisturbed condition, and that about ~ twelve to thirteen years would be required to reduce the male herd to this condition of stability under constant killme. Taking such a herd as is considered in the construction of the diagrams, it would number about 80,000, equally divided between the two sexes, 20,000 being added by birth and the same number subtracted by death each year. In order to represent more clearly the enormous herd of seals which it may be sup- posed at one time frequented the Pribilof Islands, undisturbed by man, these numbers may be multiplied so as to give a total of 3,000,000 seals, 750,000 being born every year and the same number dying from natural causes. Of the 1,500,000 females about 800,000 would be breeding, the remainder mostly too young to breed, a very small number being barren. Of the 1,500,000 males about 65,000 would be on the breeding rookeries, and the remainder, excluding the young just born, would haul out as ‘holluschickie,’ and would include 285,000 of a suitable age for killing, on account of the superior character and condition of their skins. In undertaking to utilize the products of this herd for the good of man, the problem which is 358 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Explanation of presented is to determine how many: and what diagrams. One classes of seals may be taken annually without diminishing the number of births. As already stated, the solution consists in taking a limited number of male seals between certain ages, leav- ing a sufficient number of breeding males for the rookeries and guarding the females in the most carefulmanner. ‘The investigation shows that in this assumed herd of three million 80,000 males may be taken annually between the ages of two and five years, and that the total number of males will be gradually reduced from 1,500,000 to about 880,000, thus diminishing the total of the herd from 3,000,000 to 2,380,000, after which no further reduction will take place. reason When it is remembered that of the 880,000 females are killed by pelagie sealers. male seals remaining, 375,000 are the recently born young, and after making the same reduc- tion of the total females (1,500,000) it will be seen that under these conditions the number of females is more than double the number of males and this fact alone would account for an exces- sive number of females taken by pelagic sealers. Conclusions Ayn examination of the diagrams will show from diagrams. that the number of seals included in the class of breeding females is but little in excess of the number actually necessary for the maintenance of the birthrate, provided every seal is fruitful REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 359 every year. In the nature of things, this can owe a fees not be expected, and the excess here existing is undoubtedly small enough to insure against loss. Although the allotment of one male to twelve females is believed to be less than the actual average in nature, the number of males allowed to escape the club is considerably in excess of that demanded on this supposition, and all of the hypotheses of the calculation are made to msure safety and perpetuity to the herd. The graphic representation of the condition of ree ee the herd serves also to emphasize the fact that when an attack is made on the life of the seal by destroying the females, the results of such destruction will be first noticed in a diminished number of killable males. The number of males being relatively small, any change is more readily observed, particularly since the killable males of the herd are the only seals in which the islanders are immediately interested. Having thus shown the possibility of contin- ually taking a large number of male seals with- out the slightest danger to the herd, and also that the only harmless killing of female seals is that in which the barren only are destroyed, let us examine the nature of pelagic sealing and its results as compared with sealing on the islands. 360 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. SEAL KILLING ON THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. Eeeloinaos. In reference to the latter it can be positively Be affirmed that it can be entirely controlled by man. ‘The sex and age of the seals killed may be fixed by regulation and the number to be taken definitely determined in advance. In fact, it is difficult to imagine any operation of a similar character more perfectly controllable than this. Not only can the character of seal to be killed be rigorously prescribed, but the killing can be conducted in such a manner as to be least harmful to the remaining portion of the herds, and that freedom from disturbance during the breeding season which is so essential to the life of the seal ean be assured. ens ate he only seals killed at the seal islands are nonbreeding males (under five or six years of age, called ‘holluschickie’). They come up on the rookeries apart from the breeding seals, and large numbers are present by the latter part of May or first week in June, after which they constantly pass back and forth from the water to Driving the hauling grounds. They are driven from the hauling grounds to the killing grounds by the native Aleuts, who have been trained in this work from generation to generation: Here the seals are divided into little groups. ‘Those selected as of suitable size are killed by a blow on the head REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 361 with a club, the others are allowed to go into Driving. the water and soon reappear on the hauling grounds. In this way about one hundred thou- sand young males have been killed annually on the Pribilof Islands for twenty years. In addition to the commercial killing above co lmieanavesor described, a number of male pups were formerly killed each year to furnish food for the natives, but the killing of pups is now prohibited by the Government. The only objections that have been urged Criticisms on © ~~ mauner of ‘driv- ing.’ against this mode of taking seals are such as re- late to details of the operations as ordinarily carried on, any of which could be modified if it was found desirable to do so. Much stress has been laid upon the destructive effects of seal driving, and it has even been affirmed that when a male seal has once been ‘driven’ its repro- ductive powers are lost. While there is no doubt that in some instances excessive driving has been allowed, that seals have been driven further than is actually neces- sary, and that proper care has not been taken to eliminate the nonkillable seals as far as possible before the driving is well under way, those are matters that are so entirely under control that a proper adjustment may be secured at once. 2716—46 362 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Male seals not injured by ‘driv- ing.’ Management. The assumption that driving is seriously injuri- ous to the reproductive powers of the male is doubtless unfounded, being quite contrary to the declared belief of Captain Webster and other sealers of long experience. Against every asser- . tion of this kind it is only necessary to put the fact that there is no evidence of a lack of virility on the rookeries, but, on the contrary, it is evi- dent that there is a surplus of it at the present time, unless, indeed, it is assumed that harems are defended and held against the most ferocious attacks, often at a loss of much bloodand muscle, by impotent seals. Seal killing on the Pribilof Islands has been and is conducted on the theory outlined above, that the male seal only should be killed, and of these a limited number whose age falls within certain narrow limits, and that the female should be spared at all hazards. The same principle | controls the killing on the Commander Islands, and, as far as we know, wherever and whenever the operation has been subjected to intelligent control. Where these restrictions have not been applied the life of the herd was generally short and the commercial destruction complete. The picture presented by pelagic sealing is of a different character. REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 3638 SEAL KILLING AT SEA OR PELAGIC SEALING. Pelagic sealing is carried on chiefly by means Vessels and crew. of schooners, each of which is provided with a crew of twenty to twenty-five men and several Manner of hunt- ing. small boats for hunting. When seals are en- countered the small boats put out and the hunt- ing begins. Hf a seal is seen on the surface the hunter approaches it as quietly as possible, and when near enough shoots it with the shotgun or rifle; but most seals are shot as they rise within range of the boat. When a seal is shot the oars- man pulls toward it as rapidly as possible in the hope of reaching it before it sinks. By the aid The gaff. of an iron hook on the end of a light pole many seals are secured after they have sunk below the surface but have not yet passed out of reach. Some of the sealing vessels use steam power, but most of them depend on sails. Formerly, Indian crews were taken almost Tadiane bunkers exclusively, and the spear was used instead of firearms, in order not to frighten the seals. ‘This method had the great advantage of securing nearly all seals wounded. Now, both Indian and white hunters are employed, and the use of the spear has been almost wholly superseded by the use of firearms. The shotgun is used more than the rifle for the reason that fewer wounded seals are lost thereby. o64 Indian hunters. Ilistory. REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. In addition to the destruction wrought by the sealing schooners, pelagic sealing is still carried on along shore by the native Indians in their canoes, but the number of fur-seals thus killed is relatively small. Pelagic sealing has been carried on fortuit- ously and on a small scale for many years, but it was not until within the present decade that numerous vessels engaged systematically in the enterprise. The profits are so great in compar- ison with the capital invested that, as the results of the annual catch became known each year, a constantly increasing number of vessels was led to engage in the industry, with a corresponding increase in the number of seals killed in the open Destruction of Sea. The fur-seals which move northward along female seals. Pelagic sealer the coast of the Northwestern United States, British Columbia, and southeastern Alaska from January until late in June are chiefly pregnant females, and about ninety per cent of the adult seals killed by pelagic sealers in the North Pacific are females heavy with young. s For several years the pelagic sealers were enter Bering Sea. content to pursue their destructive work in the North Pacific, but of late they have entered Bering Sea, where they continue to capture seals in the water throughout the entire summer. ‘The REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 365 females killed during this period are giving utrsing females milk, and are away from the islands in search of food. Their young starve to death on the rook- eries. We saw vast numbers of dead pups on ene ee soutne the island of St. Paul last summer (1891), which, from their emaciated condition, had evidently died of starvation. ‘The total number of their carcasses remaining on the Pribilof Islands at the end of the season of 1891 has been esti- mated by the United States Treasury agents at not less than twenty thousand. Pelagic sealing is now carried on in the North eee aouT: Pacific Ocean from January until late in June, and in Bering Sea in July, August, and Septem ber. Some sealing schooners remain as late as November, but they do so for the purpose of raiding the rookeries. The number of seals secured by pelagic, ® Catch ofjscaling els. sealers is exceedingly difficult to ascertain, because no complete record has been kept of any except those sold in Victoria, British Co- lumbia. Many thousands have been sold in San Francisco, concerning which we have not been able as yet to obtain reliable information, 366 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. The number of seal skins actually recorded as sold.as a result of pelagic sealing is shown in the following table: * Year nee Year. ae ABTO: Reese eo TAUPE Re lct pees aa et eke 17, 700 HST tis 4x c. eorreeyeer. Shee eee ee Se nae 9,195 1Q7ARORe SE emeesete Aw odg \\ 21804. b 2.2 eens #14, 000 ISTS MS cee ee 161604 lB S85 eee ae 13, 000 1876 eee eee BA0AD). | ABBG de oc a eretee ct 38, 907 Ty fy Po eee 6y'700\ | We7 ces.= chee 33, 800 ISVS Ss eee aa 9:593) A lPISS8h nance eee corer 37, 789 1s79:. ee h2P500-13 (9188922 eee eeeee nee 40, 998 ISSO See sameeren ase NS7600 W890 Reese eos eeeer 48, 519 eal ee Rh. 13, 541 | ieo1- 4 see oe 62, 500 + Number estimated from value given. Indiscriminate Tt can not be denied that in pelagic sealing killing. there can be no selective killing, as far as individual seals are concerned, and only in a limited degree by restricting it as to place and time. It necessarily follows that female seals must be killed and seals whose skins owing to age and condition are much less desirable. °As * The figures for the years 1872 to 1876, inclusive, and 1891, are from the London Trade Sales. Those from 1877 to 1887, inclusive, are from the official reports of the Minister of Marine and Fish- eries of Canada, and probably fall short of the actual catch, be- cause the catch of the United States vessels is not included. The figures for 1888 are from the same source (26,983) plus the United States pelagic catch (9,806), as stated in the Report of the United States Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries for that year. The figures for the years 1889 and 1890 are from the Canadian Fish- eries Reports, and comprise both the catch of the Canadian fleet (33,570 for 1889 and 44,750 for 1890) and of other vessels which sold their skins in Victoria, British Columbia (7,428 in 1889 and 3,768 in 1890), The catch of American vessels sold im San Fran- cisco is not included. REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. BAT a matter of fact, there is sufficient evidence to | Percentage of females in catch. convince us that by far the greater part of the seals taken at sea are females; indeed, we have yet to meet with any evidence to the contrary. The statements of those who have had occasion to examine the catch of pelagic sealers might be quoted to almost any extent to the effect that at least eighty percent of the seals thus taken are females. On one occasion we examined a pile of skins picked out at random, and which we have every reason to believe was a part of a pelagic catch, and found them nearly all females. When the sealers themselves are not influenced by the feeling that they are testifying against their own interests they give similar testimony. The master of the sealing schooner J. G. Swan declared that in the catch of 1890, when he secured several hundred seals, the proportion of females to males was about four to one, and on one occasion in a lot of sixty seals, as a matter of curiosity he counted the number of females with young, finding forty-seven. Evidence on this point might be extended indefinitely, but one or two additional references will be valuable. The following is from Messrs. Potten of CM C. M. Lampson & Co., of London, the most exten- _ ane sive dealers in furs in the world, and everywhere 368 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION, Letter of C. M. recognized as a high authority on this question. Lampson & Co. Referring to the regular supply of fur-seals that had for many years come into the market from the vicinity of Vancouver Island, they remark : “The quantity, we should say, has averaged at least ten thousand per annum. ‘This eatch takes place in the months of March and April, and we believe that the animals from which these skins are derived are females of the Alaska seals, just the same as those caught in the Bering Sea. Had this quantity been materially in- creased we feel sure that the breeding on the Pribilof Islands would have suffered more before now, but, fortunately, the catch must necessarily be a limited one, owing to the stormy time of the year at which it is made and the dangerous coast where the seals, only for a short time, are found. It must, however, be evident that if these animals were followed into the Bering Sea and hunted down in a calm sea in the quiet- est months of the year, a practically unlimited quantity of females might be taken, and, as you say, it would be only a few years till the Alaska seal was a thing of the past.” (ixtract from a letter addressed to C. A. Williams, esq., August 22; 18885) REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 369 Essentially the same view is held by so well Opinion of Sir George Baden- known an authority as Sir George Baden-Powell, Powell. after having visited the western coast and thor- oughly investigated the question, as he says, from the point of view of natural history, in a letter written by him to the London Times in November, 1889. Among other things, relating to the Bering Sea question, he says: ‘As a matter of fact, the Canadian sealers take very few, if any, seals close to these islands. Their main catch is made far out at sea and is almost entirely composed of females.” In addition to evidence of this kind, the cer etek. records of the London Trade Sales may be cited. In these the pelagic catch in Bering Sea and the North Pacific is quoted under the title “Northwest Coast,” and the character of the skins is conclusively shown by the fact that their market price is invariably very much lower than that of the island catch quoted under the title of ‘Alaska skins.” An important element in determining the Waste of life, effect of pelagic sealing is its wastefulness, growing out of the loss of many seals at sea by their being wounded so that they either die and sink at once or escape without being taken, only to die soon after. When female seals are 2716——47 370 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Waste of life. thus lost—and the great majority are shown to be females—a serious wound is inflicted upon the herd, without the gain of so much as a single skin. werent numbers While there is much difference of opinion as to the relation of the number of seals lost in this way to the number taken, no one denies that some loss occurs. ‘That seals are often wounded without being taken, is proved by the frequent finding of bullets and shot in the bodies of seals killed on the islands. As no females are killed there, and as those seals of either sex that are wounded to death at sea, but not secured, can never be appealed to as witnesses, the extent of the injury from this source must be more or less a matter of inference. The only direct testimony is that which must be furnished by those engaged in pelagic sealing, and in this matter they are personally interested to such an extent as_ to pe coensee ro! render their evidence of uncertain value. Such as we were able to examine on this point ven- tured the opinion that about one-third of those killed were lost. Captain Webster declares it to be his belief that about one-third of the number killed were saved. Doubtless much depends on the method of killing, the use of spears being thought to be much less wasteful than that of rifle REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. a71 or shotgun. Guns, however, are now generally seuer tase): 08 employed by the hunters Many persons who have had opportunities for acquiring information on this question by conference with pelagic sealers, Indian and white, or from other sources, have declared that the loss is very much greater, putting the number of seals lost to those recov- ered as five to one or ten to one, or even higher. In the absence of more certain knowledge, it is our judgment, based on the best information available, that such estimates are exaggerated, but there can be no doubt that the loss from this source is real and serious, and that it must be taken into account in any estimate of the effects of pelagic sealing. Growth of pe- Pelagic sealing as an industry is of recent ygie sealine. origin, and may be said to date from 1879. In 1880, according to the official report of the Cana- dian Minister of Marine and Fisheries, 7 vessels and 213 men were engaged in pelagic sealing in the North Pacific, secure 13,600 skins, valued at $163,200. The same authority states that in 1886, 20 vessels and 459 men secured 38,907 skins, valued at $389,070. In 1891 the number of United States and Canadian vessels had in- creased to over 100; upwards of 2,000 men were engaged, and more than 62,000 skins were se- cured. one REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. re pe Thus it appears that for ten years after the Alaska purchase the fur-seals of the Pribilof Is- lands were practically undisturbed in passing to and from their breeding grounds; that in 1879, 7 vessels and 213 men attacked them in the sea along the Northwest Coast, securing 13,600 skins; that the industry proved so remunerative that in twelve years the number of vessels had in- creased from 7 to over 100; the men from 213 to upwards of 2,000, and the skins secured from 13,600 to more than 62,000! One of the effects of this slaughter was the appearance on the rookeries upon the islands of thousands upon thousands of dead pups, starvation resulting from the loss of their mothers who went out in search of food but never returned. A glance upon the chart showing the location of the sealing schoon- ers when warned out of the sea by Government vessels will throw much light on the wholesale, not to say inhuman, destruction of young seals. Gomparicon’ of Finally, in comparing the operation of taking sealing onlandand c : ; ay dele a Sie seals on land with pelagic sealing, it is important to observe that in the latter there is no possible way in which the number of seals taken can be controlled. While limitations of time and place might restrict the number captured by one hunter, increase in the number of hunters, which REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. oe it is practically impossible to prevent, would Comparison of sealingonlandand quickly render such restriction valueless. As at sea. long as hunting was profitable it would be fol- lowed, and the profit considered would be that which is immediate. Hundreds of schooners under private direction would have little thought of the good of the many, and the effort of every individual would be to take as many seals as possible during the season, regardless of sex, age, or condition, for next year there may be no seals to take. Wither pelagic sealing or killing on land must bear the responsibility for the decadence in seal life which has taken place during the last few years, and this decadence is known to have occurred contemporaneously with the develop- ment of pelagic sealing from a comparatively trifling industry (practiced mostly by Indians and confined almost entirely to the North Pacific coast) to its present magnitude, such that, despite the presence of a considerable fleet of vessels of both the United States and Great Britain patrol- ling Bering Sea to declare it unlawful and to arrest those engaged in it, a pelagic catch of over sixty thousand seals was had in a single season. In view of this fact, and of the careful Osha scale comparison which we have made of the two sins: methods of taking seals, on land and at sea, and 374 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Bee te eeotiierd of their effects on the seal herd, we feel justified sealing. in declaring our belief that the great dimimution in the number of seals on and frequenting the Pribilof Islands, which has been observed during the past few years, must be attributed to the evil effects of pelagic sealing. 7 Seer ey: Having found the source of the evil, it is easy oe COREE to determine the remedy. The principal meas- ure necessary for the protection and preservation of seal life in Bering Sea is one which must prac- tically. prohibit pelagic sealing. Argument on this point is unnecessary if we have succeeded in establishing the propositions already laid down in this report. It may be worth while, however, to refer briefly to one or two plans, restrictive as to time and place, which have been offered as a Limited protee- solution of this problem. It is evident that any Homme B= oheme that contemplates continued license to pelagic sealing, even in a much restricted form, is not the logical outcome of the facts and cir- cumstances as they exist to-day, and must fall short of accomplishing the desired result. erect Bebe Among other plans that have been suggested, is the establishment of a zone surrounding the islands outside of which pelagic sealing might be allowed and inside of which no sealing vessels should be permitted to go. This plan has the advantage of being satisfactory, if properly REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 375 executed. If the radius of this protected area is A zone of prohi- bition inadequate. great enough to insure the exclusion of pelagic sealers from Bering Sea and the North Pacific Ocean it would be entirely acceptable. But when a radius of ten miles or of thirty or even fifty miles is suggested, the impression is strong that such a proposition is not intended to be seri- ously considered. An examination of the chart showing the location of sealers when warned in the summer of 1891 will show that they are widely distributed. On the occasion of our visit to the Pribilof Islands in July and August of that year seals appeared in considerable numbers while we were from one hundred and fifty to one hundred and seventy-five miles from the islands, and many were seen up to the time of our reach- ing the islands. _ The possibility of properly executing any pro- , Pisirimiation posed scheme of protection must also have great Possible. weight in determining its value. For instance, a proposal to permit pelagic sealing with the con- dition that only barren females were to be hunted and killed would be quite free from objection, for if all such were destroyed the herd would not suffer. But the absurdity of such a proposi- tion is at once evident to all who are familiar with the elements of the problem. The difficulty 376 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Impossible toin maintaining a protected zone about the is- maintain a zone. lands, the radius of which shall be comparatively small, will be clear to all who know the condi- tions prevailing in that part of the world. There is almost constant cloudiness and dense fog, and it is difficult for a vessel to know her own loca- tion within reasonable limits after having cruised about for a short time. The margin of uncer- tainty would be nearly as wide as the zone itself. Often the navigator receives his first information regarding the nearness to the islands by hearing the cries of the seals on the rookeries, which he can not see. Under such circumstances few arrests would be made of trespassing vessels that could not make a plausible plea in self-defense. In most cases it would be difficult to prove that the sealer was actually within the forbidden area. A close season. A more reasonable proposition is that involving a close time. ' ae UIE Poy (a Be a Meee! OF : 2 . 4 . (a - -* F > » ) - i ts } rm ‘ tees 1 ab te 3 . " ye Paes aan : i ; : A : - ~ ‘ be : ee Sur eh jaye Soe pial Tee) Pate Apis nae ey “i utey i ian Bia mise ets as. PEt entice Liars - Ne ee Oe 5 Speer sales “5a: ek pee 7 Lee Stay era eas oe es ey ee oe AM ee teh Oe Or.” ni ei Pe SNEe hoes “ng A a aR ane cad o ep ieteaee in ae = Se ae = - ee ras heer Citiks tid dace Ye fensapnlt ition a Bie PT errant Sit eh Ey rakes 7 A - 4 b 7, 7 = T ; fe ; a : oe —-— wpe? REAR a Ate Shee Pe BE eaves att i Mee aati, hee aes Lecpna! Vie oh af Swe yh ; { cee + Z ‘ e Pe . ene (ary a n : me i, fet itcee rats 7 : wTe ae | ‘by 1 tp Fae ue i, Hite nf ie 7 were cs Saas, i, ren, pide cae Ce Pease * _ Bilt ein Appendix B. DATES OF ARRIVALS OF FUR-SEALS AT PRIBILOF First arrival of bulls, cows, and pups at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, 1872-1891, inclusive (from the official record). ISLANDS, 1871-1891. Year. 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 Bulls. May Apr. May Apr. May 28 Cows. Pups. June 3 | June 13 8 25 May 24 til June 7 10 No record. May 25] May 29 June 8 | No record. 16 | June 18 No record* 10 June 8 12 No record*| No record. aed Oysaet do. Beco pera do. (010) sSi50c do. 200% cer do. Adorscsa: do. KUO egoe- May 21 June +10} June {10 6 10 il 13 t ‘‘Good many reported,’’ 271649 ~ *On June 21 rookeries rapidly filling up. +‘ Arriving in fair numbers.” 385 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. First arrival of bulls, cows, and pups at St. George Island, Bering Sea, 1871-1891, inclusive ( from the official record). Year. sulls. Cows. Pups. 1871 | May 4 | No record.| No record. 1872 Gio aacOneeree do. 1873 UU) GadeClcaase do. 1874 1| June 7/| June 7 1875 | Apr. 26 9 | No record. 1876 Feb. iis59 13 do. 1877 | May 8 8 do. 1878 10 | No record. do. 1879 10 | June 9 do. 1880 1 | No record. do. 1881 6 | June 9 | June 9 1882 2 9 11 1883 7 6 6 1884 4 7 10 1885 | Apr. 29 1 | No record. 1886 | May 4 8 | June 8 1887 7 | No record. | No record. 1888 §} |Isspacosecece May 31 1889 5 | May 31] No record. 1890 | Apr. 26 | No record. do. 1891 | May 5 | June 3/June 10 *Large numbers in water. Appendix C., YOUNG SEALS ARE BORN ON LAND ORICE; DO NOT SWIM AT FIRST, AND CAN NOT NURSE IN THE WATER. All seals born on T = a o ” ” No species of seal in any part of the world, 7 Ss! gives birth to its young in the water, either among the sea-bears and sea-lions (Otariide) or among the true seals (Phocide.) In the great majority of species the young are brought forth on rocks along the shore, but in a few kinds of hair-seals, notably the harps and hoods, they are born on the ice floes of the far north. Not only are all kinds of seals born on land (or |. Nusing impos- ice), but they remain there while nursing, for seals can not suckle their young in the sea; the young are unable to hold their breath long, and would drown if they attempted to nurse in the water. Young seals However strange it may seem to those unfa- qyolthe water. miliar with the facts, all young seals are afraid of the water at first and enter it with great reluctance. At the island of St. Paul, in August, we have seen mother seals take their young by the skin of the 387 388 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Young sealsback and carry them out into the water, much dread the water. against the will of the young, and have seen this repeated several times before the young were permitted to land, which they did in a state of ereat excitement and fatigue. Captain Bryant, who spent many years at the Pribilof Islands as chief Government agent, states: “It seems strange that an animal like this, born to live in the water for the greater portion of its life, should be at first helpless in what seems to be its natural element, yet these young seals if put into it be- fore they are five or six weeks old will drown as quickly asa young chicken. ‘They are somewhat slow, too, in learning to swim, using at first only the fore flippers, carrying the hind ones rigidly extended and partially above water. As soon as they are able to swim (usually about the last week of August) they move from the breeding places on the exposed points and headlands to the coves and bays, where they are sheltered from the heavy surf, and where there are low sand beaches. (Bryant in Allen’s Pinnipeds, 1880, p. 387.) Captain Musgrave, who was shipwrecked on the Auckland Isles for more than a year and a half, has published some important notes respect- ing the sea-lions of those islands. Concerning the young, he states: “It might be supposed REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 389 that these animals, even when young, would Young seals dread the water. readily go into the water—that being one of their natural instincts, but, strange to say, such is not the case ; it is only with the greatest difficulty and a wonderful display of patience, that the mother succeeds in getting her young in for the first time. I have known a cow to be three days getting her calves down half a mile and into the water, and, what is most surprising of all, it can not swim when it is in the water.” wae ee ais < . hired arene? dp Mala ge sore cay ee Se eee ine 7“ pTie a at Bes sizer, oe . ara: et. SS E : | Ne ae, a: eee tks fit, rite 24 ie : Pate. fh heard 07 (Be LEE : orate Pea nnte 7 a Tuit (avon Pt, | . a ae me aitery war eo Gs ap hene Ys B= sai ea i iy 90 ee eee pin ant Oi ol le Bien Bie! abe de es fs 7 : : . adre! ine + poe a Ed pH TeRS jae ep ee an > ‘ . 4 ‘coo uh ) Sutai te tt RE Ee ea Teo ans : ™ 7 ; me ] ~ 2 — > - ys moo le 7 € ’ | _ ‘ a 2 re] -y x = \ r a se 3 - . y se 7* bis Tes a? = 5 | NN. : Hi — 7 al =? rs ; E-*. An — ae ~ aay Ae * — cy — P : : a7 , > : ; y - * ) “ se . et ih ioe t& - 7 Pe : 1 Aner - ‘ a : - - ‘ ® < 7) A gt Pe oN a idioak an 4 tar gee ae) VSO Pies hone Ald ag a sea logs Peomencix |), NATURAL ENEMIES. The only important enemy of the fur-seal pee oeenler known to man is the killer-whale (Orca gladia- tor). ‘These killers visit the islands on their way north about the end of April, and return in Sep- tember. In the fall they hug the shore, keeping in the kelp or moving about the rocks as near in- shore as they find sufficient water to float in. They are sometimes seen in squads circling - round and round the islands, catching young pups by dozens. At first the pups are said to pay no attention to the enemy, sometimes swim- ming right into the killer’s mouth, but before the end of the season they learn what the presence of the killer means, and rush out of the water and up on the rocks whenever one comes near shore. The killers generally arrive early in September, and remain as long as the pups stay, which is usually until the latter part of Novem- ber. CT aeaiari Hoyer ‘ag t "a ff = . jug, : i Ey i | 4 ' “ | | . : ; 2 +i ea » S rae Ase | Godse A” Tre anitie Vad veenle Lege ae "ays | gee av . 4 raw. oh baat! 4 ie Mu ee of) 0 arin ‘a a Pale) LLP i Gree WiLLE Py jens Flic t Bae WE? is ipl tere itn MARA, tained eat Gor e igi rt plitieretth) sei: TAT bs eee hs : | teria kh eke Pod ‘i aN RPC W ead a hi men pr, | b ail cy (“a Tily . braistges | iis st} Cue ae f “ Wi; Pe Pee (ie Ae tbe Pam tC aes os | Bos | a at hiTh yy SaRiaete a Dae Re vn . | . | : | ae a THE eS Beate tA “driuin’y hag £ ; SOT et Oh} } UE P(A ‘ih CORY efia he wv Feeney; wey teas tt ogl ies eat auf] til ra | : MU Wass mer OUT arses att: ERR e. ath d —e | Z enn HAS, i sie Maw iat? adenine 1aloeea Ryde | eS Ee a aan fur see aah at oi ie he ; ; bs ‘aF ere 5, ALY TA Urine: oa atvalleae nie ay f a : . 2 . ehive stttee Ael hien a bis avers iadon, Appendix E. FOOD OF THE FUR-SEAL. CONTENTS OF STOMACHS OF FUR-SEALS KILLED AT THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. August 1-3, 1891. One hundred and eighteen stomachs of Gare ee seals were examined jointly by the United *"* States and British Bering Sea Commissioners at St. Paul and St. George Islands, August 1 and August 3, 1891, with the following results: All the stomachs were opened immediately Contents of after the seals were killed. Ninety-three out of the one hundred and eighteen were empty, except for the presence of a little mucus, bile, frothy slime, dark brownish blood, and parasitic worms. Blood in some form was present in five stomachs, and nematode worms about three inches in length were found in most of the stomachs opened. Twenty contained pebbles, or pebbles and beach-worn shells, either alone or in connection with other contents, the quantity varying from from a single small pebble to a handful. 2716——_50 $93 394 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Peenion te of Four contained beaks of squid or cuttlefish (identified by Dr. William H. Dall as probably Gonatus fabricit), of which three sets were in one stomach, two sets in another, and one each in the remaining two. Two contained fish bones, of which one con- sisted of the vertebrae and a few other bones of a cod (Gaddus morrhua); the other the ear bones of a similar fish. One contained a large Isopod crustacean (identified by Prof. Sidney I. Smith as “ appar- ently a species of Rocinela, a genus very close to figa”). One contained a small bit of kelp. CONTENTS OF STOMACHS OF FUR-SEALS KILLED IN THE NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN. April 22-May 1, 1892. Examination The stomachs of 104 fur-seals killed by made at Wash- ington, D.C. pelagic sealers in the North Pacific off south- eastern Alaska, April 22—May 1, 1892, between latitude 56° 45’ and 58° 58’, and mostly sixty to eighty miles from shore, were examined by the naturalist of the United States Fish Com- mission steamer Albatross. Of the 104 stomachs, 67, or 64.4 per cent. were empty. Of the remain- ing 37, 30 contained 37 fishes and 18 contained 728 squids or cuttlefish. REPORT OF AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS. 395 Most of the stomachs containing food Raven, Combansa of been submitted to us for examination, and the fishes have been identified by Dr. Tarleton H. Bean, Ichthyologist of the United States Fish Commission. Of the 80 containing fishes, 15 contained red rock fish or rock cod (Sebastichthys, 5 of which were found in 1 stomach, making 19 in all), 2 contained salmon, 2 pollock (Pollachius chatlco- grammus), 2 ling, 1 stickleback (Gasterosteus cataphractus), and 9 small fishes too much digested to admit of ready identification. ‘T'wo contained pebbles, and several intestinal worms. Although squids were found in only 18 of the 37 stomachs containing food, a large number were generally found in each stomach—as many as 419 beaks in one instance, and 319 in another. In all, 1,456 beaks, representing 728 squids, were found in the 18 stomachs, an average of A404 to each seal. Owing to the small size of the individual beaks, particularly those of the younger squids, many were probably lost in emptying and transferring the stomach contents, so that the number here given is certainly below the number originally contained. 396 REPORTS OF BERING SEA COMMISSION. Conclusion as to The examination of these stomachs shows that food and feeding. : : the fur-seals are chiefly surface feeders, the only food found from moderate depths being the red rock fish or rock cod (Sebastichthys), of which all the specimens obtained belong to a species of whose haunts and habits nothing is known. Norr.—Appendix EK, on the food of the fur- seal, has been completed since the foregoing report and Appendices A to D were written. THomas C. MrenpENHALL. C. Hart Merriam. Wasuineron, D. C., June 30, 1892. SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE, Acquiescence. (See Great Britain; jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Action of the United States relative to Alaska since the cession............ 78-86 (See also Alaska; Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Act of Congress. (See Alaska, action of Congress.) INCU MeO DLO CU CULON = serene omer oe cee eee ea amie seemiee hee ee ee ema 110 Acts. (See Statutes.) Age: Ofmbwllspese sense meme a snnteees anaes eee ah ees Sheek a tee eee 107 OM COW Suse cis oi al scinw iss selec oar oe Cetera teen Sec baee eee eee ee 113 Alaska: Acthionerelative toy since ther CesslOl 24-22 --- 2. ete ane ao eee 78-85 MEAT OTIO fs CONCLESSE: satis sero ce ha oa e/a see eos o comes Seno eee oes 78-82 NGUION SO tL XE CWULIVO nee cmte secic ee sae sone Sete sete eee 80-84 WecisionrofUmiLedi slates COURtSE= ste aan ee eee eee ce oer 84 BOUNMATIESS Olas a= 2 == Se gasess coe oe ota os see ohne e cokers Nase 70 Cession of, to the United States.....-.. Bas AO OAR eas Ae seh ae tee, sumer Ear Cessioneunimnecumbereda tes see 22 5,- ees eee eee eee eee es Se 72 Furs exported from, during Russian occupancy:.-.-....2.-..:.---.-.- 73 aw sor Umitredsstates tel atin oboe eee ee eee ere cr ee oe 78-84 Meaning of termisin’ wreabycOh L867 v2. -0 22242 S220 5ce52 ote se shars sees 80 Motivesttor purchaserot. by UnibediStatess 25. 5-5-4 sss. +5245225-5 22 75 DV EXEUOUI OVS TIMIE pO) te 5S ee ice ee A Eco a PPC ore ae ea ile? PRO MUCUS LO tema access 2) Aso Soe See eee ae was erences seeeeeeeiae OH (See also Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Alaska Commercial Company: Caprialkots $25 0003000 sete ej oa alae torneo eres et aN ate oa ee 134 ILGRRG UDecastesodans so 5Sco seco ds acces csudse cos sct.cedecucbed caooue bode 134 Alaskan seal herd: ; ANG RUsslaneheLd, CustinetionyDeEebWeen —- 2. se-j---se2 ose ee nae see eeee 94. Char ac hOrisutcCe Ges teet ete sass so af = a 2A Re eee ns See seioe ee 94, 295 Classifica tiomotras ee eek J etieek i Se Ls tte oeien eee ete 98 Decrease of. (See Decrease.) Depletionior by pelacic sealinG sss sseee moa eee Steele eee ease 216 Hoes notienterumland waters so. saeeag 5592 aoe ce ce ee Selene 127 398 SUBJECT INDEX OF CASE. Alaskan seal herd—Continued. Page. Does not land ati Guadalupedslands = -s2e ese ee eee ee = eee 129 Does mot landiexceptonveribvlot Islands sesso seen sees | eae 126 Does not mingle with Russian herd......--. Bes coda oA Son See SeerbS 96 HALLS Ofa-c2ek Moe iee Sees Scene eee ce ee ene oo eee ee ee chet 89 VOT 6 Otero See cea actos eres lave ie als ore neler eye Siete les ae ae eee 91 Voss if destroyed! 22222522 22 5c esi ees soedaecceisaes pectic mee eee tienen. 269 Mi or atom Ot aa mes ae ee oe ee rt ee ee ae 122 Bropertyaitee soso es ees see eee. eee eee ae eee eee a 300, 302 Protection of. (Sce Protection.) Resultsif not protected) 2.2.25 eee a eta ee 335 Amendment of 1874, relating to management of rookeries........--...----- 136 American competition for Northwest Coast.......----..-.-.----+-..--------. 32 American management: OfeTrOOKerles ees sees eee ee eee aaa eager 133 IRISULNONE Saoc cooo aaee ccoaguaosso Sons Sead ocSuSe pesGasco eas ocsannpsaujcoce 164 Antarctic seals: IDEstruchion Ofesseaete er] See eee ee eee Cee e eee eee eee 218 Wo notmicrate £99.52 5sesas-eeoee ie Rak ee Seen 2 ae ale aerate car Ss 123 Arrival at the islands: Of bachelors. ----- .-- See aoe coer Gabe see co hee ab ob ah bepaoeeuSdoEesoc 120 Orr Talley 5 5656 sos cocese saan seuss 656 Sun kascn) asco cadsodedserssooscc 108 (OlwWOD es5sseq coed sons Saas Stee sb Sees Hob a50g son cdudbscasd sees sacs Sc0c 108 PCy ANG, pe y AMO Mb Oren sioieie ee (oie ante ciele eaten fete ee ee ee eae 5 Bachelors: /SasgenlOre GaHUSWNCKy yo seeescoaqeeou Sop eo Uap oO ae so soon Ec ascsoSSaneesec 120 (CATES. Chi, Gmiiereranes TNE: WRN 25 26k Se co5o doco ooncon cdesas pees SscSns ce 120 Departure of, from islands ......-...------=--- ------ -2-2 +202 22022-5025 122 Heed! very littless- = eae ces ee ee ee ee eee ee 121 Tite on the hawlinio orowmds 2 eee oan ele eee a = i 120 Mingling with the cows.-.-.....----- +. ------20-- -2 222+ 2-2 sees eee een eee 122 Only, killed by Russians ........-.---- ---- ---- -26- +--+ - 220 2002 20-220 130 The killable class 22-2 coos. 2 tae em ae eee hm nella = = = oem sions toot 120, 152 Baden-Powell, Sir George: As to females in pelagic catch.......- BE aSGC CAST BB OS SU OR REO ODOCCO R00 200 Opinion of, as to possible catch. -.--.--------.--- --5- 5. ---- o-oo n= 290 Opinion of, that close season is impracticable..---.-------.------------ 255 Bering Island, discovery of ....... ---- 02-202 en0- enn -e oo ene see ees ann aces 22 SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE. Bering Sea: Page BOUIN aL OSKO lms Ne cae eres ecto aioree Slee micro ie cee araratatoalale steel ata ciate sate ill IDWTNSNGIONS OE spose seeesd cose coe obe ceebes Geos Yacbes SoSeuscuseeo oubeae 11 Discovery of sheres and islands of .----- --.--- 25-22-02 -2< oe oe Seon 20 Fishing rights in, not thrown open by treaties of 1824 and 1825 54-57, 61-70 D0 CE C0 SSSR - he on SRS Gas Sec beens ooo ene EEISeeerOsS- Sonect nd 19, 261 Foreign trade or hunting in, prohibited by Russia .....-...--..---.--.- 42,51 Geurrap mica skeieliOh 2 9. . 22 -ece ema 22 esac ccm cies = eee sec eeee Tilt lisllomndls Wht Sab s5c6se6 cosenooses.csan be se Seo Se essen cSeec escaped cdsu sescse 14 Jurisdiction over, always exercised for protection of furseals . c2eo 25.52 sce oes eeens Nae oes Heke oe Seek oe a1 PernOhe PUpSer see eae ma ree wee. os 225. Pee ee eee 98 INGE Ce MEN POSS TN Oram sete ancieiic 2c sacl s oe Se aa ee 102 INDIUM Ga humemee re eee es tes sek etic een sot teu ele Se EM eee ee ee 113 On kelp beds; impossibler 2s. Secs. ce sae ct es PS 104 Dh tYs) Cu PS eta SOS a oe ae ee oe Ee keke ty Ln a re 98 Birthrate not affected by killing certain number of male seals..-.....-.---- 154 ACh UY sens soso ones sacs do cose ons docooousaS Socwes commecasancn sees ouSoC 99 400 SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE. Boat-puller. (See Pelagic sealers.) Boat-steerer. (Sce Pelagic sealers.) Boundaries : Of Alaska 3a! ss Sab apas serene eee ee meres Seis se aiaaeta otek eae Of Berne Seatn 22 eek hepa seen seme eee sess sss es see cMacmecise seats Breeding oe ROUNNOS. 2. 525cns Dee Ae ane ae Ss, ono JT es cate Breeding seals provected tromidishurbancess-.-522------ 2 a= o- see eee aa eee IBTISGO] WB aieaset tate ey ee ere ci cta ia = isl Sain ein eicie einicin Ste CEC eer aritish compepiiion yor Norbhiwest Coast=---4.-5-----s-- sss seeeese ee 1B) DOU ee ASG ne HERS Oe 6 ec cane Sar Ee eee Meramec Seca tease otace INGE). sac gco05 S290 2005 2555 R05 soeeed SHNS ose5 Go50 os05 Sees Sooo esegouss0¢ Arrival (of, atraslands 2... 2 2isacs see An. see ee eke see eee eee ATV ALO fat NGiCOWS 22-2 2 3. ses teen a see mass eee Oe Ae sos eee ee (ChonmibiGiis) Seu sean Bees coed deac.cans Sobe cocoue S265 desu ucoeassoesoes Conthicts between, im 1890... 32 a eee emis ooo ee eee eee Departure of; from islands. 2.2222 eee sen cicck se oe eee eee ee Hastinie of, on) themoolkcenese ass sent eee ee ase eee eerie MOR OCUGY! Of 2 eras olorerniaay Srey steie eis be eres ici ree = See eee eee eee yet Ndile; VAS OLOUS Fase aeeis=) | eee sae aces eee oe er eee eect Landionisamerookeryiceq.222 92 scien oc cts se eee ee ee eae CapevelOrmirOOkePlesi 21m rra tay leer erie) ae ae ett Cape of Good Hope, protection of seals at...-...----------------------+---- @apexPrimCe Ot (Wales gos of ear aslo a ela nee arate rane oe re eee tere eter Caspian Sea regulations protecting hair-seals ......---.-.----.------------ Catch of sealing vessels. (See Pelagic catch. ) @atle;isealls pian aie edule epee ere era olee ee eee ala set ae eee Cause ot death of pupsion the roolkertes!s--2se eee eee eee Cause of decrease. (See Decrease.) Causes of migration of Alaskan herd. @ensus of seallite impossibleyae.-so5---e eee eeeece eae ectiee aan eee Cession of Alaska. (See Alaska.) (Choy lord letee hall MENS) 2 6S So n6 Sooo cong eseods -sso55 cso HSeaggSancSesndSdosec Characteristics of the Alaskan) herds 425-n. 24h eo eee an eee eee Charters. (See Russian American Company.) Charts: Decrease shown by (portfolio of charts, A to K) -....---....------22--- SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE. AQ1 Charts—Continued. Page. OVP Taverne OG scoop de deedoGenesssesscescesoes becdss pode eonass boSSeE 52 Of rookeries (portfolio of charts, A to K)---.--:..--------.-------+----- 165 Chief manager of Russian American Colonies, powers of...-..-.---.------- 36 Chinese markets... - .S..j.cn22 sescee ace oon win ee eee en 37, 130 (CInin@i@ WHO ase sn se bones cede so ce Setep este esores sounds aoe tee eae Secs meer et 37 (Clima ai? ne TEsk@es or Glin 45 6 55-ebesoesocquscesers sseens cacees cobe 289 Claim of the United States before the Tribunal.......-..----.-------..---- 299 Claim of the United States for damages..-.------.------------------------- 286, 299 Claims to the Northwest Coast of America. --..--------------------------.-. 26 Wlassiheation Of WamMaCes a sasssa2 = se see eee ea a ania i 286 Of migrating seals.........----------------------- ++ 2-22 eee eee eee eee 125 Ofs pups eee eee fae ee cee ce oan oe ee seem nine 99 OP SRI eb ao Uoelase ce digdce steps Seb cosecoen cobs rede cup=secrseeeeace 98 Climate of Pribilof Islands .......4---.-------.--------------------------- 18, 90 Close season: — ; As a means of protection-of seal herd ...--.-.------------------------- 253 Dr. George Dawson on...--..---------------+----+ +2222 cere reer reese 255 Establishment of, for hair-seals by Newfoundland ......--------------- 995 Impracticable for protection of seal herd...--...----------------+------ 254. Professor Huxley on ..---.------.---------------- ---- +--+ +--+ -----+----- 256 Proposed by Lord Salisbury...-------------------------+--+----+-+-+-+ 239 Sir George Baden-Powell .--- -.-.----------------------+-+---+---+----- 255 Sin dalianecanimecetoveOMmee = 222 225 ee = oa ec ae i ee ee nn = ne 255 Coast of northwestern America. (See Northwest Coast of America.) Coast thrown open to trade for ten years.-..---.-------------------------- 58 Coition: Does not take place in water.......-..--------------+-+-----+---+---+---- 110 Te GiGhWlaos Gas Gena bobbu ecoeeasnbeeeeec odes pac opeceecensearrcspeor 110 Colonial waters. (See Waters granted to Russian American Company.) Commander Islands: Discovery of......---------------- +222 ee ee een eee eee rere eee 22 IDAKWES Oil one56e 4adueecnashe doo beolocscoc comers ceacas UsEocodesebou sosorS 160 IREVHTIEEE Ol tak ab dobams aan bad geaUlescD oo SobSR nee EEeNOUeorEOorno sacemaoeacs 929 Commission, Joint. (See Joint Commission.) Commissioners. (See Joint Commission. ) Commissioners, American. (See American Bering Sea Commissioners. ) Comparison of leases OLS ZO Andel SIO 2. =e eee eee eee seieesiciaeles 146 (S@m@OWienGitgaaonedee one Code oo eee ans BeBe SD rICE Eee CR BICemho i 5565 Sor Don aoooe 295 Concurrence of nations in protection of hair-seals .---.-------------------- 297 Condition of natives: Improvement in .....-..------------------- 2-2 beer creer ere re 140-145 lnderAmentcamicontnoloe==- smc ae nee Sel oo omer = ooo ape = 142 Under the Russian Company .-..-.----.-----------------------+---+---- 141 Condition of rookeries, 1880 and 1891.....-..---.-------------------------- 167 @ontlicts of bulls sm 1890) sees e ease] ooo = a = nin nim = 174 NG ae 402 SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE. Congress. (See Alaska.) Page Congressional investigation. (See Investigation, Congressional.) Control and’ domestication of theisealses=-s5554- 2 o5- eens 2 -))-- eee eee 147 Convention. (See Treaty.) Control of trade. (See Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Control over Bering Sea. (See Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Cook, Captain, expedition to Alaskan waters ..........-.------------------ 24 Coral fisheries. (See Fisheries.) Course of misration of Alaskan herd! 2c oo ee. os ee en eee ee tr 124 Courses tolssealimoy Vessel Seem series eee oe cere nee ae ae ee eet 258 Courts, decisions of United States. (See Alaska.) Cows: JN Cy Bae IE een eA ee Sara ners Hoobs CARES JOSOSe Ses Soc: 113 Arrivalcofvatislands: =< .2c.s2 25 -2ee ee \eeeee es sete ernie eee aoe eee 108 Death of ‘causes death/of their pups =sssss—2=5 ease ee eee eee 115 Departure sof, trom islands! - sos eeea-- eee Be ae ORS mse 119 Destruction of, by pelacicisealinoe-s. es eee eee eee eee 197 Eighty to ninety per cent ef pelagic catch are ......-...-.--:.---.---.- 198 eedinosexcursionsiot here re =e eek ke er ee 116 Gestationiof period of. 222. .ceaee ee mie ae oe see ee ae ee eee 113 Harem. dife:Ob there. -cseocsce ae pace oh Seee.c cece me eee eee een eee 113 Mannertot feeding 22252 jen soot abc eicee cee = eo eae oe eee cee eee 115 Minglinge withthe bachelors. 22-2; 2se-26 2-5. -e ee oe Pe eee 122 Nourish only theirOwnupu ps sass ses eee] eae ee eee eee 114 Numberiofathatia boll can fertilize pases e see ae ee Se eee 109 Number opupsiatibirth = 2259-2... 2 4-0 =e e sae ee cee eee eee 113 Namberot, tO a sharem ee se. ye sje aye este re ar ge oO otal eee gears 109 Only killed:on islands by accident... 2-2... 9. 352 sete 2 eee eee 151 Protection ofenct =n soctt caeee tense cee coe Seer ees econ Sa eee 150 Scarcity,of, On TOOK CKICS Pee. 2-er5 so alon ee tae eee he Speed tof, while Swimithiny e222 eae ere teen ee See ee 119 Wieightiofie: ose cere tee rere oe eet ee ee eee eee eens 112 Cruisers: Duty to bepertormedsby eet a= =e eee eee ee eae eee 44, 63 Object of dispatching, to Bering Sea in 1820 and 1821.........-.....--. 44 Orders ‘to. American’. 22.25 22] 26... sce weieele somes aot aes ae = sees 80-84 Plans for; in 1820amd a Soles - 22 oer eie ete =o eee eee 43 Plans for; in 1854 <6 22ers tec c cect ce seme eae eee Ses ee eee eee 64-66 To remaim in Berns, Seanuulllawhalers leavieyeces sseeeeese se eee 65 To watch and warn whalers in colonial waters....-...-.--.------------ 63, 67 (See also Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Damages: Clause of ‘treaty... 2.225 bie csc cereee se weseee -e Chae eee sees Sesh Seen 5, 286 Claim: for, by United: Statesiancassc sec oteeee = eee nae eae ee ome 286, 302 Classification ofS... 22kecca. cost setae eich

ts os 236 Menweotamewiidile sss: sss Syne onan mien et ees 5 Gh Gs 236 Pmierenet POAE Meyer 2 eae ial oie eiei= = a ral ne =mr eae 236 Protectiom of, by Framcess:---2-- 22=-------5--- 9522893525 seas 2557 234 amdliniaenGOr alle so te Saisie == Ses ran ee ei nig a a eeciga aa 235 Sratehwhenvinga. estas sean sae ee ioe ne vee Gee ca aise 232 Sapir anmicolaleeee aeons = cane te ener eerie cam lanieea ie cicaie aaa 235 Sfatubes proveetint 22-2622 -o== -o~ - = =i ene oe ne ons 229 Fleet of sealing vessels. (See Sealing ficet.) Pogsin Bering Sea. --. y--+------ ------ ---2--2 225-22 205205 5230 o 2st ate 18, 261 PaaGl Gir ie EGR Glseee case oe oc en caoess o- ob Seas Gees sete se hoes Joe meno PeeOmOOG 116 Foreign vessels. (See Foreigners; Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Foreigners: Abandoned all business in Okhotsk and Kamchatka.-.....-------------- 49 Carried on no regular trade in Bering Sea. -.---------------------+----- Dill Contracts with, annulled.......-...-----+-----+--- +++ --+-+-- 22-2222 cee 45 Forbidden to reside or carry on business in Kamchatka or Okhotsk ---. 46-49 Officials ordered to drive them away .-----------------------------+---- 49 Their presence in Russian waters illegal...--..------------------------ 48 Trade of, on Northwest Coast -.-.--.---------- +--+ -----+---+2 2-22 rrree 5l (See also Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Tait INOS oonceos Jone cebio oo UE ene nor GoD a eeee Saar oO bobo orc Ors r aon Horo Moon 2% French legislation for protection of fisheries ....----------------+--+++--+-- 234 Fur Company. (See Russian American Company.) Fur industry. (See Furs.) Furriers: ; American, opinions of, as to the need of protection...------------------ 245 American, testimony of, as to number of females in pelagic ¢: teh ae ee 202 British, opinions of, as to need of protection.......-------------------- 243 406 SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE. Furriers—Continned. Page. British, testimony, of, as to pelagic catch 22)-.---. ---- 22... ----s25s-6 198 Hrench; opinions of, as tomecd of protection =2-5---- e225-4-- 25-5 oeees 244 Furs: Karly voyaresrin sear chioteeepeemeretaoare mens toss. Sse eeiee eee ce eee 22 Large quantities brought from Commander Islands by Bossof...-..--.. 22 Quantities of, exported during Russian occupancy of Alaska...--.----- 73 Valuejiof, known to; American ner otiatorss-.--s—- ees seeee sees == sea 74 Value of, talkeninom Berne sea prior to leb7 Sse esnee ae sees eee ee 73 (See also, Fur-seals). Fur-seal industry (See Furs; Fur-seals.) Fur-seals: Hirst foundson berimomMsland by Bering So. er - a e ease e ea eee 22 Harvestiexpected strom. 3.5. 2b sce sen cent eee eee ae ee eee eee eee 42 Jurisdiction over Bering Sea always exercised for protection of ....---.- 57 Kallinerotiabisea towbe;previented ssan=— seem eee eae e =e eee eee eee ae 44 bawseror Uniteds states melatmoitoess-eaeee sees cee aeons oer eee 78-84 Most important part of colonial enterprises..-.-.......---------+.----- 62, 63 Protection of, reason why Russia excluded Bering Sea from effect of tPOALIOSs Noe este so ak eee ate weet ep choses sesecsece see eee 59 Reductionin: number alledae: s-sseee se store eee eee eee eee eee sees 42 Revenue! yielded byaoeWmitedy States! ssese-e- ]-eeeeee ee eee ceneeeeeeee iG Right to protect Alaskan, passed to the United States --.....--.-----. 72, 76 Russia’s rights over, passed to the United States.........-....-...----- 72 Whaling company prohibited from cruising in waters frequented by -.- 68 (See also Jurisdiction over Bering Sea.) Fur trade. (See Russian American Company.) Gait, used iby pelagic sealers <- 52 sacs secs te see sce eee =a siwiasee se oseseae 194 Canine Enieceooossadoars copodeos cucu ceSd aces cede cognac oGe9 cooess Sasa cdeC 23 Geographical ‘sketch: of Bering Sea) - sesso. 22a se see ae eee ee eee 11-15 Georraphicallsketchiof Pribilot islands e222 cence 2 eee eee eeeeee 15-20 Gestation, period Of 625-8 55 -sce aco te oe cen eR eee eee eer ee oe ee 113 Government agents 2. io sek < Sse ones sees to clasiwe pans sees lee sae eee 145 Government) claimtor damages=.-- o-- seer ae ee eee eee eee eee 287 FOVELDMENG WOLKINE AIM PRACtICADLC see — 4 4-2 eeeee ee eee eee eaeeee 138 (Cathy OUl seen keno ooocooud poe ooo dooce. cage de ode4 SEablOS06 Saen Oba ded Gos Bae 99 Kallinevotistoppedeancasceseensee eae — 2 ee eee Sovssa6cessece acecee 18 Great Britain: Acquiesced in control exercised by Russia and United States ....-.-- 69, 298, 302 Burden on, to show that Russia’s rights over Bering Sea lost-.......---.- 57 Concedes that Russia’s rights over seal fisheries passed to United States 72 Modus Vivendi of 1892 between the United Statesand. (See Modus Vivendi of 1892.) Protest by, against ukase. (See Protests against ulkase of 1821.) Should concur with United States in regulations. -................-..... 302 Meader, on Northwest) Coaster... oe ct arelei2 oe al ee eeniee ee eee eee 51 SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE. Great Britain—Continued. Treaty of 1790 between Spain and. (See Treaty of 1790 between Great Britain and Spain.) Treaty of 1818 between the United States and. (See Treaty of 1818 be- tween the United States and Great Britain.) Treaty of 1825 between Russia amd. (See Treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Russia.) Treaty of Arbitration of 1892 between the United States and. (Sce Treaty of Arbitration of 1892.) Great Ocean. (See Pacific Ocean.) Guadalupe Islands, seals of, a different species from Alaskan seals..-.....-- Guns. (See Firearms.) Habits: Of the Alaskan seal .......------ eet ieee nee sae cies eet ees sien (See Pribilof Islands; Aiaskan seal herd: Pups; Bulls; Cows; Bache- lors; Migration.) Hair-seal: BrGIShepEObectionyOh Aa sass saa ae eet ooh coool Meee lL, Sen Newioundlandsresulations concerming= 25-255 = sss 2 eee Protection of, by Jan Mayen regulations.....--....--.......-.--------- rotectioniot ping Caspiany Seale. acess == ys Joscee ie Sees eee eee ErobectionyotsrimeWihite; Seay a2sceeeac oe co ciacln cere sie asics eile a eee meee te Harbors at Pribilof Islands.-.-....-..---- enna ee Beet ee aaa eae Sao Harems: Cowgsblitepingth Crepe rpeee setae eracic eats sores asl tesa 1~) one stolare.e Sere Dison ranizaome ot ERe seme aslo daciasns athe iae se ates we ee oe Ov eloistoens SS Numb erro fs Cow Splnbh Cm aye cera serena as =a reel leet eaeloreie are) tat Ore ANI AbION. Of aaa ose re 2 yas oe cieroers Fela henge Dees WOM Teen aoe as TEED rer FONG open caodidos Coe be se seEas tae Sop eaoou reds See a Dero ceesiassaen Historical and jurisdictional questions. (See part first.) romero tethers Calle sae aera aia ciaieiate cisiensaiay2 aise = setae ie alsccle eie te sate we aaiels severe Ftowertn CeaACustOls Gre atp Ee Tibaln yest elses ies ee ee eek eine alee eee ee Eadsonise bays COMP AN yes ease o 25 = Se cms ae sean: are ois) = ia = eee ee eee Hunters. (See Indian hunters and Pelagic sealers.) nba o Mater OF, Seals Wi, PNOTANS (otic atccic = me eine ienieeie= rors 2 ermclookaislander aon eee aan oe tua oa Saeeiee neta a ciwstres Jal 2 GLa Sec dens eee iniprovement, inn teatime SkiInsaces.cs2 51 Haat eee ee ose cl eee Improvement over Russian methods of taking seals .......-...--------.---- Tha onlniny GE Ty uO Gini o65 Conn copeeS pees esas (een des 465 Seu ccegbooe oséece NC REAS Oita yee eee iste ene ieicictaiwin) Sere SiS oy star one a ereraietene aaa Paton meee eee arsed inal SOOpeseet coe cee. c oad lat: Sys Ck cee ed Bea a a Lea HO wad eberimime ds aes sees seme ae cee hens See al cloe a cians oe a lratele eater > ate eT oiward ln Os with seem eter et erates aie in yi SAC aad alten eae Spon ees Resulting from American management .......-2.-----22+-------2-----<- Underivusslanwnanacemenit) a2 ssscsa soe eos eee ces nee enorme aacees Increase of seal herd. (See Increase. ) 407 Page. 129 89 408 SUBJECT-INDEX OF CASE. Page Imenespse Of:sealing eet. -..j.i0<.cue sc sob cle See Ree ae ee ae See ee 183 Indian hunters: Description of spear, canoe, and manner of hunting by -..........----- 189 1086 Very ew Sealsystrucke on.,fncm Se cakte ce cise seem oie eae 190 Opinions of, asco need: of protectiones-+ asa" eee eee eee ee ee 247 Indians: . Catch of alone coast). .”) Ditterencesbehween., andi Command eraass-sn442 5-5 ose se bo osetaee ne eee 24. Domo interns leith) © ommand ereres c= pea = eee eae eae 323 Migration of. (See Migration.) Alaskan seal herd: Condiionrot sii mmio ele daly maa eats a2 ee ears ae ee eee 345 WM CCREASG Of eee ens seein ce teies cb antony es SA aan eke cle Ne Sa 309 Deparireyot,tromaslan dsys-s2.5 445 os ss" /s-cee eae | See sie Seen yee = 329 Domo bnecconaC alitomilan COASty sae 2. eet a =e eee 331 HS timMabes OL MUM pers) Oxag Cerateds sae =e saoe lee ae = Se et ae nee = 333 TOOL Oteepee ee eee tam nates Sate aioe ae ear ewieie Seas Sree ce eee ee ae 393 Naimralieomerbont Of asa ec- his Sean Sol eee Jed oh ee ee ae 35 Na bura meme mress Olea seete ease reser fiiea areca eects Chae oe Sets 391 Me KemaimvONpUMeS AMG Stacy a samme eae ses Se yee e as tee coe 392 American Commissioners : AN SOOM Ol Soe ego AGS en ES OS ese ACCU SOD Ae keer Seat ny Bry 311 GUIIGE Ol pA Seame Sede oie: OPE See Pee CER p ret eae en, ers See 311 Nources ofeimilorm ail ONY Ol=2 5-4 a4) safe a ye osteo ate ee tee ee 332 Appendices: Ave seals simia whens cullediim thie waiter ..--ssaeere eee a= oe = clare 381 B. Dates of arrival of fur-seals at Pribilof Islands, 1871-1891 ........-.- 385 C. Pups born on land or ice can not live or nurse in water -.......---.- 387 DMN ahora Wenemlesre ace ecco aia Sac woe ote eeecas eee eae 391 Pee Godvotmule sti seal cee a jap atm oe aaa elaine sree oe smmiece aerate ae 393 Appolmbment) of Berne, Sea Commissioners = 25-2... 5-22-22 ne- sos 2 ee 311 Bachelors: SATAY, Bl Ole Coates et aaa pce Sub Reet Jets chug toa Sok en a a 325 WeqraahBee; Of nent ees 8s Pd. 5 ye ces t citae! So et ep qacmaits eee s side's 525 ential onvOlsyounoy COMMS uD Yiseeee + cee at eee bee omer nine eet ce a Seles 328 ibaden-Powell, sit Georee, OPINION Oe2 a= ane ae ashes aera teh 369 Babalesromubhegrookenessnc sa 2 cece: set uelee siete Salo a wig sieve ieee 349 Bering Sea Commission, arrangement as to meetings .....----.-.-.---.---- 314 erin o Sea seasOnOnsowulcIMee 22 oA> sues) seeelsace ote eee eee nine Se 365 Bering Sea Commission: Conduct of AnVestioAGOnp Dye essa se see a ce ae nee sae eee ea 313 427 428 SUBJECT-INDEX OF REPORTS. Bering Sea Commission-—Continued. Page. Disagreement as to application of Article 1X.....................------ 318 DisaereementiOt- asc essc.cecisee cele cose eee ee Rees: eno ea == 308, 318 WAIN NO) MO. SoarocosoudecousSsEoe cass ospde mee nesSocEsocuSscE S455¢ 333 IS JUR MME acacoso 4558 oGSeuss caqeso sce CoS nCS 6Gs605 Seconds sans oasces SHodae St 346 Explamabionton sds omeanns Oem ec ee eee = sete are eee ai eit 352 Hows, may De) Lesser e decree jeter tas cree at ee eee 349 Interference ‘with, injurious. -.22.. J2-- closes ot ele ee aoe aes 348 Not affected by killing certain number of males...............--..---- 349 On swiss CepenGs es cei ce aa teeee aaa alee alee el eee eee 351 Birth. (See Pups.) British Commissioners, appointment Of 2-222...) oes oot eee eee ae 311 Bulls: Age at which, go on breeding grounds ........-.-.---.---------------- 328 Arrivaltot, ab Islands = 2 jee ~ e-em nie = = eee eee ee eee eee 325, 385 Battling of.... ---. .--- 2. -222 cone oon 2 ne oe nn ene ne ee eee eee 325 Comparative 6126 Of Cows and = 222222 — 2 eee mea oe ee 327 Copulation ....---.------------------ +--+ ++ +22 ee eee eee eee eee eee 327 ING@ LENO S GE 4Se.5606.65ee c50806 Sans Su SHidd sands dso Suabcsaccasasn osooon oF 349 Catch of sealing vessels ...--- ------ ---- +--+ -- 2-220 2 22 en nee on eee sees 365 Table of....-------- ------ 22-222 enn ne eons nee enn s cere eee n en eens 366 Causes of decrease. (See Decrease.) Close S€ASOD .. -- -- -- ee = ee ne ee ene ee rn rr rr rr ree ree eee eee 376 Ga Mi asa peony ide COs, MCUher Oleera ear eaten ea ee eee 367 Must practically prohibit...2--...2.-++-++---+---------+------------- 376 Coition. (See Bulls.) Commander fur-seals : Difference between Alaskan fur-seals and..........---.-.---.---------- 3904 Do not intermingle wath Alaskans. (ce on stele tote re eel areal eee 323 Commissioners. (See American Commissioners and British Commissioners. ) Ganclusion as vo foodsand teed In pe as ante ae te een eee eee 396 Conclusions of American Commissioners -....-.-..-------.-----------2------ 379 Condition of rookeries. (See Rookeries.) Copulation. (See IWMI) Sep ccocauEdu doses cecseocas 5 bode csdces cososeSdcece 327 Cows: Age of puberty in.--.---.-+-.------ +--+ + 2-22 eee eee eee eee ee eee eee 328 Arrival of, at islands.........--.---- +--+ +--+ 222+ 2+ eee ee eee eee eee eee 325, 385 SUBJECT-INDEX OF REPORTS. Cows—Continued. OIRGS@S Qissaceo soso cnddcadgeanedd odes dos BB odor Sed a Seco daaoodoodsas Comparativesmeot pulls and \2a.72 225 2555s!) .0 2 bo. ae eee IDOREARS TE) QMUN NE 355. con0g0 celsode oo05 Sets odsoSEessd S56 ooee deat dso sus Westrnciiom er, by pelacie sealingeus. 5-22-2252. .2k 2 ee SSP eS Pitechs om maledife ok decrease Ob.c-- sess. s as o--- 24555 se oe ce cee eee Picemimieze xe MESIONS) Dj ne melemeem == cane See Ree ascend oot ache ae ee HenilizationyOfwy OUMCpaeies ccc occa ae elee es Net me cise em se tesco cereals Nursing. destroyed: by pelagic sealing”. 2-202... 2.4 2 2s.eeh esses sence: One reason, are killed by pelagic sealers .-......--..-.---.---. 222-022. Percentage of, in catch of sealing vessels -.....-.--..--.---.--..------ Sucidlextheirownpmpseeecseece = sens seee cette eke tees ck een uae {UNG INR SA 6 pod d Suc SooC eds CSB ODSE IOS IHO6 Adde oso ma cho Beoone cHomee Wea bhienaberernter sare ciateeiata «le cralcietsieisicicin ciate Sac See e shee nase staeie Peplanabion of diaorams Of ~ ss 2 7) 2-28) ce ewe ee heel nee esas Manidoes no timecessarily, imcrease sr o- a -e oe erate eters = siete asinine serene Decrease: Causedebye killin esol. COW S)-se)- as toes === yews sie Seo ee ase ete Caused Mb yawd amet eit a') 3 <)sisisle as eis) sare owl faretatcteierate ease eter ere eicie ctemne @auserolsmistalcensloretechyaean = ser seele tee Ce oe ten ee oa ee ee Gla ntre Timas Ue yC AEN Is am afelata a1) -127—1ormsicinriae lasts e ete siete sie sen) a Sate Imkcows dutiicuiltkhomoticeessnss-- 2. eee eee eee = ae tetas tna oltre lishnetemalemporiiomotehenrd tment ee ae ane INethiivebeS GMM OMy ASLO erate tetera alae cots ere frare tacos eralnte ie lore store slater jataranare Notieausedsbyalackvof malo Wufe soap ay c = <6 etapa atarctaret scission as oe ees Onmcows petect ot onumaleplite oe. sine ee eee ore eee oe Ofsealvherd affirmed in joint report_-.---.. 2... .-552-22.-.- ete eee ee Wisoalsvhashhakenypl ACOme sacra claser-ia- ios teeta eles ets einen Sa eiacens @OnpNortheastePomtonookerys2s-1 4c eee oe ee See oe ese elas Cusea Inge CANBO) Olas seri sah cates co So Aaa Noe sp oeate Unteicin= Senos FOS Rookerlesat Ord eva dence Obess mite eels ei oiotaie Or he = erate deroc as eee Shommebyedathys eiling ee ooo as bee eeb scans ode te eee ean oanle Show by ditiouliy to. Obtain quotas.) ss sos2 502s o-8 sons dectee lls Ak Shown by difficulty to obtain quota in 1887.....---.............-...-... Showanby Gimamnishedisize Of: saasA se seis s oat Perches edad Sas IO LORS Undusputedeescerats ss soa ase BE ao, Sone COCE SO RE Aen Ener eis sate Wikty 0b Cows MOL mo tiCedye= 2252.22 cats pon celts sh ee os SU ee eee Diagrams: : @onclusionsHlomMennsscssciat eden clos SS as ee eee Ee ee BffectisisHOwMe Yio ceo snes cea ets caen shoe. sbaaecenans saaesess st oe upluvation Ofsssaassceseassoss. 285. sels Se EE a Fe Driving. (See Management.) nemies, tevmtnals Of fur-sealy. = \osess<5c-2 52255 5522-25 6454-25-- aL savee ees Hvidencenakensbya Commissioners: =. sess eae ae ees oe ode ee ee Pxfermina LonsimMMminenteerra aan. sence ease tec Saas - sac es ee eceee eeceee Peedine Conclusionmay GO) secs sos 522s tore cage oS25 cose a ade/steeteuesouces (See also Cows.) 333 345, 373 339, 340 343 338 342 344 338 344 358 359 352 391 333 377 396 430 SUBJECT-INDEX OF REPORTS. Food: Conclusion 858:t0-2-~ o-eeee selene seeeeiee ae eee eee eee eee aaae Examination made at Washington, D.C... 2- =: 2222 seas. Examination made on Pribilof Islamds 222------- 25-2 3-25 -s5- --- Mound inistomachs 2 sone eee eee seat ata oo ee eel Female seals. (See Cows.) Bower, Prof. Wis Mees ee ere na ee ee Flower, Professor, on seals..... eee : 1X00 Pee cero opoo Seb peo Mp seoemcdc Seece Jen Gao maseeiesemeEdoesos Ta nese hNl esac caSoe AAR aS es Oss Gqe oe Sogce0e o6d= Gone 4a=8 epg ase e Sacc « IBY awe? SYN a enoageooccdoss sxbo choo. Sca6 copa soso suEmoEne eaESSsoec Clg, otlletls an ee anes cose cccs acog S505 cesebond nous code SaeaGsoc Distinction between hair-seals and....-......-.-.----.-----..-- Females: (See Cows.) i OOGNOL: cas aese Merrie ee Se ee eee is Deere ener ere erate eee iMomes Of thecserre ose coach eee eeoclee eee eee eer Eeeereee: Killing of, in the water. (See Pelagic sealing.) Ioife history.0f- 2.2o242c5 ceeaye oe ose = ee see sere eee Miorationsyotesse esse case eerste eee eee eee eee Reasons Pribilof Islands are homes’ Of 2222 =: aac. see (See Alaskan fur-seals. ) (CUBES = alas See Sanaa SO Senaesos Gecitradoaraoddagsqo.s0e" SaaS eSs Sooke Grass zones, evidence of decrease. -...------ Rare 81 7? Pepe Mee See IBIGIREN Ne op apioas ob Gu nad codasbbage qououscuShodScosses ossagsscncko one Diminished size of ..-.---.- fs Joos ose ese ds eee eee Hair-seals, distinction between fur-seals and .......-..------------- Hunters. (See Pelagic sealing.) Indian hunters. (See Pelagic sealing.) Investigation by Bering Sea Commission .--..-..-.---.------------- AOA ARE SW eacoeoeceo bo so‘S sons gos seocoeeoeaTs docu eoud Sess I dae a2 Teg AMEN peea ce susu onda ph aabeEneadaccdase sendousauasuas soon asic Killing: Of pups for food Ss. 22-35. eee eee ce hee Sac eee Seer eeere Possibility of Tesbrictin'S 3-2 ee 492 eee eis Sane eee eee Re cml ation Obst. ese re ee eee cet ree ee eee Wondon Trade Salés.°2-.5..2 52 25282. Soo soe aeons ech eee eae ere Male ‘seals, classes Of5-. 2-56 -15-% <2 ar -ecteise cesses ee ese eres Mam at Onients 22. ecaee eens = a ee ee ee eee Criticisms or manner Of drivin ease eee eee ee eee ee eee ID hab? Goce chee SS ase Sadece cue Soca ge cSuSSaSoosso Deg ESEs ceoeS Male seals nob injured. bytdrivano mas ese esse eee eeiee eee Recommendation as t0ce-< os -22 sce nc soe sso Soe cto ae eteeasieeiees INT AMENE, ChYARHON OE S56 cocoon co oSEsKoUN HOS caso song asec ooodadadst Meetings. (See Bering Sea Commission. ) Migration: Coumsecot, emo thy Cpe reper teeter eel ere aera rate lela ln otto mele lote eae SUBJECT-INDIX OF REPORTS. Migration.—Continued. XCM, O tees eee Moss cee ae net Se eemios o CAE Ss notin ae CEES eae MG On hee ie bP emer sera ace aera ae oan ss oan 20 WEE WEST ALON UG erUN-SealNa* lease ese eS. SNe nash eo% bet ssa e lo Le Northeast Point Rookery, decrease on.....-..-......--.---.--- Open-sea, killing of seals. (See Pelagic sealing. ) etry PCS CLIO) OER ON ces ae seer state at oe otal Sores Cin ss ee Catse.of decreaseor Alaskan herd 22.222 =.. 2...5-.222:. 222 Compared with sealing on land: 22.. 2-5-0. 5-2.2 2225502 38: IDET OLE COWS: Wi ieeaceocecacu cossacccre eooeLe Ge eeeee DestLuction OF NUTSIMNS COWS. DY 20. S22 -<5 5 55-ccsse0s5n ese Greatmnmb srswoundedabyeees asec een =o eee eee eae Growtheotasecericcamen eee sees aoe PSOE Ae Rees See aaa ERD OT VERO beter erate Serer ee ear ro onaiaree iio cere ere wie led PET Ate NTI OTA asic roa a Se a acl Sica eRicle eee FON LS eee Ee Re INCHES CTIA Da -era oy Sseecieid oe evs om a see ee Mhicensine Of MOGaVAllS. 42 Ba. so oe eee Se ss eae we See 4: Mammen: of: HUMULN O72 sa eet ES ye ee eee dys Mustsbe: Sup plessed’4s sas heeeacia se eee sees Sok ase Se eee One easonecow sare kallledem\ees es ase eee ere ee Percentage OracOws ims Capea secs a ace ee oe ee ee IRErcentage.Or SeaisnlOshiMy seme ss case eee = a. |e eee oe eee Prohibition of. (See Prohibition.) Wrastevolelife:calseds DY a. as,-aeiats 2 occa o eo ee Le Wearlyacatehissaeciacte a ocacess sare can ceteeSonaceecsc sete’ Pribilof Islands, reasons for being home of fur-seals....................--- Percentage of seals lost in pelagic sealing......-.-...---:------ IELOSMESSTO Me KGOLMUM A LLOMe aati oi se ey = eee te ee eae yey. ie, aes me Prohibition, absolute, necessary--- -+--e-eeee see oes see a eee Protection: By close season. (See Close season.) Dityotrof seal herdsattimmed esse ease see ass eee Levalizing pelarie sealing Noy .-22 s<2- 5-=-- ceases s--5 ce ihimited pimadequaters- 2. <2 seme a seas eee eee INQCEEREIAY Bond souseicoD Cordes esee CEn6 CHES ASS Sone Pane dace AGCUCCOt NATE GMA seas ss =a scie welscedes oceeeis Somaes s Provisions of agreement between United States and Great Britain Pups: sNccidentalybinuhs) ofsonkcoasby-esectes- eee eee oi icon clea ee ee a AG HENGE [OTMVOIE, Tt oo Mase cceacgoceb cues Se Use MBMS Ree ble boo sae Arr VialsOtes abpls lam Smeets © essen a aaa iets Ber, si aie cosets eee see Birth, ofthese eee ok = Sees eg esos 284 1 oe ede Gael 432 SUBJECT-INDEX OF REPORTS. Pups—Continued. Page. Born OM ands ss oee aero c meee e eel ee ee ee ee ete ee eae eee 387 Can not nurse In “water. 2 <6 sec sce ee Ee ee eee er Cee eee 387 Cows suckle only theiriown ..2222222...22..- CE s/s ee ere USES ECE, 326 Dead, on the rookeries <-2-teeeci-ceee are =e eee ee ee oes 365 Dependence on their mothers. 22-422 42. ss-ee as eee eee eee 326 Dread the water .te2wisce teehee ace eee cee he-cise eee ee ee Ee Te 387 Effect..of birth ofsingle 252 5. 2cc-* 2-2 oe Se ee ee 348 Killed: for foodc2 erect cise cere cise ayes eke 1s Son ase oes ae 361 Numiber of, atibintine S222 eae ss bacon te ceicesr tee bos Ses ee ek ee ee 326 Podding Of. aeeceeneniansee een eet ersactree een ce Oe ae ee 327 Raids:.on-the:rookeriesyscheyone eee aoe eee ee ee a etae ear ae ee ee eee 378 Compared withypelacicisealine pases seseee eee: ee teers eee eee eee 378 Regulation of juve ee ees sev ecwios fe a) ee eee ae Se = eager io secre seer 348 Report, jOIMNb = 22 secre cen einaecice Aeesen ese ee Eee er eee. eee eae eee 307, 318 Alitinmside crease Ol sealen end eeemee ieee eee eee eee 309 Affirms duty to protect seal herders. eeea eee ee = ae see eee eee 309 Conclusions reached inti sen cece cece case eee oer eee nee eee eee 309 Differences of opinion make further, impossible -........-..-----.-.--.. 309 Report of American Commissioners, divisions of --..-----...--..----+.----- 331 Reports of Bering Sea'Commission <--.<. 5.2.2. -s225-ese= fee eee eee 305 Reports, separate, necessibysol eo csecacs see ci soacieee tee eee ene eee eeee 318 Reportiof Treasury AgentiGott 2225 seeem esis see eterno eee eee 343 Report of United States Bering Sea Commissioners. (See Report of American ComMissioners)) 55k. selse Mein ees - telat Sa scleee se aeeiaoee ee ee eee eee 311 Rookeries: Dead pups On thes sect ieeccte see 2 Peace ree = ee iciiiete eee tees 365 Hyvidencerof decrease attordedtbyee-- 1-5-6 ---ce> 2 -- ee eeeeeeeeeeeee 339 Present conditiomvot 222 sss Weeewionns, nooo aseie oe le eerie se eee ee eae 332 Raids. Om. 2./ss.csseeccicee- aoe tise ose maen Seat ietee ce Ee yet ea = epee 378 Russian seal herd. (See Commander fur-seals. ) Seal killing at sea. (See Pelagic sealing). Sealing on land compared with pelagic sealing ....-...-.- Pujstsd Neer se 372 Sealine vessels;cabeli sos jesse aa yacte ete ee aeeeeaare ae etre aie erat ee 365 Seals. (See Fur-seals and hair-seals. ) Sealskins, Londontsale 0 fe ooeeteeeee eee meee seers teeta sere oe arn 369 Sinking: OfAntarctic dursseal shee seem sree eee reer ae evar tee etal ere 382 Oye tb a5 So sacs acoso bec0 deod cons cue 500 Sees seco SScEComeuneRSeSn scot 381 Of hair-seals -— <5 25-7 2st pe atte afta impala mani m ain aioe na 381, 382 Of seals when killedtinsthetwateneeseceesste ae tee seco = ine tae 381 Reason for, of seals 2 oss. ee eee eee ee eee erere ces cess eee cee eee 383 Sources of information of Bering Sea Commission ..---------.------------- “308 Testimony taken by Commission, extracts from. .....-....2....-------.---- 335 Treaty: APPCALLON Of <5 .\. sm ce sess ose Meee ee eee ta latn af «as are ee 316 SUBJECT-INDEX OF REPORTS. Treaty—Continued. INBMOIGS BCOl. «545 65nded pobolbe Dees O CREO E SUE Reo Ebon Sona ae> Snore Differently interpreted by American and British..--...--..--..-- Resultsotapplicablon Ofessaa ss. eas cee 5k soe sees Soa ote 2 se = Mreabya PLOVISIONS! Obese seme eee = a= Sy eR S ley icte Saisie oS sle lee else eee Waste of life. (See Pelagic sealing.) WAIIMeSSeS# DOLOLe: COmMISSIOMG== se Bente. A aais es seca oes See anes MWALUTIESSESIOXAMIN GMiee es sass sec els 2 ees se - = o-— eee 391 Declmerof hain harp, and Hooded-seallsse-eessa-- ee ae eee eee 391 International provision for a close season.......--.--....---- «scence = 391 TABLE OF CONTENTS. VII PART II. FUR-SEAL HUNTING IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE. Page. blistory “Of 6 Sees se = = -= ~~ eer enc ecencor nina” 393 Instances of Government protection.-..-------*----------------++7+-7- 394 Falkland Islands. ....-.---2-- o0--------2- == 02 5-0 - o-oo tenner tree 394 WMnnat haere eee nee oe oe caren nn ance eens ine ee = acer amino Sere = 394 ran heEnandese se. ease esh a= cen S- Selene siren ne ses soe ron te aes 395 Galapagos Islands...--------- .-----------------20---- 0-7-0 >- Oe event 396 St. Felix, St. Ambrose, St. Marys AslamMGs CC! so. ce see ee yee el 396 Tierra del Fuego and the Patagonian Coasts--.------------------------ 396 Tip ose lebands one cee c em are wic wiser eminineeein eee nn asin clin oan 396 South Shetland Islands....-...-------------+----2- eo ere terre 398 South Georgia Island ....-------.----------2-----=- eee ree rre retro 399 Sandwich Land..-.--.------------ Ree see oe eee a een ein = ie reel 399 Tristan da Cunha Islands and Gough Island....----------------------- 400 Prince Edward and Crozet Islands....---..--------- +--+ +20 ++rrrr ere? 400 Werpaclom=ahanGnr <> = 22sec = op ra a oy gee 401 Borders Island, Antipodes Islands, Bounty Islands, Auckland Islands, ete. 401 St. Paul and Amsterdam Islands..-.---.-----------+--s-e2- cree errr rtee 402 West Coast of South Africa and adjacent islands....----------+------- 403 Cape of Good Hope..-.--------s20--22222 cnns cere erie errr 404. Government regulations ....----------------2222 022s srrr errr 404 PART III. Tor ALASKAN FUR-SEAL AND PELAGIC SEALING: Priilodebslawdse s-ise oon wide eeciteels > nom -1-lnlonin nein + ele Seninincichic sae : 405 Migration of NOMI eekG doen boo soe bon cee Dee ae cobra sein GEO CACi DOS 405 @onmmandet Isl anes .--4335- 2 see ese 2 ie at sels sis ae esis 406 Islands of Southern California...--..--------------------2-- srr rr ttc 406 Griadalupe Island 2 se gq oem ciaein mnie ain ciel > zeit} a oie nell 406 Habits of Alaskan fur-seals -....-..-------------- 22 cree eerste tree 406 Mode of propagation ........-.-------22+-s2eee cece ee cre eee ect eeesecee 407 Ci prot PEt iL HOR aja, Letter from the Minister of Finance ta 2 Coxe, p. 264. the board April 2,1824, Vol. 1, Px 63. 8Tikhmenief, vol. 1, p. 57 6 Tikhmenief, vol. I, pp. 274, 27. THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. a1 | a lease for ten years of all its continental territory lying between the southern boundary of the Russian ee in latitude 54° 40’ and Cape Spencer, upon an annual rental of 2,000 land-otter Sidns: At its expiry the lease was renewed for another period of ten years.!. After executing this lease the Ross colony, established in about 1612 on the coast of California, became of less and less value to the Russians, and in the year 1841 it was given up entirely.” In the month of March, 1841, the Russian Government renewed the charter of the Russian American Company for a further period of twenty years. During this period numerous exploring expeditions con- tinued to be sent out. Furthermore, the Company embarked in some new enterprises. In conjunction with the American Russian Commer- cial Company it engaged extensively in the business of shipping ice from Kadiak and Sitka to California, much capitial being invested in plant of all description. In 1856 the. same parties undertook the work- ing of a coal mine at the mouth of Cooks Inlet. This proved very unprofitable, and for many years was a constant drain on the resources of the Russian American Company. Its third charter expired in 1862 and was not renewed, though it con- tinued to operate under it until 1867, when the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States. 1 Tikhmenief, vol. 7 p. 267. 2See Case, p. 28, note 4. RUSSIA’S EARLY TITLE TO PARTS OF THE AMERICAN COAST. From a summary of what has been said in the Case! on the subject of early discovery and ownership of the territory surrounding Bering Sea, it appears that prior to 1821 the Russians were without question both the first discoverers and settlers of all territory on its western and southern boundary. As to its eastern boundary, they were the first to visit a portion of it, and the subsequent discoveries of Cook were fol- lowed up by Russian expeditions. No nation save Russia ever claimed this territory asits own. This she did as early as the year 1799, when she conferred upon the Russian American Company exclusive privileges throughout its whole length; and it is not known that any protest was ever raised to this grant, which, furthermore, included the coast, already largely settled by Russians, down to latitude 55° N. If further proof is required as to Russia’s ownership not only of this shore but also of the coast of the continent, at least as far west as Prince William Sound or Yakutat Bay, it is furnished by what follows. In a number of the London Quarterly Review of 18227 it is said in ref. erence to the famous ukase of 1821: ‘Let us examine, however, what claim Russia can reasonably set up to the territory in question. To the two shores of Bering Sea we admit she would have an undoubted claim, on the scope of priority of discovery, that on the side of Asia having been visited by Deshnew in 1648, and that of America visited by Bering in 1741, as far down as the latitude 51° and the peaked mountain, since generally known by the name of Cape Fairweather; to the southward of this point, however, Russia has not the slightest claim.” In the North American Review for October, 1822, we find the follow- ing: “We have no doubt but Russian fur-hunters formed establish- ments, at an early period, on the Aleutian Islands and neighboring coast of the continent; bué we are equally certain that it can be clearly demonstrated that no settlement was made eastward of Bering Bay till the one at Norfolk Sound (Sitka), in 1799. The statements of Cook, Vancouver, Mears (Mirs), Portlock, and La Perouse prove, what we readily admit, that previous to 1786 the Russians had settlements on the island of Kadiak and in Cook’s River; but we shall take leave to use the same authorities to establish the fact that none of these settle- ments extended so far east as Bering Bay.! Claret Fleurieu, in his introduction to the Voyage of Marchand, pub- 1 Pp. 20-25. 2Vol. xXVI, p. 544. 3 See also, to the same effect, article in Quartely Review for 1814, p. 285. 4See also North American Review, March, 1816, p. 302: ‘‘ At the settlement of Norfolk Sound, in latitude 57° N., there are about 600 Russians.” 12 _ RUSSIA’S TITLE TO PARTS OF THE AMERICAN COAST. 13 lished in 1801, says: “The principal object of all these voyages was the examination of that long archipelago, known under the collective name of the Aleutian or Fox Islands, which the Russian charts divide into several archipelagoes under different names; of all the part of the coast which extends east and west under the parallel of 60° and compre- hends a great number of islands situated to the south of the mainland, some of “which were visited, and others only perceived by Beering: lastly, of the Peninsula of Alaska, and of the other islands situated to the north of this peninsula as far as the seventieth degree. It is on these Aleutian Islands, and on upwards of three hundred | leagues of the coast, which extend be yond the Polar Circle, that the indef fatigable Russians have formed those numerous settlements, those factories that support the fur trade, from which the Empire of Russia derives such great ad- vantages in its commercial concerns and exchanges with the Empire of China.”! Sir George Simpson, the governor in chief of the Hudson’s Bay Com- pany’s territories in North America, says in his “ Narrative of a journey round the world during the years 1841 and 1842”:? “In justice, how- ever, to Russia, I have no hesitation in saying that under the recog: nized principles of colonization she is fully entitled to all that she holds in America.” The writer goes on to describe the discoveries as far as Kadiak, and states: “. . . noother nation having previously penetrated, or even pretended to have penetrated, farther north than the parallel of 53°.” And he continues: ‘But the Russian discoveries were distin- guished by this favorable peculiarity, that they were ina great measure achieved independently of the more southerly discoveries of Spain, being the result of rumors of a neighboring continent which in the beginning g of the century the Russian conquerors had found to be rife in Kam- chatka. Moreover, in the case of the Russians, discovery and pos- session had advanced hand in hand. The settlement of Kadiak was made four years before Mears erected his solitary shed in Nootka Sound, and Sitka was established fully ten or twelve years earlier than Astoria. According to this plainsummary of undeniable facts Russia had a better claim, ‘at least down to the parallel of 56°, than any other power could possibly acquire.” In a confidential memorandum submitted by Mr. Middleton, United States Minister, to the Russian authorities during the heat of ‘the sub- sequent controversy between the United States and Russia, it is said: “* About this time, but a little later, in 1697, the Russians penetrated, by Siberia, as far as Kamchatka, and from ‘thence embarking at the ports of Okhotsk and Avatcha, between the years 1710 and 1741, they pushed their discoveries in the northern latitudes of the Great Ocean. From these discoveries Russia derives her rights to that long chain of islands intervening between the western and the eastern continents, and even to a very “considerable portion of the continent of Americz rights which have never been contested.” * * * * * * * “It is, then, demonstrated that Russia, in the year 1790, was far from forming any territorial claim for herself upon the continent of North America on this side of the sixty-first degree of north latitude.” ° *Marchand’s Voyage, translated by C. P. Claret F leurieu, London, 1801, vol. I, introduction, p. XXXv. 2 [bid., vol. 1, p. 270. 3American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. v, p. 450, IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS RELATING TO THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY, CHARTER OF 1799.! First charter of the Russian American Company. On the original is written in His Imperial Majesty’s own hand: “Be it thus.”—Peterhoff, July 8, 1799. “By the grace of a Aosta God, we, Paul the First, Emperor and Autocrat of “all the Ttussias, ete. To the Russian American Company under our highest protec tion. The benefits and advantages resulting to our empire from the hunting and trading carried on by our loyal subjects in the northeastern seas and along the coasts of America have attracted our imperial attention and consideration; therefore, having taken under our immediate protection a Company organized for the above-named purpose of carrying on hunting and trading, we allow it to assume the appellation of ‘Russian American Company, operating under our High- est Protection; and for the purpose of aiding the Company in its enter- prises, we allow the commanders of our land and sea forces to employ said forces in the Company’s aid if occasion requires it, while for fur- ther relief and assistance of said Company, and having examined their rules and regulations, we hereby declare it to be our highest Imperial will to grant to this Company for a period of 20 years the following rights and privileges: I. By the right of discovery in past times by Russian navigators of the northeastern? part of America, beginning from the fifty-fifth degree of north latitude and of the chain of islands extending from Kamchatka to the north to America, and southward to Japan, and by right of pos- session of the same by Russia, we most graciously permit the Company to have the use of all hunting-grounds and establishments now exist- ing on the northeastern? coast of America, from the above-mentioned fifty -filth degree to Bering Strait, and also on the Aleutian, Kurile, and > other islands situated in the Northeastern Ocean. II. To make new discoveries not only north of the fifty-fitth degree of north latitude, but farther to the south, and to occupy the new lands discovered, as Russian possessions, according to prescribed rules, if they have not been previously occupied by, or been dependent on, any other nation. ILI. To use and profit by everything which has been or shall be dis- covered in those localities, on the surface and in the interior of the earth, without competition from others. IV. We most graciously permit this Company to establish settle- ments in future times, wherever they are wanted, acc ording to its best ' For Russian text, see Tikhmenief, vol. I, app., p. 19, and Goloy: nin, in Materialui, I, pp. 77-80. 2 Sic. 14 CHARTER OF 1799. 15 knowledge and belief, and fortify them to insure the safety of the inhabitants, and to send ships to those shores with goods and hunters, without any obstacles on the part of the Government. V. To extend their navigation to all adjoining nations and hold busi- ness intercourse with all surrounding powers, upon obtaining their free consent for the purpose, and under our highest protection to enable them to prosecute their enterprises with greater force and advantage. VI. To employ for navigation, hunting, and all other business, free and unsuspected people, havi ing 0 illegal views or intentions. In con- sideration of the distance of the localities where they will be sent, the provincial authorities will grant to all persons sent out as settlers, hun- ters, and in other capacities, passports forsevenyears. Serfs and house- servants will only be employed by the Company with the consent of their landholders, and Government taxes will be paid for all serfs thus employed. VII. Though it is forbidden by our highest order to cut Government timber anywhere without the permission of the admiralty college, this Company is hereby permitted, on account of the distance of the admiralty from Okhotsk, when it needs timber for repairs, and occa- sionally for the construction of new ships, to use freely such timber as is required. VILL. For shooting animals, for marine signals, and in all unexpected emergencies on the mainland of America, and on the islands, the Com- pany is permitted to buy for cash, at cost price, from the Government artillery magazine at Irkutsk, yearly, 40 or 50 pouds of powder and from the Nertchinsk mine 200 pouds of lead. IX. If one of the partners of the Company becomes indebted to the Government or to private persons and is not ina condition to pay them from any other property except what he holds in the Company, such property can not be seized for the satisfaction of such debts, but the debtor shall not be permitted to use anything but the interest or divi- dends of such property until the term of the Company’s privileges ex- pires, when it will be at his or his creditor’s disposal. X. The exclusive right is most graciously granted to the Company for a period of twenty years, to use ‘and enjoy, in the above-described ex- tent of country and islands, all profits and advantages derived from hunting, trade, industries, and discovery of new lands, prohibiting the enjoyment of these profits and advantages not only to those who would wish to sail to those countries on their own account, but to all former hunters and trappers who have been engaged in this trade and have their vessels and furs at those places; and other companies which may have been formed will not be allowed to continue their business unless they unite with the present Company with their free consent; but such private companies or traders as have their vessels in those regions can either seil their property, or, with the Company’s consent, remain until they have obtained a cargo, but no longer than is required for the load- ing and return of their vessel; and after that nobody will have any privileges but this one Company, which will be protected in the enjoy- ment of all the rights mentioned. XI. Under our highest protection the Russian American Company will have full control over all above-mentioned loc: alities, and exercise judicial powers in minor cases. The Company will also be permitted to use all local facilities for fortifications in the defense of the country under their control against foreign attacks. Only partners of the Com- pany shall be employed in the administr ation of the new possessions in charge of the Company. 16 IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS. UKASE OF 1821.! Edict of his Imperial Majesty Autocrat of all the Russias. The Directing Senate maketh known unto all men. Whereas in an edict of His Imperial Majesty, issued to the Directing Senate on the 4th day of September, and signed by His Imperial Majesty’s own hand, it is thus expressed: ‘¢ Observing from reports submitted to us that the trade of our sub- jects on the Aleutian Islands and on the northwest coast of America appertaining unto Russia, is subjected, because of secret and illicit traffic, to oppression and impediments; and finding that the principal cause of these difficulties is the want of rules establishing the boun- daries for navigation along these coasts, and the order of naval com- munication as well in these places as on the whole of the eastern coast of Siberia and the Kurile Islands, WE have deemed it necessary to de- termine these communications by specitic regulations, which are hereto attached.” “In forwarding these regulations to the Directing Senate, we com- mand that the same be published for universal information, and that the proper measures be taken to carry them into execution.” (Countersigned: Count D. Gurief, Minister of Finances.) It is therefore decreed by the Directing Senate that His Imperial Majesty’s edict be published for the information of all men, and that the same be obeyed by all whom it may concern. The original is signed by the Directing Senate. Printed at St. Petersburg, in the Senate, 7th September, 1821. [L. 8.] On the original is written in the handwriting of His Imperial Maj- esty, thus: Be it accordingly— ALEXANDER. KAMENNOY OSrROFF, 4th September, 1821. RULES ESTABLISHED FOR THE LIMITS OF NAVIGATION AND ORDER OF COMMUNICATION ALONG THE COAST OF EASTERN SIBERIA, THE NORTHWEST COAST OF AMERICA, AND THE ALEUTIAN, KURILE, AND OTHER ISLANDS. Src. 1. The pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishery, and of all other industry on all islands, ports, and gulfs including the whole of the northwest coast of America, beginning from Behring’s Straits to the 51° of northern latitude, also from the Aleutian Islands to the east- ern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring’s Straits to the South Cape of the Island of Urup, viz, to the 45° 50/ northern latitude, is exclusively granted to Russian subjects. Src. 2. It is therefore prohibited to all foreign vessels not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging to Kussia as stated above, but also to approaeh them within less than a hundred Italian miles. 1 Translation as sent out by the Russian Government in 1821. UKASE OF 1821. 17 The transgressor’s vessel is subject to confiscation along with the whole cargo. Sec. 3 An exception to thisrule is to be made in favor of vessels ear- ried thither by heavy gales or real want of provisions, and unable to make any other shore but such as belongs to Russia. In these cases they are obliged to produce convincing proofs of actual reason for such an exception. Ships of friendly governments merely on discoveries are likewise exempt from the foregoing rule (See. 2). In this case, however, they must previously be provided with pass- ports from the Russian Minister of the Navy. Sec. 4, Foreign merchant ships which, for reasons stated in the fore- going rule, touch at any of the above-mentioned coasts are obliged to endeavor to choose a place where Russians are settled, and to act as hereunder stated. SEC. 5. On the arrival of a foreign merchant ship, wind and weather permitting, a pilot will meet her to appoint an anchoring place appro- priate for the purpose. The captain who, notwithstanding this, anchors elsewhere without being able to assign a proper reason to the com- mander of the place shall pay a fine of one hundred dollars. Sec. 6. All rowing boats of foreign merchant vessels are obliged to land at one place appointed for them, where in the day time a white flag is hung out, and at night a lantern, and where a clerk is to at- tend continually to prevent im- und exporting any articles or goods. Whoever lands at any other place, even without an intent of smuggling, Shall pay a fine of fifty dollars; and if a person be discovered bringing any articles ashore a fine of five hundred dollars is to be exacted and the goods to be confiscated. Sec. 7. The commanders of said vessels being in want of provisions, stores, etc., for the continuation of their voyage are bound to apply to the commander of the place, who will appoint where these may be ob- tained, after which they may without difficulty send their boats there to procure all they want. Whosoever deviates from this rule shall pay a fine of one hundred dollars. Sec. 8. [fit be unavoidable for the purpose of repairing or careening a foreign merchant ship that she discharge the whole cargo, the mas- ter is obliged to ask the permission of the commander of the place. In this case the captain shall deliver to the commander an exact list of the nature and quality of the goods discharged. Everyone who omits to report any part of the cargo will be suspected of smuggling and shall pay a fine of one thousand dollars. Suc. 9. All expenses incurred by these vessels during their stay in the Russian territories must be paid in cash or bills of exchange. In case, however, the captains of these ships have no money on board and nobody gives security for their bonds, the commander ean at their re- quest allow the sale of such articles, stores, or goods required merely for defraying the above-stated expenses. These sales, however, can be made only to the company and through the means of the commander, but must not exceed the expenses of the ships under penalty of the cargo being seized and a fine paid of one thousand dollars. SEC. 10. As soon as said foreign merchant vessels are ready for their cargoes, stores, provisions, etc., they must immediately proceed to take them in, and after an examination if they have loaded all the above-stated articles, and a written certificate of their not having left anything behind, they are to set sail. Such vessels as have not been unloaded are likewise subjected to sail, without the least delay, as soon as they are able to proceed to sea. 2) 18 IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS. Src. 11. It is prohibited to all commanders of the said foreign ves- sels, commissioners, and others, whosoever they may be, to receive any articles, stores, or goods in those places where they will have landed, except in the case as pr. sec. 7, under penalty of seizure of their ship and cargo. Sec. 12. It is prohibited to these foreign ships to receive on board, without especial permission of the commanders, any of the people in the service of the company, or of the foreigners living in the company’s settlements. Ships proved to have the intention of carrying off any person belong- ing to the colony shall be seized. SEC.13. Every purchase, sale, or barter is prohibited betwixt a foreign merchant ship and people in the service of the company. This prohi- bition extends equally to those who are on shore and to those employed in the company’s ships. Any ship acting against this rule shall pay five times the value of the articles, stores, or goods constituting this prohibited traffic. Src. 14. It is likewise interdicted to foreign ships to carry on any traffic or barter with the natives of the islands, and of the northwest coast of America, in the whole extent hereabove mentioned. A ship convicted of this trade shall be confiscated. Sec. 15. All articles, stores, and goods found on shore in ports or harbours, belonging to Russian subjects (carrying on prohibited traffic) or to foreign vessels are to be seized. Src. 16. The foreign merchant ships lying in harbor or in the roads dare under no pretence send out their boats to vessels at sea, or to those already come in, until they have been spoken to and visited ac- cording to the existing customs. Whenever a foreign vessel hoists a yellow flag, to announce an infectious disease being on board, or the symptoms of the same, or any other danger of which slie wishes to be freed; every communication is interdicted until said flag is taken down. From this rule, however, are excepted persons appointed for the pur- pose and whose boats be under the colours of the Russian American Company. Any vessel acting contrary to this regulation shall pay a fine of five hundred dollars. Sec. 17. No ballast may be thrown overboard, but in such places as are appointed by the commanders. The transgressor is liable to a fine of five hundred dollars. SEc. 18. To all foreign merchant ships during their stay in anchoring places, harbors, or roads, it is prohibited to have their guns loaded either with balls or cartridges, under the risk of paying a fine of fifty dollars for each gun. Src. 19. No foreign merchant ship in port or in the roads, or riding at anchor, may fire guns or muskets without previously informing the commander of the place or settlement, unless it be for pilots, signaliz- ing the same by the firing of one, two, or three guns, and hoisting her colours as is customary in similar wants. In acting contrary thereto, she is subjected to a fine of one hundred dollars for each shot. SEC. 20. On the arrival of a foreign ship in the harbour or in the roads, a boat will inmediately be sent to meet her, and to deliver to the cap- tain a printed copy of these regulations, for which he must give receipt ina book destined for the purpose. He is further obliged to state in the book as pr. annexed form, all information required of foreign ves- sels, All ships refusing to comply with these regulations dare not ap- proach the harbour, roads, or any anchoring place. UKASE OF 1821. 19 Name and v v , Place mactnen What Name Name Number | Number 2 pes Destination of the nation of the of the of the of Cargo. .| “ he oe of the weil. owner. captain crew guns eet seteucnrs inh y essel Src. 21. The captain of a foreign merchant ship, coming to an anchor in a port or in the roads, is obliged on his arrival to give a statement of the health of the ship’s crew, and should after this a contagious ill- ness be discovered on board of his vessel he must immediately inform the commander of the place thereof. The vessel, according to circum- stances, will be either sent off or put under quarantine in a place ap- propriated for the purpose, where the crew may be cured without put- ting the inhabitants in danger of infection. Should the captain of such a ship conceal the circumstances, the same will be confiscated with her whole cargo. SEC. 22. The master of a vessel, at the request of the commander of a place, is obliged to produce a list of the whole crew and all the pas- sengers, and should he omit any he shall pay a fine of one hundred dollars for every one left out. Src. 23. The captains are bound to keep their crew in strict order and proper behavior on the coasts and in the ports, and likewise pre- vent their trading or bartering with the company’s people. They are answerable for the conduct of their sailors and other inferiors. Illicit trade carried on by sailors subject the vessel to the same penalty as if done by the captain himself, because it were easy for the captains to carry on smuggling without punishment and justify themselves by throwing the fault on the sailors. Therefore every article found upon sailors, which they could not hide in their pockets or under their clothes to screen from their superiors, sold or bought on shore, will be con- sidered as contraband from the ship, and is subject to the prescribed fine. Src. 24. Foreign men-of-war shall likewise comply with the above- stated regulations for the merchant ships, to maintain the rights and benefits of the company. In case of opposition, complaints will be made to their governments. Sec. 25. In case a ship of the Russian Imperial Navy, or one belong- ing to the Russian American Company, meet a foreign vessel on the above-stated coasts, in harbours, or roads, within the before-mentioned limits, and the commander find or ounds by the present regulation that the ship be liable to seizure, he is to act as follows: Sec. 26. The commander of a Russian vessel suspecting a foreign to be liable to confiscation, must inquire, and search the same, and, finding her guilty, take possession of her. Should the foreign vessel resist he is to employ persuasion, then threats, and at last force, endeavoring, however, at all events, to do this with as much reserve as possible. If the foreign vessel employ force against force, then he shall consider the Same as an evident enemy and force her to surrender according to the naval laws. Sec. 27. After getting everything in order and safety on board the foreign vessel, the commander of the Russian ship, or the officer sent by him, shall demand the journal of the captured vessel, and on the spot shall note down in the same that on such a day, month, and year, 20 IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS. at such an hour, and in such a place he met such and such a foreign vessel, and shall give a brief account of the circumstance, pursuit, and, finally, of the seizure. After signing the same he shall desire the capt ain of the captured vessel to confirm the same in his own handwriting. Should he, however, refuse to sign the same, the Russian officer is to repeat his summons in presence of all the offic ers, and if on this it be again refused, and nobody will sign in lieu of the saptain, he is then to add this circumstance, signed by himself. After this arrangement the journal, list of the crew, passports, in- voices, accounts, and all further papers respecting the views and pur- suits of the voyage of the vessel shall be put up in one parcel, as well as all private papers, viz, the journals of the officers, letters, ete., and sealed with the seals of the Russian officer and those of the captain and first officer of the foreign vessel. This packet shall remain unsealed with the commander of the Russian vessel until their arrival in the port of St. Peter and Paul, where it shall be deposited in the court, as men- tioned in see. 33. Besides this, everything else must be sealed by the Russian officer and the foreign captain that is not requisite for the con- tinuation of the voyage to the port of St. Peter and Paul, excepting the effects for the immediate and sole use of the ship’s crew, which shall not be withheld from them. Src. 28. Having thus fixed all means of precaution, the officer sent to arrest the foreign vessel shall instantly make his report to his chief and await his orders. Sec. 29. Thus, should by any cause stated in the second, eleventh, twelfth, and twenty-first sections of these regulations a foreign vessel be subjected to confiscation In any port near the settlements of the Russian American Company, the commander of that settlement is obliged either to ask the assistance of the Russian inan-of-war, if there be any, and the commander of which, on receipt of a written request, is obliged to arrest the vessel and use all the precautions prescribed in the foregoing article; or,if there be no Russian man-of-war in the har- bor or its neighborhood, and the commander of the settlement find that he and his people can arrest the vessel by themselves, he is then to act according to the twenty-sixth, twenty-seventh, and twenty-eighth sec- tions, and putting ashore the captain and every means of getting the vessel away, he must endeavor as soon as possible to give information of this event either to the governor of the colonies of the Russian American Company or the commander of the imperial man. of-war, if it be known where she lie. SEc. 30. When, in consequence of such a report, the governor of the colonies shall send a company’s vessel, or a Government vessel arriving, then the commander of the place shi all deliver up the vessel seized, and all belonging to her, and shall report respecting his reasons for confis- cating the vessel. Src. 31. The commander of the vessel taking charge of the seizure prize inventory shall examine immediately into all circumstances men- tioned and compare it with the accounts of the commander of the settle- ment, who will give every elucidation required. SEC. 32. All vessels detained by Russian men-of-war are ordered by these regulations to be brought to the port of St. Peter and Paul, where the sentence is to be passed on them by a court established for adjudg- ing such cases. SEc. 33. This court, under the presidency of the commander of Kamtchatka, shall consist of three senior officers under him and of the comunissioner of the Lussian American Company. UKASE OF 1821. 2k Src. 54. As soon as a Russian vessel, bringing into the port of St. Peter and Paul a foreign vessel arrested by her, has come to anchor in the place assigued her, the commander of her is immediately to repair to the commander of Kamtchatka, stating briefly what vessel he has brought in, the number of the crew and of the sick, specifying their diseases, and reporting likewise whether the vessel has sufficient victuals, and what goods, guns and other arms, powder, etc., are on board. Sec. 35. The commander of Kamtchatka on receiving this report will order two officers and a sufficient number of men on board the de- tained vessel. Sec. 36. These two officers, together with the officers who brought in the detained ship, when on board are to summon the master and two of his mates, or men in command next to him, inspect all the seals put on the vessel, and then taking them off begin immediately to make an accurate list of all the effects belonging to the vessel. SEC. 37. This list is to be signed by all the officers on both sides who were present in drawing it up. The commander of Kamtchatka is to use all possible endeavors to secure from embezzlement or damage all effects belonging to the detained vessel. SEC. 38. The crew of the vessel is then to be sent ashore, to such places as shall be appointed by the commander of Kamtchatka, and remain there until the close of the investigation. SEc. 39. The commander of the Russian vessel is obliged, in the course of two days after his arrival at the port of St. Peter and Paul, to make a minute representation to the commander of Kamtchatka of all that shall have happened at the detention of the foreign vessel brought in by him, and to deliver said vessel, together with the sealed packet containing her papers expressed in sec. 27. SEC, 40. If the Russian vessel that brought in the port of St. Peter and Paul a foreign vessel cannot, for reasons, remain there until the close of the investigation, but be obliged to proceed to sea in a very short time, the commander, in order not to detain her, shall use all possible dispatch by bringing forward the investigation of such points as may require the presence of the Russian vessel. SEC. 41. Having settled everything on board the arrested vessel, and landed the crew, the court immediately shall open the session and en- deavor to ascertain as soon as possible the solution of the inquiry, ‘whether the vessel be lawfully arrested or not.” Sec. 42. In order to ascertain this, the following proofs shall be sub- stantiated : (1) That the vessel was met with within the boundaries prescribed in the second section of these regulations, and that her having been within said limits was not occasioned by reasons stated in section 3. (2) That the vessel is a lawful prize by virtue of the sections 2, 11, 12, 14, and 21 of these regulations, and the — § of the instructions to the commander of the Russian man-of-war. Sic. 43. In order to decide either case, the court is to inspect all documents presented, and tracing on one partall proofs of guilt, and on the other all doubts, which might clear the foreign vessel, summon the commanding officer of the Russian vessel to give all additional informa- tion deemed needful, and completing thus all circumstances condemn. ing the foreign vessel, the court shall draw up a clear statement of the reasons of her condemnation. Src. 44, Should the court in making out said statement find that the foreign vessel has been arrested without sufficient cause, said court on 22 IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS. passing the sentence is to determine the damages suffered by such de- tention, and to furnish both parties with a certified copy of this resolu- tion. Suc. 45. In the course of 2 days both parties shall declare whether they are satisfied with the decision of the court or not, and in the lat- ter case (Should it happen) assign it in writing. Src. 46. Should both p: ties be satisfied with the decision of the court, then the commander of Kamtchatka is to release immediately the detained vessel, returning everything to the master according to the inventory, along with the adjudged damages, exacting them from whomsoever is to pay the same. Sec. 47. If on the contrary the court receives on the third day a repeal to its decision, it is bound to take that repeal into immediate consideration, and finding it just, to change its decision; if not, to con- firm the same and inake it known to the parties < second time. After this no representation shall be admitted, and both parties shall be sum- moned before the court, which will allow them to make their protest in writing, and will then state all the reasons why the sentence should be carried into execution. Sec. 48. If the court find by the indictment that the vessel has been lawfully detained, then the master of the foreign vessel, or the two eldest in command under him, shall be summoned, and the reasons of their de- tention made known to them, giving them a certified copy of the con- demnation. Sec. 49. The court is to receive within three days, and no later, the representation of the master, and it he do not present the same within the time limited, the court summoning him with two of his crew, noti- fies that his silence is received as a mark of compliance, and that the condemnation is just, SEc. 50. In this case the court comes to its final decision, which on the following day is communicated to the whole crew of the foreign vessel, who shall sign all and every one that such sentence has been made known to them, after which the commander of Kamtchatka is to earry the sentence of the court into execution, as will be explained hereafter. Src. 51. Should, however, the master deliver within the time limited his protest, then the court, examining it with all possible impartiality, shall call for all further explanations, and having inserted the whole into the journal of the court, shall pass a final sentence and pronounce it as stated in section 47. Sec. 52. If by sentence of the court the arrested vessel be released and adjudged to receive damages for her detention, and if the vessel has been arrested by any of the Company’s officers, and the damages are not above five thousand rubles, the commander of Kamtchatka shall demand immediate payment of said sum from the oftice of the Russian Ameri- can Company, but if the damages exceed the sum, he is to notify it to the Company’s office, and give to the foreign master a certificate; but the money can not be paid by the Company otherwise than after the inspection and resolution of its court of directors. If, on theother hand, ue. foreign vessel has been detained unlawfully by a Russian man-of- r, the commander of Kamtchatkais to pay the adjudged damages, (not ering the sum of five thousand rubles) out of any Government § sum, and to report, in order to incash it from the guilty; but if the damages should exceed the sum of five thousand rubles, the commander of Kamtchatka is to furnish a certificate for the receipt of that money, after the regulation and confirmation of the Russian Government, UKASE OF 1821. Ze Sec. 55. The reimbursement of such damages as may have been in- curred by unlawful detention shall be exacted from the commander and all officers of the man-of-war who, having been called by the commander to a council, shall have given their opinion that such a ship ought to be detained. Src. 54. As soon as a oe ship is sentenced to be confiscated, the commander of Kamtchatka is to make the arrangements for transport- ing the crew to Ochotsk, atid from thence to any of the ports of the Baltic, in order to enable every one of them to reach his own country. With the confiscated ship and eargo he is to act as with a prize taken in time of war. Sec. 55. After this the commander of Kamtchatka shall order a committee to value the vessel and her cargo. This committee is to be composed of one member appointed by the commander of Kamtchatka, one by the commander of the man-of-war, and a third by the Russian American Company. Src. 56. These commissioners are to make up a specified list and valuation according to the following rules: (1) All provisions, rigging, iron, pow der, andarms shall be put down at such prices as they cost Government there. 2) All merchandise which might be used in Kamtchatka and the Company’s Colonies, and which are carried there at times from Russia, shall be valued at their prices then existing. (3) All goods which are not imported into these places from Russia, but are wanted there, shall be valued like goods brought from Russia, being the nearest to them, and in proportion to their wants. (4) All goods not in use at Kamtchatka or the Colonies shall be sent to Irkutsk, and sold at public auction by the proper authorities. Src. 57. The said commissioners shall present their valuation to the commander of Kamtchatka for his approbation; who, in case of not finding the same exact, shall return it with his remarks, and shall ap- point other officers to inspect such articles as may appear unfairly valued. SEC. 58. If the commissioners hereafter continue in their opinion and the commander of Kamtchatka find it impossible to agree thereto, he Shall provisionally consent, and leave the final decision to Government. Sec. 59. According to this valuation, the commander of Kamtchatka shall mark for the use of Government all those articles which he thinks are wanted; the remainder is left at the disposal of the officers of the ship, or of the Russian American Company. The seized vessel shall be valued by the court, and the valuation sent immediately to the Minister of the Navy, with a report, whether such a vessel is wanted for Govern- ment service or not. SEC. 60. The whole sum of valuation of the confiscated vessel and cargo is to be divided in the following manner: The expences necessary to forward the ship’s crew to one of the ports in the Baltic are to be deducted, and the remaining sum divided, if the vessel has been taken by the Russian American Compaiy’s officers s, and carried to the port of St. Peter and Paul, by a ship of said company, without the inter- ference of a man-of-war, into five parts, of which one goes to Govern- ment and the remaining four-fifths to the American Company. If the vessel be taken in any of the Company’s settlements by the Company’s officers, but brought to the port of St. Peter and Paul by a man-of-war, after deducting one fifth for Government, two-fifths are to belong to the crew of the man-of-war and the remaining two-fifths to the Russian American Company; and, finally, if such foreign vessel be detained by men-oi-war only, without the assistance of the Company’s officers, then, 24 IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS. after deducting one-fifth for Government, the remainder is left to the officers of the men-of-war. But if the vessel be taken by the conjoint forces of a man-of-war and a Company’s vessel, then the prize shall be divided between them in proportion to their strength, regulating the same according to the num- ber of guns. Sec. 61. The sum coming to the officers of the man-of-war shall be divided according to the rules for dividing prizes in time of war. In all cases officers who had a share in seizing foreign vessels, convicted of the intention of infringing the privileges most graciously granted to > the Russian American Company, may expect to receive tokens of His Imperial Majesty’s approbation, especially when atter deducting the expences for conveying the crew their part in the prize money should prove ‘olin trifling. SEC, 62. If a foreign vessel detained by a Russian, being under the ae ‘of a Russian offic er, Should be cast away before reaching the port of St. Peter and Paul, the following principle shall be observed : If the foreign vessel alone be lost and the Russian accompanying her arrive at the port of St. Peter and Paul, then the court acts according to the foregoing rules to determine whether the vessel was lawfully seized. In “this case Government takes upon itself the expences of con- veying to a port of the Baltic such of the ship’s crew as were saved. But if such vessel should not be proved to have been detained lawfully, then independent of those expences the ship shall be valued and such valuation forwarded to Government for the payment of what may be deemed just; at the same time investigations shall be made on the loss of the vessel; and the officer that had the command (if saved) is to be tried according to the maritime rules and regulations. SEc. 63. The Commander of Kamtchatka is bound to make a special report to the Governor-General of Siberia respecting every cireum- stance happening to foreign vessels, annexing copies of all documents, journals, and sentences of the court and of all papers relating there- unto. The original is signed: Count D. GURIEF, Minister of Finances. CHARTER OF 18211! Second charter of the Russian American Company. Signed in the original by His Imperial Majesty’s own hand thus: 3e it accordingly— ALEXANDER. PORKHOF, September 13, 1821. PRIVILEGES GRANTED TO THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY FOR A PERIOD OF TWENTY YEARS FROM THIS DATE. The following rights are most graciously conferred upon the Company : 16 The Company established for carrying on industries and trade on the mainland of Northwest America, on the Aleutian, and on the Kurile Is- 1For Russian text see Tikhmenief, vol. I, app., p. 41. , 2 | CHARTER OF 1821. 25 lands, remains as heretofore under the highest protection of His Impe- rial Majesty. Ta: It enjoys the privilege of hunting and fishing, to the exelusien of all other Russian or foreign subjects throughout the territories long since in the possession of Russia on the coasts of Northwest America, begin- ning at the northern point of the island of Vancouver, in latitude 51 north, and extending to Bering Strait and beyond, as well as on all islands adjoining this coast and all those situated between this coast and the eastern shore of Siberia, as well as on the Kurile Islands, where the Company has engaged in hunting down to the south cape of the Island Urupa, in latitude 45° 50’, PE To enjoy and use all that has been found or discovered within the limits of the localities described, on the surface as well as in the bowels of the earth, and all that they may hereafter discover, regardless of any claims advanced by others. NV: To make new discoveries beyond the limits defined above; and such newly discovered localities, if they have not been previously occupied or taken possession of by other Huropean nations or subjects of the American United States, may be occupied by the Company as Russian possessions; but no permanent settlements must be established there without highest permission. Ve, The Company is permitted to establish in the future, as necessity may require or its interests may demand, within the limits mentioned in see- tion 11, new settlements and fortifications to protect such settlements, or to extend and improve original settlements, dispatching to those regions Ships with goods and reénforcements of men without interference. Vi. In order that the Company alone may enjoy the exclusive rights be- stowed upon it, and to prevent in the future any molestation or disturb- ance on the part of Russian subjects or foreigners, rules and regulations have been established indicating how to proceed with those who either intentionally or by accident violated the prohibition against visiting the regions contained within the limits described in section 1 of these privileges. Therefore these rules must be strictly observed both by the Company and by the officials concerned. pg ile To carry on intercourse by sea with all adjoining nations and to trade with them with the consent of their respective governments, excepting with the Chinese Empire, the shores of which must not be visited by the Company’s ships. Care must also be taken that the Company’s ships do not engage in any traffic with other nations or in any other intercourse prohibited by their respective governments. t 26 IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS. VIII. The board of administration of the Russian American Company is to be recognized in all courts of law as being intrusted with the management of the Company’s affairs, and if suits are brought in courts of justice in connection with its business it must not be done in the name of any individual partner of the company, but in that of the board of ad. ministration. 1b.€ Having intrusted to the management of the Company so vast an ex- tent of country, with considerable numbers of inhabitants, in order to enable it to carry out more effectively the object of the Government the following special privileges are granted to its employés in all its interior and coast stations and agencies, whether managers, bookkeep- ers, cashiers and their assistants, supercargoes, ship’s cler ks, or others: (1) To the chief manager, on his assumption of the duties of the post, are extended the privileg es eranted by the ukase of March 21, 1810. defining the status of otficn ls in the government of Siberi la, provided he hold rank in the military or civil service of the Empire. (2) All officials who are entitled to enter the service of the Company under the provisions of the ukase of April 9, 1802, are considered as in active service in regard to reward and promotions, with the exception of such grades as are conferred only by reason of seniority or continued service with a special command. ‘They are also entitled to half pay and to military servants under the provi isions of the same requirement. (3) Officers or officials who have been retired prior to entering the Company’s service retain their original rank and are to be considered in every respect as in active service. This right is also extended to those who, sine e the grant of highest privileges in the year 1799, have entered the Company’s service in various capacities. All individuals belonging to classes entitled to enter the Imperial service, but who have not previously held any rank, will, after two years’ service with the Company, receive the rank of collegiate registrar upon due application by the board of administration; the succeeding grades to be obtained by continued service under the provisions of general laws. On leaving the service these individuals will retain their rank only when they have served five years and have been recommended by the board of admin- istration as worthy and efficient.? Sd * * * * % * “exevalale The Russian American Company is most graciously permitted to load the ships dispatched from Kronstadt around the world, and from Okhotsk to our colonies, both with Russian products and with foreign goods upon which duty has been paid; also to unload the ships return- ing from the colonies with cargoes of furs and other products without detention, upon declarations made at the custom-house at Kronstadt by the board of administration and at Okhotsk by the agent stationed there. On shipping such cargoes from one Russian port to another no duties shall be collected unless a special internal tax on furs be estab- lished hereaft er by law. - 1 Sections X-XVI contain re soul: itions rel: ling only to internal management, and have therefore been omitted in this translation. CONFIRMATION OF CHARTER OF 1821. Pat XVIII. Although it is prohibited by highest ukase to cut Government timber without the permission of the forestry ofticials, the Company is per- mitted, in view of the remoteness of the Okhotsk district, where much timber is needed for repairs and sometimes for the construe ‘tion of new ships, to take timber from this district from the most convenient locali- ties. It must, however, immediately inform the local forestry authorities of the place where the timber was cut, and of its quantity and quality. ING, For shooting animals, for marine signals, and for cases of unforeseen necessity on the mainland of America and on the islands, the Company may purchase annually for cash, at established prices, from the Irkutsk Imperial Artillery Arsenal, from 40 to 80 pouds of powder, and from the Nerchinsk Lead Works 200 pouds of lead. XX In order to secure freedom of action and safety to the operations of the Company within its lawful sphere, all buildings oceupied as its offices or stations are exempt from the quartering of soldiers. In conclusion of these privileges granted to the Russian American Company, all civil and military authorities and courts of justice are hereby enjoined not only not to hinder or restrain, but in case of any event from which loss or injury may result to the Company, to give to it every assistance and protection upon the simple request of the board of administration or its subagents. Count D. GURIEF, Minister of Finance. CONFIRMATION Of CHARTSR OF 1821. Imperial charter granted to the Russian American Company.—Confirma- tion of its rights and privileges. By the helping grace of God, we, Nicholas the First, Emperor and Autocrat of all the Russias, ete., ete. , ete. As we regard as an object of our par ticular care the development in our Empire of every kind of industry and commerce, we have turned our Inperial attention to the Russian American Company. Since its very foundation it has been favored with the protection of our most august late father and brother, and during the twenty-eight years of its. “existence it has steadily pursued its object, has cooperated in the progress of navigation, has opened to our subjects new and rich sources of commerce and industr y, and has brought to its shareholders consid- erable profits. Wishing to show our august benevolence towards this institution of common profit and to give ‘it a firm and stable basis, we take the Rus- sian American Company under our immediate protection, and confirm- ing by the force of this, our imperial charter, the rules, rights, and priv- ilewes granted to the Company by the supreme ukase of September 13, 182 a1, we order: (1) That the Company which was founded for industry on the main- 28 . IMPERIAI RUSSIAN EDICTS. land of North America, on the Aleutian Islands, and on the Kurile Is- lands and in all parts of the Northeastern Sea shall, under our supreme patronage, be called, as before the Russian American Company., (2) The limits of navigation and industry of the Company are deter- mined by the treaties concluded with the United States of America April 5, (17) 1824, and with England February 16, (28) 1825 (3) In all the places allotted ‘to Russia by these treaties there shall be reserved to the Company the right to profit by all the fur and fish industries, to the exclusion of all other Russian subje ets. (4) The DE wt that neighboring nations may take in these industries, as well as the nature of the coast relations with the Russian American Company, shall remain on the basis of these same treaties until new rules shall be published on this subject. (5) Allthe advantages and rights conceded to Russia by these treaties are granted to the Company, on which is also imposed the strict fulfill- ment of all the mutual obligations of Russia stipulated in these treaties. (6) The internal administration of the affairs of the Company, its relations to the Government, the personnel and the duties of the supreme council of the chief administration of the directors of the Colonies, of the local agencies, and of the shareholders shail remain on the basis of the rules of September 13, 1821. (7) All the articles of these rules and of the privileges published to- gether with them, which are not limited by the aforesaid tre aties, and which are not contrary to the ukase of Oc tober 14, 1827, concerning en- trance into service, shall remain in full force and vigor in their full extent and for the whole time for which they were oranted to the Rus- sian American Company by our most august brother, the late Empreror Alexander the First. In conclusion of this our Imperial charter, we order all our military and civil authorities and all our Government officers not only not to pre- vent the Russian American Company from availing itself of these rules and privileges granted to it by us, but in case of need to forewarn it of any damage or harm which may come to it, and to render all legal as- sistance and protection to its board of administration. For the greater foree of this charter which we have granted, we have signed it with our own hand and have ordered it to be strengthened by the affixing of our seal of the Empire. Published by the e Senate, March 29 (April 10), 1829, CHARTER OF 1844.! Third Charter of the Russian American Company. On the original is written in His Imperial Majesty’s own hand: “ Be it thus.” Gatchina, October 10, 1844. RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF THE COMPANY. Src. 1. The Russian American Company, established for trading on the continent of Northwestern America and on the Aleutian and Ku- riles Islands as in every part of the Northeastern Sea, standsunder the Highest protection of His Imperial M: vjesty. 1 Related back to the year 1842. For Russian text see Tikhmenief, vol. u, first ap- pendix, p. 11. CHARTER OF 1844. 29 Sec. 2. The limits of the navigation and trade of the Company on the shore of the continent and on the islands of Northwestern Americ a, are within the following line of demarcation between Russia, England, and America: Commencing with the southernmost point of the Island of Prince of Wales, which point is situated at 54° 40’ north latitude and between 151° and 153° west longitude (reckoning from the meridian of Greenwich), the above line runs northward along the straits named Portland Channel to that point of the mainland where it touches the 56th degree of north latitude. Hence the line of demarcation follows the crest of the mountains which stretch in a direction parallel with the coast to the crossing at the 141st degree of west longitude (from the same meridian), and finally, from this point of intersection, the same meridian of the 141st degree constitutes in its extension to the Arctic Sea the boundary of the Russian Possessions on the continent of North- western America SEC. 3. In all places annexed to Russia by the above-mentioned de- limitation there is granted to the Company the right to carry on the fur and fishing industries to the exclusion of all Russian subjects. Sec. 4. The Company is permitted to hold and use all things hereto- fore found and hereafter to be found in those places, as well on the surface as in the bowels of the earth, without regard for any claim thereto on the part of others. SEC. 5. The Company is allowed in future according to mee essity and its best judgment within the limits designated in Sec, 2, wherev er it may be found necessary to establish new settlements anid fortifications for safe habitation ; and those formerly established may be extended and improved, the Company being allowed to send to those regions vessels carrying merchandise and laborers without any let or hindrance. SEc. 6. The Company is authorized to send its vessels to all neigh- boring nations and to trade with them with the consent of their respec- tive Governments. The Company is also authorized, if it so desires, to send its vessels for commercial intercourse to the Chinese ports of Can- ton, Amoy, Fouchowfou, Nynpofou, and Shanghai, on condition, how- ever, that these vessels, in view of Section 2393 of the Customs Laws (Code of Laws, Volume 6, edition 1842), will in no case carry opium to China for sale. Sec. 7. All Government institutions ‘shall recognize the board of administration of the Russian American Company as an institution established for the management of the Company’s affairs, and any de- mands of Government institutions rel: iting to matters within the juris- diction of the Company shall be addressed, not to any person or member of the Company, but to the said board. Sec. 8. With a view of affording to the Company the greatest possi- ble assistance in carrying out the aims of the Government which in- trusted to the Company so vast an extent of territory with a consider- able population, the employés of the Company, of the ranks specified in the table hereto annexed, are most graciously granted the following Dir eas: . Those of the employés who belong to the States having the right of ite ing into Goverment service while employed exclusively in the service of ‘the Company, are considered as being actually in the Goy- ernment service, and enjoy the right of being promoted to ranks and wearing the uniform of the Ministry of Finance. The order of pro- motion for them is the general civil order according to the rank and right of each of the employés. The promotion in rank is made on the recommendation of the board of administration to the Minister of 30 IMPERIAL RUSSIAN EDICTS. Finance, who in the case of medical employés of the civil branch must confer with the Minister of Interior Affairs. 2. As the Company enjoys the right to invite and receive into its serv- ice from other branches of the Government officers, noncommissioned officers, sailors, cannoneers, medical employés, and assistant surgeons for employment on board the vessels sailing from Russia to the Colo- nies, as well as in the Colonies themselves, and at Okhotsk, therefore these persons while in the temporary service of the Company are con- sidered to be in active service with regard to all recompenses, except ranks to which promotion is made according to seniority upon recom- mendations from their actual superiors. The officers preserve one-half of their salary and the right to the services of an orderly. The medi- cal employés of the civil branch are confirmed in the Company’s service by the Ministry of Interior Affairs. 3. Retired employés of the Government, when entering into the employ of the Company, preserve their rank,as a general rule, and are consid- ered to be in actual service, enjoying all the privileges above enumer- ated in paragraph 1. 4, The employés of the Company from classes not having the right to enter into Government service enjoy the privileges of the classes pertaining to their offices; but in retiring from the service of the Com- pany before ten years return to their original status. 5. Those of the employés who shall have served ten years with spe- cial benefit to the Company are granted, upon recommendation of the board on being relieved from the service of the Company, personal hon- orable citizenship, upon transfer from the original class, and in case of particular deserts the board of administration of the Company is au- thorized to solicit the granting of hereditary honorable citizenship. Src. 9. Government employés while in the service of the Company preserve the right, if they afterwards continue in the service of the Government, to have their service in the Company counted with regard to pensions and orders of distinction for unimpeachable service.’ * * * * * * * Src. 16. The vessels sent by the Company from Cronstadt around the world, from Okhotsk and other Russian ports to the Russian col- onies may be loaded with Russian products as well as with foreign goods, having once paid customs duty, and the vessels returning from such colonies with cargoes of furs and other merchandise and products may be discharged without detention upon declarations made by the board of administration at the custom-houses, and at the port of Okhotsk upon declarations from the Company’s local office to the cus- toms authorities of that place. Inasmuch as all said merchandise is being carried from one Russian port to another, it is not subject to cus- toms duties or any other duties unless the furs are subjected by special law to an internal-revenue tax. Src. 17. In consideration of the remoteness of the province of Oc- hotsk, where the necessity arises for the repair and sometimes for the building of vessels, the Company is permitted to take in said province the necessary timber from convenient places, provided, however, that the Company’s office at Okhotsk shall immediately inform the local for- estry authorities of the place selected for the cutting of timber and of the quantity and quality of the timber cut. Src. 18. For the shooting of animals, for maritime signals, for the 1 Sections 10-15 contain regulations relating only to internal management, and have thereforo been omitted in this translation, CHARTER OF 1844. on arming of vessels, ports, and redoubts, and for other uses on the con- tinent and islands of America, the Company may receive for cash from the stores of the port of Cronstadt, gunpowder, cannon, ammunition, and other artillery munitions which can not be acquired by purchase in the colonies. All these articles will be furnished to the Company at the prices paid by the Navy Department with the addition of 10 per cent for the maintenance of magazines. At times when there is no communication by sea between St. Petersburg and the Colonies, the Company may receive annually on the above-stated terms trom 40 to 80 pounds of gunpowder from the Government artillery store situated at Irkutsk, and about 260 pounds of lead from the smelting establish- ment at Nerchinsk. Suc. 19. In order to secure freedom of action and safety in the opera- tions of the Company, all the premises occupied by its offices are ex- empted from military occupation. SEc. 20. As the capital of the Company affords ample security for private claims against its board of administration, the security re- quired by law in case of litigation is waived on behalf of the board. SEc. 21. It shall be the duty of all civil and military authorities and institutions not only to abstain from interfering with the Company in the enjoyment of the privileges granted, but also to warn the Company in case of necessity against any probable loss and injury, and upon re- quests of the board of administration and its subordinate counting and commission houses to afford all assistance and protection. Sec. 22. The rights and privileges granted to the Company shall be in force for twenty years, reckoning from the Ist of January of the year 1842. Sec. 23. Upon the taking effect of this charter all previous provisions relating to the Company are repealed, and will preserve their force only as to matters arising beivre the promulgation of the constitution. CREATES. CONVENTION BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND SPAIN. SIGNED AT THE ESCURIAL, OCTOBER 28, 1790. { Translation, as laid before Parliament. ] Their Britannic and Catholic Majesties, being desirous of terminat- ing, by a speedy and solid agreement, the differences which have lately arisen between the two Crowns, have judged that the best way of at- taining this salutary object would be that of an amicable arrangement, which, setting aside all retrospective discussion of the rights and pre. tensions of the two parties, should fix their respective e situation for the future on a basis contormable to their true interests, as well as to the mutual desire with which their said Majesties are animated, of estab- lishing with each other, in everything and in all places, the most per- fect friendship, harmony and good correspondence. In this view they have named and constituted for their Plenipotentiaries; to wit, on the part of His Britannic Majesty, Alleyne Fitzherbert, Esq., one of His said Majesty’s Privy Council, in Great Britain and Lreland, and His Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to His Catholic Maj- esty; and, on the part of His Catholic Majesty, Don Joseph Monimo, Count of Floridablanea, Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Spanish Order of Charles IIL, Councillor of State to His said Majesty, and His Principal Secretary of State, and of the Dispatches: who, after having communicated to each other their respective full Pow ers, have agreed upon the following articles: I. It is agreed that the buildings and tracts of land, situated on the north-west coast of the continent of North America, or on Islands ad- jacent to that continent, of which the subjects of His Britannic Majesty were dispossessed, about the month of April, 1759, by a Spanish ofticer, shall be restored to the said British subjects. Il. And further, that a just reparation shall be made, according to the nature of the case, for all acts of violence or hostility, which may have been committed, subsequent to the month of April, 1789, by the subjects of either of the Contracting Parties against the subjects of the other; and that, in case any of the said respective subjects shall, since the same period, have been forcibly dispossed of their lands, buildings, vessels, merchandize, or other property, whatever, on the said continent, or on the seas or islands adjacent, they shall be re-established in the possession thereof, or a just compe nsation shall be made to them for the losses which they shall have sustained. III. And, in order to strengthen the bonds of friendship, and to pre- Serve in future a perfect harmony and good understanding between the two Contracting Parties, it is agreed that their respective subjects shall not be disturbed or molested, either in navigating or carrying on their « 32 GREAT BRITAIN AND SPAIN, 1790. 33 fisheries in the Pacific Ocean, or in the South Seas, or in landing on the coasts of those seas, in places not already occupied, for the purpose of carrying on their commerce with the natives of the country, or of making settlements there; the whole subject, nevertheless to the restrictions and provisions specified in the three following Articles. IV. His Britannic Majesty engages to take the most effectual meas- ures to prevent the navigation and fishery of His subjects in the Pacifie Ocean, or in the South Seas, from being made a pretext for illicit trade with the Spanish settlements; and, with this view, it is more- over expressly stipulated, that British subjects shall not navigate, or carry on their fishery in the said seas, within the space of ten sea leagues from any part of the coasts already occupied by Spain. V. It is agreed, that as well in the places which are to be restored to the British subjects, by virtue of the Ist Article, as in all other parts of the north-western coasts of North America, or of the islands adja- cent, situated to the north of the parts ot the said coast already ocecu- pied by Spain, wherever the subjects of either of the two Powers shall have made settlements since the month of April, 1789, or shall hereafter make any, the subjects of the other shall have free access, and shall carry on their trade, without any disturbance or molestation. VI. It is further agreed, with respect to the eastern and western coasts of South America, and to the islands adjacent, that no settle- ment shall be formed hereafter, by the respective subjects, in such parts ot those coasts as are situated to the south of those parts of the same coasts, and of the islands adjacent, which are already occupied by Spain: provided that the said respective subjects shall retain the lib- erty of landing on the coasts and islands so situated, for the purposes of their fishery, and of erecting thereon huts, and other temporary buildings, serving only for those purposes. VII. In all cases of complaint or infraction of the Articles of the present Convention, the officers of either Party, without permitting themselves previously to commit any violence or act of force, shall be bound to make an exact report of the affair and of its circumstances, to their respective Courts, who will terminate such differences in an ami- cable manner. VIII. The present Convention shall be ratified and confirmed in the space of six weeks, to be computed froin the day of its signature, or sooner if it can be done. In witness whereof, we, the undersigned Plenipotentiaries of Their Britannic and Catholic Majesties, have, in their names, and in virtue of our respective full Powers, signed the present Convention, and set thereto the seals of our arms. Done at the Palace of St. Laurence, the 28th of October, 1790. ALLEYNE FItTzZ-HERBERT, [L. 8.] 5 EL CONDE DE FLORIDABLANCA, |[L. 8.| 34 TREATIES. TREATY OF 1818 BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN, RESPECTING FISHERIES, BOUNDARIES, AND RESTORA- TION OF SLAVES. {Extract.] ARTICLE II. It is agreed that a line drawn from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods, along the forty-ninth parallel or north latitude, or, if the said point shall not be in the forty-ninth parallel of north lati- tude, then that a line drawn from the said point due north or south as the case may be, until the said line shall intersect the said parallel of north latitude, and from the point of such intersection due west along and with the said parallel shall be the line of demarcation between the territories of the United States, and those of His Britannic Majesty, and that the said line shall form the northern boundary of the said terri- tories of the United States, and the southern boundary of the territo- ries of His Britannic Majesty, from the Lake of the Woods to the Stony Mountains. . ARTICLE IIT. It is agreed, that any country that may be claimed by either party on the northwest coast of America, westward of the Stony Mountains, shall, together with its harbours, bays and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free and open, for the term of ten years from the date of the signature of the present convention, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects of the two Powers: it being well understood, that this agreement is not to be construed to the prejudice of any claim, which either of the two high contracting parties may have to any part of the said country, nor shall it be taken to affect the claims of any other Power or State to any part of the said country; the only object of the high contracting parties, in that respect, being to prevent disputes and differences amongst themselves. TREATY OF AMITY, SETTLEMENT, AND LIMITS OF 1819, BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND SPAIN. {Extract.] ARTICLE III. The boundary line between the two countries, west of the Mississippi, shall begin on the Gulph of Mexico, at the mouth of the river Sabine, in the sea, continuing north, along the western bank of that river, to the 32d degree of latitude; thence, by a line due north, to the degree of latitude where it strikes the Rio Roxo of Natchitoc hes, or Red River; ; then following the course to the Rio Roxo westward, to ‘the degree of longitude 100 west from London and 23 from Washington; then, Cross- ing “the said Red Riv er, and running thence, by a line due north, to the river Arkansas; thence, following the course of the southern bank of the UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA, 1824. 35 Arkansas, to its source, in latitude 42 north; and thence by that paral- lel of latitude, to the South Sea. The whole being as laid down in Melish’s map of the United States, published at Philadelphia, improved to the first of January, 1818. But if the source of the Arkansas River shall be found to fall north or south of latitude 42, then the line shall run from the said source due south or north, as the case may be, till it meets the said parallel of latitude 42, and thence, along the said parallel, to the South Sea: All the islands in the Sabine, and the said Red and Arkansas Rivers, throughout the course thus described, to belong to the United States; but the use of the waters, and the naviga- tion of the Sabine to the sea, and of the said rivers Roxo and Arkan- sas, throughout the extent of the said boundary, on their respective banks, shall be common to the respective inhabitants of both nations. The two high contracting parties agree to cede and renounce all their rights, claims, and pretensions, to the territories described by the said line, that is to say: The United States hereby cede to His Catholic Majesty, and renounce forever, all their rights, claims and pretensions, to the territories lying west and south of the above-described line; and, in like manner, His Catholic Majesty cedes to the said Gnited States all his rights, claims, and pretensions to any territories east and north of the said line, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, renounces all claim to the said territories forever. TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA RELATIVE TO NAVIGATION, FISHING, AND TRADING IN THE PACIFIC OCEAN AND TO ESTABLISHMENTS ON THE NORTHWEST COAST, CONCLUDED APRIL 5/17, 1824 In the name of the Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity. The President of the United States of America and His Majesty the Kmperor of all the Russias, wishing to cement the bonds of amity which unite them, and to secure between them the invariable mainte- nance of a perfect concord, by means of the present convention, have named as their Plenipotentiaries to this effect, to wit: The President of the United States of America, Henry Middleton, a citizen of said States, and their Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary near his Imperial Majesty; and His Majesty the Em- peror of all the Russias, his beloved and faithful Charles Robert Count of Nesselrode, actual Privy Counsellor, Member of the Council of State, Secretary of State directing the administration of Foreign Affairs, actual Chamberlain, Knight of the Order of St. Alexander Nevsky, Grand Cross of the Order of St. Wladimir of the first class, Knight of that of the White Eagle of Poland, Grand Cross of the Order of St. Stephen of Hungary, Knight of the Orders of the Holy Ghost and St. Michael, and Grand Cross of the Legion of Honor of France, Knight Grand Cross of the Orders of the Black and of the Red Eagle of Prus- sia, of the Annunciation of Sardinia, of Charles III of Spain, of St. Ferdinand and of Merit of Navles, of the Elephant of Denmark, of the Polar Star of Sweden, of the Crown of Wiirtemberg, of the Guelphs of Hanover, of the Belgic Lion, of Fidelity of Baden, and of St. Con- stantine of Parma; and Pierre de Poletica, actual Counsellor of State, Knight of the Order of St. Anne of the first class, and Grand Cross of the Order of St. Wladimir of the second; 36 TREATIES. Who, after having exchanged their fll powers, found in good and due form have agreed upon and signed the following stipulations: ARTICLE I. It is agreed that, in any part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean, or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the high contracting Powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation. or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts, upon points which may not already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following articles. ARTICLE IL, With a view of preventing the rights of navigation and of fishing exercised upon the Great Ocean by the citizens and subjects of the high contracting Powers from becoming the pretext for an illicit trade, itis agreed that the citizens of the United States shall not resort to any point where there is a Russian establishment, without the permis- sion of the governor or commander; and that reciprocally, the subjects of Russia shall not resort, without permission, to any establishment of the United States upon the Northwest coast. ARTICLE ITI. It is moreover agreed that, hereafter, there shall not be formed by the citizens of the United States, or under the authority of the said States, any establishment upon the northwest coast of America, nor in any of the islands adjacent, to the north of fifty-four degrees and forty minutes of north latitude; and that, in the same manner, there shall be none formed by Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, south of the same parallel. ARTICLE IV. It is, nevertheless, understood that during a term of ten years, count- ing from the signature of the present convention, the ships of both Powers, or which belong to their citizens or subjects respectively, may reciproe ‘ally frequent, without any hindrance whatever, the interior seas, gulfs, harbors, and creeks, upon the coast mentioned in the preceding article, for the purpose of fishing and trading with the natives of the country. ARTICLE VY. All spirituous liquors, fire-arms, other arms, powder, and munitions of war of every kind, are always excepted from this same commerce permitted by the preceding article; and the two Powers engage, recip- rocally, neither to sell, nor suffer them to be sold, to the natives by their respective citizens and subjects, nor by any person who may be under their authority. It is likewise stipulated that this restriction shall never afford a pretext, nor be advanced, in any case, to authorize either search or detention of the vessels, seizure of the merchandise, or, in fine, any measures of constraint whatev er towards the merchants or the crews who may carry on this commerce; the high contracting Powers reciprocally reserving to themselves to determine upon the pen- UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA, 1824. 37 alties to be incurred, and to inflict the punishments in case of the con- travention of this article by their respective citizens or subjects. ARTICLE VI. When this convention shall have been duly ratified by the President of the United States, with the advice and consent of the Senate, on the one part, and, on the other, by His Majesty the Emperor of all the Rus- sias, the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington in the space of ten months from the date below, or sooner if possible. In faith whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed this convention, and thereto affixed the seals of their arms. Done at St. Petersburg the 17-5 April, of the year of Grace one thousand eight hundred and twenty-four. [SEAL. | HENRY MIDDLETON, [SEAL. Le Comte CHARLES DE NESSELRODE, |SEAL. PIERRE DE POLETICA. Au Nom de la trés Sainte et Indivisible Trinité: Le Président des Etats-Unis (Amérique, et Sa Majesté ?Empereur de toutes ies Russies, voulant cimenter les liens d’amitié qui les unis- sent et assurer entre eux le maintien invariable (un parfait accord, moyennant la présente Convention, ont nommé pour Leurs Plénipoten- tiaires a cet effet, savoir: le Président des Etats-Unis d’Amérique, le Sieur Henry Middleton, Citoyen des dits Etats, et Leur Envoyé Ex- traordinaire et Ministre Plenipotentiaire prés Sa Majesté Impériale: et Sa Majesté ’Empereur de toutes les Russies, Ses amés et féaux les Sieurs Charles Robert Compte de Nesselrode, Conseiller Privé actuel, Membre du Conseil d’ Etat, Secrétaire d’Etat Dirigeant le Ministére des affaires étrangéres, Chambellan actuel, Chevalier de ordre de St. Alex- andre Nevsky, Grand Croix de Vordre de St. Wladmir de la 1° classe, Chevalier de celui de Vaigle blane de Pologne, Grand Croix de Vordre de St. Etienne de Hongrie, Chevalier des ordres du St. Esprit et de St. Michel et Grand Croix de celui de la Légion d@Honneur de France, Chevalier Grand Croix des ordres de lAigle noir et de ’ Aigle rouge de Prusse, de PAnnonciade de Sardaigne, de Charles III d’Espagne, de St. Ferdinand et du mérite de Naples, de ’Eléphant de Danemare, de P’Etoile Polaire de Suede, dela Couronne de Wurtemberg, des Guelphes de Hanovre, du Lion Belge, de la Fidélité de Bade, et de St. Constantin de Parme, et Pierre de Poletica, Conseiller d@’Etat actuel, Chevalier de Pordre de Ste. Anne de la 1” classe, et Grand Croix de Vordre de St. Wladinir de la seconde; lesquels aprés avoir échangé leurs pleins-pou- vous, trouvés en bonne et due forme, ont arrété et signé les stipula- tions suivantes. ARTICLE PREMIER. I] est convenu que dans aucune partie du Grand Océan, appelé com- munément Océan Pacifique ou Mer du Sud, les Citoyens ou Sujets re- spectifs des hautes Puissances contractantes ne seront ni troublés, ni génés, soit dans la navigation, soit dans exploitation de la péche, soit dans la faculté d@aborder aux cétes sur des points qui ne seroient pas déja occupés, afin d’y faire le commerce avec les Indigénes, sauf toute- fois les restrictions et conditions déterminées par les articles qui suivent. 38 . TREATIES. ARTICLE DEUXIEME. Dans la vue d’empécher que les droits de navigation et de péche exercés sur le grand Océan par les Citoyens et Sujets des hautes Puis- Sances contractantes ne deviennent le prétexte @un commerce illicite, il est convenu que les Citoyens des Etats Unis n’aborderont a aucun point ott il se trouve un établissement Russe, sans la permission du Gouverneur ou Commandant; et que réciproquement les Sujets Russes ne pourront aborder sans permission & aucun établissement des Etats- Unis sur la Cote nord-ouest. ARTICLE TROISIEME. Tl est convenu en outre, que dorénavant il ne pourra étre formé par les Citoyens des Etats-Unis, ou sous Vautorité des dits Etats, aucun établissement sur la Cote nord ouest d’Amérique, ni dans aucune des iles adjacentes au. Nord du cinquante quatriéme degré et quarante mi- nutes de latitude septentrionale; et que de méme il n’en pourra étre formé aucun par des Sujets Russes, ou sous Vautorité de la Russie, aw Sud de la méme paralléle. ARTICLE QUATRIEME. Tlest néanmoins entendu que pendant un terme de dix années a comp- ter de la signature de la présente Convention, les Vaisseaux des deux Puissances, ou qui appartiendraient a leurs Citoyens ou Sujets respec- tifs, pourront réciproquement fréquenter sans entrave quelconque, les mers intérieures, les golfes, havres et criques sur la Cote mentionnée dans larticle précédent, afin d’y faire la péche et le commerce avec les naturels du pays. ARTICLE CINQUIEME. Sont toutefois exceptées de ce méme commerce accordé par larticle précédent, toutes les liqueurs spiritueuses, les armes 4 feu, armes blanches, poudre et munitions de guerre de toute espece, que les deux Puissances Vvengagent réciproquement a ne pas vendre, ni laisser ven- dre aux Indigénes par leurs Citoyens et Sujets respectifs, ni par aucun individu qui se trouveroit sous leur autorité. Il est également stipulé que cette restriction ne pourra jamais servir de prétexte ni étre allé- guée dans aucun cas, pour autoriser soit la visite ou la détention des Vaisseaux, soit la saisie de la marchandise, soit enfin des mesures quel- conques de contrainte envers les armateurs ou les équipages qui feraient ce commerce; les hautes Puissances coutractantes s’etant réei- proquement réservé de statuer sur les peines a encourir, et @infliger les amendes encourues en cas de contravention a cet article par leurs Citoyens ou Sujets respectifs. ARTICLE SIXIEME, Lorsque cette Convention aura été duement ratifiée par le Président des Etats Unis de lavis et du consentement du Sénat, dune part, et de Yautre par Sa Majesté PEmpereur de toutes les Russies, les ratifica- tions en seront échangées & Washington dans le délai de dix mois de la date ci-dessous ou plutot si faire se peut. GREAT BRITAIN AND. RUSSIA, 1825. 39 En foi de quoi les Plénipotentiaires respectifs Vont signée, et y ont fait apposer les cachets de leurs armes. Fait a St. Petersbourg le ==, Avril de ’an de grace mil huit cent vingt quatre. [SEAL. | HENRY MIDDLETON. | SEAL. | Le Comte CHARLES DE NESSELRODE. [SEAL. | PIERRE DE POLETICA. TREATY BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND RUSSIA, SIGNED AT ST. PETERSBURG FEBRUARY =o 1825. In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Treland, and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, being desirous of drawing still closer the ties of good understanding and friendship which unite them, by means of an “agreement which may settle, upon the basis of reciprocal convenience, different points connected with the commerce, havigation, and fisheries of their subjects on the Pacific Ocean, as well as the limits of their respective possessions on the North- west coast of America, have named Plenipotentiaries to conclude a convention for this purpose, that is to say: His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Right Honora- ble Stratford Canning, a member of his said Majesty’s Most Honorable Privy Council, ete., and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the Sieur Charles Robert Count de Nesselrode, His Imperial Majesty’s Privy Councillor, a member of the Council ot the Empire, Secretary of State for the department of Foreign Affairs, etc., and the Sieur Pierre de Poletica, His Imperial Majesty’s Councillor of State, etc. Who, after having communicated to each other their respective. full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon and signed the following articles: J. It is agreed that the respective subjects of the high contracting Parties shall not be troubled or molested, in any part of the ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean, either in navigating the same, in fishing therein, or in landing at such parts of the coast as shall not have been already occupied, in order to trade with the natives, under the restrictions and conditions specified in the following articles. II. In order to prevent the right of navigating and fishing, exercised upon the ocean by the subjects of the high contracting Parties, from becoming the pretext for an illicit commerce, it is agreed that the sub- jects of His Britannic Majesty shall not land at any place where there may be a Russian establishment, without the permission of the Gov- ernor or Commandant; and, on the other hand, that Russian subjects shall not land, without permission, at any British establishment of the Northwest coast. III. The line of demarkation between the possessions of the high con- tracting Parties, upon the coast of the continent, and the islands of America to the Northwest, shall be drawn in the manner following: Commencing from the southernmost point of the island called Prince of Wales Island, which point lies in the parallel of fifty-four degrees forty minutes, north latitude, and between the one hundred and thirty- first and the one hundred and thirty-third degree of west longitude (Meridian of Greenwich), the said line shall ascend to the north along AO TREATIES. the channel called Portland Channel, as far as the point of the conti- nent where it strikes the fifty sixth degree of north latitude; from this last-mentioned point, the line of demarkation shall follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to to the coast, as far as the point of in- tersection of the one hundred and forty-first degree of west longitude (of the same meridian); and, finally, from the said point of intersec ‘tion, the said meridian line of the one hundred and forty-first degree, in its pro- longation as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the limit between the Russian and British Possessions on the continent of America to the Northwest. IV. With reference to the line of demarkation laid down in the pre- ceding article it is understood: First. That the island called Prince of Wales Island shall belong wholly to Russia. Second. That wherever the summit of the mountains which extend in « direction parallel to the coast, from the fifty-sixth,degree of north latitude to the point of intersection of the one hundred and forty-first degree of west longitude, shall prove to be at the distance of more than ten marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between the British Pos- sessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia, as above mentioned, shall be formed by a line parallel to the windings of the coast, and which shall never exceed the distance of ten marine leagues therefrom. V. It is moreover agreed, that no establishment shall be formed by either of the two parties within the limits assigned by the two preced- ing articles to the possessions of the other; consequently, British sub- jects shall not form any establishment either upon the coast, or upon the border of the continent comprised within the limits of the Russian Possessions, as designated in the two preceding articles; and, in like manner, no establishment shall be formed by Russian subjects beyond the said limits. VI. It is understood that the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, from whatever quarter they may arrive, whether from the ocean, or from the interior of the continent, shall forev er enjoy the right of navigating freely, and without any hindrance whatever, all the rivers and streams which, in their course towards the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarkation upon the line of coast described in article three of the present convention. VII. It is also understood, that, for the space of ten years from the signature of the present conve ntion, the vessels of the two Powers, or those belonging to their respective subjects, shall mutually be at lib- erty to frequent, without any hindrance whatever, all the inland seas, the gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast mentioned in article three for the purposes of fishing and of trading with the natives. VIII. The port of Sitka, or Novo Archangelsk, shall be open to the commerce and vessels of British subjects for the space of ten years from the date of the exchange of the ratifications of the present convention. In the event of an extension of this term of ten years being granted to any other Power, the like extension shall be granted also to Great sritain. IX. The above mentioned liberty of commerce shall not apply to the trade in spirituous liquors, in fire-arms, or other arms, gunpowder or other warlike stores; the high contracting Parties reciprocally engag- ing not to permit the above-mentioned articles to be sold or delivered, in any manner whatever, to the natives of the country. X. Every British or Russian vessel navigating the Pacific Ocean, GREAT BRITAIN AND RUSSIA, 1825. Al which may be compelled by storms or by accident, to take shelter in the ports of the respective Parties, shall be at liberty to refit therein, to provide itself with all necessary stores, and to put to sea again, with- out paying any other port and light-house dues, which shall be the same as those paid by national vessels. In case, however, the master of such vessel should be under the necessity of disposing of a part of his mer- chandise in order to defray his expenses, he shall conform himself to the regulations and tariffs of the place where he may have landed. XI. In every case of complaint on account of an infraction of the articles of the present convention, the civil and military authorities of the high contracting Parties, without previously acting or taking any forcible measure, shall make an exact and circumstantial report of the matter to their respective courts, who engage to settle the same, in a friendly manner, and according to the principles of justice. XII. The present convention shall be ratified, and the ratification shall be exchanged at London, within the space of six weeks, or sooner if possible. In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and have affixed thereto the seal of their arms. Done at St. Petersburg, the 16th-28 day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty-five. [L. 8. STRATFORD CANNING. |L. 8. THE COUNT DE NESSELRODE. [L. 8.] PIERRE DE POLETICA. Au Nom de la Trés Sainte et Indivisible Trinité. Sa Majesté le Roi du Royaume Uni de La Grande Bretagne et de Pirlande, et Sa Majesté ’Empereur de toutes les Russies, désirant res- serrer les liens de bonne intelligence et @amitié qui les unissent, au moyen Wun accord qui réglerait, @aprés le principe des convenances réciproques, divers points relatifs au Commerce, dla Navigation, et aux Pécheries de leurs Sujets sur ’Océan Pacifique, ainsi que les limites de leurs Possessions respectives sur la Cote Nord-ouest de PAmérique, ont nommé des Plénipotentiaires pour conclure une Convention a cet effet, savoir;—Sa Majesté le Roi du Royaume Uni de La Grande Bre- tagne et de PIrlande, le Trés Honorable Stratford Canning, Conseiller de Sa dite Majesté en Son Conseil Privé, &c. Et Sa Majesté ’Empe- reur de toutes les Russies, le Sieur Charles Robert Comte de Nessel- rode, Son Conseiller Privé actuel, Membre du Conseil de ?Empire, Se- crétaire @Etat dirigeant le M inistere des Affaires Ktrangeres, Wc. ; et le Sieur Pierre de Poletica, Son Conseiller @Etat actuel, &c. Lesquels Plénipotentiaires, apres sétre communiqué leurs Plein- -pouvoirs respec- tits, trouvés en bonne et due forme, ont arrété et signé les Articles suivans :— I. Il est convenu que dans aucune partie du Grand Océan, appelé communément Océan Pacifique, les Sujets respectifs des Hautes Puis- sances Contractantes ne seront ni troublés, ni génés, soit dans la naviga- tion, soit dans exploitation de la péche, soit dans la faculté @aborder aux Cotes, sur des Points qui ne seraient pas déja occupés, afin dy faire le commerce avec les Indigénes, sauf toutefois les restrictions et conditions déterminées par les Articles qui suivent. II. Dans la vue @empécher que les droits de navigation et de péche exercés sur le Grand Ovéan par les Sujets des Hautes Parties Con- tractantes, ne deviennent le prétexte d’un commerce illicite, il est con- 6 42 TREATIES. venu que les Sujets de Sa Majesté Britannique n’aborderont & aucun Point ot il se trouve un Etablissement Russe, sans la permission du Gouverneur ou Commandant, et que, réciproquement, les Sujets Russes ne pourront aborder, sans permission, & aucun Etablissement Bri- tannique, sur la Cote Nord-ouest. III. La ligne de démarcation entre les Possessions des Hautes Par- ties Contractantes sur la Cote du Continent et les Iles de ’ Amérique Nord-ouest, sera tracée ainsi qwil suit :— A partir du Point le plus méridional de Ve dite Prince of Wales, lequel Point se trouve sous la paralléle du 54™° degré 40 minutes de latitude Nord, et entre le 131™° et le 133™° degré de longitude Ouest (Méridien de Greenw ich), la dite ligne remontera au Nord le long de la passe dite Portland Channel, jusqu’au Point de la terre ferme ou elle atteint le 56° degré de latitude Nord: de ce dernier point la ligne de démareation suivra la créte des montagnes situées parallelement a la Cote, jusqu’au point intersection du 141™¢ degré de longitude Ouest (méme Meridien); et, finalement, du dit point (intersection, la méme ligne méridienne du {41m degré formera, dans son prolongement jusqw’a la mer Glace iale, la limite entre les Possessions Russes et Britanniques sur le Continent de ’ Amérique Nord-ouest. IV. Il est entendu, par rapport a la ligne de démarcation déterminée dans l’Article précédent: 1°. Que Vile dite Prince of Wales appartiendra toute entiére a la Russie: 2°, Que partout ot la créte des montagues qui s’étendent dans une direction parallele a la Cote depuis le 5Gme degré de latitude Nord au point @intersection du 141™° degré de longitude Ouest, se trouverait a la distance de plus de dix lieues marines de VOcean, la limite entre les Possessions Britanniques et la lisiére de Cote mentionnée ci-dessus comme devant appartenir a La Russie, sera formeée par une ligne paral- léle aux sinuosités de la Cote, et qui ne pourra jamais en étre éloignée que de dix lieues marines. V. lest convenu en outre, que nul Etablissement ne sera formé par Tune des deux Parties dans les limites que les deux Articles précédens assignent aux Possessions de Autre. En conséquence, les Sujets Britanniques ne formeront aucun Etablissement, soit sur la céte, soit sur la lisiere de terre ferme comprise dans les limites des Possessions Russes, telles qu’elles sont désignées dans les deux Articles précedens ; et de méme, nul Etablissement ne sera formé par des Sujets Russes au dela des dites limites. VI. Il est entendu que les Sujets de Sa Majesté Britannique, de quelque Cote quils ar rivent, soit de VOcéan, soit de Vintérieur du Con- tinent, jouiront a perpétuité du droit de naviguer librement, et sans entrave quele jonque, sur tous les fleuves et rivieres, qui, dans leurs cours vers la mer Pacifique, traverseront la ligne de démarcation sur la lisiére de la Céte indiquée dans l Article 3. de la présente Conven- tion. VII. I] est aussi entendu que, pendant ’espace de dix Ans, a dater de la signature de cette Convention, les Vaisseaux des deux Puissances, ou ceux Appar tenans a leurs Sujets vespectifs, pourront réciproquement fréquenter, sans entrave queleonque, toutes les Mers intévieures, les Golfes, Havres, et Criques sur la cote mentionnée dans lArticle 3. afin dy faire la pée he et le commerce avec les Indigeénes. VIII. Le Port de Sitka, ou Novo Archangelsk, sera ouvert au Com- merce et aux Vaisseaux des Sujets Britanniques durant Pespace de dix ans, 4 dater de ’échange des Ratifications de cette Convention. Au UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA, 1867. 43 cas quwune prolongation de ce terme de dix ans soit accordée a quelque autre Puissance, la méme prolongation sera également accordée a La Grande Bretagne. IX. La susdite liberté de commerce ne s’appliquera point au trafic des liqueurs spiritueuses, des armes-a-feu, des armes blanches, de la poudre a canon, ou d’autres munitions de guerre; les Hautes Parties Contractantes syengageant réciproquement a ne lJaisser ni vendre, ni livrer, de quelque maniére que ce puisse étre, aux Indigénes du pays, les articles ci-dessus mentionnés. X. Tout Vaisseau Britannique ou Russe naviguant sur POcéan Pa- cifique, qui sera forcé par des tempétes, ou par quelque accident, de se réfugier dans les Ports des Parties respectives, aura la liberté de s’y radouber, de s’y pourvoir de tous les objets qui lui seront nécessaires, et de se remettre en mer, sans payer d’autres Droits que ceux de Port et de Fanaux, lesquels seront pour lui les mémes que pour les Batimens Nationaux. Si, cependant, le Patron d’un tel navire se trouvait dans la nécessité de se défaire d’une partie de ses marchandises pour sub- venir a ses dépenses, il sera tenu de se conformer aux Ordonnances et aux Tarifs de ’Endroit ot il aura abordé. XI. Dans tous les cas de plaintes relatives a Vinfraction des Articles de Ja présente Convention, les Autorités Civiles et Militaires des deux Hautes Parties Contractantes, sans se permettre au préalable ni voie de fait, ni mesure de force, seront tenues de faire un rapport exact de Vaftaire et de ses circonstances a leurs Cours respectives, lesquelles vengagent a la régler a ’amiable, et apres les principes @une parfaite justice. XII. La présente Convention sera ratifiée, et les Ratifications en seront échangées a Londres, dans l’espace de six semaines, ou plutét si faire se peut. En Foi de quoi les Plénipotentiares respectifs Pont signée, et y ont apposé le Cachet de leurs Armes. Fait a St. Petersbourg, le ene pay Février, de Yan de Grace mil- Seize huit-cent-vingt-cing. | é [L. 8.] STRATFORD CANNING. [L. S8.| Le COMTE DE NESSELRODE. [L. 8.] PIERRE DE POLETICA. TREATY CONCERNING THE CESSION OF THE RUSSIAN POSSES- SICNS IN NORTH AMERICA BY HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR OF ALL THE RUSSIAS TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. [Concluded March 30, 1867. Ratified by the United States May 28, 1867. Exchanged June 20,1867. Proclaimed by the United States June 20, 1867. ] The United States of America and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, being desirous of strengthening, if possible, the good under- standing which exists between them, have, for that purpose, appointed as their plenipotentiaries: the President of the United States, William ' H.Seward, Secretary of State; and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the Privy Counsellor, Edward de Stoeckl, his Envoy Extraor- dinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the United States. _And the said plenipotentiaries having exchanged their full powers, 44 TREATIES. which were found to be in due form, have agreed upon and signed the following articles: ARTICLE I. His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias agrees to cede to the United States, by this convention, immediately upon the exchange of the ratifications thereof, all the territory and dominion now possessed by his said Majesty on the continent of America and in the adjacent islands, the same being contained within the geographical limits herein set forth, to wit: The eastern limit is the line of demarcation between the Russian and the British possessions in North America, as estab- lished by the convention between Russia and Great Britain, in February 28-16, 1825, and deseribed in Articles ILI and IV of said convention, i the following terms: Commencing from the southernmost point of the island called Prince of Wales Is- land, which point lies in the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes north latitude, and be- tween the 131st and the 133d degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the said line shall ascend to the north along the channel called Portland channel, as far as the point of the continent where it strikes the 56th degree of north latitude; from this last-mentioned point, the line of demarcation shall follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast as far as the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude (of the same meridian); and finally, from the said point of intersection, the said meridian line of the 141st degree, in its prolongation as far as the Frozen ocean, {V. With reference to the line of demarcation laid down in the preceding article, it is understood— Ist. That the island called Prince of Wales Island shall belong wholly to Russia (now, by this cession, to the United States). 2d. That whenever the summit of the mountains which extend in a direction par- allel to the coast from the 56th degree of north latitude to the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude shall prove to be at the distance of more than ten marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between the British possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia as above mentioned (that is to say, the limit to the possessions ceded by this convention) shall be formed by a line parallel to the winding of the coast, and which shall never exceed the distance of ten marine leagues therefrom. The western limit within which,the territories and dominion conveyed, are contained, passes through a point in Behring’s Straits on the parallel of sixty-five degrees thirty minutes north latitude, at its intersection by the meridian which passes midway between the islands of Krusenstern, or Ignalook, and the island of Ratmanoff, or Noonarbook, and proceeds due north, without limitation, into the same Frozen Ocean. The same western limit, beginning at the same initial point, proceeds thence in a course nearly southwest, through Behring’s Straits and Behring’s Sea, so as to pass midway between the northwest point of the island of St. Lawrence and the southeast point of Cape Choukotski, to the meridian of one hundred and seventy-two west longitude; thence, from the in- tersection of that meridian, in a southwesterly direction, so as to pass midway between the island of Attou and the Copper Island of the Ko- mandorski couplet or group in the North Pacific Ocean, to the meridian of one hundred and ninety-three degrees west longitude, so as to include in the territory conveyed the whole of the Aleutian Islands east of that meridian. ARTICLE II. In the cession of territory and dominion made by the preceding arti- cle are included the right of property in all public lots and squares, vacant lands, and all public buildings, fortifications, barracks, and other edifices which are not private individual property. It is, however, un- UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA, 1867. A5 derstood and agreed, that the churches which have been built in the ceded territory by the Russian Government, shall remain the property of such members of the Greek Oriental Church resident in the territory, as may choose to worship therein. Any government archives, papers, and documents relative to the territory and dominion aforesaid, which may be now existing there, will be left in the possession of the agent of the United States; but an authenticated copy of such of them as may be required, will be, at all times, given by the United States to the Russian Government, or to such Russian officers or subjects as they may apply for. ARTICLE III. The inhabitants of the ceded territory, according to their choice, re- serving their natural allegiance, may return to Russia within three years; but if they should prefer to remain in the ceded territory, they, with the exception of uncivilized native tribes, shall be admitted to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of the United States, and shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property and religion. The uncivilized tribes will be subject to such laws and regulations as the United States may, trom time to time, adopt in regard to aboriginal tribes of that country. ARTICLE IV. His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias shall appoint, with con- venient despatch, an agent or agents for the purpose of formally deliv- ering to a similar agent or agents appointed on behalf of the United States, the territory, dominion, property, dependencies, and appurte- nances which are ceded as above, and for doing any other act which may be necessary in regard thereto. But the cession, with the right of immediate possession, is nevertheless to be deemed complete and abso- lute on the exchange of ratifications, without waiting for such formal delivery. ARTICLE V. Immediately after the exchange of the ratifications of this conven- tion, any fortifications or military posts which may be in the ceded ter- ritory shall be delivered to the agent of the United States, and any Rus- sian troops which may be in the territory shall be withdrawn as soon aS may be reasonably and conveniently practicable. ARTICLE VI. In consideration of the cession aforesaid, the United States agree to pay at the Treasury in Washington, within ten months after the ex- change of the ratifications of this convention, to the diplomatic repre- sentative or other agent of his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, duly authorized to receive the same, seven million two hundred thou- sand dollars in gold. The cession of territory and dominion herein made is hereby declared to be free and unincumbered by any reserva- tions, privileges, franchises, grants, or possessions, by any associated companies, whether corporate or incorporate, Russian or any other, or by any parties, except merely private individual property holders; and the cession hereby made, conveys all the rights, franchises, and priv- ileges now belonging to Russia in the said territory or dominion, and appurtenances thereto. 4G TREATIES. ARTICLE VII: When this convention shall have been duly ratified by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, on the one part, and on the other by his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington within three months from the date hereof, or sooner, if possible. In faith whereof, the re spective plenipotentiaries have signed this convention, and thereto affixed the seals of their arms. Done at Washington, the thirtieth day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven. [L. S.] WILLIAM H. SEWARD. [L. 8. | 5 EDOUARD DE STOECKL. Sa Majesté VEmpereur de toutes les Russies et les Etats-Unis d’?Amé- rique, désirant raffermir, s’il est possible, la bonne intelligence qui existe entre eux, ont nommé, a cet effet, pour leurs Plénipotentiaires, savoir: Sa Majesté ?Empereur de toutes les tussies, le Conseiller Privé Edouard de Stoeckl, son Envoyé Extraordinaire et Ministre Plénipoten- tiaire aux Etats- Unis; et, Le Président des Etats-Unis, le Sieur William H. Seward, Secrétaire d’Ktat; Lesquels, apres avoir échangé leurs pleins-pouvoirs, trouvés en bonne et due forme, ont arrété et signé les articles suivans: ARTICLE I. Sa Majesté ’Empereur de toutes les Russies s’eng gage, par cette con- vention, a céder aux Etats-Unis, immédiatement apres ’échange des ratifications, tout le territoire avec droit de Souveraineté actuellement possédé par Sa Majesté sur le continent d’Amérique ainsi que les iles contigties, le dit territoire étant compris dans les limites géographiques cl- dessous indiquées, savoir: la limite orientale est la ligne. de démar- cation entre les possessions Russes et Britanniques dans VPAmérique du Nord, ainsi qu’elle est établie par la Convention conelue entre la Russie et la Grande-Bretagne, le $$ Février 1825, et définie dans les termes Suivans des articles III et LV de la dite convention: A partir du point le plus méridional de Vile dite Prince of Wales, lequel point se trouve sous la paralléle du 54™° dogré 40 minutes de latitude nord, et entre le 131™° et le 1383™¢ degré de longitude ouest (méridien de Greenwich), la dite ligne remon- tera, au Nord le long de la passe dite Portland Channel, jusquwau point ; de la terre ferme, oii elle atteint le 56 ™ degré de latitude nord; de ce dernier point la lene de démarcation suivra la créte des montagnes situées parallelement ala céte jusqu’au point @intersection du 141™¢ degré de longitude ouest (méme méridien); et finale- ment du dit point d’intersection, la méme ligne méridienne du 141™¢ degré formera, dans son prolongement jusqu’a la mer Glaciale, la limite entre les possessions Russes et Britanniques sur le continent de Amérique Nord-Ouest. IV. Lest entendu, par rapport a la ligne de démarcation déterminée dans l’article précedent: 1°. Que Vile dite Prince of Wales, appartiendra toute entiere a la Russie: (mais dés ce jour en vertu de cette cession aux Itats-Unis.) 2°, Que partout ot la créte des montagnes qui s’étendent dans une direction pa- ralléle a la céte, depuis le 56™° degré de latitude nord au point dintersection du 441™e degré de longitnde ouest se trouverait a la distance de plus de dix lienes marines de Océan, la limite entre les possessions Britanniques et la lisiere de céte mentionnée ci-dessus comme devant appartenir A la Russie (c’est-a-dire la limite des possessions cédées par cette Convention) sera formée par une ligne parallele aux sinuosités de la céte et qui ne pourra jamais en étre Toes: que de dix lieues marines, UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA, 1867. 47 La limite Occidentale des territoires cédés passe par un point au détroit de Behring sous la parallele du soixante-cinquiéme degré trente minutes de latitude Nord a son intersection par le méridien qui sépare a distance égale les iles Krusenstern ou Ignalook et Vile Ratmanow ou Noonarbook et remonte en ligne directe, sans limita- tion, vers le Nord jusqu’a ce qu’elle se perde dans la mer Glaciale. Commengant au méme point de départ, cette limite Occidentale suit de la un cours presque Sud-Ouest, a travers le détroit de Behring et la mer de Behring, de maniére a passer a distance égale entre le point Nord- Ouest de Vile Saint Laurent et le point Sudest du cap Choukotski jusqwau méridien cent-soixante-douzi¢éme de longitude Ouest; de ce point a partir de Vintersection de ce méridien, cette limite suit une di- rection Sud-Ouest de maniére a passer a distance égale entre Vile d’At- touet VileCopper du groupe @ilots Komandorski dans ’Océan Pacifique Septentrional jusqwau méridien de cent quatre-vingt-treize degrés de longitude Ouest, de maniére 4 enclaver dans le territoire cédé, toutes les iles Aléoutes situées a Vest de ce méridien. ARTICEE IL. Dans le territoire cédé par Varticle précédent a la Souveraineté des Etats Unis, sont compris le droit de propriété sur tous les terrains et places publics, terres inoccupées, toutes les constructions publiques, fortifications, casernes et autres édifices qui ne sont pas propriété privée individuelle. I est toutefois entendu et convenu que les églises con- struites par le Gouvernement Russe sur le territoire cédé, resteront la propriété des membres de l’Eglise Grecque Orientale résidant dans ce Territoire et appartenant a ce culte. Tous les archives, papiers, et documens du Gouvernement ayant trait au susdit territoire, et qui y sont maintenant déposés, seront placés entre les mains de ’agent des Etats-Unis; Mais les Etats-Unis fourniront, toujours quand il y aura lieu, des copies légalisées de ces documens au Gouvernement Russe, aux officiers ou sujets Russes qui pourront en faire la demande. ARTICLE III. Il est réservé aux habitans du territoire cédé le choix de garder leur nationalité et de rentrer en Russie dans Vespace de trois ans; mais s’ils préferent rester dans le territoire cédé, ils seront admis, 4 ’exception toutefois des tribus sauvages, a jouir de tous les droits, avantages et immunités des citoyens des Etats-Unis, et ils seront maintenus et pro- tégés dans le plein exercice de leur liberté, droit de propriété et reli- gion. Les tribus sauvages seront assujéties aux lois et réglements que les Etats-Unis pourront adopter, de tems en tems a légard des tribus aborigénes de ce pays. ARTICLE LV. Sa Majesté ?Empereur de toutes les Russies nommera, aussit6t que possible, un agent ou des agens chargés de remettre, formellement & VYagent ou aux agens nommés par les Etats-Unis, le territoire, la Sou- veraineté, les propriétés, dépendances et appartenances ainsi cédés et de dresser tout autre acte qui sera nécessaire 4 l’accomplissement de cette transaction. Mais la cession, avec le droit de possession immédiate, doit toutefois étre considérée compléte et absolue a ’échange des ratifica- tions, sans attendre la remise formelle. 48 TREATIES. ARTICLE V. Immédiatement aprés ’échange des ratifications de cette Convention, les fortifications et les postes militaires qui se trouveront sur le terri- toire cédé seront remis a Vagent des Etats-Unis et les troupes Russes qui sont stationnées dans le dit territoire seront retirées dans un terme praticable et qui puisse convenir aux deux parties, ARTICLE VI. En considération de la susdite cession, les Etats-Unis s’engagent 4 payer a la Trésorerie & Washington, dans le terme de dix mois, apres Véchange des ratifications de cette Convention, sept millions deux cent mille dollars en or, au Représentant diplomatique ou tout autre agent de Sa Majesté PEmpereur de toutes les Russies diiment autorisé a re- cevoir cette somme. La cession du Territoire avec droit de Souveraineté, faite par cette Convention, est déclarée libre et dégagée de toutes réser- vations, priviléges, franchises ou possessions par des compagnies Russes ou toute autre; légalement constitucées ou autrement, ou par des asso- ciations, sauf simplement les propriétaires possédant des biens privés individuels, et Ja cession ainsi faite transfere tous les droits, franchises et priviléges appartenant actuellement ala Russie dans le dit territoire et ses dépendances. ARTICLE VII. Lorsque cette Convention aura été diment ratifiée par Sa Majesté V’Empereur de toutes les Russies @une part, et par le Président des Etats-Unis, avec Pavis et le consentement du Sénat de Vautre, les rati- fications en seront échangées & Washington dans le terme de trois mois, & compter du jour de la signature ou plus tot si faire se peut. En foi de quoi les plénipotentiaires respectifs ont signé cette Conven- tion et y ont apposé le sceau de leur armes. Fait 4 Washington le 18-30 jour de Mars de Van de Notre Seigneur mil-huit-cent-soixante-sept. [L. 8. EDOUARD DE STOECKL. [L. S. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO THE AFFAIRS OF THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY.’ PART I.—ILLUSTRATING RUSSIA’S EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION OVER BERING SEA. No. 1. Abstract of letter from the Minister of Finance to the Minister of Marine. Written from St. Petersburg April 9, 1820. The committee of Ministers appointed by His Majesty on the 8th day of July, 1819, instructed the Minister of Internal Affairs to collect all information obtainable relating to the determination of the future rights and privileges of the Russian American Company. Subsequently, upon highest request, the Department of Manufac- tures and Internal Commerce, together with the Russian American Company, submitted statements on this subject supported by the an- nual reports of the board of administration and by the testimony of the commanders of ships sailing in those regions, from which I learn that the foreigners, especially the citizens of the North American States, come to our Colonies in their ships and carry on both openly and secretly a trade with the native inhabitants, doing thereby great injury and wrong to our settlements in their traffic, and also endangering the general interests by furnishing the islanders with various arms and ammunitions. In view of the recent establishment at these Colonies, and of the ab- sence of forces required to prevent such irregularities, and of the small number of Russians scattered over an area of nearly 4,000 versts, the Company finds it impossible to occupy all localities in sufficient num- bers to prevent the foreigners from maintaining their illegitimate inter- course with the native inhabitants, and from exercising their pernicious influence upon them. In this connection I have taken into considera- tion that the interests of the Company, its establisiments and objects . are inseparable from the interests of the Government, and it appears of the most imperative necessity for the preservation of our sovereignty in the northwestern part of America and on the islands and waters situated between them to maintain there continuously two ships of the Inperial fleet. This object will, in my opinion, be most readily accomplished in the following manner. Starting in the month of August or September of the present year, one of these armed ships can sail for the island of Sitka, and the other for the harbor of Petropavlovsk, arriving there in the month of April or May, 1821. The first having discharged at Sitka any cargo which may be intrusted to the commander, should sail to the northward along 1 Fac-similes of the original documents will be found at the end of this volume. (ent 49 50 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO the American coast to Kadiak; should the commander receive at any of these places no special information as to foreign contrabandists from the manager of the Russian American Company’s Colonies, he may pur- sue his course to the westward, and having thoroughly examined the shores of the Aleutian Islands, the coast of Kamchatka, the Kurile Islands, and the intervening waters, he may return for the winter to the harbor of Petropavlovsk. The other ship, however, having examined the eastern coast of the Kamchatka peninsula up to 62° of northern latitude and the west coast of America from this latitude to the island of Unalaska, and the inter- vening waters, should proceed to Kadiak and from there to Sitka for the winter. The object of the cruising of two of our armed vessels in the locali- ties above mentioned is the pr otection of our Colonies and the exclusion ot foreign vessels engaged in traffic orindustry injurious to the interests of the Russian Company, as wellas to those ofthe native inhabitants of those regions. If in the following year, 1821, two similar ships are dispatched from our Baltic ports they could in May or June of the year 1822 relieve the ships sent out in 1520, and the latter could return to their home ports by the middle of 182 In this manner two ships of war would always be present in the Col- onies, and the Company would be assured of their protection. In ad- dition to the other advantages resulting from this arrangement it would afford a most excellent opportunity for the officers of the Imperial navy to perfect themselves by practice in the science of navigation. In submitting this proposition to your Excellency, I consider it un- necessary to enumerate in detail the advantages resulting therefrom, but you must not omit to take into consideration the expenditure in- volved in such an undertaking. It therefore becomes necessary to know how much the fitting out of such shipsand themaintenanceof their crews would cost the treasury. We should also know whether it be possible for such ships to take in addition to provisions and stores for their own use during a period of three years any other supplies which may be needed in Kamchatka and Okhotsk, and how much of their tonnage could be devoted to the latter object. This information would be useful also for other purposes. The Governor-General of Siberia, in his report on the impoverished condition of the Yakutsk country, points out as the principal reason for this condition the burdens imposed upon the people through trans- portation of Government and commercial cargoes overland from Yakutsk to Okhotsk. If by means of the vessels of the Imperial fleet to be dispatched to those shores the Yakutsk people are relieved from this service, they may devote their energies to cattle-breeding, already — established among them them and thus better their deplorable condi- tion. If your Excellency should find an annual dispatch of two such ves- Sels, as suggested above, practicable, and if the two vessels, or one, as the case may be, could take in addition to their own supplies a certain quantity of arms and ammunition for Okhotsk and Petropavlovsk, such a measure would relieve the suffering Yakutes and at the same time afford a partial reimbursement of the Government’s expense. A force of soldiers and sailors should also be stationed at the two ports mentioned above in order to fill all vacancies caused by death or other- wise in the commands of the cruising vessels. In thus laying before you my thoughts on the subject I am permitted to state that they have received the highest consideration of His Inpe- THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 51 rial Majesty, and I can assure your Excellency that the proposition meets with the highest approval, and this matter is submitted to you now to enable you to consider the arrangements necessary to be made for the purpose of taking in due time action looking toward a renewal of the privileges and rights now enjoyed by the Russian American Company under Highest protection. True copy. ZELENSKIY, Chief Clerk. No. 2. Letter from the Minister of Finance to the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company. Written from St. Petersburg, April 10, 1820. [Confidential. | The report of your board, dated November 14, 1819, has, up to this time, remained unanswered, because the necessary information concern- ing the contracts concluded with the Englishman Pigott had not been received. Of this the board spoke in its report. The intormation is now at hand, having been received on the 3d ultimo. At the same time lI also received detailed statements of the appointment by the Government of Court-Councilor Dobello as resident agent on the island of Manilla, and of the propositions of this officer to dispatch a vessel from there to Kamchatka with provisions in order to convince the Government how cheaply the country may be supplied from the Philippine Islands. Mr. Dobello also requested permission to dispatch from Manilla to Cronstadt two ships with tea and other Chinese goods. All these propositions were duly submitted to His Majesty the Em- peror, and I have now received the following highest decision of His Imperial Majesty: 1. That the contractentered into with the Englishman Pigotcan not be sustained by the Government; but since the whaling industry may be of use aS a means of securing subsistence to the inhabitants of Kamchatka and Okhotsk in case of failure in the fisheries, and as a basis for establish- ing a new branch of trade from which the Russian American Company may derive considerable profit, His Imperial Majesty has most gra- ciously deigned to turn his attention to this subject and has expressed the opinion that for this purpose a ship should be employed, furnished with all necessary implements and instruments and manned with the very best officers and sailors. To enable the Company to secure skilled masters for inaugurating this enterprise, Mr. Dobello has been in- structed to endeavor to obtain such with the understanding that in addition to their salaries they shall be entitled to certain rewards and premiums, including one poud of oil from every whale or other marine animal killed by them. 2. The commander of the Government of Irkutsk is hereby instructed to forbid all foreigners except such as have become Russian subjects to enter the mercantile guilds or to settle in business in Kamchatka or Okhotsk; also to entirely prohibit foreign merchant vessels from trading in these localities and from anchoring in any port of Eastern Siberia, except in case of disaster. (In such cases great care should be taken 52 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO that no part of their cargo be discharged or sold to anybody, under pain of confiscation of the ship.) It is hereby ordered that the local authorities shall inform the Englishman Davis at Okhotsk and Dobello’s agent in Kamchatka that the Government does not permit them to re- side in those places, much less to erect buildings or other immovable property. In consideration of said prohibition they will be awarded damages and afforded every facility on the part of the local authorities to dispose of their property and to take their departure. Mr. Dobello, however, is hereby instructed that the ship which he proposes to dispatch from the Philippine Islands to Kamchatka may, on this single occasion, take goods as well as provisions, and he shall be per- mitted to dispose of the same. But to prevent him from dispatching such vessels in the future, he is permitted to supply only Russian ships belonging to the Government or to our American Company, which may call at Manilla for supplies. 3. Permission is denied to Mr. Dobello to dispatch two ships to Cron- stadt with tea and other Chinese goods, since such operations do not accord with the views of the Government, and he is hereby informed that he has been and is now required only to furnish information as to the prices of Chinese goods at Manilla and as to what supplies and production from Eastern Siberia could be profitably disposed of there, to the end that all such information may be used for the benefit of our American Company in all its various commercial transactions. Pursuant to this highest decision I have already addressed the Gov- ernor-general of Siberia and the Minister of Foreign Affairs and sent the necessary orders to Mr. Dobello; and now the following proposi- tions are laid before the board of administration of the Russian Ameii- can Company: 1. From the whaling industry on the eastern shores of Siberia the Government expects not only such advantages as have been pointed out by the Governor-General of Siberia and by the commander of the districts of Kamchatka in their communication, of which copies are here- with appended, but discovers in this industry the promise of special advantages to the Company, and therefore hopes that the board of ad- ministration will at once furnish the means necessary for taking the preliminary steps toward the inauguration of whaling in those waters and proceed, without waiting for the information requested from Mr. Dobello, to inform itself concerning the engagement of experienced masters, ete. A ship should be purchased at once and dispatched in the following year, if it be found impossible to do so during the present. 2. Having, for the benefit of the American Company, excluded all foreigners from Kamchatka and Okhotsk and prohibited them from en- gaging in trade and from hunting and fishing in all the waters of East- ern Siberia, the Government fully expects that the Company, on its part, will hold itself responsible for supplying those regions with all necessaries. In connection with this requirement, and in consideration of a request from the Governor-General of Siberia, the board of admin- istration will report on the following points: A. As to the means by which communication can be maintained between Yakutsk and Okhotsk without oppression of the Yakut people. B. Whether the Company can undertake to land at the ports of Petropavlovsk and Okhotsk provisions, especially flour and salt, from their correspondents in California or the Philippine Islands, in such quantities as may be required by the Goy- ernment forces and officials and by all other inhabitants, employing for this purpose a ship which must visit the places named at least once a year and at a time previously fixed; also as to the probable cost of pro- THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 53 visions, prices of freight, ete. C. To propose measures for a develop- ment and increase of. the fishing industries for the benefit of the native population of Kamchatka and Okhotsk. D. Whether the Company can undertake to furnish the districts of Kamchatka and Okhotsk with al! the necessary articles of trade which the inhabitants now receive from Irkutsk, and at what prices. 3. In refusing permission to Mr. Dobello to dispatch ships loaded with tea and Chinese goods, the Government had in view the avoid- ance of any complications which might interfere with the full enjoy- ment by the Russian American Company of its privileges granted by Imperial ukase, not only in connection with the trade in teas across the Chinese border at Kiakhta, but also in connection with the exclu- sive rights of trade and navigation in all the waters adjoining the Sibe- rian as well as the American possessions of Russia, and all interior waters connected therewith. For this purpose Mr. Dobello was re- quested to furnish detailed information of the trade and commerce at the Philippine Islands, in order to relieve the Company of the necessity of employing foreign ships and masters for this trade which involves their admission to waters reserved for the exclusive use of the Russian American Company under its charter. In conclusion it is stated as the decision of His Majesty the Emperor, in view of possible future complications of this nature, that no contracts involving the admissiox, free navigation, or trade of foreign ships and foreign subjects in the waters adjoining or bounded by the coasts of the Russian Colonies will be approved by the Imperial Government. The board of administration of the Russian American Company is hereby informed that Court-Councilor Dobello has not been recognized as Russian consul by the Spanish Government, because the court of Madrid declares it to be contrary to its colonial system to admit for- eign consuls to its colonies; but having acquiesced in his residence at Manilla and in his exercise there of the duties of agent, it is now under- stood that the object of his appointment was only to assist vessels of the Russian American Company visiting Manilla in purely commercial transactions. Count D. GURYEF, Minister of Finance. Count YAKOV LAMBERT, Privy Councilor. No. 3. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company to Captain M. I. Muravief, of the Imperial Navy, Chief Manager of the Russian-American Colonies. Written Jrom St. Peters- burg, April 23, 1820. [Confidential.] On the 10th instant the Minister of Finance communicated to the board of administration in a message marked confidential, the will of His Imperial Majesty in the following words: 1. That the contract concluded with the Englishman Pigott is disap- proved by the Government. 2. That the Governor of Irkutsk be instructed to allow no foreigners, except such as have become Russian subjects, to join in any commer- cial guild or to settle in Kamchatka or Okhotsk; also to strictly pro- 54 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO hibit all foreign mercantile vessels from visiting these points, or trading in any of the ports of Eastern Siberia, except in case of disaster, when the strictest vigilance must be exercised to prevent the disposal of any of the vessel’s cargo, under pain of confiscation of both ship and cargo. At the same time the Englishman Davis at Okhotsk and Dobello’s agent at Kamchatka must be informed that the Government does not permit them to reside at those places, much less to acquire houses or other immovable property. The local authorities are instructed to allow them damages for the immediate disposal of what property they have already acquired, and to see to their immediate departure. Mr. Dobello is to be informed that the ship he has proposed to dispatch from the Philippine Islands to Kamchatka with provisions and articles of luxury will not be allowed to visit Kamchatka, unless it be trans- ferred to the ownership of a Russian subject, preference to be given to the Russian American Company, operating under highest protection. 3. Permission is also denied to Mr. Dobello to despatch any ships to Kronstadt with teas or other Chinese goods, such transactions being in direct conflict with the views of the Government. He is also in- formed that no further intercourse is possible between him and the au- thorities of Eastern Siberia, and that even if supplies should be needed from Manilla or any other adjacent foreign country, such transactions would be intrusted to the hands of our American Company. Having informed you of these highest views, the board of administra- tion adds the tollowing explanation: The contract which was disapproved by the Imperial Government was concluded with Pigott on the 18th of June, 1819, for a period of ten years by Mr. Riccord, commander of the Kamchatka district, and Court-Councillor Dobello on behalf of the Government, parties of the first part, and the above named Englishmen Pigott on behalf of himself and his partners, Davis, Ebbets and Meek, captains of American mer- chant vessels, of the second part, for the purpose of whaling and hunt- ing marine animals for their furs and oil on the coasts of Kamchatka and of Eastern Siberia, in the harbors, bays and straits, and on the islands, for their own benefit and profit, without any duty or royalty, and with the privilege of carrying the Russian flag, and with the addi- tional privilege of fishing and of shipping the catch from Kamchatka on payment of fifty kopeks per poud on salted fish. This contract was naturally considered by the Government to be injurious to the in- terests of the Company, since all the benefits accrued to foreigners, and no provision was made to protect the native inhabitants of those regions who depend for their principal means of subsistence upon fish, which under this contract would have been carried away by foreigners before their longing eyes. Having thus reached the conviction that the real object of these scheming foreigners, with whom it appears that Dobello was allied on terms of intimacy, was not only to obtain the privilege of killing whales and of trying out their blubber, or the chase of other marine animals which frequent our waters that wash the coasts of Eastern Siberia, but rather to gradually obtain control over our Kurile and Aleutian Islands for the purpose of hunting sea-otters and fur-seals, which object, had it been obtained, would have erippled the Russian American Company, the board of administration expresses the following opinion: As soon as the Imperial Government ascertained that the contracts made were in open violation of the privileges granted the Company, it prohibited at once all foreigners not only trom settling in Kamchatka or Okhotsk, but also from all intercourse with those regions, enjoining THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 5D the authorities to maintain the strictest surveillance over their move. ments. Basing your own action upon this proceeding on the part of our Highest Protector, you as commander of all our Colonies must pro- hibit with equal strictness all foreigners from engaging in any inter- course or trade with native inhabitants, as well as from visiting the waters frequented by sea-otters and fur-seals, over which our operations extend, under the penalty of the most severe measures, including the contises ation of ships and the imprisonment of crews engaged in this illegal traffic. You must act with the greatest severity in cases where foreigners have sold to the natives arms, powder,and lead. They must be made to understand that their presence in our waters is contrary to our laws, and that they will never be admitted to any port unless you or your subordinates convince yourselves that such is necessary for the saving of life. In a word, you must preserve an attitude in full accord with the views of the Imperial Government on this subject, and protect against allintruders the domain of land and water granted to us by the grace of the Emperor, and necessary for our continued existence and prosperity. You must transmit these instructions without delay to your subordi- nate commanders for their conduct in their intercourse with foreigners, and especially to the commanders of ships navigating our waters, to enable them to drive away the foreign intruders. The communication from the Minister of Marine also contained a copy of a letter from the present Governor-General of Siberia embodying many suggestions and opinions of advantage to the Company. Of this document the board of administration forwards a copy for your guidance, to enable you to act for the best interests of the Company. MICHAEL KISSELEF, VENEDICT KRAMER ANDREI SEVERIN, Directors. APRIL 235, 1820. No. 265, P.S.—We hereby inform you that the Government has decided to dispatch two ships around the world during the present summer; one to winter in Kamchatka, and the other to proceed to Sitka and to cruise in search of foreign vessels. No. 4. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Capt. M. I. Muravief, Chief Manager of the Russian American colonies. Written from St. Petersburg, March 31, 1821. Your two letters from Okhotsk, of the 26th and 28th of July, have been received by us with satisfaction, but with still greater pleasure we read your just remarks relating to various subjects intimately con- nected with the Company’s interests. For this we render you our most sincere thanks, wishing you at the same time a safe arrival at your des- tination and good health, and that you may always retain at heart the best interests of our Company. Your remarks to Mr. Riccord can not, we think, have been very ac- 56 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO ceptable to that gentleman. From the copy herewith inclosed of com- munications from the ministries you will see that the Imperial Govern- ment not only repudiates Messrs. Riecord, Dobello, and Pigott, but also prohibited them altogether from trading in Okhotsk and “Kamchatka, with the result that to-day the foreigners have abandoned their enter- prise in that region, and no other foreigners will be allowed to visit these places in the future. The principles involved in this action of the Government you must also observe in dealing with foreigners who may visit our Colonies, using all the foree at your command to drive them a our waters. Together with our new privileges, which have al- ‘eady been pr omulgated by the minister, and which are only awaiting ine return of our monarch, we shall also receive definite instructions how to deal with foreigners who venture to cross the limits of posses- sions acquired long ago through Russian enterprise and valor. From the same ministerial documents you will see that the Company has been urged to engage in the whaling industry, and the necessary experiments ‘will be entered into at once, though we know beforehand that no great profits will accrue to us therefrom, since Kamehatka and Okhotsk are districts ve ry thinly populated, affording but an insignifi- cant market for whale oil, and we could not sell it anywhere else. In iesé documents you will also find that the Government desires the Company to supply Kamehatka and Okhotsk with breadstuffs, but this we are compelled temporarily to decline. When the Borodino called at Manilla, there appeared to be no market for the articles of Russian man- ufacture which, in Dobello’s opinion, could be sold there with profit; on this matter, howev er, you must be fully informed through our officers, who must have reached you long ago, and who it is to be hoped are now on their return voyage. There only remains the hope of obtaining bread from California, if the missions there have not been abolished. Your information on this point has been gratifying to us. Upon all the questions submitted by Mr. Yanovsky, we have embodied our decisions in dispatches already forwarded to you, accompanied by copies of all papers for use in case of loss of the originals which were sent on the Borodino. During the present year no naval vessel has been dispatched around the world for the protection of our Colonies, but now two ships are being fitted out, to the command of which Tulubief and Filatof have been appointed, the former being in charge of the squadron. You will, therefore, have an ample force patrolling our waters and protecting our interests. In addition, we send you the brig Aurik, commanded by Master Klotchkof. The brig is to return to us after cruising in colo- nial waters. In the accompanying newspapers and journals forwarded by the Rurik, with the additional dispatches, you will learn the state of affairs in Europe and in other countries. Renewing our wishes for your prosperity and good health, we have, most gracious sir, the honor to remain, with the most sincere friendship and respect, Your very humble servants, MICHAEL KISSELEF. VENEDICT KRAMER. ANDREI SEVERIN. : THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. ot No. 5. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain M. I. Muravief, of the Imperial Navy, Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies. Written from St. Petersburg, August 3, 1820. In order to enable you to issue your instructions to the various offices and to the managers of the islands of St. Paul and St. George, as well as for your own information, we inclose herewith a statement of the views entertained by the General Government, as well as by the management of the Company. You will perceive from this statement that we, as wellas the Government, do not countenance any intercourse with foreigners, or the admission of foreigners within the precincts of our possessions, except in case of absolute necessity. Heretofore, all such transactions have generally resulted in serious losses to us, and the very presence of foreigners in our waters has become a vital ques- tion, affecting the existence of the Company. The board of administra- tion expects you to exercise the utmost vigilance on this subject, and to warn all district commanders against any intercourse with foreigners. To enable you to comply with these instr uctions more stric tly, we shall henceforth dispatch every year a ship with supplies for the Colonies. VENEDICT KRAMER, Director. ANDREI SEVERIN, Director. [Inclosure in No. 5.] Orders from the Russian American Company to its Kadiak office, August 3, 1820. The deceased Baranof was frequently instructed to abstain as far as possible from all intercourse with the foreigners visiting our Colonies, and also to inform the subordinate officers at Kadiak, Unalaska, and the seal islands on this subject. Now it has been decided to dispatch annually to the Colonies a ship loaded with all supplies needed for the maintenance of the people, ships, ete. In the years 1816 and 1819 the ships Kutuzof and Borodino were dispatched with valuable cargoes, and during the present year the Autuzof will be again dispatched ; consequently there will be no necessity for dealing with foreigners in the matter of supplies. It is the desire of His Majesty the Emper or, which has been communicated to our Company, that all such inter- course should cease, and that the benefits arising from the possessions acquired by Russia on the coasts of Asia and America should accrue wholly to the benefit of Russian subjects, and especially to our Company under its lmperial charter. The Imperial Government has also issued orders to expel from Okhotsk and Kamchatka all foreigners who come there for the purpose of trade; as well as to abstain henceforth from all intercourse with any foreigners who may hereafter visit those shores. For the sake of preserving intact our valuable privileges in the waters over which our trade and industry extends, we may well dispense with such articles of Juxury as the foreigners endeavor to make us purchase from them. Consequently, each commmander of a station will be held strictly responsible for the slightest infraction of these rules, or the most trivial transactions between foreigners and the people in his charge. In cases of necessity protection will be afforded by the com- manders of New Archangel and of Okhotsk. 0. 4 AUGUST 3, 1820. 8 58 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO No. 6. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain-Lieutenant and Knight M. I. Muravief, Chief Man- ager of the Russian American colonies. Written from St. Petersburg, March 15, 1821. Mr. Yanovsky, in his report under date of February 25, 1820, No. 41, deseribing his inspection of the fur-seal industry on the islands of St. Paul and St. Geor ge, remarks that every year a greater number of young bachelor seals is being killed, while for propagation there re- mained only the females, sekateh,! and halt sekatch.? Consequently only the old breeding animals remain, and if any of the young breeders are not killed by autumn they are sure to be killed in the following spring. From this it naturally results that the industry decreases every year in volume, and that in course of time it may be extinguished entirely, as can clearly be seen from experiments made. In order to avert such disaster it would be to our great advantage that for one year no seals at all should be killed. Then strict orders should be issued that the annual take of seals should not exceed 40,000 on St. Paul and 10,000 on St. George. Mr. Yanovsky thinks that under such rules the. fur seal will not continue to diminish. The board of administration of the Company, while acknowleging the justice of these remarks, would desire that these measures be employed only in case of a failure to discover other seal rookeries on islands to the northward and southward of the Aleutian chain, which it is hoped to discover. In the meantime, on the islands of St. Paul and St. George, every third year the first “ pri- val”? only should be worked on one of the islands, in turn. For in- stance, if on one island the first ‘‘ prival” is spared, killing from this ““prival” is done on the other; and, again, when a period of rest is ob- served on the second island, all three “privals” are worked on the first island to make up the annual catch determined upon for both islands. he this way the people will not be idle during any year, since they can easily be carried to whichever island is designated for working all three endivals If, however, the islands to the northward are discovered, and are found to be available for sealing, we may, in conformity with Mr. Yan- ovsky’s opinion, instruct the officials of St. Paul and St. George to work them every fifth year, limiting the annual catch in the interval on St. Paul Island to 40,000 and on St. George to 10,000. We must suppose that a total suspension of killing every fifth year will effectually stop the diminution of the fur-seals, and that it will be safe at the expiration of the close season to resume killing at the rate mentioned above. By strict observance of such rules, and a prohibition of all killing of fur- seals at Sea or in the passes of the Aleutian Islands, we may hope to make this industry a permanent and reliable source ‘of income to the Company, without disturbing the price of these valuable skins in the market. Great care must be taken to prevent the burning of skins subjected to artificial drying. This process must not be resorted to with salt wood (driftwood), and if no other can be obtained, the greatest care must be- taken to regulate the fires. The non-observance of strict “1 Bulls. _ Noung bulls. ’The word ‘‘prival” means the larger waves of an incoming tide, and it is used upon the assumption that the seals are landed upon the islands in three distinct waves or “‘privals.” The meaning of the text is not quite clear at this point. THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 59 rules upon this point has already been the cause of losses to the Com- pany amounting to millions of rubles. The latest shipments of fur seals to Russia were in fair condition, consequently we may hope that equal care will be taken in the future. When you visit the islands you will make such arrangements as in your judgment will prove bene- ficial to both the Company and the natives employed. If, from unfore- seen circumstances, you should be prevented from visiting the islands in question, be sure to send a trustworthy representative who will im- press upon officials as well as employés that our rules for preserving these valuable animals must be observed. “With the greatest respect, we are your Excellency’s humble servants, MIcHAEL KISSELEF, VENEDICT KRAMER, ANDREY SEVERIN, Directors of the Russian American Company. Now :7. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain-Lieutenant M. I. Muravie/, Chief Manager of the Rus- sian American Colonies. Written from St. Petersburg September 7, 1871. The board of administration having received a copy of the rules for the limits of navigation and communication along the coast of Eastern Siberia, the northwest coast of America, the Aleutian, Kurile, and other islands and the intervening waters, established and confirmed by His Majesty the Emperor and transmitted to the governing senate for promulgation and publication, we hereby send you one stamped copy for your guidance and observance. These rules and regulations will be translated into the English and French languages, and as soon as these translations have been received we shall endeavor to forward them to you by one of the naval vessels.! VENEDICT KRAMER, Director. ANDREI SEVERIN, Director. No. 8. Letter from the Board of “Adininisiration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain-Lieutenant of the Imperial Navy and Knight M. I. Muravief, Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies. Written Srom St. Petersburg September 20, 1821. The Minister of Finance, His Excellency Count Dmitry Alexandrovitch Guryet, under date of the 18th instant, has informed the board of admin- istration of the Company that His Imperial Majesty, on the 13th day of the present month, has most graciously deigned to consider in private council the propositions submitted by his Excelleney of granting anew 1 The rules referred to are the ukase of 1821. See Vol. ie p. 16. 60 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO to the Company its rights and privileges for a period of t\enty years. «\ new set of rules and regulations were also taken under advisement, and the subsequent action, aS evinced by the imperial edict, furnishes proot of the sincere anxiety on the part of the Imperial Government to assist all praiseworthy and patriotic enterprises, such as that repre- sented by our Company, and to extend over them its highest protection. Our august Monarch is ready to do all in his power to further the efforts of the Russian American Company in spreading civilization and christianity in the most distant possessions of Russia, promising at the same time to secure to the Company its well-deserved profits and ad- vantages. The board of administration of the Company has received the edict and accompanying regulations as promulgated by the directing senate, and ten copies of these documents with the seal of the Company affixed are herewith inclosed. With this precious act in your hand you will be enabled to assume a new position and to stand firmly opposed to all attempts on the part of foreigners to infringe upon our rights and privileges. In accordance with the will of His Imperial Majesty, we will not be left to protect unaided the land and waters embraced in our exclusive privileges. A squadron of naval vessels is under orders to prepare for a cruise to the coasts of northeastern Asia and northwestern America. In your deal- ings with foreigners you will act especially under the provisions of the followi ing paragraphs contained in the new regulations: 35, 39, 41, 43, 44, 46-49, 51, 52, 53, 55-60, 62, 64, 67-70. "These paragraphs bear plainly upon the points in dispute between us and other seafaring na- tions. We can now stand upon our rights and drive from our w: aters and ports the intruders who threaten to neutralize the benefits and gifts most graciously bestowed upon our Company by His Imperial Majesty. Faithfulness and energy on your part in carrying out the provisions of this edict will be duly reported to and appreciated by the highest authorities. Of the copies of the documents herewith inclosed,! you will furnish one each to the offices of New Archangel, Kadiak, Unalaska, Ross, and to the agents on the northern fur-seal islands, with instructions to com- ply with all its provisions as far as local circumstances will permit, with such additional explanations as you may see fit to furnish to the vari- ous individuals in charge. It is necessary to add that such additional instructions and explanations must be uniform in tenor and expression in order to avoid misunderstanding and embarrassment to the board of administration. Upon the receipt of such overwhelming evidence of the good will of our Monarch toward the Company we most sincerely congratulate you and your colaborers in the field of enterprise. In our future correspondence we will not forget to further enlarge upon this subject as circumstances may require. Lack of time pre- vents us from saying more at present. VENEDICT KRAMER, Director. ANDREI SEVERIN, Director. *A copy of the ukase, translated into the English language, was inclosed with this letter, and from it is copied the translation of the ukase inserted in Vol. I, p. 24. THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 61 No. 9. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain Lieutenant of the Imperial Navy and Knight M. I. Muravief, Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies, written From St. Petersburg, February 28, 1822. In your dispatch No. 36, dated January 21, 1821, you asked for instructions as to sending in one cargo all the furs remaining in your hands, as you did in that year, shipping 60,000 fur seals by the Boro- dino. The board of administration of the Company informs you that it is necessary to suspend for a time shipments of fur-seals, since those shipped by the Borodino still remain unsold, and other lots are in the same condition at Moscow and in Siberia. These fur-seals were not sold because the demand for them as well as all other furs, has been greatly reduced during the Turco-Grecian difficulty. However, you need not on that account discontinue the shipments of the other valuable furs by the way of Okhotsk and Kronstadt. As to fur-seals, however, since our Gracious Sovereign has been pleased to strengthen our claims of jurisdiction and exclusive rights in these waters with his strong hand, we can well afford to reduce the number of seals killed annually, and to patiently await the natural increase resulting there- from, which will yield us an abundant harvest in the future. In reference to your action in disposing of the Japanese brass can- non, we fully approve of what you have done. You did not need them in the colonies, since you must have on hand sufficient armament to fit out all the Company’s vessels as cruisers for the protection of our waters. MICHAEL KISSELEF. V. KRAMER. ANDREI SEVERIN. No. 10. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain-Lieutenant of the Imperial Navy and Knight M. I. Muravief. Written from St. Petersburg July 31, 1822. From the inclosed ministerial documents and the observations thereon by the board of administration you will see that England and the United States are contesting the privileges and marine jurisdiction conferred upon the Company. The first-mentioned power protests against the boundary claimed by our Government on the line of the fifty-first parallel; the other power against the prohibition of foreign vessels from approaching within 100 miles of our colonies. In view of these pretensions His lnperial Majesty has deigned to instruct the Russian Minister to the United States to negotiate with the Government of those States as to what measures could be taken which would prove satis. factory to both, with a view of averting further disputes. If you should happen to become involved in difficulties with foreign- ers on that subject, you may allow yourself to be guided by the spirit of the above-mentioned documents. At the same time we can inform you that without regard to future negotiations His Imperial Majesty, through the naval commander of his general staff, has ordered the com- 62 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO mander of the frigate Kreisser, about to sail for the Colonies, not to in- sist too strictly upon the full distance of 100 miles, while at the same time affording the fullest protection to our industries, and proceeding with all foreign ships engaged in pursuits injurious to them to the full extent of marine jurisdiction. V. KRAMER. ANDREI SEVERIN. [Inclosure, | Letter from the Minister of Finance to the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company. Written from St. Petersburg, July 18, 1822. The managing chief of the ministry of Foreign Affairs has informed me that on presentation by our Government to the cabinets of London and Washington of the rules promulgated on the 4th day of Septem- ber, 1821, concerning the limits of navigation and system of coastwise intercourse along the shores of Hastern Siberia, northwestern America, and the Aleutian and Kurile Islands and others, protests were entered by the English and North American Governments against what they called an extension of our domain, as well as against the rule forbidding foreign ships from approaching the above-mentioned localities within the distance of 100 Italian miles. In considering my report on these representations, His Majesty the the Emperor, wishing always to preserve the best possible understand- ing with foreign powers, and having in view at the same time the pos- sibility of acts of violence occurring between Russian and American vessels and the misfortunes which thence might result, has deigned to instruct the naval authorities to guide their action by his sentiments on this subject. These instruc tions will be communicated to the com- mander of the two Imperial ships ordered to sail this year for the Northwest Coast of America. i the meantime I am authorized to communicate to you the following 1. That Baron Tuyll von San eOERen has been appointed as suc- cessor to Mr. Poletica in the position of Imperial Russian Ambassador and Minister Plenipotentiary to the United North American States, and that he has already taken his departure for Washington in order to consult with the Government there as to such measures as may prove satisfactory to both and meet with mutual consent, avoiding all further difficulties concerning our mutual rights in connection with our posses- sions on the Nor thwest Coast of America. His principal object will be to abolish all cause of complaint on the part of our American Company concerning the intrusive enterprise of certain subjects of the United States, and also to relieve them of a strict observance of the edict dated September 4, 1821, which in every other respect must be sustained. 2. In order that Baron Tuyll’s negotiations may be facilitated and brought to a speedy conclusion, he has been furnished with a transeript of the Russian American Company’s views as to the rules we could ask the Government of the American United States to observe, with a view to the maintenance of friendly intercourse without injury to the vast interests of our Company and those of the native inhabitants of that country. The rules to be proposed will probably imply that it is no longer necessary to prohibit the navigation of foreign vessels for the distance mentioned in the edict of September 4, 1821, and that we will THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 63 not claim jurisdiction over coastwise waters beyond the limits accepted by any other maritime power for the whole of our coast facing the open ocean. Over all interior waters, however, and over all waters in- closed by Russian territory, such as the Sea of Okhotsk, Bering Sea, or the Sea of Kamchatka, as well as in all gulfs, bays, and estuaries within our possessions, the right to the strictest control will. always be maintained. In informing me of the highest will on these points the managing chief of the ministry of Foreign Affairs expresses the desire to obtain a full and clear discriptive statement of all localities which are at the present day occupied by the Russian American Company, and over which the same Company is now enjoying its exclusive privilege of trade, navigation, and fishery in order to make it possible to ascertain def- initely the points to which foreign vessels may be admitted without in- jury to the Company’s vested rights. The managing chief of the ministry of Foreign Affairs adds that when, in the charter granted to the Russian American Company in the year 1799, the fifty-fifth degree of northern latitude was settled upon as the southern boundary, this line was looked upon as well to the northward of any possessions claimed by other powers, and one which could safely be changed in case our Russian American Company should be found occupying territory farther south. For this reason Privy Counselor Count Nesselrode suggests that it would be well for the Russian-American Company to compile in addi- tion a list of its stations, the time of their establishment, and mainte- nance, together with any information they may possess of the situation, strength, and importance of any establishments maintained in the vicinity of our possessions by English or North American trading com- panies. In order to enable me to comply with these various suggestions, and in view of the urgency of the matter in hand, I now respectfully request the board of administration of the Russian American Company to fur- nish me, without any unnecessary delay, a report containing the infor- mation specified above, in duplicate, one copy to be forwarded to the Imperial Ambassador at Washington. At the same time I am author- ized to assure you that every effort will be made to secure the adoption of such rules as will effectually protect the Russian American Company from inroads on the part of foreigners upon their vested priviliges, in strict conformity not only with the privileges granted by highest act, but also with the edict of September 4, 1821. Count D. GURYEF, Minister of Finance. Y. DRUSHININ, Director. No. 11. Letter from the Minister of Finance (Department of Manufactures and Internal Trade) to the Board of Administration of the Russian Amert- can Company. Written from St. Petersburg April 2, 1824. On the subject of your representations, under No. 73, of February 11 of this year, concerning the permission to foreign vessels of entering the harbor of New Archangel for the purpose of trading with the chief manager of the Russian American Colonies for such necessaries as he > e 64 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO may be in want of, I have received a communication from the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Count Karl Vassilievitch has been pleased toinform me that he has sub- mitted the matter to His Majesty the Emperor, and that His Majesty, finding that the solicitations on the part of the board of administra- tion of the Russian American Company concerning the renewal of inter- course with foreigners in the Colonies were deserving of attention, has most graciously ordained that intercourse and trade with foreign ships in the Colonies may be carried on under established regulations, and in one port designated for the purpose. Informing you of this gracious permission on the part of His Majesty the Emperor, I will add that I am authorized to state that it is the in- tention of the proper authorities to designate Sitka as the one port which foreign vessels will be permitted to enter for the purpose of trading with the Company only. Lieutenant-General KANKRIN, Minister of Finance. SERGEI UVAROF, Director. No. 12. Letter from Count Nesselrode to Nikolas Semenovitch Mordvinof. Written Srom St. Petersburg April 11, 1824. The communication of your Excellency, dated February 20th of this year, in which you express your opinion on the subject of the rights of the Russian American Company to control certain parts of the north- west coast of America, and on the threatening dispute over the limits of such rights, I have had the honor to submit to His Majesty the Emperor. His Majesty, upon receipt of the communication, most graciously gave it his immediate and careful attention. His Majesty was pleased to enter into the subject with the thoroughness and promptitude which, as your Excellency is well aware, he bestows upon all subjects relating to the welfare of Russian subjects, especially of those who by their enterprise and energy have contributed to the enlargement and development of the Empire. The Emperor recalls with pleasure all that has been ac- complished by our bold navigators m the discovery of islands and coasts of America; their efforts and successes, their losses and the dangers incurred in the settlement of regions theretofore unknown, the natural riches of which they were the first to gather in and to lay be- fore the civilized world. These achievements doubtless gave us the right to look for commensurate advantages from those regions, and His Majesty’s ministers will not during the present negotiations ignore, nor have they at any other time ignored, this point of view. But while endeavoring to preserve the advantages gained under such difficulties, and while anxious to obtain others by all legitimate means, we must not forget that there may be other more important public interests and requirements imposing other more important duties upon the Govern- ment. I consider it unnecessary, my dear Sir, to explain to you, who are thoroughly versed in all branches of the science of government, that in political negotiations we can not confine ourselves to weighing only the greater or lesser immediate advantage involved in a question. His THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 65 Majesty’s ministers primarily consider the right and justice of a ques- tion, and when right or justice can not be obtained without sacrifice, they make the lesser interests yield to the greater, and above all they strive to secure the object in view without 1 resort to force or embroil- ment with friendly powers. Without such sentiments no success could be expected in any negotiations, and these principles will guide the plenipotentiaries named by His Imperial Majesty to negotiate the ques- tions in which the Russian American Company is interested. Our cabinet, by the right of discovery, first settlement, and development, claims sovereignty over the islands and western coast of America from the northernmost point to the 55th degree of northern latitude. Great Britain, on the other hand, advances the rights of the Hudson’s Bay Company, whose trading posts and stations are being pushed farther and farther into the interior of the country, and have almost reached the Northwest Coast under the same parallel. The basis upon which these confleting claims are founded is almost identical, and it can not be denied that through injudicious action on either side the most serious and unfortunate consequences might at any time arise. Prudence de- mands a speedy agreement between both sides interested. The most practicable solution seemed this: To establish at a certain distance from the shore a boundary line which both our trappers and hunters and the employés of the Hudson’s Bay Company must be for- bidden to cross. The representatives of both powers recognized the necessity of such a boundary, but the width of the strip of coast necessary for the peaceable prosecution of the enterprises of our Colonies, the direction of the line, and its initial point on the mainland of America, are subjects still under discussion, since the envoy of His Britannic Majesty declares he must wait for further in- structions from his court. It is hardly necessary for me to repeat that in all these negotiations with England we have recognized, and always will recognize, the paramount importance of the interests of the Russian American Company in this matter; on the other hand, we must consider the extent of rights in the interior and the most practicable means of securing and maintaining the same. As I observe above, it is necessary for the peaceable existence of our Col- onies that their boundaries be defined with the greatest possible accuracy. The extent of territory between the coast and this boundary should be sufficient for the requirements of all our establishments now exisiting, as well as of such as may be founded in the future. At this point, most gracious Sir, you will permit me to remark that we have no right or power to extend our claims in the interior of the American continent to the Rocky Mountains. Such claims would. only give rise to disputes and possible complications without any visible aa antages resulting therefrom. On the other hand it is your Excellency’s own opinion that those regions are nearly barren and without proper soil to produce breadstufts for our Colonies, and since the principal and almost exclu- sive industry of our settlers consists in the capture, not of land, but of marine animals, there seems to exist no necessity for an extended terri- tory to the eastward of the boundary now proposed. Consequently there can be no cause for a dispute on the subject of fixing the boun- dary of this strip of coast. We must also consider that as long as we avoid such disputes, the neighborhood of an enlightened people can not pe injurious, but must be of ‘advantage to the Colonies, affording facili- ties for the purchase of supplies in case of need. There is no reason to apprehend that the mere fact of having such a neighbor would compel us to abandon any of the islands and coast heretofore occupied by us 9 » 66 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO south of the sixtieth degree of latitude. Such were the conclusions ar- rived at by His Imperial Majesty on reading your Excellency’s communi- cation. One point referred to in your letter especially attracted His Majesty’s attention, namely, where you, dear Sir, asserted that in consequence of England’s demands Kussia would be obliged to yield or give up many natives of America who had been conver ted to christianity by us. To lose subjects who had voluntarily come under his sceptre, and sons of the Russian Church, would certainly be repugnant to our great- hearted Monarch, but from all the information which I have been able to collect it would appear that on the coast below the fifty-fifth degree of latitude, or at any great distance from the sea-coast in the interior, there exists no settlements of the Company or native inhabitants con- verted to the Greco-Russian faith, and as to any extention of our set- tlements to the northward I venture to consider it somewhat improb- able. Having acquainted you (as far as I may while respecting the secrecy of diplomatic negotiations) with the present status of our arrange- ments with England, I turn to another subject of interest to your excelleney and all the members of the Company’s board of managers, the negotiations with the North American Republic, which have been brought to a successful conclusion. The convention which was entered into on the 5th of April, 1824, and of which I inclose an abstract for your information, consists of an agreement arrived at by mutual consent, and the clauses of which, in my opinion, will be mutually satisfactory and highly beneficial. In article ILI the United States acknowledge the sovereignty of Russia over the west coast of America from the Polar Sea to latitude 54° 40/ north, while we, on our side, promise to establish no settlements below that latitude, with the exception of such as have been already made, espec- ially the Ross colony in California. By article II the States undertake to forbid their citizens and subjects from landing in any part of the Russian Colonies without special permission of the local authori- ties. In article I’ it is agreed that the Americans will not sell to the savage inhabitants of the territory belonging to Russia any strong liquors, the cause of all evil among unenlightened peoples, and, what is still more important, they agree to abstain from selling them any firearms. Hereby we have been fortunate enough to abolish, by means of diplomacy, at one stroke the principal cause of all disorders and bloodshed in that distant country, and we have thus laid the founda- tion for the peaceable existence of our Colonies. In article [V we per- mit the American States.to carry on for a period not exceeding ten years trading and fishing in localities situate within our possessions. To this clause, advantageous to them, our cabinet found itself obliged to consent for two very important reasons. IT irst, because the Govern- ment of the North American Republic, not unre: wsonably, demanded an equivalent for the great advantages conceded to us in other articles of the convention, especially those of article V. Second, because the Americans had ‘been for some time engaged in this trade and fishery, which the Company has thus far been unable to prevent them from doing; and because, on the other hand, it was much better that they should accept as a special and temporary privilege from our hands what they might come to look upon as a natural right in course of time; since now the Americans acknowledge officially that at the ex- 1 Sic. It was doubtless intended to refer to article Vv THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 67 piration of a few short years we have the legal power to entirely pro- hibit trading and fishing in that region. The Emperor has deigned to approve the articles of the convention by which the demands and interests of both contracting parties have been considered as much as possible. " an of September, 1864, PART II.—_ILLUSTRATING RUSSIAN MANAGEMENT OF THE SEAL ISLANDS. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company to Alexander Andreievitch Baranof, Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies. Written from St. Petersburg, April 6, 1817. The board of administration of the Company incloses herewith for your information a copy of a report from the Kiakhta office, relating to the favorable reception by the Chinese at Kiakhta of fur-seal skins, and desires you to use your best endeavors to send to Okhotsk for the Kiakhta market such kinds of furs as are preferred by the Chinese, and not to send any young sea lion skins. {Inclosure.] Report of the Kiakhta office to the Board of Administration of the Russian Americun Company. No. 137.] FEBRUARY 8th, 1817. This office had the honor to receive on the first instant the order of the board of administration, dated December 14, 1816, No. 715, in which directions are given in disposing of the fur-seal skins rec eived by the ship Suvorof to observe what kinds of skins are preferred. In_refer- ence to this the oftice has the honor to report that the fur-seal skins from both the ships Honstantin and Suvorof were sold together, but it was noticed, from the manner in which the skins were received by the THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 81 Chinese, that the 450 bachelor and young bull skins from the ship Suvorof were not accepted as California skins, which are considered by the Chinese to be worth one and a half times as much as the grays. The bulls and young bulls received by the Konstantin are valued still higher than the bachelors, although the hair on them is coarse and can not be utilized; the skins, however, are large, of good texture, and of whitish-yellow color, the hair being plucked out so as to leave only the fur on the skin. The fur thus obtained is dyed and is then re: vdy for use. The grays from the ship Swvorof have cleaned skin, but short hair, and are rather thin. They were valued lower than those from the Kon- stantin, which, although of a paler color and with reddish spots, are larger in size and have a thieker and longer fur. Our friends (the Chi- nese) are very particular as to quality, and not less particular as to size; they sort and measure by inches, and they therefore valued the skins brought by the Konstantin ligher than the bachelors aud grays from the Suvorof. The young sea lion skins received by this office have been exhibited, but inasmuch as they have no fur and short hair, though they make a very good hide, our friends refused to take them at aly price, but asked that they be given a couple of skins to take to Kal- gan, where they might ascertain by experiment whether they could be utilized for any purpose. DEMETRI KUZNE'TZOF, Manager. VASSILI JOUKOFP, Bookkeeper. No. 22. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain of the first rank and Knight Adolf Carlovitch Etholin, Chief Manager of the Russian American colonies. Written from St. Petersburg, March 8, 1843. The regulations of the fur-seal industry mentioned in your dispatch No. 287, of May 9, 1543, are fully approved and confirmed by the board of adminiscration, and the proposed close season on the Island of St. George and the Commander Islands is hereby ordered. For the pur- pose of preserving this most valuable resource, the board of adminis- tration respectfully requests you to make it your permanent rule to conduct the annual catch in such a manner that not only the rookeries will not be depleted, but that they will be allowed to increase, 7. e., that the annual increase should always exceed the annual catch. In order not to disturb prices at.present, an annual shipment of 10,000 fur-seal skins to Russia will suffice. WRANGEL, A. SEVERIN, N. PROKOFYEFP, N. Kusor, Directors. 11 82 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO No. 23. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain of the Imperial Navy of the second nas Alexander Llitch Rudakof. Written from St. Petersburg, April 22, 1853. From dispatches received from your Excellency’s predecessor we learn that the fur-seals in the Colonies are rapidly increasing, and as there is every appearance of a good market for the same, the board of adminis- tration instructs you herewith to make all necessay arrangements for carrying on the sealing industry on all the islands frequented by these animals to the full extent of their capacity, without depleting the rook- eries. The rules for the protection of females, ete., will be strictly ob- served as heretofore. Of the fur-seal catch you will forward annually 6,000 skins to Kiakhta by way of Ayan; 10,000 skaus to Shanghai, and the remainder to St. Petersburg on the Company’s ships. At the present time, the board of administration orders the discon- tinuance of the present process of salting skins, as being unfavorable to the sale of fur-seal skins. V. POLITKOVSKY, Presiding Officer. V. KLUPFEL, A. ETHOLIN, N. KUSOF, Baron WRANGELL, Members. No. 24. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain of the First Rank and Knight Stepan Vassilicvitch Voyevodsky, chief manager of the Russian American Colonies. Written Srom St. Peter sburg, April 24, 1854. In his dispatch, No. 318, dated May 30, 1853, Captain Rudakof, in reporting the increase of fur-seals on the Tsland of St. Paul, and his action relating to the fur-seal industry, requests a decision from the board of administration as to the number of seals to be killed in the future, and the grade of skins preferred. The board of administration, therefore, respectfully requests your excellency to order the killing ‘principally of bachelors, the older the better, since our customers are eager to secure large skins. Small seals should be killed only in numbers sufficient to supply the demand for oil and food for the natives. Since, however, at present, the demand for fur-seal skins has somewhat diminished, the catch may be limited to such a number as will not interfere with a regular increase, until a greater demand has again been created. To this end the board of managers is devoting all its energies. V. KLUPFEL, Presiding Officer. A. EPHOLIN, N. KUSOF, Baron WRANGELL, Members. THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 83 Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Com- pany to Captain of the second rank Prince Maksutof, chief manager of the Russian American Colonies. Written from St. Petersburg, Novem- ber 8, 1854. At the present time the market for fur-seal skins is limited*to the number of 43,000, namely: In New York, from 20,000 to 21,000; at St. Petersburg, from 15,000 to 16,000, and at Irkutsk, from 5,000 to 6,000 skins, which must all be of the best quality, 7. e., full-grown males, half grown males, large and medium bachelors. . The whole number sent to New York may be salted, but the buyers demand that all fat or blubber be removed very carefully previous to salting, for the better preservation and further preparation of the skins. The skins may be shipped to New York by San Francisco, preferably as supplementary freight on the clippers of the New York and Cali- fornia trade,as in this manner they can be forwarded quite cheaply. At St. Petersburg only dried skins are in demand. These should be shipped in our own vessels, but in the absence of such, they may also be shipped by San Francisco or Victoria, preferably on ships bound for London, where they will be consigned to Pelly & Co., ov to Hamburg, consigned to Strong & Co., thence to be forwarded to their destination, since no ships bound for St. Petersburg or Kronstadt can be found at San Francisco, and to charter special vessels is very expensive. At Irkutsk also, only dry skins are required; they may be forwarded by Ayan. At the same time the board of administration asks you to make arrangements to enable you, with the proposed increase in the fur-seal catch to 50,000 skins per annum, to ship 43,000 as indicated above in due time to their several destinations, storing the remainder at New Archangel for use in case of special demands. In order that these stored skins may not spoil in the warehouses you will make it a rule to ship the reserve of each year to Russia in the following year, replac- ing them from the new surplus. The killing of small seals should be avoided altogether, if possible, but if it must be done, for the sake of procuring food, you must find means of using the skins for clothing in the Colonies, keeping a strict watch to prevent their falling into the hands of foreign traders. In the opinion of the board there can be no difficulty in preparing such small skins in the Colonies, where so many men are in need of employment whom we can more easily assist in this way than with direct charity. In connection with this object of finding a market for the small seal- skins, the board of administration would ask you to introduce their use as an article of clothing among the savages of the northern dis- tricts who may purchase them with other furs, which the Company could dispose of at a greater profit. The principal object in trying to accustom the natives to the use of small fur-seal skins for their cloth- ing is of course to prevent their falling into the hands of foreigners. V. KLUPFEL, Presiding Officer. N. TEBENKOF, V. ZAVOIKO, Members. 84 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO No. 26. Letter from the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company to penlaie of the first rank and Knight Stepan Vassilie- vitch Voyevodsky, Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies. Written from St. Petersburg, June 5, 1857. In reply to your excellency’s despatch No. 41, of March 9, concern- ing the shipment of furs a New York and Shanghai, the board of administration has the honor to inform you that the annual demand for fur-seal skins in Russia has now increased to 15,000 dry skins, of which 5,000 are for the Kiakhta market; at this place only 2,000 beavers will be required. The remaining number of fur- seals, 12,000 or more, principally salted (in which shape they are preferred), you will dispatch in the autumn to Messrs. Lobach & Scheppler of New York immediately after the arrival of the ship from the districts, with- out subjecting the skins to any kind of treatment at New Archangel, leaving them just as they are when they arrive from the districts, and in the same packages. At the same time the board of administration places upon the men in charge of sealing gangs the strictest injunctions to discontinue the killing of small gray seals, and in no ease to ship them away from the Colonies, since they seriously interfere with profitable sales of ftr- seals in Russia and in foreign markets, where only the larger skins secure good prices. V. POLITKOVSKY, Presiding Officer. V. KLUPFEL A. ETHOLIN, M. TEBENKOF, Members. No. 27. Letter from the Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies to the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company. Written from the Colonies, October 7, 1857. CONCERNING FUR-SEALS AND BEAVERS. Referring to the dispatches of the board, Nos. 655 and 650, dated re- spectively June 5 and 10, and received on the 7th of September of this year, I have the honor to report that the instructions contained therein in regard to fur-seals and beavers will be carried into effect at once. From the fur-seal skins on hand 10,060 have been packed and forwarded by the ship Cearevitch to Kronstadt; 5,000 skins will be put aside for shipment to Kiakhta by way of Ayan; and the remainder, about 5,000 skins, not including grays, will be torwarded to New York, together with all the beaver skins which can be collected, except the 2,000 skins destined for Kiakhta. The fur-seal skins require no working over in New Archangel, but when the fact is taken into consideration that they will have to stand the passage across the equator and the tropics twice, it will hardly be safe to send them to New York, as indicated in the dispatch of the board, in the same packages iu which they are received from the vari- THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 85 ous districts, 7. e., in bundles of several tens of skins, bound by leather straps. According to information received by me from Messrs. Lobech and Sheppler, the people at New York were greatly pleased with the way in which our skins were forwarded and packed, the same having been received in good order, and it is probable that it would be better to con- tinue packing in the same way, and, by way of experiment, to send two or three packages in the condition in which they are received from the colonial districts. Messrs. Lobech and Sheppler advised that in packing the skins should not be folded on account of their liability to break at the folds; this advice will be followed in future in shipping of skins around the world. The salting of fur-seals, which had been stopped by order of the board, will be renewed next year; but inasmuch as the orders to that effect will reach the islands of St. Paul and St. George not earlier than in the summer of that year, the receipt of a sufficient number of salted skins from those islands in the same year can not be guaranteed. The experiment of salting fur-seal skins in New Archangel will also be made. In regard to gray seals, I have the honor to express the opinion that the number of such seals taken should be increased. Until now, only such number of these seals was taken as was necessary for obtaining blubber to supply the wants of the Aleuts on the islands and to send to St. Michael’s redoubt in exchange for skins furnished by the inde- pendent natives, but of late the demand for blubber in New Archangel itself has been on the increase by reason of the increase in the number of steamers and engines. The blubber to be found in this market comes very high, and in order to reduce the expense 1 sent orders to the islands of St. Paul and St. George for supplies of fur-seal blubber, and have now received about a thousand gallons of seal oil, the cost of which at San Francisco would be about 8,000 paper rubles. In view of the above stated consid- erations, while issuing orders for the suppression, as far as practicable, of the killing of small gray seals, fit only for oil and meat, as winter supplies, I find it necessary to request definite instructions from the board of administration as to the absolute suspension of such killing. Should, however, the board, in view of the above-stated circumstances, authorize the killing of gray seals in such quantities as may be neces- sary for the supplies of blubber and meat required by the natives and residents on the islands of St. Paul and St. George, in such case the question will arise as to the disposition of the skin. At the present time, there are about 5,000 such skins in the ware- house, and if about 3,000 skins a year be taken, then in a few years a quantity will be accumulated which will require a correspondingly large place of storage. I am inclined to the opinion that in case the sending of such skins to Russia and foreign markets should prove un- profitable, an attempt might be made to dispose of them in the colonies for making garments and coats, which, if the tanning is good, may be substituted for sheep-skin coats. As an experiment a few garments might be made from the skins now lying unused in warehouses. In conclusion, I have the honor to report to the board of adminis- tration that according to information now received, the fur-seal rook- eries In all places, but particularly on the island of St. Paul, are so crowded that all available points for breeding are filled and they ap- pear to be adequate so that an extension of the catch is deemed indis- peusable; and this will be carried into effect next year. 86 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO No. 28. Letter from the Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies to the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company. Written JSrom the Colonies, January 13, 1859. CONCERNING FUR-SEALS. In accordance with the instructions of the board of administration in dispatch No. 697, dated June 5, 1858, and received on the 2d of No- vember, there were sent by the ship Kamchatka, in addition to the 10,000 ordered by former instructions, 10,664 skins which had been prepared and packed before the receipt of dispatch No. 697, for shipment to New York; thereafter there remained 3,600 dry skins and 1,176 salted skins, which are now sent per brig Kadiak to San Francisco, for transmission to Messrs. Lobach and Sheppler. In regard to the inquiry of the board as to the number of fur- seals which might be taken annually in the Colonies without detri- ment to the preservation of the species and to the rookeries, I have the honor to report that, according to information received from the manager of the Pribilof Islands, where the most important rook- eries are situated, and from the Commander Islands, the numbers of seals on all the rookeries have increased to such an extent as to render the space quite inadequate, and that it would be quite possible to take from all the rookeries a total of 70,000 skins in one season, including the grays, but that in order to take such quantity, it would be necessary to increase the number of sealers on the Pribilof Islands, and the sup- ply of firewood for the drying of the skins. It may be positively stated that the taking of 70,000 skins each year for a long period to come, will not result in the impoverishment of the rookeries, No. 29. Letter from Captain of the first rank and Knight Ivan Vassiliviteh Furuhelm, Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies, to the Board of Administration of the Russian American Company. Written Jrom the Colonies, May 13, 1860. IT have the honor to submit to you herewith a list of the furs obtained during the past year from the districts of the colonies, from which the board. will learn the following: Hight hundred and ninety- tw o more sea-otters were killed than in the year "1858. There has not been so good a season since 1844, and the in- crease is confined to the Kadiak district, Unalaska, and Urupa. With reference to the sea-otter industry, the Kadiak office reports to me that pursuant to the arrangements made by my predecessor the Chugatch people living in the vicinity of the Konstantin redoubt, have been permitted to hunt independently of the general hunting p: wty, in places known only to themselves. On their arrival at Kadiak, how- ver, it appeared that they had been hunting on grounds upon which a Gee season had been proclaimed tor 1859, and where our principal party was to have hunted during the current year. Under such untor- tunate circumstances, | can not hope to meet with the same success in THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 87 the sea-otter industry as Rear Admiral Voyevodsky attained during the last year of his management of the Colonies. Of beavers 760 more were killed last year than in 1858. The annual difference in the figures of this industry depends altogether upon local and climatic circumstances, to which the northern natives are more or less exposed. The excess of this year over last came chiefly from St. Michaels and the Kolmakovsky redoubts. Castoreums also shown an excess of 470 pair over 1858. Of fur -seals the output was 11,160 less than in 1858. The reason for this decrease given by the manager of the island of St. Paul is the late spring, during g which the females were prevented by ice from reach- ing their hauling grounds and thereby lost their young. In explanation of - this occurrence I inclose a copy of the report of Mr. Repin, the manager of the island. I have dispatched Lieutenant Wehrman, of the Imperial Navy, to superintend the new buildings on St. Paul Island and to reorganize the laboring force, which had become demoralized to a certain extent. An excess of 1,145 in this year’s output over that of last year appeared as to foxes, and of 1,174 as to blue foxes. A decrease appears in lynx of 178 and in sables ‘of 219. According to the report of the manager of Copper Island, sea-otters are increasing there, and I have issued the strictest orders to prevent their being disturbed. On Atka Island a decrease in sea-otters has necessitated declaring a close season. Only one poud and thirty-six pounds of walrus ivory have been received. The manager of Unga Island reports that on the northern side of the Alaska peninsula, in Moller Bay, five hundred pounds were obtained in 1856 and 1857, and stored there. On his visit to Moller Bay, in 1858, the ivory was not found, the walrus rookery had been destroyed, and the storehouse burned. Who committed this robbery is not known, but a few pieces of pilot bread and other remnants of food, as well as an oar from a whaleboat and tracks of boots, point to the commission of the deed by whalers. This I have the honor to report to the board of administration. [Copy of letter of Repin, manager of the island of St. Paul, dated June 20, 1859, addressed to the Chief Manager. ] Most GRActous Sir: I write to you to let you know that I received all your orders and instructions and also other instructions from the captain of the steamer. I see that you wish me to have killed on both islands not less than 60,000 fur seals of various grades. I would say to you, most gracious sir, that in my opinion it would not be advisable to kill so large a number this year on St. Paul Island. The female seals came this year in May at the usual time after the “sekatches” had landed. Only a few had come ashore, when, with a strong northwest wind, the ice came from the north. It closed around the islands and was kept there by the wind for thirteen days. The ice ‘was much broken and was kept in motion by the sea. It is an actual fact, most gracious sir, that the females could not reach the shore through the i ice. Some of the Aleuts went out as far as it was safe to go on the larger pieces of ice, and they saw the water full of seals. When the northwest gale ceased, the ice remained for nearly a week longer, beiag ground up in the heavy swell, and no females could land. A few “sekatches” tried to go out to sea, but did not succeed. 88 RUSSIAN CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO On the 10th of June the first females began to land, but they came slowly, and it was very late when the rookeries began to fill. Very few of the females—no more than one out of twenty or twenty-five—had their young after they came ashore. Nearly all must have lost them in the water, as for many weeks since the ice went away the bodies of young seals have been washed up by the seain thousands. This misfor- tune | must humbly report to you. It was not the work of man, but of God. Your very hunble servant, IvAN REPIN, Manager of St. Paul Island. —_—_— No. 3 Letter from Captain of the first rank and Knight Ivan Vassilivitch Furuhelm, Chief Manager of the Russian American Colonies, to the board of administration of the Russian American Company. Written JSrom the Colonies, July 16, 1863. In reply to the communication addressed to my predecessor by the board of administration January 31st of this year, No. 111, I have the honor to submit for your consideration the subjoined statement of the cost of preparing the dried and salted fur-seal skins: REQUIRED FOR THE DRYING OF SEALSKINS. Rubles. Wood for each 1,000 skins, 24 fathoms, making the cost of each skin.....----- 2.85 For tying the bundle of 100 skins, 12 arshin sea lion-hide str: ups (a medium-sized skin worth 40 kopek yields 16 arshin straps), making for one skin.......--. 10 Potala 2 nFacses-wss nines oi sa siss Se tlowe hace wse ose Sse eee eee eeeeee 2.95 Cio ae eet ee ee ee tem ED RRC a Le tnd ein SO eae 3. 00 To this we must add the pay of the Aleuts for each bachelor seal skin-..-.---- 75. 00 Total o.22.055 Sakae os 228k s oe ee eee eee seco ere eas Eee eee 78. 00 REQUIRED FOR THE SALTING OF SEAL SKINS. The casks contain an average of 73 skins, and cost 5 rubles; the iron hoops and fastenings weigh 17 pounds, costing 67. 80k., a total of 11”. 80k., mak- Ine ford Slain Ae eae Seen he Meions ale oer afce aiiis wie eats eeitere ee hee ee .16 Vor the preliminary salting on the islands 34 pouds of salt are used for each skin; during the final salting in New Archangel, 8 pouds of salt are 59 added to each cask of 73 skins, making 4.4 pouds for each skin, a total OL. SmpoudSiot walt Ls Aes. Sasa Se eae ee ie oe are ee et eee eS ~19 Ia abate rea avis fanILS TAL ry nhs eAois Soo eSB SBS eek Gaea sods bsscoece cen - 024 l’or the wear and tear of coopers’ instruments and material, approximately for each iskkimy.f2.3%6 ons blo sale State Be. Be See ee O01 Total v5.25 fo. ees date Re ie ate» ee eee ne cen ae . 98 To this must be added the pay of the Aleuts for each batchelor fur-seal skin 75 Total: 0. ead Os eS ES ceehe SIS AES ee re ee Sgt ee 1.73 Concerning the processes employed in preparation according to both methods, I have the honor to report to the board of administration. The dried fur-seal skins are prepared as follows: After separating the skin from the meat and carefully removing the blubber, the skin is stretched upon a frame, remaining thus until it is finally dried. After removing the skin from the frame it is folded twice lengthwise and THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. 89 packed in bales containing from 50 to 100 skins, according to size, and finally the bales are bound with sea-lion straps. The salted fur-seal skins are treated as follows, in accordance with the instructions of Mollison, inclosed in a dispatch of the board of administration, No. 81, of January 25, 1860. After the skins are removed and stripped of meat or fat, they are strewn with salt and stacked in kenches. Later, when the laborers have more time the skins are taken from the kenches and the inner side of each skin covered with a thick layer of salt. Another skin is laid on top of this with its inner side down. Any protruding edges of the skins are apt to spoil, being removed from the influence of the salt; consequently they are carefully doubled in and both skins together rolled into a cylindrical shape. This roll is then lashed with strong seine twine. Tinally the rolls are again tied together in bundles of from five to ten. Though the labor of carrying the skins on the shoulders of men and women, the carrying of salt from the beach to the salt houses, and later the carrying of the heavy salted skins from the magazine to the beach to be loaded into bidaras for transmittal to the ship is very great, yet the process of drying presents still greater difficulties on account of the constant fog and rain prevailing on the Pribilof Islands. It may be positively stated that of the 25,000 dried skins prepared annually on these islands less than one fifth can be dried in the air. The re- mainder are dried in sod houses by the means of fires, or in the huts of: the Aleuts, which are anyway too small and ill ventilated. For this reason and also on account of the difficulty of obtaining wood in quan- tities sufficient for the drying of seal skins, the salting by the Mollison method offers the greatest advantage. No. 31. Letter from the Chief Manaaer of the Russian American Colonies to the Manager of the island of St. Paul. Written from Sitka May 1, 1864. Your reports forwarded last year by the steamship Konstantin and the bark Prince Menshikof have been received, and in reply I give you the following instructions: As to No. 29. Last year you were instructed to fill requisitions of the manager of Unalaska Island in a certain contingency. Instructions have now been given to the manager of the island of St. George here- after to furnish Unalaska with local products, and it will be your duty as heretofore to see to the supply of local products for Sitka and St. Michael’s redoubt. As to Nos. 30,31. For want of space on the brig Shelikof I was unable to grant permission to Mrs. Jraida Herman to visit this year the island of St. Paul, and for the same reason I could not send you a cow or a bull. As to No. 32. In my instructions No. 249 of last year I determined the number of fur-seal skins to be taken by you in each year. By order of the board of administration I revoke said instructions No. 249, as well as all previous instructions concerning the eateh of fur- seals. I now direct you to take hereafter annually about 70,000 fur- seal skins, of which 25,000 shall be dried and the remaining 45,000 baited according to the new directions in your possession, 12 90 THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY. The 70,000 skins now ordered to be prepared you must take only in case no decrease in the numbers of the animals is observed, otherwise you must immediately advise me for the purpose of having the number reduced with a view to preserve fur seals for subsequent years. As these instructions will reach you late in the season, and as you will consequently be unable to prepare the whole quantity of fur-seal skins now required, I have to request that you will endeavor to take and salt not less than 10,000 skins during the time occupied by the trip of the vessel from St. Paul to St. Michael’s redoubt and back, and to put them on board of the vessel on her second visit to the island. Last year you sent only 10,000 dried skins, while the order was to send about 20,000. In future you must endeavor to strictly fill the orders. As to No. 34. You will make a report to my successor as to the re- wards to deserving employés. He will probably visit your island in the course of this year. As to No. 36. I thank you for your efforts in regard to the vaccina- tion of the inhabitants, and I request that you will not neglect the matter in future. In regard to your request for the admission of your son to the gen- eral colonial school of the Company at the Company’s expense, I have to inform you that this school is not fully organized for the reception of boarders, and I therefore advise you to place your son as a boarder with one of your sisters here who receive pensions; your son when residing at Sitka can attend the school on the same terms as the day pupils of the Company. The brig Shelikof will carry to you a cargo of supplies which you will discharge, sending on the same vessel the accumulated furs as well as your reports. Besides this vessel, you will be visited by the steamer Konstantin on her return trip from Nushagak; this vessel will bring you about 2,500 pounds of salt, and probably some logs. I have ordered skipper. Archimandritof to proceed by this brig for an inspection of the island under your care; you are therefore directed to comply with all his requests. NOTICE ISSUED BY ats NITED STATES GOVERNMENT V 1845. No. 2017. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Department of State. To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting: I certify that a notice, of which the annexed is a copy, was, at the direction of this Department, published on the 26th day of September, 1845, in the Daily Union newspaper of the city of Washington. In testimony whereof, I, John W. Foster, Secretary of State of the United States, have hereunto subscribed my name and caused the seal of the Department of State to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington this Ist day of August, A. D. 1892, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and seventeenth. [SEAL] JOHN W. FOSTER. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, September 26, 1845. The Russian Minister at Washington has informed the Secretary of State that the Imperial Government, desirous of affording official pro- tection to the Russian territories in North America against the infrae- tions of foreign vessels, has authorized cruisers to be established for this purpose along the coast by the Russian-American Company. It is, therefore, recommended to American vessels to be careful not to violate the existing aos eaty between the two countries, by resorting to any point upon the Russian American coast where there is a Russian establishment, without the permission of the governor or commander, nor to frequent the interior seas, gulfs, harbor s, and creeks upon that coast at any point north of the latitude of 54° 40’ 91 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT RELA- TIVE TO ALASKA SINCE THE CESSION. Pages. Laws-enactedi by Conoresssecmnseccieeece ect c ct ce esse eemieee © oe mele 92-99 Action of the Exee utive by Sips lds ey IY act Ry Sn OE ee ae ge SM 99-113 Decisionsvotiuhe Uniteds states) Courtsss se oo one cee aoe eee eee ee 113-124 LAWS ENACTED BY CONGRESS. A resolution more efficiently to protect the fur-seal in Alaska, Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the islands of St. Paul and St. George in Alaska be, and they are hereby, declared a special reserva- tion for Government purposes; and that, until otherwise provided by law, it shall be unlawful for any person to land or remain on either of said islands, except by the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury ; and any person found on either of said islands, contrary to the provi- sions of this resolution, shall be summarily removed; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War to carry this resolution immediately into effect, Approved, March 3, 1869, An act to prevent the extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it shall be unlawful to kill any fur-seal upon the islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, or in the waters adjacent thereto, except during the months of June, ‘July, September and October in each year, and it shall be unlawful to kill such seals at any time by the use of fire-arms, or use other means tend- ing to drive the seals away from said islands: Provided, That the natives of said islands shall have the privilege of killing such young seals as may be necessary for their own food and clothing during other months, and also such old seals as may be required for their own clothing and for the manufacture of boats for their own use, which killing shall be limited and controlled by such regulations as shall be pr escribed by the Secretarv of the Treasury. Sno. 2. And be it further enacted, that it shall be unlawful to kill any female seal, or any seal less than one year old, at any season of the year, except as above provided; and it shail also be unlawful to kill any seal in the waters adjacent to said islands, or on the beaches, cliffs, or rocks where they haul up from the sea to remain; and any person who shall violate either of the provisions of this or the first section of this act shall be punished, on conviction thereof, for such offence by a 92 LAWS ENACTED BY CONGRESS. 93 fine of not less than two hundred dollars, nor more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not exceedin g six months, or by such fine and 1 impr isonment both, at the discretion of the court having jurisdiction by taking cognizance of the offence; and all vessels, their tackle, ap- parel, and fur niture, whose crew shall be found engaged in the violation of any of the provisions of this act shall be forfeited to the United States. Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, that for the period of twenty years from and after the passing of this act the number of fur seals which may be killed for their skins upon the island of Saint Paul is hereby limited and restricted to seventy-five thousand per annum; and the number of fur-seals which may be killed for their skins upon the island of Saint George is hereby limited and restricted to twenty-five thousand per annum: Pr ovided, That the Secretary of the Treasury may restrict and limit the right of killing if it shall become necessary for the preser- vation of such seals with such proportionate reduction of the rents re- served to the Government as shall be right and proper, and if any per- son shall knowingly violate either of the provisions of this section he shall, upon due conviction thereof, be punished in the same way as pro- vided her:in for a violation of the provisions of the first and second sections of this act, Sic. 4. And be it further enacted, that immediately upon the passage of this act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall lease for the rental men- tioned in section six of this act, to proper and responsible parties, to the advantage of the United States having due regard to the interests of the Government, the native inhabitants, the parties heretofore en- gaged in trade, and the protection of the seal fisheries for a term of twenty years from the first day of May, eighteen hundred and seventy, the right to engage in the business of taking fur seals on the islands of Saint Paul and Saint Geor ge, and tosend avesselorvesselsto said islands for the skins of such seals, giving to the lessee or lessees of said islands a lease, duly executed in duplicate not transferable, and taken from the lessee or lessees of said islands a bond with sufficient securities in a sum not less than five hundred thousand dollars conditioned for the faithful observance of all the laws and requirements of Congress and of the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury touching the sub- ject-matter of taking fur seal, and disposing of the same, and for the payment of all taxes and dues according to the United States connected therewith, and in making said lease the Secretary of the Treasury shall have due regard to the preservation of the seal-fur trade of said islands and the comfort, maintenance, and education of the natives thereof. The said lesses shall furnish to the several masters of vessels employed by them certified copies of the lease held by them respectively, which shall be presented to the Government revenue officer for the time being who may be in charge at the said islands as the authority of the party for landing and taking skins. SEC. 5. And be it further enacted, That at the expiration of said term of twenty years or on surrender or ’ forfeiture of any lease, other ieases may be made in manner aforesaid for other terms of twenty years; but no persons other than American citizens shall be permitted by lease or otherwise, to occupy said islands or either of them, for the purpose of taking the skins of fur seals therefrom, nor shall any foreign vessel be engaged in taking such skins, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall vacate and declare any lease forfeited if the same be held or operated for the use, benefit, or advantage, directly or indirectly, of any person or persons other than American citizens. Every lease shall contain a 94 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. covenant on the part of the lessee that he will not keep, sell, furnish, give, or dispose of any distilled spirits or spirituous liquor Son either of said islands to any of the natives thereof, such person not being a phy- sician and furnishing the same for use as medicine; and any person who shall kill any fur seal on either of said islands, or in the waters adjacent thereto, without authority of the lessees thereof, and any person who shall molest, disturb, or interfere with said lessees, or either of them, or their agents or employés in the lawful prosec ution of their business under the provisions of this act, shall be deemed guilty of a misde- meanor, and shall for each offense on conviction thereof, be punished in the same way and by like penalties as prescribed in the second section of this act. And all vessels, their tackle, apparel, appurtenances, and cargo, whose crews shall be ‘found engaged in any violation of either of the provisions of this section, shall be forfeited to the United States; and if any person or company under any lease herein authorized, shi ill knowingly kill, or permit to be killed, any number of seals exceeding the number for each island in this act prescribed, such person or com- pany shall, in addition to the penalties and forfeitures aforesaid, also forfeit the whole number of the skins of seals killed in that year, or, in case the same have been disposed of, then said person or company shall forfeit the value of the same, and it shall be the duty of any reveuue officer officially acting as such on either of said islands to seize and de- stroy any distilled spirits or spiritous liquors found thereon: Provided, That such officer shall make detailed report of his doings to the collector of the port. SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That the annual rental to be re- served by said lease shall not be less than fifty thousand dollars per annum; to be secured by deposit of United States bonds to that amount, and in addition thereto a revenue tax as a duty, of two dol- lars, is ‘hereby laid upon each fur-seal skin taken and shipped from said islands during the continuance of such lease, to be paid into the Treasury of* the United States; and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby empowered and authorized to make all needful rules and regu- lations for the collection and payment of the same, for the comfort maintenance, education, and protection of the natives of said islands, and also for carrying into full effect all the provisions of this act: Provided further, That the Secretary of the Treasury may terminate any lease given to any person, company, or cor poration on full and satisfactory proot of the violation of any of the provisions of this act or the rules and regulations established by him: Provided further, That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized to deliver to the owners the fur-seal skins now stored on the island, on the payment of one dollar for each of said skins taken and shipped away by said owners. SEC. 7. And be it further enacted, That the provisions of the seventh and eighth sections of “An act to extend the laws of the United States relating tocustoms, commerce, and navigation over the territory ceded to the United States by Russia, to establish a collection district thereon, and for other purposes,” approved July twenty-seventh, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight,” shall be deemed to apply to this act, and all the prosecutions for offenses committed against the provisions of this act, and all other proceedings had because of the violations of the_ provisions of this act, and which are authorized by said act above men- tioned, shall be in accordance with the provisions thereof; and all acts and parts of acts inconsistent with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed. LAWS ENACTED BY CONGRESS. 95 SEc. 8. And be it further enacted, That the Congress may at any time hereafter alter, amend, or repeal this act. Approved July 1, 1870. REVISED STATUTES RELATING TO ALASKA. CHAPTER III.—Provisions relating to the wnorgunized Territory of Alaska. Sec. Sec. 1954. Customs, etc., laws extended to | 1964. Bond. Alaska. 1965. Who may lease. 1955. Importation of firearms and dis- | 1966. Covenants in lease. tilled spirits may be prohibited. | 1967. Penalty. 1956. Killing of fur-bearing animals pro- | 1968. Penalty upon leases. hibited. 1969. Tax upon seal skins. 1957. What courts to have jurisdiction of | 1970. Lease may be terminated. offenses. 1971. Lessees to furnish copies to masters 1958. Remission of fines, etc. of their vessels. 1959. St. Paul and St. George islands de- | 1972. Certain sections may be altered. clared special reservations. 1973. Agents and assistants to manage 1960. Killing of seal upon them prohib- ‘seal fisheries. ited except in certain months. 1974. Their pay, ete. 1961. Killing of certain seal prohibited. | 1975. Not to be interested in right to take 1962. Limit to number of seals to be seals. killed. 1976. Agents may administer certain 1963. Right to take seal may be leased. oaths and take testimony. Sec. 1954. The laws of the United States relating to customs, com- merce, and navigation, are extended to and over all the mainland, islands, and waters of the territory ceded to the United States by the Emperor of Russia by treaty concluded at Washington on the thirtieth day of March, A. D. one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven, so far as the same may be applicable thereto. . Sec. 1955. The President shall have the power to restrict and regu- late or to prohibit the importation and use of firearms, ammunition, and distilled spirits into and within the Territory of Alaska; the ex- portation of the same from any other port or place in the United States, when destined to any port or place in that Territory, and all such arms, ammunition, and distilled spirits exported or attempted to be exported from any port or place in the United States and destined for such Ter- rftory in violation of any regulations that may be prescribed under this section, and all such arms, ammunition, and distilled spirits landed or attempted to be landed or used at any port or place in the Territory, in violation of such regulations, shall be forfeited; and if the value of the same exceeds four hundred dollars, the vessel upon which the same is found, or from which they have been landed, together with her tackle, apparel, and furniture, and cargo, shall be forteited ; and any person willfully Violating such regulations shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than six months. Bonds may be rexuired for a faithful observance of such regulations from the master or owners of any vessel departing from any port i in the United States having on board firearms, ammunition, or distilled spirits, when such vessel is destined to any place i in the Ter ‘ritory, or if not so destined, when there is reasonable ground of suspicion that such arti- cles are intended to be landed therein in violation of law; and similar bonds may also be required on the landing of any such articles in the Territory from the person to whom the same may bé consigned. 96 : ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. SEc. 1956. No person shall kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur seal, or other fur-bearing animal, within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof; and ever y person guilty thereof shall, for each offense, be fined not less than two hundred doilars nor more than one thousand dollars, or imprisonment not more than six months, or both; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in violation of this section shall be forfeited. But the Secretary of the Treasury shall have power to authorize the killing of any such mink, marten, sable, or other fur-bearing animal, except fur seals, under such regulations as he may prescribe; and it shall be the duty of the Secre- tary to prevent the killing of any fur seal and to provide for the exeeu- tion of the provisions of this section until it is otherwise provided by law; nor shall he grant any special privileges under this section. Sec. 1957. Until otherwise provided by law, all violations of this chapter and of the several laws hereby extended to the Territory of Alaska and the waters thereof committed within limits of the same shall be prosecuted in any district court of the United States in Cali- fornia or Oregon, or in the district courts of Washington; and the col- lector and deputy collectors appointed for Alaska Territory, and any person authorized in writing by either of them, or by the Secretary of the Treasury, shall have-power to arrest persons and seize vessels and merchandise liable to fines, penalties, or forfeitures under this and the other laws extended over the Territory, and to keep and deliver the same to the marshal of some one of such courts; and such courts shall have original jurisdiction, and may take cognizance of all cases arising under this act and the several laws hereby extended over the Te vitory, and shall proceed therein in the same manner and with the like effect as if such cases had arisen within the district or territory where the proceedings are brought. SEC. 1958. In all cases of fine, penalty, or forfeiture embraced in the act approved the third March, one thousand sev en hundred and ninety- seven, chapter thirteen, or mentioned in any act in addition to or amendatory of such act, that have occurred or may oc cur in the collee- tion district of Alaska, the Sec retary of the Treasury is authorized, if, in his opinion, the fine, penalty, or forfeiture was incurred without will- ful negligence or intention of fraud, to ascertain the facts in such man- ner and under such regulations as he may deem proper without regard to the provisions of the act above referred to; and upon the facts so to be ascertained he may exercise ail the power of remission conferred upon him by that act, as fully as he might have done had such facts been ascertained under and according to the provisions of that act. Src. 1959. The islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, in Alaska, are declared a special reservation for Government purposes, and until otherwise provided by law it shall be unlawful for any person to land or remain on either of those islands, except by the authority of the Sec- retary of the Treasury, and any person found on either of those islands, contrary to the provisions hereof, shall be summarily removed; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War to carry this section into ef. fect. Sec. 1960. It shall be unlawful to kill any fur seal upon the islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, or in the waters adjacent thereto, ex- cept during the months of June, July, September, and October in each year; and “it shall be unlawful to kill ‘such seals at any time by the use of fire arms, or by other means tending to drive the seals away from those islands, but the natives of the islands shall have the privilege of killing such young seals as may be necessary for their own food and LAWS ENACTED BY CONGRESS. 97 clothing during other months, and also such old seals as may be required for their own clothing and for the manufacture of boats for their own use; and the killing in such cases shall be limited and controlled by such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. Sgec. 1961. It shall be unlawful to kill any female seal, or any seal less than one year old, at any season of the year, except as above provided; and it shall also be unlawful to kill any seal in the waters adjacent to the islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, or on the beaches, cliffs, or rocks where they haul up from the sea to remain; and every person who violates the provisions of this or the preceding section shall be punished for each offense by a fine of not less than two hundred dollars nor more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, and furniture, whose crews are found engaged in the violation of either this or the preceding section, shall be forfeited to the United States. SEco. 1962. For the period of twenty years from the first July, one thousand eight hundred and seventy, the number of fur seals which may be killed for their skins upon the island of Saint Paul is limited to seventy-five thousand per annum; and the number of fur-seals which may be killed for their skins upon the island of St. George is limited to twenty-five thousand per annum; but the Secretary of the Treasury may limit the right of killing, if it becomes necessary for the preserva- tion of such seals, with such proportionate reduction of the rents re- served to the Government as may be proper; and every person who knowingly violates either of the provisions of this section shall be pun- ished as provided in the preceding section. Sxc. 1963. When the lease heretofore made by the Secretary of the Treasury to “The Alaska Commercial Company” of the right to engage in taking fur seals on the islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, pur- suant to the act of the first July, chapter one hundred and eighty-nine, or when any future similar lease expires, or is surrendered, forfeited, or terminated, the Secretary shall lease to proper and responsible par- ties, for the best advantage of the United States, having due regard to the interests of the Government, the native inhabitants, their comfort, maintenance, and education, as well as to the interests of the parties heretofore engaged in trade and the protection of the fisheries, the right of taking fur seals on the islands herein named, and of sending a vessel or vessels to the islands for the skins of such seals, for the term of twenty years, at an annual rental of not less than fifty thousand dol- lars, to be reserved in such lease and secured by a deposit of United States bonds to that amount; and every such lease shall be duly ex- ecuted in duplicate, and shall not be transferable. SEC. 1964. The Secretary of the Treasury shall take from the lessees of such islands in all cases a bond, with securities, in a sum not less than five hundred thousand dollars, conditioned for the faithful observ- ance of all the laws and requirements of Congress, and the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury touching the taking of fur seals, and the disposing of the same, and for the payment of all taxes and dues accruing to the United States connected therewith. Sxc. 1965. No persons other than American citizens shall be per- mitted, by lease or otherwise, to occupy the islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, or either of them, for the purpose of taking the skins of fur seals therefrom, nor shall any foreign vessels be engaged in taking such skins; and the Secretary of the Treasury shall vacate and declare any lease forfeited if the same be held or operated for the use, benefit 13 98 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. or advantage, directly or indirectly, of any persons other than Ameri- can citizens. SEC. 1966. Every lease shall contain a covenant on the part of the lessee that he will not keep, sell, furnish, give or dispose of any dis- tilled spirits or spiritous liquors on either of those islands to any of the natives thereof, such person not being a physician and furnishing the same for use as medicine; and every revenue officer, officially acting as such on either of the islands, shall seize and destroy any distilled or spirituous liquors found thereon; but such officer shall make detailed reports of his doings in that matter to the collector of the port. SEc. 1967. Every person who kills any fur seal on either of those islands, or in the waters adjacent thereto, without authority of the les- sees thereof, and every person who molests, disturbs, or interferes with the lessees, or either of them, or their agents or employés, in the lawful prosecution of their business, under the provisions of this chapter, shall for each offense be punished as prescribed in section nineteen hundred and sixty-one; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, appurtenances, and cargo, whose crews are found engaged in any violation of the pro- visions of sections nineteen hundred and sixty-five to nineteen hundred aud sixty-eight, inclusive, shall be forfeited to the United States. SEc. 1968. If any person or company, under any lease herein author- ized, knowingly kills, or permits to be killed, any number of seals ex- ceeding the number for each island in this chapter prescribed, such person or company shall, in addition to the penalties and forfeitures herein provided, forfeit the whole number of the skins of seals killed in that year, or, in case the same have been disposed of, then such per- son or company shall forfeit the value of the same. SEC. 1969. In additional to the annual rental required to be reserved in every lease, as provided in section nineteen hundred and sixty-three, a revenue tax or duty of two dollars is laid upon each fur-seal skin taken and shipped from the islands of Saint Paul and Saint George during the continuance of any lease, to be paid into the Treasury of the United States; and the Secretary of the Treasury is empowered to make all needful regulations for the collection and payment of the same, and to secure the comfort, maintenance, education, and protection of the natives of those islands, and also to carry into full effect all the provisions of this chapter except as otherwise prescribed. Sec. 1970. The Secretary of the Treasury may terminate any lease given to any person, company, or corporation on full and satisfactory proof of the violation of any of the provisions of this chapter or the reg- ulations established by him. Src. 1971. The lessees shall furnish to the several masters of vessels employed by them certified copies of the lease held by them respectively, which shall be presented to the Government revenue officer for the time being who may be in charge at the islands as the authority of the party for landing and taking skins. Sno. 1972. Congress may at any time hereafter alter, amend, or re- peal sections from nineteen hundred and sixty to nineteen hundred and seventy-one, both inclusive of this chapter. Snmc. 1973. The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to appoint one agent and three assistant agents, who shall be charged with the management of the seal fisheries in Alaska, and the performance of such other duties as may be assigned to them by the Secretary of the Treasury. Src. 1974. The agent shall receive the sum of ten dollars each day, one assistant agent the sum of eight dollars each day, and two assist ACTION OF EXECUTIVE. 99 ant agents the sum of six dollars each day while so employed; and they shall also be allowed their necessary traveling expenses in going to and returning from Alaska, for which expenses vouchers shall be presented to the proper accounting officers of the Treasury, and such expenses Shall not exceed in the aggregate six hundred dollars each in any one year. Sec. 1975. Such agents shall never be interested, directly or indi- rectly, in any lease of the right to take seals, nor in any proceeds or profits thereof, either as owner, agent, partner, or otherwise. Src. 1976. Such agents are empowered to administer oaths in all cases relating to the service of the United States, and to take testi- mony in Alaska for the use of the Government in any matter concern- ing the public revenues. CuaP. 64.—An act to amend the act entitled ‘“‘An act to prevent the extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska,” approved July first, eighteen hundred and seventy. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the act entitled “An act to prevent the extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska,” ap- proved July first, eighteen hundred and seventy, is hereby amended so as to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury, and he is hereby author- ized, to designate the months in which fur seals may be taken for their skins on the islands of St. Paul and St. George, in Alaska, and in the waters adjacent thereto, and the number to be taken on or about each island respectively. An act to provide for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska. Sec. 3. Thatsection nineteen hundred and fifty-six of the Revised Stat- utes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Bering Sea; and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his proclaination and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper if any such there be published at each United States port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruise said waters and arrest all persons, and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any vio- lation of the laws of the United States therein. Approved, March 2, 1889, ACTION OF THE EXECUTIVE. CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Treasury Department, July 30, 1892. Pursuant to section 882 of the Revised Statutes I hereby certify that the annexed papers are true copies of regulations and instructions issued and letters written by this Department relative to the Territory of Alaska. 100 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the Treasury Department to be affixed, on the day and year first above written. [SEAL. | CHARLES FOSTER, Secretary of the Treasury. Regulations issued by the United States Treasury Department relative to the Pribilof Islands. i TREASURY DEPARTMENT, February 8, 1870. The attention of collectors and other officers of the customs is di- rected to the following Executive order: EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, D. C., February 4, 1870. Under and in pursuance of the authority vested in me by the provisions of the sec- ond section of the act of Congress, approved on the 27th day of July, 1868, entitled “An act to extend the laws of the United States relating to customs, commerce, and navigation over the territory ceded to the United States by Russia, to establish a collection district therein, and for other purposes,” the importation of distilled spir- its into and within the district of Alaska is hereby prohibited, and the importation and use of firearms and ammunition into and within the islands of St. Paul and St. George, in said district, are also hereby prohibited, under the pains and penalties of law. U. S. GRANT, President. In conformity with the foregoing order of the President, and to in- sure its faithful execution, collectors of customs are hereby instructed to refuse clearance to all vessels having on board distilled spirits for ports, places, or islands within the territory and collection district of Alaska. Vessels clearing for any port or place intending to touch, trade, or pass within the waters of Alaska, with distilled spirits or firearms and ammunition on board, will be required to execute and deliver to the collector of customs, at the port of clearance, a good and sufficient bond in double the value of the articles so laden, conditioned that said spirits, or any part thereof, shall not be landed upon or disposed of within tlie Territory otf Alaska, or that said arms and ammunition, or any part thereof, shall not be landed, disposed of, or used upon either of the islands of St. Paul or St. George, in said district. GEO. S. BOUTWELL, Secretary of the Treasury. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, September 10, 1870. The following Executive order relating to the importation of arms into the islands of St. Paul and St. George, within the district of Alaska, is published for the information of officers of the customs: EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, D. C., September 9, 1870. So much of Executive order of February 4, 1870, as prohibits the importation and use of firearms and ammunition into and within the islands of St. Paul and St. George, Alaska, is hereby modified so as to permit the Alaska Commercial Company to take a limited quantity of firearms and ammunition to said islands, subject to the directions of the revenue officers there, and such regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe. U. S. GRANT, President. ACTION OF EXECUTIVE. 101 The instructions issued by this Department in its circular of Feb- ruary 8, 1870, are accordingly modified so as to adjust them to the above order. Revenue officers will, however, see that the privilege granted to the said company is not. abused; that no firearms of any kind are ever used by said company in the killing of seals or other fur- bearing animals on or near said islands or near “the haunts of Seals or sea-otters in the district, nor for any purpose whatever, during the months of June, July, August, September, and October of each year, nor after the arrival of seals j in the spring or before their departure in the fall, excepting for necessary protection and defense against marauders or public enemies who may unlawfully attempt to land upon the islands. In all other respects the instructions of February 8, 1870, will remain in force. Wm. A. RICHARDSON, Acting Secretary. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Washington, D. C., July 3, 1875. To collectors of customs: The importation of breech-loading rifles and fixed ammunition suit- able therefor into the Territory of Alaska, and the shipment of such rifles or ammunition to any port or place in the Territory of Alaska, are hereby forbidden, and collectors of customs are instructed to refuse clearance of any vessel having on board any such arms or ammunition destined for any port or place in said Territory. If, however, any vessel intends to touch or trade at a port in Alaska Territory, or to pass within the waters thereof, but shal] be ultimately destined for some port or place not within the limits of said Territory, and shall have on board any such firearms or ammunition, the master or chief officer thereof will be required to execute and deliver to the collector of customs at the port of clearance a good and sufficient bond, with two sureties, in double the value of such merchandise, conditioned that such arms or ammunition, or any part thereof, shall not be landed or disposed of within the Territory of Alaska. Such bond shall be taken for such time as the collector shall deem proper, and may be satisfied upon proofs similar to those required to satisfy ordinary export bonds, showing that such arms have been landed at some foreign port; or, if such merchandise is landed at any port of the United States not within the limits of the Territory of Alaska, the bond may be satisfied upon production of a certificate to that effect from the collector of the port where it so landed. Approved. CHAS. F. CONANT, Acting Secretary. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Washington, D. C., April 21, 1879. Section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States provides that no person shall, without the consent of the Secretary of the Treas- ury, kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the ‘limits ‘of Alaska Territory, or in the waters ther eof, and that any person convicted of a violation of that section shall, for 102 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. each offense, be fined not less than $200 nor more than $1,000, or be imprisoned not more than six months, or both; and that all vessels, with their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in vio- lation of that section shall be forfeited. No tur-bearing animals will, therefore, be allowed to be killed by per- sons other than the natives within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof, except fur-seals taken by the Alaska Commercial Company in pursuance of their lease. The use of firearms by the na- tives in killing otter during the months of May, June, July, August, and September is hereby prohibited. No vessel will be allowed to anchor in the well-known otter-killing grounds, except those which may carry parties of natives to or from such killing grounds; and it will be the duty of the officers of the United States, who may be in that local- ity, to take all proper measures to enforce all the pains and penalties of the law against persons found guilty of a violation thereof. White men lawfully married to natives and residing within the Territory are considered natives within the meaning of this order. JOHN SHERMAN, Secretary of the Treasury. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D. C., March 12, 1881. Str: Your letter of the 19th ultimo, requesting certain information in regard to the meaning placed by this Department upon the law reg- ulating the killing of fur-bearing animals in the Territory of Alaska was duly received. The law prohibits the killing of any fur-bearing ani- mals, except as otherwise therein provided, within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof, and also prohibits the killing of any fur-seals on the islands of St. Paul and St. George or in the waters adjacent thereto, except during certain months. You inquire in regard to the interpretation of the terms “ waters thereof” and “ waters adjacent thereto, ” as used in the law, and how far the jurisdiction of the United States is to be understood as extending. Presuming your inquiry to relate more especially to the waters of western Alaska, you are informed that the treaty with Russia of March 30, 1870, by which the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States, defines the boundary of the Territory so ceded. This treaty is found on pages 671 to 673 of the volume of treaties of the Revised Stat- utes. It will be seen therefrom that the limit of the cession extends from a line starting from the Arctic Ocean and running through Bering Strait to the north of St. Lawrence Islands. The line runs thence in a southwesterly direction, so as to passmidway between the island of Attu and Copper Island of the Kromanboski couplet or group in the North Pacific Ocean, to meridian of 193 degrees of west longitude. All the waters within that boundary to the western end of the Aleutian Archi- pelago and chain of islands are considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska Territory. All the penalties prescribed by law against the killing of fur-bearing animals would therefore attach against any violation of law within the limits before described. Very respectfully, H. F. FRENCH, Acting Secretary. Mr. D. A. ANCONA, No. 717 O'Farrell street, San Francisco, Cal. ACTION OF EXECUTIVE. 103 TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 6, 1886. S1r: I transmit herewith for your information a copy of a letter ad- dressed by the Department on the 12th March, 1881, to D. A. D’Ancona, concerning the jurisdiction of the United States in the waters of the Territory of Alaska and the prevention of the killing of fur-seals and other fur-bearing animals within such areas as prescribed by Chapter 3, Title 23, of the Revised Statutes. The attention of your predecessor in office was called to this subject on the 4th April, 1881. This com- munication is addressed to you inasmuch as it is understood that cer- tain parties at your port contemplate the fitting out of expeditions to kill fur-seals in these waters. You are requested to give due publicity to such letters in order that such parties may be informed of the con- struction placed by this Department upon the provision of law referred to. Respectfully, yours, D. MANNING, Secretary. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, San Francisco. Regulations governing the seal fisheries in Alaska, published in 1889. The law limits the number of seals which may be killed for their skins on the islands of St. Paul and St. George to 100,000 per annum. At present the quota is fixed at 80,000 for St. Paul Island, and 20,000 for St. George Island. This proportion may be varied from time to time by the Secretary of the Treasury as facts may seem to demand. The skins will be counted by the Treasury agents as they are placed in the salt houses, and again as they are placed on board the vessel; and a daily record of the count will be kept. This record will be filed, and from it will be entered in a ledger a proper report of the season’s catch. At the close of each season a report to the Treasury Depart- ment will be made by the principal agent, showing the number of skins taken and shipped, which will include the skins of any seals killed for food and accepted by the company as part of its quota. The report will also show to what extent the company has performed the other condi- tions of the lease with respect to furnishing supplies to the natives, keeping the school, etc., and generally embracing a review for the year of the condition of affairs at the islands. The natives are expected to perform the work assigned them in an orderly and proper manner, and the making or the use of “ quass” or other intoxicating drinks will be discouraged by the officers of the company and of the Government, and, when necessary, the issuance of supplies from which such beverages can be made may be refused. To do the coarser kind of work, such as salting the skins, etc., the company is authorized to take from other parts of the Territory a proper number of men, who may be used to do the work of killing or flaying, should the natives of the islands fail or refuse to do their work or to perform it in a satisfactory manner. The Treasury agents are expected to maintain order, require the attendance of the children at the school, and lend their best efforts to regulate the condition of affairs, so as to promote the welfare of the natives and advance them in civilization. Occasional visits will be made by the Government officers to Otter 104 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. Island, situate about 6 miles from St. Paul Island, where large numbers of seals congregate, in order to keep off marauders and prevent the un- lawful killing of seals. On shipment of the skins from the seal islands a certificate, signed by the Treasury agent and by the captain of the vessel, of the number of skins laden on board will be made out in dupli- cate, one copy to be given to the captain and one to be retained by the agent. The captain will, on arrival, deliver his copy to the collector of customs at San Francisco. The skins will be then counted by officers detailed by the collector for that purpose, and a record of each day’s count made. Temporary payment of tax will be accepted on the count of skins at San Francisco, and a report will, upon payment of such tax, be made by the collector of the Treasury, showing the number of skins embraced in the certificate presented by the captain, the number ascer- tained by the San Francisco count, and the sum paid as tax. Should any considerable variance be shown by these reports between the count of the skins made at the islands and that made at San Francisco the Department will take such action in regard thereto as the facts may ap- pear to demand. These regulations are in force to-day, except as modified by the lease of 1890 and the modus vivendi of 1891 and 1892. In the summer of 1891 instructions were given to the Treasury agents stationed on the Pribilof Islands to prohibit in future all killing of pup- seals for food, or for any other purposes. CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Treasury Department, July 30, 1892. Pursuant to section 882 of the Revised Statutes, I hereby certify that the annexed papers are true copies of the contracts made by the Secre- tary of the Treasury with The Alaska Commercial Company in 1870, and with The North American Commercial Company in 1890 relative to sealing rights in the Pribilof Islands. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the Treasury Department to be afiixed, on the day and year first above written. [SEAL. | CHARLES FOSTER, Secretary of the Treasury. Lease of sealing rights on the Pribilof Islands to The Alaska Commercial Company in 1870. CONTRACT BETWEEN WILLIAM A. RICHARDSON, ACTING SECRETARY OF THE TREAS-= URY, AND THE ALASKA COMMERCIAL COMPANY. This indenture, in duplicate, made this3d day of August, A. D. 1870, by and between William A. Richardson, Acting Secretary of the Treasury, in pursuance of an act of Congress approved July Ist, 1870, entitled ‘An act to prevent the extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska,” and The Alaska Commercial Company, a corporation duly established under the laws of the State of California, acting by John F., Miller, its presi- ACTION OF EXECUTIVE. 105 dent and agent, in accordance with a resolution of said corporation duly adopted at a meeting of its board of trustees held January 31st, 1870. Witnesseth that the said Secretary hereby leases to The Alaska Com- mercial Company, without power of transfer, for the term of twenty years, from the 1st day of May, 1870, the right to engage in the business of taking fur-seals on the islands of St. George and St. Paul, within the Territory of Alaska, and to send a vessel or vessels to said islands for the skins of such seals. And the said Alaska Commercial Company, in consideration of their right under this lease, hereby covenant and agree to pay for each year during said term, and in proportion during any part thereof, the sum of $55,000 into the Treasury of the United States, in accordance with the regulations of the Secretary, to be made for this purpose under said act, which payment shall be secured by deposit of United States bonds to that amount; and also covenant and agree to pay annually into the Treasury of the United States, under said rules and regulations, a reve- nue tax or duty of $2upon each fur-sealskin taken and shipped by them in accordance with the provisions of the act aforesaid; and also the sum of 624 cents for each fur-seal skin taken and shipped and 55 centsper gallon for each gallon of oil obtained from said seals for sale on said islands or elsewhere and sold by said company. And also covenant and agree, in accordance with said rules and regulations, to furnish free of charge the inhabitants of the islands of St. Paul and St. George, annually during said term, 25,000 dried salmon, 60 cords firewood, a sufficient quantity of salt, and a sufficient number of barrels for preserving the necessary supply of meat. And the said lessees also hereby covenant and agree during the term aforesaid, to maintain a school on each island, in accordance with said rules and regulations, and suitable for the education of the natives of said islands, for a period of not less than eight months in each year. And the said lessees further covenant and agree not to kill upon said island of St. Paul more than 75,000 fur-seals, and upon the island of St. George not more than 25,000 fur-seals per annum; not to kill any fur-sealupon the islands aforesaid in any other month except the months of June, July, September, and October of each year; not to kill such seals at any time by the use of firearms or other means tending to drive the seals from said islands; not to kill any female seal or any seal less than one year old; not to kill any seal in the waters adjacent to said islands or on the beaches, cliffs, or rocks where they haul up from the sea to remain. And the said lessees further covenant and agree to abide by any re- striction or limitation upon the right to kill seals under this lease that the act prescribes or that the Secretary of the Treasury shall judge necessary for the preservation of such seals. And the said lessees hereby agree that they will not in any way sell, transfer, or assign this lease, and that any transfer, sale, or assign- ment of the same shall be void and of no effect. And the said lessees further covenant and agree to furnish to the sev- eral masters of the vessels employed by them certified copies of this lease, to be presented to the Government revenue officers, for the time being in charge of said islands, as the authority of said lessees for the land- ing and taking said skins. And the said lessees further covenant and agree that they or their agents shall not keep, sell, furnish, give, or dispose of any distilled spirits or spirituous liquors on either of said islands to any of the ee 106 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. natives thereof, such person not being a physician furnishing the same for use as medicine. And the said lessees further covenant and agree that this lease is accepted subject to all needful rules and regulations which shall at any time or times hereafter be made by the Secretary of the Treasury for the collection and payment of the rentals herein agreed to be paid by said lessees, for the comfort, maintenance, education, and protec- tion of the natives of said islands, and for carrying into effect all the provisions of the act aforesaid, and will abide by and conform to said rules and regulations. And the said lessees, accepting this lease with the full knowledge of the provisions of the aforesaid act of Congress, further covenant and agree that they will fulfill all the provisions, requirements, and limita- tions of said act, whether herein specifically set out or not. In witness whereof the parties aforesaid have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year above written. WILLIAM A. RICHARDSON, Acting Secretary of the Treasury. ALASKA COMMERCIAL COMPANY, By Jno. F. MILLER, President. Executed in the presence of— J. H. SAVILLE. Lease of the sealing rights on the Pribilof Islands to the North American Commercial Company in 1890. This indenture, made in duplicate this 12th day of March, 1890, by and between William Windom, Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, in pursuance of Chapter 3, of Title 23, Revised Statutes, and The North American Commercial Company, a corporation duly estab- lished under the laws of the State of California and acting by I. Liebes, its president, in accordance with a resoiution of said corporation adopted at a meeting of its board of directors held January 4, 1890. Witnesseth: That the said Secretary of the Treasury, in considera- tion of the agreements hereinafter stated, hereby leases to the said North American Commercial Company for a term of twenty years from the 1st day of May, 1890, the exclusive right to engage in the business of taking fur-seals on the islands of St. George and St. Paul, in the Territory of Alaska, and to send a vessel or vessels to said islands for the skins of such seals. The said North American Commercial Company, in consideration of the rights secured to it under this lease above stated, on its part coy- enants and agrees to do the things following, that is to say: To pay to the Treasurer of the United States each year during the said term of twenty years, as annual rental, the sum of $60,000; and in addition thereto agrees to pay the revenue tax, or duty, of $2 laid upon each fur-seal skin taken and shipped by it from said islands of St. George and St. Paul; and also to pay to the said Treasurer the further sum of $7.624 apiece for each and every fur-seal skin taken and shipped from said islands; and also to pay the sum of 50 cents per gallon for each gallon of oil sold by it made from seals, that may be taken on said is- lands during the said period of twenty years; and to secure the prompt payment of the $60,000 rental above referred to, the said company agrees to deposit with the Secretary of the Treasury bonds of the ACTION OF EXECUTIVE. 107 United States to the amount of $50,000, face value to be held as a guarantee for the annual payment of said $60,000 rental, the interest thereon when due to be collected and paid to The North American Com- mercial Company, provided the said company is not in default of pay- ment of any part of the said $60,000 rental. That it will furnish to the native inhabitants of said islands of St. George and St. Paul annually such quantity or number of dried sal- mon, and such quantity of salt and such number of salt barrels for pre- serving their necessary supply of meat as the Secretary of the Treas- ury Shall from time to time determine. That it will also furnish to the said inhabitants 80 tons of coal an- nually and a sufficient number of comfortable dwellings in which said native inhabitants may reside, and will keep said dwellings in proper repair; and will also provide and keep in repair such suitable school- houses as may be necessary, and will establish and maintain during eight months of each year proper schools for the education of the children on said islands, the same to be taught by competent teachers, who shall be paid by the Company a fair compensation, all to the satis- faction of the Secretary of the Treasury; and will also provide and maintain a suitable house for religious worship; and will also provide a competent physician or physicians and necessary and proper medi- cines and medical supplies; and will also provide the necessaries of life for the widows and orphans and aged and infirm inhabitants of said islands who are unable to provide for themselves; all of which foregoing agreements will be done and performed by the said Company free of all costs and charges to said native inhabitants of said islands or to the United States. The annual rental, together with all other payments to the United States provided for in this lease, shall be made and paid on or before the first day of April of each and every year during the existence of this lease, beginning with the 1st day of April, 1891. The said Company further agrees to employ the native inhabitants of said islands to perform such labor upon the islands as they are fitted to perform, and to pay therefor a fair and just compensation, such as may be fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury; and also agrees to con- tribute, as far as in its power, all reasonable efforts to secure the com- fort, health, education, and promote the morals and civilization of said native inhabitants. The said Company also agrees faithfully to obey and abide by allrules and regulations that the Secretary of the Treasury has heretofore or may hereafter establish or make in pursuance of law concerning the taking of seals on said islands, and concerning the comfort, morals, and other interests of said inhabitants, and all matters pertaining to said islands and the taking of seals within the possessions of the United States. It also agrees to obey and abide by any restrictions or limita- tions upon the right to kill seals, that the Secretary of the Treasury Shall judge necessary under the law, for the preservation of the seal fisheries of the United States; and it agrees that it will not kill, or per- mit to be killed, so far as it can prevent, in any year, a greater number of seals than is authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury. The said Company further agrees that it will not permit any of its agents to keep, sell, give, or dispose of any distilled spirits or spirituous liquors or opium on either of said islands, or the waters adjacent thereto, to any of the native inhabitants of said islands, such person not being a physician and furnishing the same for use as a medicine. It ts understood and agreed that the number of fur-seals to be taken 108 ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES. and killed for their skins upon said islands by the North American Commercial Company during the year ending May 1, 1891, shall not exceed 60,000. The Secretary of the Treasury reserves the right to terminate this lease and all rights of the North American Commercial Company under the same at any time, on full and satisfactory proof that the said com- pany has violated any of the provisions and agreements of this lease, or in any of the laws of the United States, or any Treasury regulation respecting the taking of fur-seals, or concerning the islands of St. George and St. Paul, or the inhabitants thereof. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals the day and year above written. WILLIAM WINDOM, 5 : EAU ei rh Secretary of the Treasury. a da NorTH AMERICAN COMMERCIAL COMPANY corporated ? December, 1889.] By I. LIEBEs, President of the North American Commercial Company. Attest: H. B. PARSONS, Assistant Secretary. CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, * Treasury Department, July 30, 1892. Pursuant to section 882 of the Revised Statutes, I hereby certify that the annexed table is a correct statement of the vessels seized in Bering Sea by officers of the United States pursuant to instructions of this Department. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the Treasury Department to be affixed, on the day and year first above written. [SEAL. | CHARLES FOSTER, Secretary of the Treasury. Table of vessels seized by revenue steamers of the United States in Ber- ing Sea. In the year 1876, the schooner San Diego, an American vessel, was seized for illegal sealing near Otter Island, by the Treasury agents in charge of the Pribilof Islands. In the year 1884, the schooner Adele, a vessel sailing under the Ger- man flag, was seized for illegal sealing near St. Paul Island, by the United States Revenue Marine. ACTION OF EXECUTIVE. 109 1886. VESSELS SEIZED BY REVENUE Oey aN, CAPT. C. A. ABBEY, COMMAND. Section of Revised No Date of A A A Lati- | Longi-| Statutes 3 No. seizure, Nationality. Rig. Name. tude N. tude W.| under ee which |8*128- seized. fo) / ° J 1 | July 17 | American..... Schooner -| City of San Diego....| 54 04 | 166 46 | 1955, 1956 577 2 Ade ek | Bribish 225 oe] - 5 -- doer AOrN TON a= a= e es ni - 55 45 | 168 25 1956 403 3) || Juri a Se CS Soe eee dO: 222% @arolinaracs2-c-- 2-2 55 30 | 168 10 1956 685 C3 || ANGISOS Pall oo S00) Cosmas oes domeaee Onward teers eee einesict 55 10 | 167 40 1956 402 Totals Peee seen tens: [elements Aesth bee heme Leb ies S Lh SG FUR bese ATS 0) Sa 2, 067 1887. VESSELS SEIZED BY REVENUE STEAMER BEAR, CAPT. M. A. HEALY, COMMANDING. ; 1 | Aug. 25 | American....-. Schooner -| Allie J. Algar..-...... 54 05 | 166 42 1956 | 1,594 Qi Aug.25) | ‘British. ss. ...|---- dOmeea= "AMA = see soko setae sas 54 06 | 166 20 1956 | 1,876 3 | Sept. 2] American....-].... doy seee Sylvia Handy......--. 54 12 | 166 53 | 1956,1961 | 1,679 1887. (Continued.) VESSELS SEIZED BY REVENUE STEAMER RUSH, CAPT. L. G. SHEPARD, COM- MANDING. 1] June 30 | American. ...- Schooner -| Challenge ...... gec5e5 About an Is- 1961 | 151 and. 2| July 2] British --.-... Steam} Anna Beck........... | o4 58 | 167 26 1956 | 336 schooner fal diel Oece(ike) so eoeo osc Schooner .| W.P. Sayward......-.. 54 53 | 167 514 1956 477 A) Bh he PA Roe ai ty cekorages Site ama Dolphinicee ss. soce- tee 54 38 | 167 03 | 1955,1956 | 618 schooner 5 | July 16 | American..... Schooner =|-Lillie b:.5..-.2-.2-4-. 55 46 | 170 38 | 1961, 1956 197 6 | July 17 | British ...-.... SSusOna Wi GTaACOs semae eos acne: 55 03 | 168 40 | 1955, 1956 769 schooner 7| Aug. 6 | American..... Sehooner!= |) Ellen) 22° .2-2--5..-5= 54 19 | 166 56 | 1956, 1961 195 SyeNus oP british ce. |- 2 do -5-=: Alfred Adams---....- 54 42 | 167 20 | 1955,1956 | 1,379 9| Aug. 6 | American.....|.... doneee- JWI) 3 S58 saoSdeeBoBe 55 05 | 167 19 | 1955, 1956, 304 1961 UD || Are Stille sa 2G Kt) he spas abd sec doeeae- IDNA omecsee aatiass<- 56 55 | 169 40 | 1956, 1961 389 11 | Aug. 8 Steam | Kate and Annie ...... 57 07 | 169 51 | 1956, 1961 577 schooner 12 | Aug. 18 |...-. Schooner | San Jose......-.....-. 54 14 | 167 28 | 1956, 1961 891 Joe pas cecnddSsenocd bossa dancod SSS 66 -BaotOuESEeeEeSes Pabseree bocasoes Bedeearencre 6, 726 18s9. VESSELS SEIZED BY THE UNITED STATES REVENUE STEAMER RICHARD RUSH, CAPT. L. G. SHEPARD, COMMANDING. 1 | July 11 | British ......- Schooner -| * Black Diamond...--. 56 22 | 170 25 1956 76 Ail pehtelypplom Heed Oe eetecenid- (eee (ie Sane Minnie 165 55 1956 418 So ceive 20 Bee Ol ona... Son a2< do) sa. Pathfinder 4 | 171 55 1956 853 4 | July 30 | United States.|....do ..... James G. Swan : yale 1956 | 171 Si |rdialive ols british ec se o|t5 5-0). 2')52 Juanita aoe 170 40 1956 619 6 | Ader Gila cGO eee eosees leo. = Owes cee. da Bill eae ee, Pe eee 166 15 1956 333 Totals |e-n— ses emer. a poods.. 6103 Wialtuisiviony, Son.cscace.s doreee 7765 beaver tallsi.o< saccete ces se cecas 25, 797 MEAWSS eaves oka ees cae tee 40, 588 During the years 1863-1867 there were exported from the Russian American Colonies fur-seals to the number of 198,718.° 1 Page 83. This author explains at length the causes of the diminution of seal life during the period concerning which he wrote. ?Tikhmenief, Vol. 1, p. 327, and Vol. U1, p. 221. 3 And 10 pounds. * And 6 pounds. 5 And 16 pounds. 6 And 21 pounds. 7 And 34 pounds. ® Tenth Census Report of the United States, Report on the the Population, Indus- tries, and Resources of Alaska, p.61. See, generally, this report for greater details as to the whole of the foregoing. 128 FUR INDUSTRY OF BERING SEA. Recapitulation of the foregoing as to fur-seals exported between 1748 and 1867. W743=1820) (Berg, table 1)... Sone nce bas 2 ae caterer cs/eas = oes oiseeienaineines 2, 167, 040 1S2i=1842 (Tikhmeniet) 2.2... 1ccscccccat neeeeeeee se 2 c+ cess ecincee enone 458, 502 18431862 (Likhmenief ) ssoccccs> ccc Cece eee enero: ce cls cicme sciosiecieseeee 372, 894 1863-1867 ((Lenth| Census). «+. eseccocesecemeeeerce. cece cence eetecetae 198, 718 Totalcseweccackise Slee de conc Seco Meee ene es een iece ce cece sles Honeee 3, 197, 154 Fur-seal skins taken from the Pribilof Islands between the years 1868 and 1891. Number, Number. Number: SOScec ee Ee ecees 2240000 MISiGzeacsoneeeeee Sie900) | 1884 eeeeeeeaeee 99, 733 S69 Rees cite cance. TST OOOR IS iittaaeeceeeesee MGSOS4. ||| 1885. 2s: sjttnerne sje 100, 895 STORES oe ene. + OF OGo a Si Saas cense sees OOMS 2A AMS862eaaseeeeeeee 99, 890 Slee atarsie aieis WOH | IU saacsoosocos HOM O04 PUSSieeasececreene 100, 996 Shite oe see LOONSO2Z I ASSO eres ccc eee 985925 EIS88eeeea-eeeeeee 99, 116 NS omen rome nce NCO || Te Se Soh sop6cs WO, Bishsy aketel ne Soguocuasos CEL SBT SUA eee ee ae OZ; 2216 MI SS2heeeeescecene Ce (Sts |) keh 0 ocean coosce 621, 238 LS lomeamacistcsoee 1OOSOSGHIMUSSS aase eee oe eee Testes NI eee a56 coer 713, 473 Extract from Report on the Resources of Alaska, published by the Bureau of Statistics of the United States Treasury Department, 1890. A brief estimate of the value of permanent improvements in Alaska has been compiled from such sources as could be made available. No attempt at even approximate assessment has ever been made. Real estate can hardly be said to exist in a country as yet without provision for acquiring title to anything but mining claims. Estimated value of permanent improvement in Alaska. Invested in gold and silver mines and mills. -..-.---............--.------ $1, 500, 0060 Invested. in coal mines 52: so0 acele nyse ase Secise clos eelnee ee een ae eee ae 30, 000 SAIMOMICATNELIOS |. Sass we s oeisissioc eae See ie he cee cee OE ee ee ee eee 1, 800, 000 SP PIN ess. alee iele cine s oiciw cle ba.e se mage ee See oe eae oe eee orton eee 200, 000 S aryl Syasioree ioc ire win vaiate mois Saepeleaeedey ae ere oe Ae ere Seas Sens Sener 130, 200 Codfishineistationsand ivesselsiassaqeeeeee eee cece eee eee eee eee eee 100, 000 Rradingstations;wRATV6S, tC s...jcotiee sate eeees see ene ose Cree 350, 000 4, 110, 000 A very interesting summary of the value of preducts obtained from Alaska from the time of its purchase to the year of 1889 will serve to elucidate the value of this vast territory which we acquired for the paltry sum of $7,200,000, and which has returned over $60,000,000 within twenty-three years. The value of products of the whale fishery has been omitted from this summary as belonging more properly to San Francisco and New Bedford. During the timé covered by this statement the United States Treas- ury has drawn $5,955,535.07 from the same source, and on the large proportion of fur-seal skins which have been returned dressed and dyed to this country a duty of 20 per cent has been received. For reasons already given, this total only represents the skins of which records were kept, which records, especially in early times, were very imperfect. 2 Thomas F. Morgan, Vol. 1, p. 63. 3 Tenth Census, Report on the population, etc., of Alaska, p. 61. 4 Emil Teichmann, Vol. 1, p. 585. ° For this and succeeding years down to 1889, inclusive, see Max Heilbronner, Vol. I Pp. Aon. 6 Charles J. Goff, Vol. 11, p. 112. 7 Emil Teichmann, Vol. U1, p. 585. AND ADJOINING REGIONS. 129 Value of products obtained from Alaska from the time of its purchase to the year 1890. EERE SEN GIDE Dea wet ee SR ee a a ee $31, 557, 392 Other furs. (total)\..¢2>- ss. sees ee sue Wed OCA S nO AG DORE CORES Raa eee 14, 908, 938 ened! 6 alniOn fee vege ee Sele Bos. On ees o 2 sae ocd ek ees 6, 459, 797 RalLed) Salm OTe pene ene mee es wd ee Na ke 460, 808 PONE SIN See Ae ee ee mee eA Rr eA. sewoeacdeedbang 2, 950, 236 old arid silver eee Seana nee 2 CL ce ok ee 3, 741, 550 60, 058, 721 A REVENUE DERIVED FROM THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June 10, 1852. Str: In reply to your request of the 8th instant I have the honor to transmit herewith a statement of the revenue derived from the lease of the islands of St. Paul and St. George, Alaska, from 1871 to 1891, in- clusive. Respectfully, yours, CHARLES FOSTER, Secretary. Hon. JoHN W. FOSTER, Department of State. Statement of the revenue derived by the Government of the United States from the lease of the islands of St. Paul and St. George, Alaska. Fiscal year Fiscal year| Fiseal year Fiscal year, ending Amount. || ending Amount. ending Amount. | ending Amount. June 30— June 30— June 30— | June 30— | | bial seuoese $101, 080. 00 || 1877 ......| $291, 155.50 || 1883 ..-..- | $317, 295.25 |) 1889 ......| $317,500. 00 UTP) acco 322, 863.38 || 1878 ...... 253, 255. 75 || 1884 .....- 251, 875. 00 1890 reese 262, 500. 00 ARG} Sonones 307, 181.12 || 1879 ...... 317, 447.50 || 1885 .....- | 318,400.25 |} 1891-...... | 269, 673. 88 IS (A veraite mit 356, 610. 42 || 1880 ...... ersl'7.4005255|/\e1S86\eeaeer 317, 489. 50 ——— Operant 317, 494. 75 || 1881 ...-.. | 317,594.50 || 1887 ..---- 317, 452. 75 Total..| 6, 226, 239. 55 EY Treaosaoe 317, 584. 00 || 1882 ...... 316, 885. 75 | LSSS seers 317, 500. 00 Note. It will be seen by reference to the statement! sworn to by Joseph Ullmann and others, furriers, of New York City: First: That upon a catch of 100,000 seals at the Pribilof Islands, about 70,000 have, after dressing and dyeing in London, been annually, during the last ten years, returned to the United States. Second: That the average value of each skin so returned was $25, The total value of skins so imported would therefore be, during ten years, $17,500,000. The customs duty received therefrom by the United States Govern- ment is 20 per cent of this sum, or, for ten years, $3,500,000; and it is within bounds to say that for the past twenty years the above-men- tioned duty amounted in all to $5,000,000. 1 Vol. —p.— 130 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE, CHRONOLOGICAL ARRANGEMENT. Pages Correspondence of the years 1822-1825 relative to ukase of 1821, and to the Breatvesvot- 1824) ai dg Sz aes aa eae pee a2 Sh ees see ena Te 132-152 Correspondence between the United States and Great Britain relative to the seizure of British sealing vessels in Bering Sea in 1886 and 1887.........--- 153-163 Correspondence relative to proposed international measures for the pro- Heepron, of, fur-seals (A88(—-1888.)o ater ese eel ne aloe oS oie eicces cece es -oen ye LOS=194 Correspondence relative to and growing out of the seizure of British earns vessels in Bering Sea in 1889 (August 24, 1889, to January 22, 1890)-....-.-- 195-203 Correspondence relative to proposed international measures for the pro- of fur-seals—continued—(February 10, 1890, to June 27,1890) -....--..-.. 204-228 Correspondence relative to the jurisdictional rights in Bering Sea formerly possessed by Russia and transferred to the United States by the treaty of Orel SG (Mab lanes) note or june so0 5390) pee rer |e een aAete eee cee 224-235 Correspondence relative to Great Britain’s willingness to enter into a con- vention for the protection of fur-seals (June 30, 1890, to July 19, 1890)... 236-242 Correspondence relative to the jurisdictional rights in Bering Sea foemotle possessed by Russia and transferred to the United States by the treaty of 1867—continued—(August 2, 1890, to April 14, 1891).................. 242-298 Correspondence relative to the modus vivendi of 1891 and to the negotiations for arbitration (April 20, 1891, to February 8, 1892) ...-...--.....-......- 298-350 Correspondence relative to the antes vivendi of 1892 (February 9, 1892, MoE Che ZG elS 02) sreermmeteer etre etaec are ans erac ls ova oe reine a ce acest ie ” 351-364 CORRESPONDENCE OF THE YEARS 1822-1825 RELATIVE TO THE UKASE OF 1821 AND THE TREATIES OF 1824 AND 1825. M. de Poletica to Mr. Adams. (Translation.] WASHINGTON, January 30 [February 11], 1822. The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, in consequence of orders which have lately reached him, hastens herewith to transmit to Mr. Adams, Secretary of State in the Department of Foreign Affairs, a printed copy of the regulations adopted by the Russian-American Com- pany, and sanctioned by His Imperial Majesty, relative to foreign com- merce in the waters bordering the establishments of the said company on the northwest coast of America. The undersigned conceives it to be, moreover, his duty to inform Mr. Adams that the Imperial Government, in adopting the regulation, sup- poses that a foreign ship, which shall have sailed from a Huropean port after the 1st of March, 1822, or from one of the ports of the United States after the Ist of July of the same year, can not lawfully pretend ignorance of these new measures. The undersigned, etc., PIERRE DE POLETICA. [The inclosure referred to is the ukase of September 4, 1821. It is in the English language. An exact copy appears at page 16 of this volume. | Mr. Adams to M. de Poletica. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 25, 1822. Str: I have the honor of receiving your note on the 11th instant, in- closing a printed copy of the regulations adopted by the Russian Ameri- can Company, and sanctioned by His Imperial Majesty, relating to the commerce of foreigners in the waters bordering on the establishments of that company upon the northwest coast of America. Iam directed by the President of the United States to inform you that he has seen with surprise, in this edict, the assertion of a terri- torial claim on the part of Russia, extending to the fifty-first degree of north latitude on this continent, and a regulation interdicting to all com- mercial vessels other than Russian, upon the penalty of seizure and confiscation, the approach upon the high seas within 100 Italian miles of the shores to which that claim is made to apply. The relations of the United States with His Imperial Majesty have always been of the most friendly character; and itis the earnest desire of this Govern- ment to preserve them in that state. It was expected, before any act which should define the boundary between the territories of the United States and Russia on this continent, that the same would have been ar- 132 CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. Las ranged by treaty between the parties. To exclude the vessels of our citizens from the shore, beyond the ordinary distance to which the ter- ritorial jurisdiction extends, has excited still greater surprise. This ordinance affects so deeply the rights of the United States and of their citizens that [am instructed to inquire whether you are author- ized to give explanations of the grounds of right, upon principles gen- erally recognized by the laws and usages of nations, which can warrant the claims and regulations contained in it. I avail, etc., JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, M. de Poletica to Mr. Adams. WASHINGTON, February 28, 1822. M. de Poletica replied on the 28th of the same qonth: and after giv- ing a summary of historical incidents which seemed to him to establish the title of Russia to the territories in question by first discovery, said: ‘“‘T shall be more succint, sir, in the exposition of the motives which determined the Imperial Government to prohibit foreign vessels from approaching the northwest coast of America belonging to Russia within the distance of at least 100 Italian miles. This measure, however severe it may at first appear, is, after all, but a measure of prevention. It is exclusively directed against the culpable enterprises of foreign adventur- ers, who, not content with exercising upon the coasts above mentioned an illicit trade very prejudicial to the rights reserved entirely to the Russian American Company, take upon them besides to furnish arms and ammunition to the natives in the Russian possessions in America, ex- citing them likewise in every manner to resist and revolt against the authorities there established. “The American Government doubtless recollects that the irregular conduct of these adventurers, the majority of whom was composed of American citizens, has been the object of the most pressing remon- strances on the part of Russia to the Federal Government from the time that diplomatic missions were organized between the countries, These remonstrances, repeated at different times, remain constantly without effect, and the inconveniences to which they ought to bring a remedy continue to increase. * * * Pacificmeansnot having brought any alleviation to the just grievances of the Russian American Com- pany against foreign navigators in the waters which environ their estab- lishments on the northwest coast of America, the Imperial Government saw itself under the necessity of having recourse to the means of coer- cion, and of measuring the rigor according to the inveterate character of the evil to which it wished to put a stop. * * * “Tt ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, sir, that the Russian possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend, on the northwest coast of America, from Behring’s Strait to the fifty-fir st degree of north lati- tude, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent, from the same strait to the forty-fifth degree. The extent of sea of which these possessions form the limits comprehends all the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas (mers fermées), and the Russian Government might consequently judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and especially that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners. But it preferred only assert- ing its essential rights, without taking any advantage of localities.” [A full copy of the above letter will be found in the North American Review, volume Xv, p. 376, (1822).] iley! DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Myr. Adams to M. de Poletica. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 30, 1822. Str: I have had the honor of receiving your letter of the 28th ultimo, which has been submitted to the consideration of the President of the United States. From the deduction which it contains of the grounds upon which articles of regulation of the Russian-American Company have now, for the first time, extended the claim of Russia on the northwest coast of America to the fifty-first degree of north latitude, its only foundation appears to be the existence of the small settlement of Novo Archangelsk, situated, not on the American continent, but upon a small island in latitute 57°; and the principle upon which you state that this claim is now advanced is, that the fifty-first degree is equidistant from the settlement of Novo Archangelsk and the establishment of the United States at the mouth of the Columbia River. But, from the same state- ment, it appears that, in the year 1799, the limits prescribed by the Emperor Paul to the Russian-American Company were fixed at the fifty- fifth degree of latitude, and that, in assuming now the latitude 57°, a new pretension is asserted, to which no settlement made since the year 1799 has given the color of a sanction. This pretension is to be considered not only with reference to the question of territorial right, but also to that prohibition to the vessels of other nations, including those of the United States, to approach within 100 Italian miles of the coasts. From the period of the existence of the United States as an independent nation, their vessels have freely navigated those seas, and the right to navigate them is a part of that independence. With regard to the suggestion that the Russian Government might have justified the exercise of sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea, because it claims territory both on its American and Asiatic shores, if may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore on this sea, in latitude 51° north, is not less than 90° of longitude, or 4,000 miles. As little can the United States accede to the justice of the reason as- signed for the prohibition above mentioned. The right of the citizens ot the United States to hold commerce with the aboriginal natives of the northwest coast of America, without the territorial jurisdiction of other nations, even in arms and munitions of war, is as clear and indis- putable as that of navigating the seas. That right has never been ex- ercised in a spirit unfriendly to Russia; and although general com- plaints have occasionally been made on the subject of this commerce by some of your predecessors, no specific ground of charge has ever been alleged by them of any transaction in it which the United States were, by the ordinary laws and usages of nations, bound either to re- Strain or to punish. Had any such charge been made, it would have received the most pointed attention of this Government with the sin- cerest and firmest disposition to perform every act and obligation of justice to yours which could have been required. I am commanded by the President of the United States to assure you that this disposition will continue to be entertained, together with the earnest desire that the harmonious relations between the two countries may be preserved. Relying upon the assurance in your note of similar dispositions reciprocally entertained by His Imperial Majesty towards the United 4 CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. 135 States, the President is persuaded that the citizens of this Union will remain unmolested in the prosecution of their lawful commerce, and that no effect will be given to an interdiction manifestly incompatible with their rights. I am, etc., JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. M, de Poletica to Mr. Adams. WASHINGTON, April 2, 1822. Mr. Poletica replied on the 2d of April following, and after again endeavoring to prove the title of Russia to the northwest coast of America from Behring Straits to the fifty-first degree of north latitude, said: ‘‘In the same manner the great extent of the Pacific Ocean at the’ fifty-first degree of latitude can not invalidate the right which Russia may have of considering that part of the ocean as close. But as the Imperial Government has not thought fit to take advantage of that right, all further discussion on this subject would be idle. “As to the right claimed for the citizens of the United States of trad- ing with the natives of the country of the northwest coast of America, without the limits of the jurisdiction belonging to Russia, the Imperial Government will not certainly think of limiting it, and still less of at- tacking it there. But I can not dissemble, sir, that this same trade be- yond the fifty-first degree will meet with difficulties and inconveniences, for which the American owners will only have to accuse their own im- prudence after the publicity which has been given to the measures taken by the Imperial Government for maintaining the rights of the Russian American Company in their absolute integrity. ‘‘T shall not finish this letter without repeating to you, sir, the very positive assurance which I have already had the honor once of express- ing to you that in every case where the American Government shall judge it necessary to make explanations to that of the Emperor, the President of the United States may rest assured that these explana- tions will always be attended to by the Emperor, my august sovereign, with the most friendly, and consequently the most conciliatory, dispo- sitions.” Myr. Middleton to Mr. Adams. ST. PETERSBURG, August 8, 1822. Sir: Lam desirous of giving you a full account of what has occurred here upon the subject of the N. W. Contestation, because I con- ceive it to be important, on account of the impending negotiation upon that subject, that you should be furnished with all the information at- tainable respecting the views and feelings of this Government upon it; and also because 1 wish you to understand the reason of the very mod- erate tone of the note I presented upon receipt of the instructions con- tained in your No. 12. Having premised thus much, I proceed to state that from the time of ¢ 136 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. the publication of the ukase respecting the N. W. Trade, although IT refrained from taking any official steps until I should receive in- structions so to do, yet I omitted no proper occasion of making known my private opinion upon that subject in conversation with the secre- taries and with all such persons as I knew were habitually consulted upon questions of a similar nature. To Mr. Speransky, Governor-Gen- eral of Siberia, who had been one of the committee originating this measure, I stated my objections at length. He informed me that the first intention had been (as Mr. Poletica afterwards wrote you) to de- clare the northern portion of the Pacific Ocean as mare clausum, but that idea being abandoned, probably on account of its extravagance, they determined to adopt the more moderate measure of establishing limits to the maritime jurisdiction on their coasts, such as should se- cure to the Russian American Fur Company the monopoly of the very lucrative traffic they carry on. In order todo this they sought a pree- edent and found the distance of 30 leagues, named in treaty of Utrecht, and which may be calculated at about 100 Italian miles, sufficient for all purposes. I replied ironically that a still better precedent might have been pointed out to them in the papal bull of 1493, which estab- lished as a line of demarcation between the Spaniards and Portuguese a meridian to be drawn at the distance of 100 miles west of the Azores, and that the expression “Italian miles” used in the ukase very naturally mightlead tothe conclusion that this was actually the precedentlooked to. He took my remarks in good part, and I am disposed to think that this conversation led him to make reflections which did not tend to confirm his first impressions, for I found him afterwards at different times speaking confidentially upon the subject. For sometime past I began to perceive that the provisions of the ukase would not be persisted in. It appears to have been signed by the Emperor without sufficient examination, and may be fairly consid- ered as having been surreptitiously obtained. There can be little doubt, therefore, that with a little patience and management it will be molded into a less objectionable shape. But in this, as in other mat- ters, the revocare gradum is most difficult. Since the receipt of your dispatch No. 12 I have had several conferences with the secretaries of state and we have discussed fully and freely the state of the question as left by Mr. Poletica with your letter unanswered in his pocket. At length, on the morning of the 24th of July, having learned that prepa- ration was making for the departure of the Emperor for Vienna, I had a conversation with Count Capodistrias, in which I informed him that J intended to ask a formal interview with Count Nesselrode before his departure, for the purpose of taking up this subject and urging some decision upon it, as I never had been able to ascertain officially whether the offensive provisions of the ukase would be revoked. I felt the more anxious, too, because I had learned that a Russian Frigate was shortly to sail for the N. W. Coast. I informed him further that I hiad prepared a note verbale to leave with Count Nesselrode, which I begged to be permitted to read to him (Count Capodistrias), as I was well assured of his anxious desire that all things should go on smoothly between us. (See paper No. 1.) After hearing this paper with attention he said to me: ‘ Puisque vous me faites Vhonneur de me consulter, je vous dirai franchement mon avis. Si vous voulez que la chose s’arrange, ne donnez point votre note—l’Empereur a déja eu le bon esprit de voir que cette af- faire ne devrait pas étre pousée plus loin. Nous sommes disposés & ne pas y donner de suite. Les ordres pour nos vaisseaux de guerre CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. a lesiy seront bornés 4 empécher la contrebande dans les limites reconnues par Jes autres puissances, en prenant nos établissemens actuels pour base de ces opérations. De cette manieére, il n’y aura pas de complication pour entraver la négociation que pourra entamer M. le Baron de Tuyll des son arrivée 4 Washington. Si vous dites que vous faites protestation, vous ferez du tort a la négociation; il ne faut pas non plus faire Vinsinuation que nous ayons avancé une injuste préten- tion, méme en nous complimentant sur notre politique passée; il ne faut pas nous sommer de révoquer des ordres donnés; nous ne révo- quons pas; nous ne nous rétractons pas. Mais dans le fait il n’y a pas d’ordres donnés qui autorisent ce que vous craignez.” After much discussion I acquiesced in the solidity of the reasons for not delivering my note, and immediately wrote to Count Nesselrode asking an interview, which was granted for the 27th day of the month. At that conference I talked over the matter with the two secretaries of state and brought fully to their view the substance of the instruc- tions upon the ukase of 4th September last, insisting upon the neces- sity of this Government suspending the execution of those regulations which violate the general right of navigating within the common juris- diction of all nations, and declaring that the territorial pretension ad- vanced by Russia must be considered as entirely inadmissible by the United States until the conflicting claims shall have been settled by treaty. I received verbal assurances that our wish in both respects will be complied with, and that it is the intention of the Emperor that Baron Tuyll shall be furnished with full powers to adjust all controver- sies upon the subject of trade and territory upon the N. W. Coast. “Mais en attendant,” said Ct. Capodistrias, ‘votre gouverument voudra bien défendre a ses sujets le commerce dans les limites sujettes a contestation.” In answer to this apostrophe I represented that this could not possibly be done without admitting the exclusive rights of Russia, and that until those should be made manifest our Government has no authority to inhibit its citizens from exercising their free indus- try within the limits sanctioned by the laws of their country and of na- tions. I thought it necessary to give official form to these verbal communi- cations, and upon stating this to the secretaries it was agreed that I should simply ask to be “infor med what was intended by the Imperial Government, and they promised that the answer should Pe satisfactory. Immediately on my return home I penned the note No. : 2; and received in answer, upon the Ist of this month, that numbered 3. I have the honor to be sir, etc., etc., HENRY MIDDLETON. P.S.—A Russian frigate of 44 guns and 120 men, commanded by Capt. Lieut. Lazaroff, sailed about the Ist of Aug ust (O. S.), in company with a Norse ship, bound for the N. W. Coast. The SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ST. PETERSBURG, August 8, 1822. [Inclosure No. 1—Prepared, but not delivered.] Note verbale. The correspondence of the Russian Envoy in the United States of America with the Secretary of State of that Government has probably given the Imperial Government 18 138 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. a sufficient knowledge of the weighty reasons that have induced the Government of the said States to protest against the changes made in the regulations governing foreign commerce in those parts of the Russian possessions that are situated on the Pacific coast. If all the powers, and especially commercial nations, are interested in the main- tenance of maritime rights unimpaired, it is not to be doubted that the President of the United States has learned, with the deepest concern, that the aforesaid regula- lations have been sanctioned by a power which has long been fondly regarded as a protector of the freedom of navigation against all unjust pretensions; for he must, with reason, fear the influence of such an example, and must also fear lest nations possessing preponderating power at sea may avail themselves thereof to justify abuses of power by the example of those which should be most interested in upholding the universal rights of nations. Since the President cannot close his eyes to the-fact that public opinion is greatly opposed to these regulations, and is fully convinced that it is quite impossibie for the United States Government to acquiesce in them, he has thought proper, not only in view of his feelings of friendship for His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, but of the uprightness of intention of which he is conscious, and of the frankness which he uses on all occasions, not to leave the Imperial Government in uncertainty with regard to his determination to uphold the rights and interests of his fellow-cit- izens, and to insist that the United States and their subjects shall still have, as they have had in the past, full liberty to sail in the Pacific Ocean and oft the coasts of the neighboring countries within the limits recognized by the law of nations. A careful perusal of the correspondence which has recently been exchanged at Washington in relation to the aforesaid regulations cannot fail to show thata state of war between the two powers exists already, owing to the principles that have been avowed on both sides. Nothing is lacking to make this complete except a declaration or acts of violence, which latter cannot be long in coming, unless pre- cautionary measures be at once taken. It is especially owing to this circumstance that the departure of Mr. Poletica, without having been authorized to enter upon a discussion of our mutual rights and duties, is to be regretted. Under present circumstances it is very desirable that there should be a suspension of the territorial claims of Russia to the border regions of the United States, with- out prejudice to the respective rights of the powers interested, until the settlement of the boundaries by a treaty, but it is especially necessary, for the avoidance of any complications that might arise through hostilities, that the Russian Govern- ment should abstain from putting into execution the measures ordered by the ukase of September 4, 1821, and that it should consent to revoke the orders issued to its vessels of war, if any such have been issued authorizing those measures to be put into execution. In the fear of jeopardizing more important interests than those just now under consideration, and in order not to run any risks that foresight may prevent, the undersigned deems it his duty to make this representation, and he earnestly hopes that the Imperial Government will see, and will avert by acting upon these sugges- tions, the dangers which threaten to disturb the good understanding which so hap- pily exists between the two countries. (Signed) H’y MrIppLeTon. Sr. PerersspurG, July 24th, 1522. . [Inclosure No. 2.] The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, has the honor to call the attention of his excellency the Secretary of State, Count Nesselrode, to the correspondence which has recently taken place between the Envoy of Russia in the United States and the Secretary of State of the United States. The correspondence has probably sufficiently made known the reasons which the United States have alleged for not agreeing to the regulations adopted by the Russian American Company for the government of foreign commerce in those parts of their possessions that are on the Pacific coast. Mr. Poletica’s departure from the United States, without having been authorized to enter more fully upon the discussion of our reciprocal rights and duties, is to be regretted exceedingly, because the divergence of the opinions avowed on both sides may give rise, by its duration, to acts of violence which will occasion annoying complications. In the mean time the undersigned deems it his duty to inquire what the intentions CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. 139 of the Imperial Government are as regards the measures to be adopted for the avoid- ance of the complications which would be the outcome of the peremptory cxecution of the aforesaid regulations. The undersigned flatters himself that the Imperial Government will regard this step simply as the result of his earnest desire to avert the dangers which might threaten to disturb the good understanding which so happily exists between the two powers, and, awaiting a favorable reply, he has the honor to renew to his excellency the Secretary of State the assurance of his high consideration. (Signed) H’y MIDDLETON. ST. PETERSBURG, July 27th, 1822. [Inclosure No. 3.] The undersigned Secretary of State, acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, hastened to lay before the Emperor the note which Mr. Middleton, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, addressed to him on the 27th ultimo, calling the attention of the Imperial Ministry to the correspondence which has passed between the Envoy of Russia at Washington and the United States Government, with regard to certain clauses of the regulations issued September +4,, 1821, which were designed to protect the interests of Russian commerce on the Northwest Coast of North America. Being actuated by the constant desire to maintain in all their integrity the friendly relations existing between the court of Russia and the United States Government, the Emperor has been pleased to forestall the wishes which have just been made known to him. Major-General Baron de Tuyll, who has been appointed to the post that was filled by Mr. de Poletica, received orders to devote himself to the impor- tant task which his predecessor would have performed had the state of his health allowed him to prolong his stay in America. Having no doubt of the friendly disposition which will be manifested by the American Government in the negotiations which are about to be set on foot by Gen- eral Tuyll, and feeling assured in advance that, by a series of these same negotia- tions, the interests of the commerce of the Russian American Company will be pre- served from all injury, the Emperor has caused the vessels oft the Imperial Navy which are about to visit the Northwest Coast to be furnished with instructions which are very much in keeping with the object that both Governments desire to attain, by mutual explanations, in a spirit of justice, harmony, and friendship. Having thus removed, so far as he is concerned, everything that might have given rise to the acts of violence which the American Government seems to have been long apprehending, His Imperial Majesty trusts that the President of the United States will, in turn, adopt such measures as his wisdom may suggest to him as best adapted to rectify all those errors, that have been intensified by that malevolence which seeks to misconstrue intentions and jeopardize the amicable relations of the two Governments. As soon as the shippers and merchants of the United States shall become con- vinced that the questions which have arisen in connection with the regulations of September 4-16 are receiving attention, and that it is firmly purposed to bring them to a decision that shall be mutually satisfactory, under the auspices of justice and of our unalterable friendship, then will it be impossible for the surveillance which the vessels of the Imperial Navy going to the Northwest Coast of America are directed by the new instructions to exercise there, ever to give rise to unpleasant complica- tions. The undersigned, entertaining this conviction, which will doubtless be shared by Mr. Middleton, has but to add to the communications which he has been ordered to make in reply to the note of July 27th, the assurance of his very distinguished consideration. (Signed) NESSELRODE, St. PETERSBURG, August Ist, 1822. Baron Tuyll to Mr. Adams. [Translation. ] WASHINGTON, April 12 (24), 1823. The undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias near the United States 140 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. of America, has had the honor to express to Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, the desire of the Emperor, his master, who is ever animated by a sincere friendship toward the United States, to see the discussions that have arisen between the cabinets of St. Petersburg and Washing- ton, upon some provisions contained in the ukase of the 4th (16th) of September, 1821, relative to the Russian possessions on the northwest coast of America, terminated by means of friendly negotiation. These views of His Imperial Majesty coincide with the wish expressed sometime since on the part of the United States in regard to a settle- ment of limits on the said coast. The ministry of the Emperor having induced the British ministry to furnish Sir Charles Bagot, ambassador of His Majesty the King of Exg- land near His Imperial Majesty, with full powers necessary for the negotiation about to be set on foot for reconciling the difficulties exist- ing between the two courts on the subject of the northwest coast, the English Government is desirous of acceding to that invitation. The undersigned has been directed to communicate to Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, in the name of his august master, and as an addi- tional proof of the sentiments entertained by His Imperial Majesty towards the President of the United States and the American Govern- ment, the expression of his desire that Mr. Middleton be also furnished with the necessary powers to terminate with the Imperial cabinet, by an arrangement founded on the principle of mutual convenience, all the differences that have arisen between Russia and the United States in consequence of the law published September 4 (16), 1821. The undersigned thinks he may hope that the Cabinet of Washing- ton will, with pleasure, accede to a proposition tending to facilitate the completion of an arrangement based upon sentiments of mutual good will and of a nature to secure the interests of both countries. He profits, ete., TUYLL. Ifr, Adams to Baron Tuyll. DEPARTMENT OF STaTE, Washington, May 7, 1823. The undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, has sub- mitted to the consideration of the President the note which he had the honor of receiving from the Baron de Tuyll, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, dated the 12th (24th) of the last month. The undersigned has been directed, in answer to that note, to assure the Baron de Tuyll of the warm satisfaction with which the President receives and appreciates the friendly dispositions of His Imperial Majesty toward the United States; dispositions which it has been, and is, the earnest desire of the American Government to meet with corre- sponding returns, and which have been long cemented by the invariable friendship and cordiality which have subsisted between the United States and His Imperial Majesty. Penetrated with these sentiments, and anxiously seeking to promote their perpetuation, the President readily accedes to the proposal that the minister of the United States at the court of His Imperial Majesty should be furnished with powers for negotiating, upon principles adapted CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825, L4t to those sentiments, the adjustment of the interests and rights which have been brought into collision upon the northwest coast of America, and which have heretofore formed a subject of correspondence between the two Governments, as well at Washington as at St. Petersburg. The undersigned is further commanded to add that, in pursuing, for the adjustment of the interests in question, this course, equally congenial to the friendly feelings of this nation towards Russia and to their reliance upon the justice and magnanimity of his Imperial Majesty, the President of the United States confides that the arrangements of the cabinet of St. Petersburg will have suspended the possibility of any consequences resulting from the ukase to which the Baron de Tuyll’s note refers which could affect the just rights and the lawful commerce of the United States during the amicable discussion of the subject between the Governments respectively interested in it. The undersigned, ete., JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, Mr. Adams to Mr. Middleton. No. 16.] DEPARTMENY OF STATE, Washington, July 22, 1823. Srr: I have the honor of inelosing herewith copies of a note from Baron de Tuyll, the Russian minister, recently arrived, proposing, on the part of His Majesty the Emperor of Russia, that a power should be transmitted to you to enter upon a negotiation with the ministers of his Government concerning the differences which have arisen from the Imperial ukase of 4th (16th) September, 1821, relative to the northwest coast of America, and of the answer from this Department acceding to this proposal. A full power is accordingly inclosed, and you will con- sider this letter as communicating to you the President’s instructions for the conduct of the negotiation. From the tenor of the ukase, the pretentions of the Imperial Govern- ment extend to an exclusive territorial jurisdiction from the forty-fifth degree of north latitude, on the Asiatic coast, to the latitude of fifty-one north on the western coast of the American continent; and they as- sume the right of interdicting the navigation and the fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the whole of that coast. The United States can admit no part of these claims. Their right of navigation and of fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the peace of 17835, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions, which, so far as Russian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the fifty- fifth degree of latitude, and have no existence on the continent of America. The correspondence between Mr. Poletica and this Department con- tained no discussion of the principles or of the facts upon which he at- tempted the justification of the Imperial ukase. This was purposely avoided on our part, under the expectation that the Imperial Govern- ment could not fail, upon a review of the measure, to revoke it alto- gether. It did, however, excite much public animadyersion in this country, as the ukase itself had already done in England. I inclose herewith the North American Review for October, 1822, No. 37, which 142 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. contains an article (p. 370) written by a person fully master of the sub- ject; and for the view of it taken in England I refer you to the fifty- second number of the Quarterly Review, the article upon Lieutenant Kotzebue’s voyages. From the article in the North American Review it will be seen that the rights of discovery, of occupancy, and of uncon- tested possession, alleged by Mr. Poletica, are all without foundation in fact. It does not appear that there ever has been a permanent Russian settlement on this continent south of latitude 59°, that of New Arch- angel, cited by Mr. Poletica, in latitude 57° 30’, being upon an island. So far as prior discovery can constitute a foundation of right, the papers which I have referred to prove that it belongs to the United States as far as 59° north, by the transfer to them of the rights of Spain. There is, however, no part of the globe where the mere fact of discovery could be held to give weaker claims than on the northwest coast. ‘The great sinuosity,” says Humboldt, ‘formed by the coast between the fifty-fifth and sixtieth parallels of latitude embraces discov- eries made by Gali, Behring and Techivikoff, Quadra, Cook, La Perouse, Malespier, and Vancouver. No European nation has yet formed an establishment upon the immense extent of coast from Cape Mendocino to the fifty-ninth degree of latitude. Beyond that limit the Russian fae- tories commence, most of which are scattered and distant from each other, like the factories established by the European nations for the last three centuries on the coast of Africa. Most of these little Russian colonies communicate with each other only by sea, and the new denom- inations of Russian America, or Russian possessions in the new conti- nent, must not lead us to believe that the coast of Behring’s Bay, the peninsula of Alaska, or the country of the Ischugatschi have become Russian provinces in the same sense given to the word when speaking of the Spanish provinces of Sonora or New Biscay.” (Humboldt’s New Spain, Vol. 11, Book 3, chap. 8, p. 496.) In Mr. Poletica’s letter of 28th February, 1822, to me, he says that when the Emperor Paul I granted to the present American Company its first charter, in 1799, he gave it the exclusive possession of the north- west coast of America, which belonged to Russia, from the fifty-fifth degree of north latitude to Bering Strait. In his letter of 2d of April, 1822, he says that the charter of the Rus- sian American Company, in 1799, was merely conceding to them a part of the sovereignty, or, rather, certain exclusive privileges of commerce. This isthe most correct view of the subject. The Emperor Paul granted to the Russian American Company certain exclusive privileges of com- merce—exclusive with reference to other Russian subjects; but Russia had never . before asserted a right of sovereignty over any part of the North American continent, and in 1799 the people of the United States had been at least for twelve years in the constant and uninterrupted enjoyment of a profitable trade with the natives of that very coast, of which the ukase of the Emperor Paul could not deprive them. Jt was in this same year, 1799, that the Russian settlement at Sitka was first made, and it was destroyed in 1802 by the natives of the country. There were, it seems, at the time of its destruction, three American seamen who perished with the rest, and a new settlement at the same place was made in 1804. In 1808 Count Romanzoff, being then Minister of Foreign Affairs and of Commerce, addressed to Mr. Harris, consul of the United States at St. Petersburg, a letter complaining of the traffic carried on by citizens of the United States with the native islanders of the northwest coast, CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. 143 instead of trading with the Russian possessions in America. The Count stated that the Russian Company had represented this traffic as clan- destine, by which means the savage islanders, in exchange for otter skins, had been furnished with firearms and powder, with which they had destroyed a Russian fort, with the loss of several lives. He ex- pressly disclaimed, however, any disposition on the part of Russia to abridge this traffic of the citizens of the United States, but proposed a convention by which it should be carried on exclusively with the agents ot the Russian American Company at Kadiak, a small island near the promontory of Alaska, at least 700 miles distant from the other settle- ment at Sitka. On the 4th of January, 1810, Mr. Daschkoff, chargé d’affaires and consul-general from Russia, renewed this proposal of a convention, and requested as an alternative that the United States should, by a legis- lative act, prohibit the trade of their citizens with the natives of the northwest coast of America as unlawful and irregular, and thereby induce them to carry on the trade exclusively with the agents of the Russian American Company. The answer of the Secretary of State, dated the 5th of May, 1810, declines those proposals for reasons which were then satisfactory to the Russian Government, or to which at at least no reply on their part was made. Copies of these papers and of those containing the instructions of the minister of the United States then at St. Petersburg, and the relation of his conferences with the chancellor of the empire, Count Romanzoff, on this subject are here- with inclosed. By them it will be seen that the Russian Government at that time explicitly declined the assertion of any boundary line upon the northwest coast, and that the proposal of measures for confining the trade of the citizens of the United States exclusively to the Russian settlement at Kadiak and with the agents of the Russian American Company had been made by Count Romanzoff under the impression that they would be as advantageous to the interests of the United States as to those of Russia. It is necessary now to say that this impression was erroneous; that the traffic of the citizens of the United States with the natives of the north- west coast was neither clandestine, nor unlawful, nor irregular; that it had been enjoyed many years before the Russian American Company existed, and that it interfered with no lawful right or claim of Russia. This trade has been shared also by the English, French, and Portu- guese. In the prosecution of it the English settlement of Nootka Sound was made, which occasioned the differences between Great Britain and Spain in 1789 and 1790, ten years before the Russian American Com- pany was first chartered. It was in the prosecution of this trade that the American settlement at the mouth of the Columbia River was made in 1811, which was taken by the British during the late war, and formally restored to them on the 6th of October, 1818. By the treaty of the 22d of February, 1819, with Spain, the United States acquired all the rights of Spain north of latitude 42°; and by the third article of the convention between the United States and Great Britain of the 20th of October, 1818, it was agreed that any country that might be claimed by either party on the northwest coast of America, westward of the Stony Mountains, should, together with its harbors, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free and open for the term of ten years from that date to the vessels, citizens, and subjects of the two powers, with- out prejudice to the claims of either party or of any other State. You are authorized to propose an article of the same import for a 144 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. term of ten years from the signature of a joint convention between the United States, Great Britain, and Russia. The right of the United States from the forty-second to the forty-ninth parallel of latitude on the Pacific Ocean we consider as unquestionable, being founded, first, on the acquisition, by the treaty of February 22, 1819, of all the rights of Spain; second, by the discovery of the Co- lumbia River, first from sea, at its mouth, and then by land, by Lewis and Clarke; and third, by the settlement at its mouth in 1811. This territory is to the United States of an importance which no possession in North America can be to any European nation, not only as it is but the continuity of their possessions from the Atlantic to the Pacitic Ocean, but as it offers their inhabitants the means of establishing here- after water communications from the one to the other. It is not conceivable that any possession upon the continent of North America should be of use or importance to Russia for any other purpose than that of traffic with the natives. This was, in fact, the inducement to the formation of the Russian-American Company and to the charter granted them by the Emperor Paul. It was the inducement to the ukase of the Emperor Alexander. By offering free and equal access for a term of years to navigation and intercourse with the natives to Russia, within the limits to which our claims are indisputable, we con- cede much more than we obtain. It is not to be doubted that, long be- fore the expiration of that time, our settlement at the mouth of the Columbia River will become so considerable as to offer means of useful commercial intercourse with the Russian settlements on the islands of the northwest coast. With regard to the territorial claim, separate from the right of traffic with the natives and from any system of colonial exclusions, we are willing to agree to the boundary line within which the Emperor Paul had granted exclusive privileges to the Russian American Company, that is to say, latitude 55°. tf the Russian Government apprehend serious inconvenience from the illicit traffic of foreigners with their settlements on the northwest coast, it may be effectually guarded against by stipulations similar to those, a draft of which is herewith subjoined, and to which you are authorized, on the part of the United States, to agree. As the British ambassador at St. Petersburg is authorized and in- structed to negotiate likewise upon this subject, it may be proper to adjust the interests and claims of the three powers by a joint conven- tion. Your full power is prepared accordingly. Instructions conformable to these will be forwarded to Mr. Rush, at London, with authority to communicate with the British Government in relation to this interest and to correspond with you concerning it, with a view to the maintenance of the rights of the United States. I am, ete., JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. HENRY MIDDLETON, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States, St. Petersburg. {Inelosure.] Draft of treaty between the United States and Russia. Art. I. In order to strengthen the bonds of friendship and to preserve in future a perfect harmony and good understanding between the contracting parties, it is agreed CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. 145 that their respective citizens and subjects shall not be disturbed or molested, either in navigating or in carrying on their fisheries in the Pacific Ocean or in the South Seas, or in landing on the coasts of those seas, in places not already occupied, for the purpose of carrying on their commerce with the natives of the country; subject, nevertheless to the restrictions and provisions specified in the two following articles. Art. II. To the end that the navigation and fishery of the citizens and subjects of the contracting parties, respectively, in the Pacific Ocean or in the South Seas, may not be made a pretext for illicit trade with their respective settlements, it is agreed that the citizens of the United States shall not land on any part of the coast actually occupied by Russian settlements, unless by permission of the governor or commander thereof, and that Russian subjects shall, in like manner, be interdicted from landing without permission at any settlement of the United States on the said northwest coast. Art. III. It is agreed that no settlement shall be made hereafter on the northwest coast of America by citizens of the United States or under their authority, north, nor by Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, south of the fifty-fitth degree of north latitude. (or other inclosures, see American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. v, pp. 436-438.) Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush. No. 70.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, July 22, 1823. Sir: Among the subjects of negotiation with Great Britain which are pressing upon the attention of this Government is the present con- dition of the northwest coast of this continent. This interest is con- nected, in a manner becoming from day to day more important, with our territorial rights; with the whole system of our intercourse with the Indian tribes; with the boundary relations between us and the British North American dominions; with the fur trade; the fisheries in the Pacific Ocean; the commerce with the Sandwich Islands and China; with our boundary upon Mexico; and, lastly, with our political stand- ing and intercourse with the Russian Empire. By the third article of the convention between the United States and Great Britain of October 20, 1818, it is agreed that any “country that may be claimed by either party on the northwest coast of America, westward of the Stony Mountains, shall, together with its harbors, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same be free and open for the term of ten years from the date of the signature of the convention to the vessels, citizens, and subjects of the two pow- ers; it being well understood that this agreement is not to be construed to the prejudice of any claims which either of the two high contracting parties may have to any part of the said country, nor shall it be taken to affect the claims of any other power or State to any part of the said country. The only object of the high contracting parties in that re- spect being to prevent disputes and differencies amongst themselves.” On the 6th of October, 1818, fourteen days before the signature of the convention, the settlement at the mouth of Columbia River had been formally restored to the United States by order of the British Government. (Message of the President of the United States to the House of Representatives, April 15, 1822, page 13. Letter of Mr. Trevost to the Secretary of State of November 11, 1818.) By the treaty of amity, settlement, and limits between the United States and Spain of February 22, 1819, the boundary line between them was fixed at the forty-second degree of latitude, from the source of the 19 146 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Sditeanes River to the South Sea: by which treaty the United States acquired all the rights of Spain north of that parallel. The right of the United States to the Columbia River, and to the interior territory washed by its waters, rests upon its discovery from the sea and nomination by a citizen of the United States; upon its ex- ploration to the sea by Captains Lewis and Clarke; upon the settlement of Astoria, made under the protection of the United States, and thus restored to them in 1818; and upon this subsequent acquisition of all the rights of Spain, the only European power who, prior to the discov- ery of the river, had any pretenses to territorial rights on the north- west coast of America. The waters of the Columbia River extend by the Multnomah to the forty-second degree of latitude, where its source approaches within a few miles of those of the Platte and Arkansas, and by Clarke’s River to the fiftieth or fifty-first degree of latitude; thence descending southward, till its sources almost intersect those of the Missouri. To the territory thus watered, and immediately contiguous to the original possessions of the United States, as first bounded by the Mississippi, they consider their right to be now established by all the principles which have ever been applied to Kuropean settlements upon the American hemisphere. By the ukase of the Emperor Alexander, of the 4th (16th) of Sep- tember, 1821, an exclusive territorial right on the northwest coast of America is asserted as belonging to Russia, and as extending from the northern extremity of the continent to latitude 51°, and the navigation and fishery of all other nations are interdicted by the same ukase to the extent of 100 Italian miles from the coast. When Mr. Poletica, the late Russian minister here, was called upon to set forth the grounds of right conformable to the laws of nations which authorized the issuing of this decree, he answered in his letters of February 25 and April 2, 1822, by alleging first discovery, occupancy, and chen possession. It appears upon examination that these claims have no foundation in fact. The right of seo on this continent, claimable by Russia, is reduced to the probability that, in 1741, Captain Tchirikoff saw from the sea the mountain called St. Eli: as, im about the fifty-ninth degree of north latitude. The Spanish navigators, as early as 1582, had dis- covered as far north as 57° 350’, As to occupancy, Captain Cook, in 1779, had the express declaration of Mr. Ismaeloff, the chief of the Russian settlement at Unalaska, that they knew nothing of the continent in America; and in the Nootka Sound controversy between Spain and Great Britain it is explicitly stated in the Spanish documents that Russia had disclaimed all preten- sion to interfere with the Spanish exclusive rights to beyond Prince William Sound, latitude 61°. No evidence has been exhibited of any tussian settlement on this continent south and east of Prince William Sound to this day, with the exception of that in California, made in 1816, . It never has been admitted by the various European nations which have formed settlements in this hemisphere that the occupation of an island gave any claim whatever to territorial possessions on the conti- nent to which it was adjoining. The recognized principle has rather been the reverse, as, by the law of nature, islands must be rather con- sidered as appendages to continents than continents to islands. The.only color of claim alleged by Mr. Poletica which has an appeatr- ance of plausibility is that which he asserts as an authentic fact, “ that CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. 147 in 1789 the Spanish packet St. Charles, commanded by Captain Haro, found in the latitude 48° and 49°, Russian settlements to the number of eight, consisting in the whole of twenty families and 462 individuals.” But, more than twenty years since, Heurieu had shown, in his intro- duction to the voyage ot Marchand, that in this statement there was a mistake of at least ten degrees of latitude, and that instead of 48° and 49°, it should read 58° and 59°. This is probably not the only mistake in the account. It rests altogether upon the credit of two private let- ters—one written from San Blas, and the other from the City of Mexico, to Spain—there communicated to a French consul in one of the Spanish ports, and by him to the French minister of marine. They were writ- ten in October, 1788, and August, 1789. We have seen that in 1790 Russia explicitly disclaimed interfering with the exclusive rights of Spain to beyond Prince William Sound in latitude 619; and Van- couver, in 1794, was informed by the Russians on the spot that their most eastern settlement there was on Hinchinbrook Island, at Port Etches, which had been established in the course of the preceding summer, and that the adjacent continent was a sterile and uninhabited country. Until the Nootka Sound contest Great Britain had never advanced any claim to territory upon the northwest coast of America by right of occupation. Under the treaty of 1763 her territorial rights were bounded by the Mississippi. On the 22d of July, 1793, McKenzie reached the shores of the Pacific by land from Canada in latitude 52° 21’ north, longitude 128° 2/ west of Greenwich. It is stated in the 52d number of the Quarterly Review, in the article upon Kotzebue’s voyage, ‘that the whole country from latitude 56° 30/ to the boundary of the United States in latitude 48°, or thereabouts, is now and has long been in the actual possession of the British North- west Company;” that this company have a post on the borders of a river in latitude 54° 30/ north, longitude 125° west, and that in lati- tude 55° 15’ north, longitude 129° 44’ west, “by this time (March, 1822) the United Company of the Northwest and Hudsons Bay have, in all probability, formed an establishment.” It is not imaginable that, in the present condition of the world, any Kuropean nation should entertain the project of settling a colony on the northwest coast of America. That the United States should form establishments there, with views of absolute territorial right and inland communication, is not only to be expected, but is pointed out by the finger of nature, and has been for many years a subject of serious deliberation in Congress. A plan has, for several sessions, been before them for establishing a Territorial government on the borders of the Columbia River. It will undoubtedly be resumed at their next session, and even if then again postponed, there can not be a doubt that, in the course of a few years, it must be carried into effect. As yet, however, the only useful purpose to which the Northwest Coast of America has been or can be made subservient to the settle- ments of civilized men are the fisheries on its adjoining seas and trade with the aboriginal inhabitants of the country. These have hitherto been enjoyed in common by the people of the United States and by the British and Russian nations. The Spanish, Portuguese, and French nations have also participated in them hitherto, without other annoyance than that which resulted from the exclusive territorial claims of Spain, so long as they were insisted on by her. The United States and Great Britain have both protested against the Russian imperial ukase of September 4 (16), 1821. At the proposal 148 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. of the Russian Government a full power and instructions are now trans- mitted to Mr. Middleton for the adjustment, by amicable negotiation, of the conflicting claims of the parties on this subject. We have been informed by the Baron de Tuyll that a similar author- ity has been given on the part of the British Government to Sir Charles Bagot. Previous to the restoration of the settlement at the mouth of the Columbia River in 1818, and again upon the first introduction into Con- gress of the plan for constituting a Territorial government there, some disposition was manifested by Sir Charles Bagot and Mr. Can- ning to dispute the right of the United States to that establishment, and some vague intimation was given of British claims on the North- west Coast. The restoration of the place and the convention of 1818 were considered as a final disposal of Mr. Bagot’s objections, and Mr. Canning declined committing to paper those which he had intimated in conversation. The discussion of the Russian pretensions in the negotiation now pro- posed necessarily involves the interests of the three powers and renders it manifestly proper that the United States and Great Britain should come to a mutual understanding with respect to their respective preten- sions, as well as upon their joint views with reference to those of Russia. Copies of the instructions to Mr. Middleton are, therefore, herewith transmitted to you, and the President wishes you to confer freely with the British Government on the subject. The principles settled by the Nootka Sound Convention of October 28, 1790, were— (1) That the rights of fishery in the south seas, of trading with the natives of the Northwest Coast of America, and of making settlements on the coast itself for the purposes of that trade, north of the actual settlements of Spain, were common to all the European nations, and of course to the United States. (2) That so far as the actual settlements of Spain had extended she possessed the exclusive rights, territorial and of navigation and fishery, extending to the distance of 10 miles from the coasts so actually occu- pied. (3) Thaton the coasts of South America, and theadjacent islands south of the parts already occupied by Spain, no settlement should thereafter be made either by British or Spanish subjects, but on beth sides should be retaimed the liberty of landing and of erecting temporary buildings for the purposes of the fishery. These rights were also, of course, en- joyed by the people of the United States. The exclusive rights of Spain to any part of the American continents have ceased. That portion of the convention, therefore, which recog- nizes the exclusive colonial right of Spain on these continents, though confirmed, as between Great Britain and Spain, by the first additional article to the treaty of the 5th of July, 1814, has been extinguished by the fact of the independence of the South American nation and of Mexico. These independent natious will possess the rights incident to that condition, and their territories will, of course, be subject to no exclusive right of navigation in their vicinity, or of access to them by any foreign nation. A necessary consequence of this state of things will be that the American continents henceforth will no longer be subjects of coloniza- tion. Occupied by civilized, independent nations, they will be acces- sible to Europeans and to each other on that footing alone, and the Pacific Ocean in every part of it will remain open to the navigation of all nations in like manner with the Atlantic. CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. 149 Incidental to the condition of national independence and sovereignty, the rights of anterior navigation of their rivers will belong to each of the American nations within its own territories. The application of colonial principles of exclusion, therefore, can not be admitted by the United States as lawful on any part of the Northwest Coast of America, or as belonging to any European nation. Their own settlements there, when organized as Territorial govern- ments, will be adapted to the freedom of their own institutions, and, as constituent parts of the Union, be subject to the principles and pro- visions of their constitution. The right of carrying on trade with the natives throughout the North- west Coast they (the United States) can not renounce. With the Rus- sion settlements at Kodiak, or at New Archangel, they may fairly claim the advantage of a free trade, having so long enjoyed it unmolested, and because it has been and would continue to be as advantageous at least to those settlements as to them. But they will not contest the right of Russia to prohibit the traffic, as strictly confined to the Russian sect- tlement itself and not extending to the original natives of the coast. If the British Northwest and Hudson’s Bay Companies have any posts on the coast, as suggested in the article of the Quarterly Review, above cited, the third article of the convention of October 20, 1818, is applicable to them. Mr. Middleton is authorized by his instructions to propose an article of similar import, to be inserted ina joint convention between the United States, Great Britain, and Russia, for a term of ten years from its signature. You are authorized to make the same pro- posal to the British Government, and with a view to draw a definite line of demarcation for the future, to stipulate that no settlement shall hereafter be made on the Northwest Coast or on any of the islands thereto adjoining by Russian subjects south of latitude 55°, by citizens of the United States north of latitude 51°, or by British subjects either South of 51° or north of 55°. I mention the latitude of 51° as the bound within which we are willing to limit the future settlement of the United States, because it is not to be doubted that the Columbia River branches as far north as 51°, although it is most probably not the Taconesche Tesse of Mackenzie. As, however, the line already runs in latitude 49° to the Stony Mountains, should it be earnestly insisted upon by Great Britain, we will consent to carry it in continuance on the same parallel to the sea. Copies of this instruction will likewise be forwarded to Mr. Middleton, with whom you will freely, but cautiously, correspond on this subject, as well as in relation to your negotiation respecting the suppression of the slave trade. I have the honor to be, with great respect, sir, your very humble obedient servant, JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, Hon. RIcHARD RUSH, Hnvoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States, London. Mr. Middleton to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 33.] ST. PETERSBURG, December 1 (13), 1823. Sir: I have prepared, and shall deliver inon the first fit occasion, for his Imperial Majesty’s inspection, a confidential memoir on the North- 150 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. west question, and I now forward a copy of it marked A. The subject must be trite to you; but I have found here that it is indispensable to make some statements of facts and principles in this case before I can proceed further in the negotiation. I hope you will approve of the course I am pursuing, and that you will find that I have stated cor- rectly both facts and principles. I felt it to be necessary to broach the subject in this mode, knowing the erroneous impressions which pre- vail. Ihave now ereat hopes, notwithstanding the unfavorabie ap- pearances which this affair has worn for a few weeks past, that it may take a new turn, and that I may yet be enabled to succeed in attaining the main object of the negotiation. Sir Charles Bagot is now daily expecting tlie return of his messenger with new powers and instructions respecting the same matters. I mentioned in my last, and I now repeat, that I have a reasonable ex- pectation that he will be instructed to pursue the course of policy so obviously pointed out by the true interests of England, and suggested by a sense of the propriety of being consistent, and of persevering in the principles which marked the Nootka Sound contestation. Neither he nor I foresee any difficulty in reconciling and adjusting the interests of our respective countries upon this question. (For inclosures see American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. V, p. 449, et seq.) Mr. Rush to Mr. Adans, No. 353.] Lonpon, December 19, 1823. Sir: Since I last wrote, Mr. Canning has been confined to his house by a sharp attack of gout; nevertheless, he wrote mea note the day before yesterday inviting me to call upon him on that day for the pur- pose of having our proposed conference on the topic of the Northwest Coast. I went accordingly and was received by him in his chamber. He repeated his wish to learn from me our general grounds upo this subject preparatory to his sending off instructions to Sir Charles Bagot. TL at once unfolded them to him by stating that the proposals of my Government were, first, that as regarded the country lying between the Stony Mountains and the Pacific Ocean, Great Britain, the United States, and Russia should jointly enter into a convention, similar in its nature to the third article of the convention of the 20th of October, 1818, now existing between the two former powers, by which the whole of that country westward of the Stony Mountains and all its waters would be free and open to the citizens and subjects of the three powers as long as the joint convention remained in forece.. This my Govern- -ment proposed should be for the term of ten years. And, second, that the United States were willing to stipulate to make no settlements north of the fifty-first degree of north latitude on that coast, provided Great Britain stipulated to make none south of 51° or north of 55°, and Russia to make none south of 55°, These, I said, were the principal points which I had to put forward upon this subject. The map was spread out before us, and, in stating the points, | endeavored to explain and recommend them by such ap- propriate remarks as your instructions supplied me with, going as far as eoeor fitted to a discussion regarded only as preparatory and in- formal, CORRESPONDENCE OF 1822-1825. yt Mr. Canning repeated that he had not invited me to call upon him with any view to discussion at present, but only to obtain from me a Statement of the points, in anticipation of the opening of the negotiation, from the motive that he had mentioned of writing to Mr. Ba wot. Yet my statement naturally led to further conversation. He expressed no opinion on any of the points, but his inquiries and remarks under that which proposes to confine the British settlements within 51° and 55° were evidently of a nature to indicate strong objections on his side, though he professed to speak only from his first impressions. It is more proper, I should say, that his objections were directed to our pro- posal of not letting Great Britain go above 55° north with her settle- ments, whilst we allowed Russia to come down to that line with hers. In treating of this coast he had supposed that Britain had her northern question with Russia, as her southern with the United States. He could see a motive for the United States desiring to stop the settle- ments of Great Britain southward; but he had not before known of their desire to stop them northward, and, above all, over limits con- ceded to Russia. It was to this effect that his suggestions went. He threw out no dissent to the plan of joint asufruction between the three powers of the country westward of the Stony Mountains for the period of time proposed. In the course of my remarks I said that the United States no longer regarded any part of that coast as open to European colonization, but only to be used for purposes of traffic with the natives and for fishing in the neighboring seas; that we did not know that Great Britain had ever advanced any claim whatever to territory there founded on occu- pation prior to the Nootka Sound controversy; that under the treaties of 1763 her territorial rights in America were bounded westward by the Mississippi; that if the Northwest and Hudson’s Bay Companies now had settlements as high up as 54° or 55° we suppose it to be as much as could be shown, and were not aware how Great Britain could make good her claims any further; that Spain, on the contrary, had much larger claims on that coast by right of discovery, and that to the whole extent of these the United States had succeeded by the Florida treaty ; that they were willing, however, waiving for the present the full ad- vantage of these claims, to forbear all settlements north of 51°, as that limit might be sufficient to give them the benefit of all the waters of the Columbia River; but that they would expect Great Britain to ab- stain from coming south of that limit or going above 55°, the latter parallel being taken as that beyond which it was not imagined that she had any actual settlements. The same parallel was proposed for the southern limit of Russia as the boundary within which the Emperor Paul had granted certain commercial privileges to his Russian Ameri- can Company in 1799; but that, in fixing upon this line as regarded Russia, if was not the intention of the United States to deprive them- selves of the right of traffic with the natives above it and still less to concede to that power any system of colonial exclusion above it. Such was the general character of my remarks which Mr. Canning said he would take into due consideration. In conclusion I said to him that I should reserve myself for the negotiation itself for such further elucidations of the subject as might tend to show the justice and rea- sonableness of our propositions. I have the honor to be, ete., RIcHARD RUSH. Hon. JOUN QUINCY ADAMs, Secretary of State. 152 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. No. 43.] St. PETERSBURG, 17th February, 1st March, 1825. (Received May 2.) Str: I have the honor to acquaint you that a convention was signed yesterday between the Russian and British plenipotentiaries relative to navigation, fisheries, and commerce in the Great Ocean, and to ter- ritorial demarcation upon the Northwest Coast of America. In a con- versation held this day with Mr. Stratford Canning I have learned that this treaty is modeled in a great degree upon that which was signed by me in the month of April last, and that its provisions are as follows, to wit: The freedom of navigation and fishery throughout the Great Ocean and upon all its Coasts; the privilege of landing at all unoccupied points; that of trading with the natives; and the special privileges of reciprocal trade and navigation secured for ten years upon the north- west Coast of America, together with the mutual restrictions prohibit- ing the trading in firearms or spirituous liquors, are all stipulated in the British as in the American Treaty; and some new provisions are made for the privilege of refitting vessels in the respective Ports, and no higher duties are to be imposed than upon National Vessels. The third article of this convention establishes the line of demarka- tion between the possessions of the two powers upon the Continent and Islands, as follows: It begins at the southernmost point of Prince of Wales’s Island (about 54° 40’), leaving the whole of that island to Rus- sia. It follows the strait called Portland Passage up to the fifty-sixth degree; then turns eastward upon that latitude until it touches the highest ridge of the chain of mountains lying contiguous to.and nearly parallel with the coast; it follows that ridge. up to the sixtieth degree, and then takes the direction of that degree of latitude until its inter- section with the one hundred and forty: first degree of longitude west of Greenwich; thence it follows that meridian ‘north to the Tey Sea. But in case the ridge of the Mountain lying parallel with the Coast shall be more than 10 marine leagues from the Shores of the Continent, then the distance of 10 marine leagues from the Shore is to be considered as the boundary of the Russian possessions upon the Continent. I beg leave here to repeat an opinion I ventured to express in my dispatch No. 38, respecting the policy of establishing a Post upon the Continent somewhere within the Straits of Fuca. The most valuable part of the furs procured upon the northwest Coast is obtained in the interior Seas running around the cluster of Islands bordering the Coast. I should consider such a post aS more important in many points of view than one upon Columbia River, and as likely to have a most de- cisive influence in securing an advantageous settlement of limits with England, who will be anxious, now that her northern limit is estab- lished, to settle her southern boundary upon that Coast. I have the honor to be, sir, very faithfully, your obedient servant, HENRY MIDDLETON. The SECRETARY OF STATE. Nore.—for Mr. Middleton’s full report of the negotiation of the treaty of 1824, and for further corr respondence relative to the ukase of 1821 and the treaties of 1824 and 1825, see American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. v, pp. 457-462. SEIZURES OF 1886-1887. 153 CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN RELATIVE TO THE SHSIZURE OF BRITISH SEALING VESSELS IN BERING SHA IN 1886 AND 1887. Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, September 27, 1886. (Received September 28.) Srr: I have the honor to inform you that Her Majesty’s Government have received a telegram from the commander-in-chief of Her Majesty’s naval forces on the Pacific station respecting the alleged seizure of three British Columbian seal schooners by the United States revenue cruiser Corwin, and I am in consequence instructed to request to be furnished with any particulars which the United States Government may posses relative to this occurrence. I have, etc., L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, October 21, 1886. (Received October 22.) Srr: With reference to my note of the 27th ultimo, requesting to be furnished with any particulars which the United States Government may possess relative to the seizure in the North Pacific waters of three British Columbian seal schooners by the United States revenue cruiser Corwin, and to which I am without reply, | have the honor to inform you that I am now instructed by the Earl of Iddesleigh, Her Hajesty’s principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, to protest in the name of Her Majesty’s Government against such seizure, and to reserve all rights to compensation. I have, etc., L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Earl of Iddesleigh to Sir L. S. Sackville West.! FOREIGN OFFICE, October 30, 1886. Str: Her Majesty’s Government are still awaiting a report on the result of the application which you were directed by my dispatch No. 181, of the 9th ultimo, to make to the Government of the United States for information in regard to the reported seizure by the United States revenue cutter Corwin of three Canadian schooners while engaged in the pursuit of seals in Berhing’s Sea. In the meanwhile further details in regard to these seizures have been sent to this country, and Her Majesty’s Government now consider it incumbent on them to bring to the notice of the United States Gov- ernment the facts of the case as they have reached them from British sources. 1Left at the Department of State by Sir L. 8. Sackville West November 12, 1886, 20 154 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. It appears that the three schooners, named respectively the Carolina, the Onward, and the Thornton, were fitted out in Victoria, British Co- lumbia, for the capture of seals in the waters of the Northern Pacific Ocean, adjacent to Vancouver's Island, Queen Charlotte Islands, and Alaska. According to the depositions inclosed herewith! from some of the officers and men, these vessels were engaged in the capture of seals in the open sea, out of sight of land, when they were taken possession of, on or about the Ist August last, by the United States revenue cutter Corwin—the Carolina in latitude 55° 50’ north, longitude 168° 53’ west; the Onward in latitude 50° 52’ north, longitude 167° 55’ west; and the Thornton in about the same Jatitude and longitude. They were all at a distance of more than 60 miles from the nearest land at the time of their seizure, and on being captured were towed by the Corwin to Oonalaska, where they are still detained. The crews of the Carolina and Thornton, with the exception of the captain and one man on each vessel detained at that port, were, it appears, sent by the steamer St. Paul to San Francisco, Cal., and then turned adritt, while the crew of the Onward were kept at Oonalaska. At the time of their seizure the Carolina had 686 seal-skins on board, the Thornton 404, and the Onward 900, and these were detained, and would appear to be still kept at Oonalaska, along with the schooners, by the United States authorities. According to information given in the Alaskan, a newspaper pub- lished at Sitka, in the Territory of Alaska, and dated the 4th Septem- ber, 1886, it is reported: (1) That the master and mate of the schooner Thornton were brought for trial before Judge Dawson, in the United States district court at Sitka, on the 30th August last. (2) That the evidence given by the officers of the United States revenue cutter Corwin went to show that the Thornton was seized while in Bering Sea, about 60 or 70 miles south southeast of St. George Island, for the offense of hunting and killing seals within that part of Behring Sea which (it was alleged by the Alaskan news- paper) was ceded to the United States by Russia in 1867. (3) That the judge in his charge to the jury, after quoting the first article of the treaty of the 30th March, 1867, between Russia and the United States, in which the western boundary of Alaska is defined, went on to say: ‘‘All the waters within the boundary set forth in this treaty to the western end of the Aleutian archipelago and chain of islands are to be considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska, and all the penalties prescribed by law against the killing of fur-bearing animals must, therefore, attach against any violation of law within the limits heretofore described. If, therefore, the jury believe from the evidence that the defendants, by themselves or in conjunction with others, did, on or about the time charged in the information, kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal or animals on the shores of Alaska or in the Behring Sea east of 193° of west longitude, the jury should find the defendants guilty, and assess their punishment separately at a fine of not less than $200 nor more than $1,000, or imprisonment not more than six months, or by both such fine (within the limits herein set forth) and imprisonment.” (4) That the jury broughtin averdict of guilty against the prisoners, in accordance with which the master of the Thornton, Hans Guttounsen, was sentenced to imprison- ment for thirty days, and to pay a fine of $500; and the mate of the Thornton, Norman, was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days, and to pay a fine of $300; which terms of imprisonment are presumably now being carried into effect. There is also reason to believe that the masters and mates of the Onward and Caro- lena have since been tried and sentenced to undergo penalties similar to those now being inflicted on the master and mate of the Thornton. You will observe, from the facts given above, that the authorities of the United States appear to lay claim to the sole sovereignty of that part of Behring Sea lying east of the westerly boundary of Alaska, as defined in the first article of the treaty concluded between the United 1 For inclosure see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, 50th Congress, 2d sess., p. 7, note. SEIZURES OF 1886 AND 1887. 155 States and Russia in 1867, by which Alaska was ceded to the United States, aud which includes a stretch of sea extending in its widest part some 600 or 700 miles easterly [westerly ?| from the mainland of Alaska, In support of this claim, those authorities are alleged to have inter- fered with the peaceful and lawful eccupation of Canadian citizens on the high seas, to have taken possession of their ships, to have subjected their property to forfeiture, and to have visited upon their persons the indignity of imprisonment. Such proceedings, if correctly reported, would appear to have been in violation of the admitted principles of international law. I request that you will, on the receipt of this dispatch, seek an inter- view with Mr. Bayard, and make him acquainted with the nature of the information with which Her Majesty’s Government have been furnished respecting this matter, and state to him that they do not doubt that, if on inquiry it should prove to be correct, the Government of the United States will, with their well-known sense of justice, at once adinit the illegality of the proceedings resorted to against the British vessels and the British subjects above mentioned, and will cause reasonable reparation to be made for the wrongs to which they have been subjected and for the losses which they have sustained. Should Mr. Bayard desire it, you are authorized to leave with him a copy of this dispatch. I am, ete., IDDESLEIGH. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. S. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, November 12, 1886. Str: The delay in my reply to your letters of September 27 and Oc- tober 21, asking for the information in my possession concerning the seizure by the United States revenue cutter Corwin, in the Behring Sea, of British vessels, for an alleged violation of the laws of the United States in relation to the Alaskan seal fisheries, has been caused by my waiting to receive from the Treasury Department the information you desired. I tender the fact in apology for the delay and as the reason for my silence, and, repeating what I said verbally to you in our con- versation this morning, I am still awaiting full and authentic reports of the judicial trial and judgment in the cases of the seizures referred to. My application to my colleague, the Attorney-General, to procure an authentic report of these proceedings was promptly made, and the de- lay in furnishing the report doubtless has arisen from the remoteness of the place of trial. So soon as I am enabled I will convey to you the facts as ascertained in the trial and the rulings of law as applied by the court. I take leave also to acknowledge your communication of the 21st of October, informing me that you had been instructed by the Earl of Iddesleigh, Her Majesty’s principal secretary of state for foreign af- fairs, to protest against the seizure of the vessels above referred to, and to reserve all rights of compensation. All of which shall receive respectful consideration. I have, etc., T. F. BAYARD. 156 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, December 7, 1886. (Received December 8.) Sir: Referring to your note of the 12th instant [azine ?| on the sub- ject of the seizure of British vessels in the Behring Sea, and promising to c oo to me as soon as possible the facts as ascer tained i in the trial and the rulings of law as applied by the court, [ have the honor to state that vessels are now, as usual, equipping in British Coiumbia for fishing in that sea. The Canadian Government, therefore, in the absence of in- formation, are desirous of ascertaining whether such vessels fishing in the open sea and beyond the territorial waters of Alaska would be ex- posed to seizure, and Her Majesty’s Government at the same time would be glad if some assurance would be given that, pending the settlement of the question, no such seizures of British vessels will be made in Ber- ing Sea. I have, etc., L, S. SACKVILLE WEST. Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, January 9, 1887. (Received January 10.) Str: [have the honor to inform you that I have received instrue- tions from the Earl of Iddesleigh, Her Majesty’s principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, again ‘to pring to your notice the grave repre- sentations made by Her Majesty’s Government respecting the seizure of the British vessels Carolena, Onward, and Thornton in Behring Sea by the United States cruiser Corwin, to which no reply has as yet been received. On the 27th of September last I had the honor to address to you a note, in which I stated that her Majesty’s Government requested to be furnished with any particulars which the United States Government might possess relative to this occurrence. On the 21st of October last I had the honor to inform you that I was instructed by the Earl of Iddesleigh to protest in the name of Her Majesty’s Government against such seizures, and to reserve all rights to compensation. In a note dated the 12th of November last you were good enough to explain the delay which had occurred in answering these communica- tions, and on the same day I had the honor to communicate to you a dispatch from the Earl of Iddesleigh, a copy of which, at your request, I placed in your hands. On the 7th ultimo I again had the honor to address you, stating that vessels were equipping in British Columbia for fishing in Behring Sea, and that the Canadian Government were desirous of ascer taining whether such vessels fishing in the open sea and beyond the territorial waters of Alaska would be exposed to seizure, and that Her Majesty’s Gov- ernment would be glad if some assurance could be given that pending the settlement of the questions no such seizures of British vessels would be made in Behring Sea. The vessels in question were seized at a distance of more than 60 mniles from the nearest land at the time of their seizure. The master of SEIZURES OF 1886 AND 1887. 157 the Thornton was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days, and to pay a fine of $500, and there is reason to believe that the masters of the Onward and Carolena have been sentenced to similar penalties. In support of this claim to jurisdiction over a stretch of sea extend- ing in its widest part some 600 or 700 miles from the inainland, advanced by the judge in his charge to the jury, the authorities are alleged to have interfered with the peaceable and lawful occupation of Canadian citizens on the high seas; to have subjected their property to forfeiture and to have visited upon their persons the indignity of imprisonment. Such proceedings therefore, if correctly reported, appear to have been in violation of the admitted principles of international law. Under these circumstances Her Majesty’s Government do not hesi- tate to express their concern at not having received any reply to their representations, nor do they wish to conceal the grave nature which the case has thus assumed, and to which I am now instructed to call your immediate and most serious attention. It is unnecessary for me to al- lude further to the information with which Her Majesty’s Government have been furnished respecting these seizures of British vessels in the open seas, and which for sometime past has been in the possession of the United States Government, because Her Majesty’s Government do not doubt that if, on inquiry, it should prove to be correct, the Govern- ment of the United States will, with their well-known sense of justice, admit the illegality of the proceedings resorted to against the British vessels and the British subjects above mentioned, and will cause rea- sonable reparation to be made for the wrongs to which they have been subjected and for the losses which they have sustained. In conclusion, I have the honor again to refer to your note of the 12th of November last, and to what you said verbally to me on the same day, and to express the hope that the cause of the delay complained of in answering the representations of Her Majesty’s Government on this grave and important matter may be speedily removed. I have, ete., L. 8S. SACKVILLE WEST. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. S. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, January 12, 1887. Sir: Your note of the 9th instant was received by me on the next day, and I regret exceedingly that, although my efforts have been dili- gently made to procure from Alaska the authenticated copies of the judicial proceedings in the cases of the British vessels Carolena, Onward, and Thornton, to which you refer, I should not have been able to obtain them in time to have made the urgent and renewed application of the Karl of Iddesleigh superfluous. The pressing nature of your note constrains me to inform you that on September 27 last, when I received my first intimation from you that any question was possible as to the validity of the judicial proceedings referred to, I lost no time in requesting my colleague, the Attorney- General, in whose department the case is, to procure for me such au- thentic information as would enable me to make full response to your application. From week to week I have been awaiting the arrival of the papers, 158 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. and to-day, at my request, the Attorney-General has telegraphed to Portland, Oregon, the nearest telegraph station to Sitka, in Alaska, in order to expedite the furnishing of the desired papers. You will understand that my wish to meet the questions involved in the instructions you have received from your Government is averred, and that the delay has been enforced by the absence of requisite infor- mation as to the facts. The distance of the vessels from any land or the circumstances at- tendant upon their seizure are unknown to me save by the statements in your last note, and it is essential that such facts should be devoid of all uncertainty. Of whatever information may be in the possession of Her Majesty’s Government I have, of course, no knowledge or means of knowledge, but this Department of the Government of the United States has not yet been placed in possession of that accurate information which would justify its decision in a question which you are certainly warranted in considering to. be of grave importance. I shall diligently endeavor to procure the best evidence possible of the matters inquired of, and will make due response thereupon when the opportunity of decision is afforded to me. You require no assurance that no avoidance of our international ob- ligations need be apprehended. I have, etc., T. F. BAYARD. Sir DL. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. BRITISH LEGATION, Washington, February 1, 1887. (Received February 2.) Sir: With reference to your note of the 12th ultimo, I have the honor to inform you that under date of the 27th ultimo the Marquis of Salis- bury instructs me to inquire whether the information and papers rela- tive to the seizure of the British schooners Carolena, Onward, and Thorn- ton have reached the United States Government. I have, ete., L. S. SACKVILLE WES‘. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. 8. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 3, 1887. Str: I beg to acknowledge your note of yesterday’s date, received to-day. Upon its receipt | made instant application to my colleague, the At- torney-General, in relation to the record of the judicial proceedings in - the cases of the three British vessels arrested in August last in Behring Sea for violation of the United States laws regulating the Alaskan seal fisheries. I am informed that the documents in question left Sitka on the 26th of January, and may be expected to arrive at Port Townsend, in Wash- SEIZURES OF 1886 AND 1887. 159 ington Territory, about the 7th instant, so that the papers, in the usual course of mail, should be received by me within a fortnight. In this connection I take occasion to inform you that, without con- clusion at this time of any questions which may be found to be involved in these cases of seizure, ordershave been issued by the President’s di- rection for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith. I have, ete., T. F. BAYARD. Sir DL. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, February 4, 1887. (Received February 5.) Str: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 3d instant, informing me that without conclusion at this time of any questions which may be found to be invoived in the cases of seizure of British vessels in Behring Sea, orders have been issued, by the Presi- dent’s direction, for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons un- der arrest in connection therewith. I have, etc., L. S. SACKVILLE WEs?. Sir L. 8. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, April 4, 1887. (Received April 4.) Sir: In view of the approaching fishing season in Behring Sea and the fitting out of vessels for fishing operations in those waters, Her Majesty’s Government have requested me to inquire whether the owners of such vessels may rely on being unmolested by the cruisers of the United States when not near land. Her Majesty’s Government also desires to know whether the docu- meuts referred to in your note of the 3d of February last connected with the seizure of certain British vessels beyond the three-mile limit and legal proceedings connected therewith have been received. And I have the honor therefore to request you to be good enough to enable me to reply to these inquiries on the part of Her Majesty’s Government with as little delay as possible. I have, etce., L. 8. SACKVILLE WEST. 1 For further correspondence in reference hereto, see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, 50th Congress, 2d sess, p. 56 et seq. 160 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. S. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 12, 1887. Sim: I have the honor to acknowledge your note of the 4th instant relative to the fisheries in Behring Sea, and inquiring whether the documents referred to in my note of February 3, relating to the cases of seizure in those waters of vessels charged with violating the laws of he United States regulating the killing of fur seals, had been received. The records of the judicial proceedings in the cases in the district court in Alaska referred to, were only received at this Department on Saturday last, and are now under examination. The remoteness of the scene of the fur-seal fisheries and the special peculiarities of that industry have unavoidably delayed the Treasury officials in framing appropriate regulations and issuing orders to United States vessels to police the Alaskan waters for the protection of the fur seals from indiscriminate slaughter and consequent speedy extermi- nation. The laws of the United States in this behalf are contained in the Re- vised Statutes relating to Alaska, in sections 1956-1971, and have been in force for upwards of seventeen years; and prior to the seizures of last summer but a single infraction is known to have occurred, and that was promptly punished. The question of instructions to Government vessels in regard to pre- venting the indiscriminate killing of fur seals is now being considered, and I willinform you at the earliest day possible what has been decided, so that British and other vessels visiting the waters in question can govern themselves accordingly. I have, etc., T. F. BAYARD. (For inclosures, see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, 50th Congress, 2nd Sess., pp. 14-16.) Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WaSHINGTON, July 8, 1887. (Received July 9.) Str: With reference to your note of the 12th April, stating that the records of the judicial proceedings in the cases of the British vessels seized in the Behring Sea had been received, I have the honor to inform you that the Marquis of Salisbury has instrueted me to request you to be good enough to fernish me with a copy of the same for the informa- tion of Her Majesty’s Government. I have, etc., lL. S. SACKVILLE WES‘. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. S. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, July 11, 1887. Sir: Complying with the request contained in your note of the Sth instant, conveyed to me under the instructions of your Government, I SEIZURES OF 1886 AND 1887. 161 have the honor to inclose you two printed copies of the judicial pro ceedings in the United States district court for the District of Alaska- in the several cases of libel against the schooners Onward, Carolena, and Thornton, for killing fur seals in Alaskan waters. Accept, ete., T. F. BAYARD. (For inclosure see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, 50th Congress, 2d session, pp. 17-48.) Sir L. 8. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. * WASHINGTON, August 11, 1887. (Received August 12.) Sir: I have the honor to inform you that Her Majesty’s Government have received a telegram from the commander-in-chief of Her Majesty’s naval forces in the Pacific, dated Victoria, British Columbia, August 7, reporting the seizure by United States cruisers of three British Co- Iumbian sealing schooners in Behring Sea, a long distance from Sitka, and that several other vessels were in sight being towed in. In conveying this information to you, lam requested at the same time by the Marquis of Salisbury to state that, in view of the assurances given in your note of the 3d of February last, Her Majesty’s Govern- ment had assumed that pending the conclusion of discussions between the two Governments on general questions involved, no further seizures would be made by order of the United States Government. I have, ete., LS. SACKVILLE WEST. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. S. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 13, 1887. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 11thinstant, received yesterday afternoon, informing me of a telegraphic communication from the commander-in-chief of Her Majesty’s naval forces in the Pacific, dated at Victoria, British Columbia, August 7, re- porting the seizure of three British Columbian sealing schooners “in Behring Sea, a long distance from Sitka,” and that “ several other ves- sels were in sight being towed in.” The reference to my note to you of the 3d of February last, which you make under the instruction of the Marquis of Salisbury, has caused me to examine the expressions contained therein, and I can discover no ground whatever for the assumption by Her Majesty’s Government that it contained assurances “that pending the conclusion of discus- sions between the two Governments on general questions involved, no further seizures would be made by order of the United States Govern- ment.” Until your note of the 11th instant was received, I had no informa- tion of the seizure of the sealing vessels therein referred to, and have no knowledge whatever of the circumstances under which such seizures have been made. 21 162 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. I shall at once endeavor to supply myself with the information nec- essary to enable me to reply to you more fully. The cases of seizure referred to in my note of February 3, 1887, had occurred during the previous August, and upon the basis of the infor- mation then obtained I wrote you as follows: In this connection I take the occasion to inform you that, without conclusion at this time of any questions whieh may be found to be involved in these cases of seizure, orders have been issned by the President’s direction for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith. Having no reason to anticipate any other seizure, nothing was said in relation to the possibility of such an cecurrence, nor do I find in our correspondence on the subject any grounds for such an understanding as you inform me had been assumed to exist by Her Britannic Majesty’s Government. A short time since, when you called upon me and personally obtained copies of the record of the judicial proceedings in the three cases of seizure in August last in Behring Sea, nothing was said in relation to other cases. Whether the circumstances attendant upon the cases which you now report to me are the same as those which induced the Executive to direct the releases referred to, remains hereafter to be ascertained, and this with as little delay as the circumstances will permit. 1 have, ete., Y. Ff. BAYARD. Marquis of Salisbury to Sir LD. 8S. Sackville West. [Left at the Department of State by Sir L. 8. Sackville West, September 23, 1887.] FOREIGN OFFICE, September 10, 1887. Sir: By a dispatch of the 30th October last (No. 214) the late Earl of [ddesleigh instructed you to eall the attention of the United States Secretary of State to the circumstances of the seizure in Behring’s Sea, by the American cruiser Corwin, of some British Canadian vessels; and his lordship directed you to state to Mr. Secretary Bayard that Her Majesty’s Government felt sure that if the proceedings which were re- ported to have taken place in the United States district court were cor- rectly described the United States Government would admit their ille- gality, and would cause reasonable reparation to be nade to the British subjects for the wrongs to which they had been subjected and for the losses which they had sustained. By a previous dispatch of the 9th September, you had been desired to ask to be furnished with any partieulars which the United States Government might possess relative to the seizures in question; and on the 10th October you were instructed to enter a protest on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government, and reserve for consideration hereafter all rights to compensation. Nearly four months having elapsed without any definite information being furnished by the United States Government as to the grounds of the seizures, my predecessor instructed you, on the 8th of June [Jan- uary?| last, to express to Mr. Bayard the concern of Her Majesty’s Government at the delay, and to urge the immediate attention of the SEIZURES OF 1886 AND 1887. 163 United States Government to the action of the American authorities in their treatment of these vessels and of their masters and crews. On the 3d February Mr. Bayard informed you that the record of the judicial proceedings which he had called for was shortly expected to reach Washington, and that, without conclusion at that time of any questions which might be found to be involved in these cases of seizures, orders had been issued by the President’s direction for the discontinu- ance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith. On the 4th of April, under instructions from me, you inquired of Mr. Bayard, in view of the approaching fishing season in Behring’s Sea, whether the owners of British vessels might rely when not near ‘land on being unmolested by the cruisers of the “United States, and you again asked when the record of the judicial proceedings might be expected. Mr. Bayard informed you, in reply (12th April), that the papers re- ferred to had reached him and were being examined; that there had been unavoidable delay in framing appropriate regulations and issuing orders to the United States vessels to police the Alaskan wate TS; that the Revised Statutes relating to Alaska, sections 1956 and 1971, con- tained the laws of the United States in relation to the matter ; and that the regulations were being considered, and he would inform you at the earliest day possible what had been decided, so that British and other vessels might govern themselves accordingly. In view of the statements made by Mr. Bayard in his note of the 3d February, to which I have referred above, Her Majesty’s Government assumed that, pending a conclusion of the discussion between the two Governments on the general question involved, no further similar seiz- ures of British vessels would be made by order of the United States Government. They learn, however, from the contents of Mr. Bayard’s note of the 13th ultimo, inclosed in your dispatch, No. 245, of the 15th ultimo, that such was not the meaning which he intended should be attached to his communication of the 3d February; and they deeply regret to find a proof of their misinterpretation of the intentions of the United States Government from an announcement ree ently received from the commander-in-chief of Her Majesty’s naval forces in the Pacitic, that several more British vessels engaged in seal hunting in Behring’s Sea have been seized when a long distance from land by an American rey- enue vessel. Her Majesty’s Government have carefully considered the transcript record of the judicial proceedings in the United States district court in the several cases of the schooners Carolina, Onward, and Thornton, which were communicated to you in July, and were transmitted to me in your dispatch, No. 196, of the 12th of that month, and they can not find in them any justification for the condemnation of those vessels. The libels of information allege that they were seized for killing fur seal within the limits of Alaska Territory, and in the waters ther eof, in violation of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States; and the United States Naval Commander Abbey certainly affirmed that the vessels were seized within the waters of Alaska and the Territory of Alaska, but according to his own evidence, they were seized 75, 115, and 70 miles, respectively, south-southwest of St. George’s Island. It is not disputed, therefore, that the seizures in question were effected at a distance from land far in excess of the limit of maritime jurisdic- tion, which any nation ean claim by international law, and it is hardly a essary to add that such limit can not be enlarged by any municipal awe 164 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. The zlaim thus set up appears to be founded on the exceptional title said to have been conveyed to the United States by Russia at the time of the cession of the Alaska Territory. The pretention which the Russian Government atone time put forward to exclusive jurisdiction over the whole of Behring Sea was, however, never admitted either by this country or the United States of Americ a. On the contrary, it was strenuously resisted, as I shall presently show, and the American Government can hardly claim to have received from Russia rights which they declared to be inadmissable when asserted by the Russian Government. Nor does it appear from the text of the treaty of 1867 that Russia either intended or purported to make any such grant, for by Article I of that instrument Russsia agreed to cede to the United States all the terr itory and dominion then ‘possessed by Russia ‘‘on the continent of America and in the adjacent islands” within certain geographical limits described, and no mention was made of any exclusive right over the waters of Behring Sea. Moreover, whatever rights as regards their respective subjects and citizens may be reciprocally conferred on the Russian and American Governments by treaty stipulation, the subjects of Her Majesty can not be thereby affected, except by special arrangement with this country. With regard to the exclusive claims advanced in times past by Rus- sia, | transmit to you documents communicated to the United States Congres Ss in 1822, which show the view taken by the American Govern- ment of these pretentions. In 1821 the Emperor of Russia had issued an edict establishing “rules for the limits of navigation and order of communication along thee oast of the eastern Siberia, the northwestern coast of America, and the Aleu- tian, Kurile, and other islands.” The first section of the edict said: The pursuit of commerce, whaling, and fishing, and of all other industry on all islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the northwest coast of America, be- ginning from Behring Straits to the 51st degree of northern latitude; also from the ‘Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring Straits to the south cape of the Island of Urup, viz, to the 45° 50’ of northern latitude, is exclusively granted to Russian subjects. And section 2 stated: It is, therefore, prohibited to all foreign vessels, not only to land on the coast and islands belonging to Russia, as stated above, but also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. ‘The transgressor’s Vessel is subject to contiscation, along with the whole cargo. A copy of these regulations was officially communicated to the Amer- ican Secretary of State by the Russian minister at Washington on the 1ith February, 1822, whereupon Mr. Quincy Adams, on the 25th of that month, after informing him that the President of the United States had seen with surprise the assertion of a territorial claim on the part of Russia extending to the fifty-first degree of north latitude on the Amer- ican continent, and a regulation inter dicting to all commercial vessels other than Russian upon the penalty of seizure and confiscation the approach upon the high seas within 100 Italian miles of the shores to which that claim was made to apply, went on to say that it was ex- pected, before any act which should define the boundary between the territories of the United States and Russia, that the same would have been arranged by treaty between the parties, and that ‘to exclude the vessels of American citizens from the shore beyond the ordinary dis- tanee to which territorial jurisdiction extended has excited still greater surprise;”? and Mr. Adams asked whether the Russian minister was au- thorized to give explanations of the “ ground of right upon principles SEIZURES OF 1886 AND 1887. 165 generally recognized by the laws and usages of nations which ean war- rant the claims and regulations.” The Russian minister in his reply, dated the 28th February, after ex- plaining how Russia had acquired her possessions in North America, said: I ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, sir, that the Russian posses- sions in the Pacifie Ocean extend on the northward coast of America from Behring’s Strait to the 51st degree of north latitude, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent from the same strait to the 45th degree. The extent of sea of which these possessions form the limits comprehends all the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas (‘mers fermées’), andthe Russian Government might consequently judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and especi- ally that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners; but it preferred only asserting its essential rights without taking advantage of localities. On the 30th March Mr. Adams replied to the explanations given by the Russian minister. He stated that, with respect to the pretension advanced in regard to territory, it must be considered not only with ref- erence to the question of territorial rights, but also to that prohibition to the vessels of other nations, including those of the United States, to approach within 100 Italian miles of the coasts. That from the period of the existence of the United States as an independent nation their vessels had freely navigated these seas, the right to navigate them be- ing apart of that independence; and with regard to the suggestion that “the Russian Government might have justified the exercise of sover- eignty over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea, ‘because it claims territory both on its American and Asiatic shores,’ it may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore on this sea, in latitude 51° north, is not less than 90° of longitude or 4,000 miles.” Mr. Adams concluded as follows: The President is persuaded that the citizens of this Union will remain unmolested in the prosecution of their lawful commerce, and that no effect will be given to an interdiction manifestly incompatible with their rights. The convention between the United States of America and Russia of the 17th April, 1824, put an end toany further pretension on the part of Russia to restrict navigation or fishing in Behring Sea so far as Ameri- can citizens were concerned; for by Article 1 it was agreed that in any part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the high contracting powers shall neither be disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or fish- ing, saving certain restrictions which are not material to the present issue; and a Similar stipulation in the convention between this country and Russia in the following year (15th May, 1825), put an end as re- garded British subjects to the pretensions of Russia to which I have referred, and which had been entirely repudiated by Her Majesty’s Government in correspondence with the Russian Government in 1821 and 1822, which for your more particular information I inclose herein. Her Majesty’s Government feel sure that, in view of the considera- tions which I have set forth in this dispatch, which you will communi- ‘ate to Mr. Bayard, the Government of the United States will admit that the seizure and condemnation of these British vessels and the im- prisonment of their masters and crews were not warranted by the cir- cumstances, and that they will be ready to afford reasonable compen- sation to those who have suffered in consequence, and issue immediate instructions to their naval officers which will prevent a recurrence of these regrettable incidents. I am, etc., SALISBURY. 166 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, October 4, 1887. (Received October 5.) Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith a letter addressed to the United States district attorney and United States marshal at Sitka, which has been forwarded to me by the governor-general of Canada for transmission to you. Lord Lansdowne states that this letter came into the possession of the Canadian Government through the captain of the sealing schooner Alfred Adams, to whom it was given by the first heutenant of the United States revenue- cutter Richard Rush, after boarding the said schooner and confiscating the skins and arms contained in her, His excellency adds, by way of explanation, that the envelope of the letter which is deseribed by the minister of marine in the report trans- mitting it as sealed and unopened appears to have been worn through at one end in transmission by post. I have, ete., L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. [Inclosure.] Captain Shepard to the United States district altorney and United States marshal of Alaska. U. S. REVENUE STFAMER Rusa, Behring Sea, August 6, 1887. GENTLEMEN: I have the honor to inform you that I have this day seized the British schooner Alfred Adans, of Victoria, B. C., W.H. Dycr, master, and Hugh Mckay, of Victoria, B. C., managing owner, for violation of law, section 1956, Revised Statutes. I have taken the seal skins (which will be delivered to the United States deputy marshal at Oonalaska) and his arms on board the United States revenue steamer Rush, and ordered the captain to proceed with his vessel to Sitka, Alaska, and on his arrival to sct his crew at liberty, and to report in person to you, and I have to request that you will take charge of this vessel and her officers until I can appear in the United States district court against them, about September 1 next. Tam, etc., L. G. SHEPARD, Captain United States Revenue Marine. Mr. Bayard to Mr. Garland. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, October 7, 1887. Sm: T have the honor to transmit to you herewith, for your informa. tion, a copy of a note to this Department from the British minister at this capital, inclosing a letter, addressed to the United States district attorney and the United States marshal at Sitka; and stating the man- ner in which it reached the minister’s hands. I have, etc., T. F. BAYARD. SEIZURES OF 1886 AND 1887. 167 Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, October 12, 1887. (Received October 13.) Str: In connection with the representation which I was instructed to make to you respecting the seizure of the British schooners Onward, Carolina, and Thornton, by the United States cruiser Corwin, in Behring’s Sea, L have the honor to inform you that Iam now further instructed to make similar representations in the cases of the British Columbian ves- sels Grace, Dolphin, and W. P. Sayward, seized lately by the United States revenue-cutter Richard Rush, and at the same time, as in the vases of the Onward, Carolina, and Thornton, to reserve all rights to compensation on behalf of the owners and crews. Lam also instructed to point out to you that according to the deposi- tion of the mate of the W. P. Sayward, a copy of which is inclosed, no seals had been taken by her crew in Behring’s Sea, as is alleged in the libels of information filed on behalf of the United States district attor- ney in the district court of Alaska. I have, ete., L. 8S. SACKVILLE WEsT. (For inclosure see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, Fiftieth Congress, second session, p. 96.) Mr. Bayard to Sir L. S. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, October 13, 1887. Sim: [ have the honor to acknowledge your note of yesterday, in re- lation to the cases of seizure of the British schooners Onward, Caro- lina, and Thornton, in Behring Sea, by United States revenue vesseis, in August, 1886, and also your instructions to include by similar repre- sentations the cases of the British Columbian vessels Grace, Dolphin, and W. P. Sayward, seized by the United States revenue authorities in Behring Sea, with notification that Her Britannic Majesty’s Govern- ment reserves all right to compensation on behalf of the owners and erews of the above-meutioned vessels. The affidavit of the mate of the W. P. Sayward has been read, and the facts therein stated will be at once investigated. I have, etc., 1.28), BAYARD; Sir L. S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, October 19, 1887. (Received October 21.) Ste: I have the honor to inform you that I am instructed by the Marquis of Salisbury, Her Majesty’s principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, to protest against the seizure of the Canadian vessel Alfred Adams, in Behring Seas, and against the continuation of simi- lar proceedings by the United States authorities on the high seas. I have, etc., L, S. SACKVILLE WEST. 168 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE, Myr. Bayard to Sir LD. 8. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Washington, October 22, 1887. Sir: I had the honor of receiving last evening your note of the 19th instant, conveying the instruction to you by the Marquis of Salisbury that you should ‘protest against the seizure of the Cunadian vessel Alfred Adams in Behring Sea, and against the continuance of similar proceedings by the United States authorities on the high seas; and I have, etc., T. F. BAYARD. Sir L. 8. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, October 26, 1887. (Received October 27.) Sir: With reference to my note of the 19th instant, protesting against the seizure of the British schooner Alfred Adams, I have the honor to transmit to you herewith copy of the report of the Canadian minister of marine and fisheries and other papers relating thereto. I have, etc., L. 8S. SACKVILLE WEST. (For inclosure, see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, 50th Congress, 2d ses- sion, pp. 59-64. In this document will also be found further corre- spondence relating to the foregoing subject.) CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES FOR THE PROTECTION OF FPUR-SEALS. FRANCE. Mr. Bayard to Mr. Vignaud.} No. 256.] | DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 19, 1887. Srr: Recent occurrences have drawn the attention of this Depart- ment to the necessity of taking steps for the better protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea. Without raising any question as to the exceptional measures which the peculiar character of the property in question might justify this Government in taking, and without reference to any exe eptional marine jurisdiction that might properly be claimed for that end, it is deemed advisable—and I am instructed by the President so to inform you—to attain the desired ends by international codperation. It is well known that the unregulated and indiscriminate killing of seals in many parts of the world ‘has driven them from place to place, and, by breaking up their habitual resorts, has greatly reduced their number 5 Under these circumstances, and in view of the common interest of all nations in preventing the indiscriminate destruction and consequent 1Tdentie instructions were sent to the United States ministers te Germany, Great Britain, Japan, Russia, and Sweden and Norway. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. 169 extermination of an animal which contributes so importantly to the commercial wealth and general use of mankind, you are hereby in- structed to draw the attention of the Government to which you are ae- credited to the subject, and to invite it to enter into such an arrangement with the Government of the United States as will prevent the citizens of either country from killing seal in Behring Sea at such times and places, and by such methods as at present are pursued, and which threaten the speedy extermination of those animals and consequent serious loss to mankind. The ministers of the United States to Germany, Sweden and Nor- way, Russia, Japan, and Great Britain have been each similarly ad- dressed on the subject referred to in this instruction. I am, ete., T. F. BAYARD. Mr. McLane to Mr. Bayard. No. 490.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Paris, October 22, 1887. (Received Nov ember TER.) Sir: Referring to your No. 256, of August 19, instructing Mr. Vig- naud to draw the attention of the French Government to the necessity ot taking steps for the better protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behr- ing Sea, with a view of obtaining its codperation with the United States in measures intended to reach that end, L have to state that Mr. Flou- rens is willing to consider favorably any project of international arran ge- ment you may be disposed to submit concerning the matter. I inclose herewith a translation of a note received from Mr. Flourens which explains his view. The note of September 17, to which he refers, is simply an acknowledgment. I have, ete., RoBERT M. McLANE. [Inclosure with No. 490.—Translation.] Mr. Flourens to Mr. McLane. PARIS, October 21, 1887. Srr: Mr. Vignaud was good enough to inform me on the 3ist of August last that the United States Government was desirous of ¢ onsulting with the principal nations interested, with the view of making regulations in regard to the seal fisheries in Behring Strait. teferring to my communication of the 17th September last, I have the honor to inform you that, although the industry in question has not been engaged in by French shipowners up to the present time, the Government of the Republic is not the less disposed to confer for that purpose with the Government of the United States and to examine any draft of an international convention which may be conununicated to it by the Cabinet at Washington. 1 will be obliged to you if you will be kind enough to transmit this reply to the American Governmert. Accept, ete., 99 FLOURENS. —e ~ —_) DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Mr. Bayard to Mr. McLean. No. 271.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, November 18, 1887. Sir: [have to acknowledge your No. 490, of the 22d ultimo, trans- mitting copy of a note of the 21st of October from Mr. Flourens, inform- ing this Government of the willingness of the French Republic, though there are not many French ships engaged in the seal fisheries, to con- fer with us or to examine any draft of a convention intended to regu- late those fisheries in Behring Straits. This response of the French Government to our invitation is very sat- isfactory, and in due time further instructions on the subject will be sent you. I am, ete., T. F. BAYARD: Mr. Bayard to Mr. MeLane.} No. 293.] DEPARTMENT OF STATR, Washington, February 7, 1888. Str: I inclose herewith, for your information, two printed copies of an instruction? of this date to H. J. Phelps, Esquire, United States min- ister at London, in response to a dispatch from him, in which it was stated that Lord Salisbury had expressed acquiescence in a proposal made by me for an agreement between the United States and Great Britain in regard to the adoption of concurrent regulations for the preservation of fur seals in Behring Sea from extermination by destrue- tion at improper seasons and by improper methods by the citizens of either country. J am, ete., T. F. BAYARD. GERMANY. Myr. Coleman to Mr. Bayard. No. 498.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Berlin, September 1, 1887. (Received September 17.) Str: Ihave the honor to inclose herewith a copy of a note I have to-day addressed to the foreign office in execution of your instruction No. 246, of the 19th ultimo, relating to the necessity of measures being adopted for the better protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea. I have, ete., ; CHAPMAN COLEMAN. [Inclosure with Mr. Coleman’s No. 498.] Mr. Coleman to Count von Berchem. No. 311.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Berlin, September 1, 1SS?. The undersigned, chargé datfaires ad interim of the United States of America, has the honor, acting under instructions from his Gevernment, to inform Count von Ber- 1Tdentic instructions were sent to the United States ministers to Germany, Rus- sia, and Sweden and Norway. 2See infra, p. 172; see also Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, Fiftieth Congress, second ses- sion, p. 88. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’s8. LUE chem, under secretary of state in charge of the imperial foreign office, that recent occurrences have drawn the attention of that Government to the necessity of taking steps tor the better protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea. Without raising any question as to the exceptional measures which the peculiar character of the property in question might justify the Government of the United States in taking, and without reference to any exceptional marine jurisdiction that might properly ‘be claimed for that end, it has been deemed advisable to seek to at- tain the desired ends by international codperation, It is well known that the unregulated and indiscriminate killing of seals in many parts of the world has driven them from place to place, and by breaking up their habitual resorts has greatly reduced their number. Under these circumstances and in view of the common interest of all nations in preventing the indiscriminate destruction and consequent extermination of an ani- mal which contributes so importantly to the commercial wealth and general use of mankind, the Government of the United States has instructed the undersigned to present the subject to the attention of the Imperial Government, and to invite it to enter into such an arrangement with the Government of the United States as will prevent the citizens of either country from killing seals in Behring Sea at such times and places, and by such methods as at present are pursued, and which threaten the speedy extermination of those animals and consequent serious loss to mankind. The undersigned begs to add that he has been informed by his Government that the ministers of the United States to Sweden and Norway, Russia, France, Great Britain, and Japan have been each similarly addressed on the subject referred to, and avails himself, ete. CHAPMAN COLEMAN. GREAT BRITAIN. Mr. Phelps to Mr. Bayard. No. 618.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, November 12, 1857. (Received November 22.) Str: Referring to your instructions numbered 685, of August 19, 1887, I have now to say that owing to the absence from London of Lord Salis- bury, secretary of state for foreign affairs, it has not been in my power to obtain his attention to the subject until yesterday. I had then an interview with him, in which I pr ad on the part of the Government of the United States that by mutual agreement of the two Governments a code of regulations should be adopted tor the pres- ervation of the seals in Behring Sea from destruction at improper times and by improper means by the citizens of either country; such agree- ment to be entirely irrespective of any questions of conflicting jurisdic- tion in those waters. His lordship promptly acquiesced in this-proposal on the part of Great Britain and suggested that | should obtain from my Government and submit to him a sketch of asystem of regulations which would be adequate for the purpose. I have therefore to request that I may be furnished as early as possi- ble with a draft of such a code as in your judgment should be adopted. 1 would suggest also that copies of it be furnished at the same time to the ministers of the United States in Germany, Sweden and Norway, Russia, France, and Japan, in order that it may be under considera- tion by the Governments of those countries. A mutual agreeinent be- tween all the Governments interested may thus be reached at an early day. I have, ete., EK. J. PHELPS. 12 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Mr. Bayard to Mr. Phelps. No. 733.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, N ovember 25, 1887. Str: Your No. 618, of the 12th instant, stating the result of your interviews with Lord Salisbury on the subject of the seal fisheries in Behring Sea, is received. The tavor able response to our suggestion of mutually agreeing to a code of regulations is very satisfactor y, and the subject will have im- mediate attention. I am, ete., Tt. BAYARD: Myr. Bayard to Mr. Phelps. No. 782.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 7, 1888. Sm: [have received your No. 618, of the 12th of November last containing an account of your inter view with Lord Salisbury of the preceding day, in which his lordship expressed acquiescence in my: proposal ofan agreement between the United States and Great Britain in regard to the adoption of concurrent regulations for the preserva- tion of fur seals in Behring Sea from extermination by destruction at improper seasons and by improper methods: by the citizens of either country. In ues omse to his lordship’s suggestion that this Government sub- mit a sketch of a system of regulations for the purpose indicated, it may be expedient, before making a definite proposition, to descr ibe some of the conditions of seal life; and for this purpose it is believed that a concise statement as to that part of the life of the seal which is spent in Behring Sea will be sufficient. All those who have made a study of the seals in Behring Sea are agreed that, on an average, from five to six months, that is to. say, from the middle or toward the end of spring till the middle or end of October, are spent by them in those waters in breeding and in rearing their young During this time they have their rookeries on the islands of St. Paul and St. George, which constitute the Pribilof group and be- long to the United States, and on the Commanéder Islands, which belong to Russia. But the number of animals resor ting to the latter group is small in comparison with that resorting te the former. The rest ofthe year they are supposed to spend in the epen sea south of the Aleutian Islands. Their migration northward, which has been stated as taking place during the spring and till the middle of June, is made through the numerous passes in the long chain of the Aleutian Islands, above which the courses of their travel converge chiefly to the Pribilof group. Dur- ing this migration the female se als are so advanced in pregnancy that they ¢ renerally give birth to their young, which are commonly called pups, “within two wee ks after reaching the rookeries. Between the time of the birth of the pups and of the emigration of the seals from fas islands in the autumn the females are occupied in suckling their young and by far the largest part of the seals found at a distance from fie islands in Behring Sea during the summer and early autumn are te- males in search of food, which is made doubly necessary to enable them to suckle their young as well as to support a condition of renewed preg- nancy, which begins in a week or a little more after their delivery. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. fies) The male seals, or bulls, as they are commonly called, require little food while on the islands, where they remain guarding their harems, watching the rookeries, and sustaining existence on the large amount of blubber which they have secreted beneath their skins and which is gradually absorbed during the five or six succeeding months. Moreover, it is impossible to distinguish the male from the female seals in the water, or pregnant females from those that are not so. When the animals. are killed in the water with firearms many sink at once and are never recovered, and some authorities state that not more than one out of three of those so slaughtered is ever secured. This minay, however, be an overestimate of the number lost. It is thus apparent that to permit the destruction of the seals by the use of firearms, nets, or other mischievous means in Bering Sea would result in the speedy extermination of the race. There appears to be no difference of opiuion on this subject among experts. And the fact is so clearly and for cibly stated in the report of the inspector of fisheries for British Columbia of the 31st of December, 1886, that [ will puoue there- from the following pertinent passage: There were killed this year, so far, from 40,000 to 50,000 fur seals, which have been taken by schooners from San Francisco and Victoria. The greater number were killed in Behring Sea, and were nearly all cows or female seals. ‘This enormous catch, with the increase which will take place when the vessels fitting up every year are ready, will, I am afraid, soon deplete our fur-seal fishery, and it is a great pity that such a valuable industry could not in some way be protected. (Report ot Thomas Mowat, inspector of fisheries for British Columbia; Sessional Papers, Vol. 15, No. 16, p. 268; Ottawa, 1887.) The only way of obviating the lamentable result above predicted ap- pears to be by the United States, Great Britain, and other interested powers taking concerted action to prevent their citizens or subjects from killing fur seals with firearms, or other destructive weapons, north of 50° of north latitude, and between 160° of longitude west and 170° of longitude east from Greenwich, during the period intervening be- tween “April 15 and November il To prevent the killing within a marine belt of 40 or 50 miles from the islands during that period would be ineffectual as a preservative measure. This w vould clearly be so during the approach of the seals to the islands. And after their ar- rival there such a limit of protection would also be insufficient, since the rapid progress of the seals through the water enables them to go great Le tetas s from the islands in so short a time that it has been eal- culated that an ordinary seal could go to the Aleutian Islands and back, in all a disthnte of 360 or 400 iniles, in less than two days. On the Pribilot Islands themselves, where the killing is at present _ under the direction of the Alaska Commercial Company, which by the terms of its contract is not permitted to take over 100,000 skins a year, no females, pups, or old bulls are ever killed, and thus the breeding of the animals is not interfered with. The old bulls are the first to reach the islands, where they await the coming of the females.. As the young bulls arrive they are driven away by the old bulls to the sandy part of the islands, by themselves. And these are the animals that are driven inland and there killed by clubbing, so that the skins are not perforated, and discrimination is exercised in each case. That the extermination of the fur seals must soon take place unless they are protected from destruction in Behring Sea is shown by the fate of the animal in other parts of the world, in the absence of concerted action among the natious interested for its preservation, Formerly many thous ands of seals were obtained annually from the South Pacifie Islands, and from the coasts of Chile and South Africa. They were also 174 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONIVENCE. common in the Falkland Islands and the adjacent seas. But in those islands, where hundreds of thousands of skins were formerly obtained, there have been taken, according to best statistics, since 1880, less than 1,500 skins. In some places the indiscriminate slaughter, especially by use of firearms, has in a few years resulted in completely breaking up extensive rookeries, At the present time it is estimated that out of an aggregate yearly yield of 185,000 seals from all parts of the globe, over 130,000, or more than two- thirds, are obtained from the rookeri ies on the American and tussian islands in Behring Sea. Of the remainder, the larger part are taken in Behring Sea, although such taking, at te aast Oi such a seale, in that quarter is a comparativ ely recent thine. pee if the killing of the fur seal there with firearms, nets, and other destructive implements were permitted, hunters would abandon other and exhausted places of pursuit for the.more productive field of Behring Sea, where extermina- tion of this valuable animal would also rapidly ensue. It is manifestly for the interests of all nations that so deplorable a thing should not be allowed to occur. As has already been stated, on the Pribilof Islands this Government strictly limits the number of seals that may be killed under its own lease to an American company ; and citizens of the United States have, during the past year, been ar- rested and ten American vessels seized for killing fur seals in Behring Sea. England, however, has an especially great interest in this matter, in addition to that whic h she must feel in preventing the extermination of an animal which contributes so much to the gain and comfort of her peo- ple. Nearly all undressed fur-seal skins are sent to London, where they are dressed and dyed for the market, and where many of them are sold. It is stated that at least 10,000 people in that city find profitable em- ployment in this work; far more than the total number of people en- gaged in hunting the fur seal in every part of the world. At the Prib- ilof Islands it is believed that there are not more than 400 persons so engaged; at Commander Isl: ands, not more than 3800; in the Northwest coast fishery, not more than 525 Indian hunters and 100 whites; afd in the Cape Horn fishery, not more than 400 persons, of whom perhaps 300 are Chileans. Great Britain, therefore, in codperating with the United States to prevent the destruction of fur seals in Behring Sea would also be perpetuating an extensive and valuable industry in which her own citizens have the most lucrative share. I inclose for your information copy of a memorandum on the fur-seal fisheries of the world, prepared by Mr. A. Howard Clark, in response to a meas made by this Department to the U.S. Fish Gomanissiouer: I inclose also, for your further information, copy of a letter to me, dated December 3d 1: ist, from Mr. Henry W. Elliott. who has spent much time in Alaska, engag edi in the study of seal life, upon which he is well known as an authority. I desire to call your especial attention to what is said by Mr. Eliiott in respect to the new method of catching the seals with nets. As the subject of this dispatch is one of great importance and of im- mediate urgency, I will ask that you give it as early attention as possible. I am, etc., T. F. BAYARD. (For inclosures see Senate Ex, Doc. No. 106, Fiftieth Congress, seccnd session, pp. 90-06.) PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’s8. 175 Mr. Phelps to Mr. Bayard, No. 690. | LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, February 18, 1888. (Received February 28.) Str: I received yesterday your instruction No. 782, under date of February 7, relative to the Alaskan seal fisheries. I immediately ad- dressed a note to Lord Salisbury, inclosing for his perusal one of the printed copies of the instruction, and requesting an appointment for an early | interview on the subject. I also sent a note to the Russian ambassador, and an interview with him is arranged fer the 21st instant. The whole matter will receive my immediate and thorough attention po I hope for a favorable result. Meanwhile [would ask your consid- ration of the manner in which you would propose to carry out the PF iilintions of these fisheries that may be agreed upon by the countries interested. Would not legistation be necessary; and, if so, is there any hope of obtaining it on the part of Congress? I have, ete., i. J. PHELPS. Mr. Phelps to Mr. Bayard. [ Extract. | No. 692.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, February 25, 1888. (Received March 6.) Sim: Referring to your instructions, numbered 782, of February 7, 1888, in reference to the Alaska seal fisheries, and to my reply thereto, numbered 690, of February 18, [ have the honor to inform you that | have since had interviews on the subject with Lord Salisbury and with M. de Staal, the Russian ambassador. Lord Salisbury assents to your proposition to establish, by mutual arrangement hethate the governments interested, a close time for fur seals, between April 15 ad November 1, and between 160° of longitude west and 170° of longitude east, in the Behring Sea. He will also join the United States Government in any preventive mneasures it May be thought best to adopt, by orders issued to the naval vessels in that region of the respective governments. I have this morning telegraphed you for additional printed copies of instructions 782 for the use ot Her Majesty’s Government. The Russian ambassador concurs, so far as his personal opinion is concerned, in the propriety of the proposed measures for the protection of the seals, and has promised to communicate at once with his Govern- ment in regard to it. Dhave tarnished him with copies of instructions 782 for the use of his Government. I have, ete., Ki. J. PHELPS. Myr. Bayard to Mr. Phelps. No. 810.| DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 2, 1888. Sir: 1 have to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 690, of fe 18th ultimo, in relation to the Alaskan seal fisheries, and have pleasure in observing the promptitude with which the business has been conducted, 176 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. It is hoped that Lord Salisbury will give it favorable consideration, as there can be no doubt of the importance of preserving the seal fish- eries in Behring Sea, and it is also desirable that this should be done by an arrangement between the governments interested, without the United States being called upon to consider what special measures of its own the exceptional character of the property in question might re- quire it to take in case of the refusal of foreign powers to give their co- operation. Whether legislation would be necessary to enable the United States and Great Britain to carry out measures for the protection of the seals would depend much upon the character of the regulations; but itis probable that legislation would be required. The manner of protecting the seals would depend upon the kind of arrangement which Great Britain would be willing to make with the United States for the policing of the seas and for ‘the trial of British subjects violating the regulations which the two Governments may agree upon for such protec tion. As it appears to this Government, the commerce carried on in and about Behring Sea 1s so limited in variety and extent that the present efforts of this Government to protect the seals need not be complicated by considerations which are of great im- portance in highways of commerce and render the interference by the officers of one Government with the merchant vessels of another on the high seas inadmissible. But even in regard to those parts of the globe where commerce is extensively carried on, the United States and Great Britain have, for a common purpose, abated in a measure their objection to such interference and agreed that it might be made by the naval vessels of either country. teference is made to the treaty concluded at Washington on the 7th of April, 1862, between the United States and Great Britain for the e sup- pression of the slave trade, under which the joint policing of the seas by the naval vessels of the contracting parties was provided for. In this convention no limitation was imposed as to the part of the high seas of the world in which visitation and search of the merchant ves- sels of one of the contracting parties might be made by a naval vessel of the other party. In the present case, however, the range within which visitation and search would be required is so limited, and the commerce there carried on so insignificant, that it is scarcely thought necessary te refer to the slave-trade convention for a precedent, nor is it deemed necessary that the performance of police duty should be by the naval vessels of the contracting parties. In regard to the trial of offenders for violation of the proposed regu- lations, provision might be made for such trial by handing over the alleged offender to the courts of his own country. A precedent for such procedure is found in the treaty signed at the Hague on May 6, 1882, for regulating the police of the North Sea fish- eries, a copy of which is inclosed. I am, etc, T. F. BAYARD. Sir L. 8S. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard. WASHINGTON, March 26, 1888. (Received March 29.) Sir: With reference to the proposal that concerted action be taken by Great Britain, the United States, and other interested powers, in order PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. aD fr to preserve from extermination the fur seals which at certain seasons are found in Behring Sea, I am requested by the Marquis of Salisbury to inform you that the Russian ambassador in London has been communi- cated with on the subject, and that he has referred to his Government for instructions. But in making this communication to you I am in- structed to state that this action on the part of Her Majesty’s Govern- ment must not be taken as an admission of the rights of jurisdiction in Behring Sea exercised there by the United States authorities during the fishing seasons of 188687 and 1837-88, nor as affecting the claims which Her Majesty’s Government will have to present on account of the wrongful seizures which have taken place of British vessels en- gaged in the seal-fishing industry. I have, etc., L. 8. SacKVILLE WEST. Mr. Bayard to Sir L.S. Sackville West. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 30, 1888. Str: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 26th instant in which you inform the Department that the action of Her Majesty’s Government in respect to the proposal of this Govern- ment for an arrangement to protect the fur seal from extermination in Behring Sea, is not to be taken as an admission of the jurisdiction of the United States over Bering Sea, nor as affecting the claims which Her Majesty’s Government will have to present on account of the seiz- ure of certain British vessels in those waters. I have, etec., T. Ff. BAYARD. Sir L. 8. Sackville West to Mr. Bayard, WASHINGTON, April 2, 1888. (Received April 3.) Sir: I have the honor to inform you that the Marquis of Salisbury has received intimation from the Canadian Government to the effect that orders have been issued by the United States Government for the capture of British ships fishing in Behring Sea, and that he has tele- graphed to me to represent earnestly the extreme importance of ena- bling Her Majesty’s Government to contradict this rumor. I have, ete., L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Mr. White to Mr. Bayard. [Telegram.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, April 7, 1888. (Received April 7.) Mr. White stated that on the following Thursday he was to meet Lord Salisbury and M. de Staal to discuss the question of the protec 23 178 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. tion of the seals. On April 7 he had had an interview on the subject with M. de Staal, from whom he learned that the Russian Government wished to include in the proposed arrangement that part of Behring Sea in which the Commander Islands are situated, and also the sea of Okhotsk. Mr, White supposed that the United States would not object to this. Mr. White to Mr. Bayard. No. 720.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, April 7, 1888. (Received April 17.) Sir: Referring to your instructions munbered 782 of February 7 and 810 of March 2, respecting the protection of sealsin Behring Sea, I have the honor to ac quaint you that I received a private note from the Mar- quis of Salisbury this morning stating that at the request of the kus- sian embassador he had appointed a meeting at the foreign office next Wednesday, 11th instant, “to discuss the question of a close time for the seal fishery in Behring Sea, ” and expressing a hope that I would make it convenient to be present, and I have replied that I shall be happy to attend. Subsequently I saw M. de Staal, the Russian embassador, at his re- quest. He referred to the interviews which My. Phelps had had with him, of which I was, of course, cognizant, and stated that his full in- structions on the subject would not reach London until to-night or to- morrow, and that he was about to leave town until next Wednesday, but meanwhile he could say that his Government would like to have the regulations which might be agreed upon for Behring Sea extended to that portion of the latter in which the Commander Islands are situated, and also to the Sea of Okhotsk (in which Robben Island is situated). As both these places are outside the limit laid down in your instrue- tion numbered 782 (170° of longitude east from Greenwich), I have thought it best to send you the telegram, of which I inclose a copy here- with.' I am etce., UEnry WHITE. Mr. Bayard to Mr. White. [Telegram.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 9, 1888. Mr. Bayard stated, in reply to Mr. White’s telegram of April 7, that this Government did not object to the extension of the arrangement for the protection of the fur-seal fisheries to the whole of Behring Sea. ‘Por inclosure see supra, p. 177. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-88. LG Mr. Bayard to Mr. White. [Extract. ] No. 849.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 18, 1888. Sir: I have to acknowledge your No. 720 of the 7th instant, inelos- ing copy of your telegram of the same date, in which you intormed the Department that Lord Salisbury, the Russian embassador, and your- self were to meet on Thursday, ‘the 12th instant, to discuss "the protec- tion of seals, am that the Russian Government "desired to include in the proposed arrangement that portion of Behring Sea in which Com- mander Islands are situated, and also the Sea of Okhotsk. Oi the 9th instant I sent you a telegram stating that this Govern- ment did not object to the extension of the arrangement for the protec- tion of the fur-seal fisheries to the whole of Behring Sea. Owing to an error in transmission of your telegram, Okhotsk Sea did not appear to be included in the suggestion, but there i is no objection to such inclusion. I am, ete., T. F. BAYARD Mr. White to Mr. Bayard. No. 725.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, April 20,1888. (Received April 30.) Sir: Referring to your instructions Nas. 685, 752, and 810, to Mr. Phelps’s dispate hes Nos.618 and 690, and tosubsequent corr espondenc e; I have the honor to acquaint you that I called at the foreign office on the 16th instant for the purpose of discussing with the Marquis of Salisbury and M. de Staal, the Russian embassador, the details of the proposed conventional ari ‘ang sment for the protection of seals in Ber- ing Sea. M. de Staal expressed a desire, on behalf of his Government, to in- clude in the area to be protected by the convention the Sea of Okhotsk, or at least that portion of it in which Robben Island is situated, there being, he said, in that region large numbers of seals, whose destruction is thre: atened in the same way as those in Behring Sea. He also urged that measures be taken by the insertion of a clause in the proposed convention or otherwise, for prohibiting the importation, by merchant vessels, into the seal-protected area, for sale therein, of alcoholic drinks, firearms, gunpowder, and dynamite. Lord Salisbury expressed no opinion with regard to the latter propo- sal, but, with a view to meeting the Russian Government’s wishes re- specting the waters surrounding Robben Island, he suggested that, be- sides the whole of Behring Sea, those portions of the Sea of Okhotsk and of the Pacific Ocean north of north latitude 47° should be included in the proposed arrangement. His lordship intimated furthermore that the period proposed by the United States for a close time, April 15 to November 1, might interfere vith the trade longer than absolutely necessary for the protection of fhe seals, and he suggested October 1, instead of a month later, as the termination of the period of seal protection. 180 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. I referred to the communications already made by Mr. Phelps on this subject to Lord Salisbury, and said that I should be obliged to refer to you the proposals which had just been made, before expressing an opin- ion with regard to them. I have accordingly the honor to ask for instructions in reference to the same. Meanwhile the Marquis of Salisbury promised to have prepared a draft convention for submission to the Russian embassador and to myself. I shall lose no time in forwarding to you a copy of this docu- ment when received. I am, ete¢., HENRY WHITE. Mr. Bayard to Mr. White. No. 864.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May 1, 1888. Sir: Your dispatch No. 725 of the 20th ultimo stating the result of your interview with Lord Salisbury and the Russian embassador rela- tive to the protection of seals in Behring Sea, and requesting further instructions as to their proposals, has been received. As you have already been instructed, the Department does not object to the inclusion of the sea of Okhotsk, or so much of it as may be neces- sary, in the arrangement for the protection of the seals. Nor is it thought absolutely necessary to insist on the extension of the clese sea- son till the 1st of November. Only such a period is desired as may be requisite for the end in view. But in order that success may be assured in the efforts of the various Governments interested in the protection of the seals, it seems advisa- ble to take the 15th of October instead of the Ist as the date of the close season, although, as Iam now advised, the Ist of November would be safer. . The suggestion made by Lord Salisbury that it may be necessary to bring other Governments than the United States, Great Britain, and Russia into the arrangement has already been met by the action of the Department, as I have heretofore informed you. At the same time the invitation was sent to the British Government to negotiate a convention for seal protection in Behring Sea, a like invitation was extended to various other powers, which have without exception returned a favor- able response. In order, therefore, that the plan may be carried out, the convention proposed between the United States, Great Britain, and Russia should contain a clause providing for the subsequent adhesion of other powers. In regard to the suggestion of the Russian ambassador that the con- vention be made to cover the question of the sale of firearms and liquor to the natives on the coast in question, I am compelled to think, while in favor of restricting or prohibiting such sale, that it would be advisable to regulate the subject separately from the protection of the seals. It is possible that some Governments might readilv assent to the latter object, while indisposed to accede to the former, and in that way lead to the defeat of the end first proposed by this Goveriment. I am, ete., T. F. BAYARD. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. 181 Mr. White to Mr. Bayard. No. 786.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, June 20, 1888. (Keceived June 30.) Str: I have the honor to inform you that Lavailed myself of an early opportunity to acquaint the Marquis of Salisbury and the Russian am- bassador of the receipt of your instructions numbered 864, of May 3, and shortly afterwards (May 16) his excellency and I called together at the foreign office for the purpose of discussing with his lordship the terms of the proposed convention for the protection of seals in Behring Sea. Unfortunately Lord Salisbury had just received a communication from the Canadian Government stating that a memorandum on the subject would shortly be forwarded to London, and expressing a hope that pend- ing the arrival of that document no further steps would be taken in the matter by Her Majesty’s Government. Under these circumstances Lord Salisbury felt bound to await the Canadian memorandum before pro- ceeding to draft the convention. I have inquired several times whether this communication from Can- ada had been received, but it has not yet come to hand. I was informed to-day by Lord Salisbury that an urgent telegram had been sent to Canada a week ago with respect to the delay in its expedition, and that a reply had been received by the secretary of state for the colonies stating that the matter would be taken up immediately. I hope, there- fore, that shortly after Mr. Phelps’s return this Government will be in a condition to agree upon the terms of the proposed convention. I have the honor to inclose for your information the copy of a ques- tion asked by Mr. Gourley and answered by Sir James Fergusson in behalf of the British Government with respect to the seal fishing in Behring Sea. | have, ete., HENRY WHITE. (For inclosure see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, Fiftieth Congress, sec- ond session, p. 103.) Mr. Phelps to Mr. Bayard. No. 825.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, September 1.2, 1888. (Received September 22. SiR: Referring to the subject of the Alaskan seal fisheries, and to the previous correspondence on the subject between the Department and this legation, | have now the honor to acquaint you with the pur- port of a conversation which I held with Lord Salisbury in regard to it on the 13th August. Illness, which has incapaciated me from business during most of the interval, ‘has prevented my laying it before you earlier. One of the objects of the interview I then -sought with his lordship was to urge the completion of the convention between the United States, Great Brit ain, and Russia, which under your instructions had previously been the subject of discussion between the secretary for foreign affairs, the Russian ambassador, and myself. This convention, as T have be- fore advised you, had been virtually agreed on verbally, except in its details; and the Russian as well as the United States Government were 182 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. desirous to have it completed. The consideration of it had been sus- pended for communication by the British Government with the Cana- dian Government, for which purpose an interval of several months had been allowed to elapse. During this time the attention of Lord Salis- bury had been repeatedly ree alled to the subject by this legation, and on those occasions the answer received from him was that no reply from the Canadian authorities had arrived. In the conversation on the 15th, above mentioned, I again pressed for the completion of the convention, as the extermination of the seals by Canadian vessels was understeod to be rapidly proceeding. His lord- ship in reply did not question the propriety or the importance of taking measures to prevent the wanton destruction of so valuable an industry, in which, as he remarked, England had a large interest of its own, but said that the Canadian Government objected to any such restric tions, and that until its consent could be obtained, Her Majesty’s Government was not willing to enter into the convention; that time would be re- quisite to bring this about, and that meanwhile the convention must wait. It is very apparent to me that the British Government will not exe- cute the desired convention without the coneurrence of Canada. And it is equally apparent that the concurrence of Canada in any such ar- rangement is not to be reasonably expected. Certain Canadian vessels are making a profit out of the destruction of the seal in the breeding season in the waters in question, inhuman and wasteful as itis. That it leads to the speedy extermination of the animal is no loss to Canada, because no part of these seal fisheries belong to that country; and the only profit open to it in connection with them is by destroying the seal in the open sea during the breeding time, although many of the animals killed in that way are lost, and those saved are worth much less than when killed at the proper time. Under these circumstances, the Government of the United States must, in my opinion, either submit to have these valuable fisheries de- stroyed or must take measures to prevent their destruction by captur- ing the vessels employed in it. Between these alternatives it does not appear to me there should be the slightest hesitation. Much learning has been expended upon the discussion of the abstract. question of the right of mare clausum. I do not conceive it to be ap- plicable to the present case. Here is a valuable fishery, and a large and, if properly managed, per- manent industry, the property of the nations on whose shores it is car- ried on. It is proposed by the colony of a foreign nation, in defiance of the joint remonstrance of all the countries interested, to destroy this business by the indiscriminate slaughter and extermination of the ani- mals in question, in the open neighboring sea, during the period of gestation, when the common dictates of humanity ought to protect them, were there no interest at all involved. And it is suggested that we are prevented from defending ourselves against such depredations because the sea at a certain distance from the coast is free. The same line of argument would take under its protection piracy and the slave trade, when prosecuted in the open sea, or would justify one nation in destroyi ing the commerce of another by placing danger- ous obstructions and derelicts in the open sea near its coasts. There are many things that can not be allowed to be done on the open sea with impunity, and against which every sea is mare clausum. And the right of self defense as to person and property prevails there as fully as else- where, If the fish upon the Canadian coasts could be destroyed by PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. 183 seattering poison in the open sea adjacent, with some small profit to those engaged in it, would Canada, upon the just principles of interna- tional law, be held defenseless in sucha case? Yet that process would be no more destructive, inhuman, and wanton than this. If precedents are wanting for a defense so necessary and so proper it is because precedents for such a. course of conduet are likewise un- known. The best international law has arisen from precedents that have been estabiished when the just occasion for them arose, undeterred by the discussion of abstract and inadequate rules. Especially should there be no hesitation in taking this course with the vessels of a colony which has for three years harassed the fisheries of our country with constant captures of vessels engaged in no viola- tion of treaty or legal rights. The comity of nations has not deterred Canada from the persistent obstruction of justifiable and legitimate fishing by American vessels near its coasts. What principle of reci- procity precludes us from putting an end to a pursuit of the seal by Canadian ships which is unjustifiable and illegitimate? I earnestly recommend, therefore, that the vessels that have been already seized while engag eed in this business be firmly held, and that measures be taken to capture and hold every one hereafter found con- cerned in it. If further legislation is necessary, it can doubtless be readily obtained. There need be no fear but that a resolute stand on this subject will at once put an end to the mischief complained of. It is not to be rea- sonably expected that Great Britain will either encourage or sustain her colonies in conduct which she herself concedes to be wrong and which is detrimental to her own interests as well as toours. More than 10,000 people are engaged in London alone in the preparation of seal skins. And it is understood that the British Government has requested that clearances should not be issued in Canada for vessels employed in this business; but the request has been disregarded.! I have, ete., E. J. PHELPS. JAPAN. Mr. Hubbard to Mr. Bayard. No. 387.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokio, Japan, September 28, 1887. (Received October 24.) Str: [have the honor to inform the Department of State that I have submitted to the Japanese minister for foreign affairs the substance of your instruction No. 153, in relation to taking steps for the better pro- tection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea by international codper- ation, Waiving all exceptional measures and exceptional marine juris- diction that might be properly claimed for that end by the United States. In invoking the early and earnest consideration of the propo- sitions of your instructions for the reasons given, and which are alike of practical commercial interest to Japan as well as to the other friendly powers designated as having been invited to enter into a similar ar- ‘angement with our Government, I have requested Count Ito to name at his pleasure some time in the future when we may discuss infor- mally the reasons for and the terms anid conditions of such arrange- 1For further BONES Deol EE relating to Great Britain’s w illingness to agree to pro- tect seal-life, sve infra, pp. 212-217, and 236-242. 184 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. ment for the protection of the seal-fur fisheries in Behring Sea as will safely guard that large marine interest against the lawless and indis- criminate slaughter of this animal, contributing so much to the wealth and general welfare of mankind. Due report will be made to the De- partment of State as the negotiations progress, which I hope and expect will be concluded favorably to all concerned. I have, ete., Ricnarp B. HUBBARD. Mr. Hubbard to Mr. Bayard. (Telegram. ] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Tokio, September 29, 1887. (Received September 29.) Mr. Hubbard acknowledges the receipt of Mr. Bayard’s instruction No. 153, of August 19, 1887, and requests, at the instance of the Japan- ese Government, copies of the Treasury regulations and contracts con- cerning the seal fisheries, and also a more definite statement as to the nature of the protection which it is desired to extend to those fisheries Mr. Hubbard to Mr. Bayard. ° [Extract. ] No. 388.] _ UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokio, Japan, September 29, 1887, (Received October 24.) Str: Referring to your instruction No. 153 I have already had the honor to inform the Department of State that I would seek a personal official conference with the minister for foreign affairs on the subject of the international protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea. The Japanese Government is anxious to enter into an arrangement or convention with the United States Government, invoking similar arrangement or convention with our Government for the protection of the fur-seal fisheries in the waters of their northern islands. [ expressly called attention to the waiver for this purpose, as ex- pressed in your instruction No. 153, and in my dispatch No. 387, of any legal rights under former conventions, that my Government now de- sired to invite this cobdperative protection of friendly powers of their fur-seal fisheries from wanton destruction without reference to said former conventions. Nevertheless, the Japanese Government requested as an especial favor that I would cable the Department of State, in order to save time, for certain documents mentioned in the subjoined cablegram, and for such specifications of said desired arrangement or convention as will be satisfactory and meet the wishes of my Govern- ment in that regard, and which might be reciprocally invoked for the protection of their own fur-seal fisheries. I have, etc., RicHarD B. HUBBARD. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-788. 185 Mr. Bayard to Mr. Hubbard. No. 156.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, September 30, 1887. Str: The Department is glad to infer from your telegram of the 29th instant that the Government of Japan has favorably received the prop- osition of the United States to negotiate for the protection of the seal _. fisheries in Behring Sea. A memosandum on the subject is now being prepared in reference to my suggestions and will be transmitted as soon as it is completed. I am, ete., Toh. BAYARD: Mr. Tubbard to Mr. Bayard. No. 393.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokio, Japan, October 10, 1887. (Received November 2.) Str: I have the honor herewith to inclose for the information of the Department of State, copies, respectively, of my note to Count Ito, and his reply thereto, relating to the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea. I am requested to call the attention of my Government respectfully and especially to the proposed reciprocal protection of the sea otter, and to enlarge the protected zone so as to embrace the known habitat of that animal. I took occasion to say unofficially to Count Ito that I had no hesita- tion in giving him the hopeful assurance that my Government would codperate with his excellency’s Government in the proposal to include sea otter aswell as fur seal in any reasonable arrangement which would prevent unregulated and indiscriminate slaughter of this valuable ani- mal in the waters of Behring Sea as well as on the coast of Japan and in their conterminous waters. IL shall have the honor to await, in def- erence to Count Ito’s expressed request, your instructions in response to the respectful proposition of the Japanese Government before enter- ing upon any formal negotiations on this subject. On receipt of this dispatch by the Department of State, I have the honor to suggest that if the reply to my cablegram of the 29th ultimo has been mailed to this legation by the Department, that in that end a brief telegram signify- ing your willingness to include the sea otter in the said negotiations would advance the negotiations and gratify this Government as well, who manifests a deep interest in securing an early arrangement by our respective governments for the better protection of the fur-seal and sea- otter fisheries of American and Japanese waters. I have, etc., RicHARD B. HUBBARD. [Inclosure tin No. 393.] Mr. Hubbard to Count Ito Hirobumi. UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokio, October 6, 1887. Sir: I have the honor herewith to forward to your excellency, and to beg your early and favorable consideration of, a copy of an instruction which I have had the honor to receive from the Department of State of my Government. 24 186 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. The general proposition respectfully submitted in this instruction by my Govern- ment, as well as the obvious and convineing reasons there set forth in favor of its adoption by the friendly powers named therein, will, Iam sure, receive from your excellency’s Government the same earnest consideration as they have received from the United States. As already indicated unofficially to the foreign office, I shall, in furtherance of the wishes and instructions of my Government, be oratified and obliged if your excellency will formally appoint any future time and ple vee when and where I may have the honor to confer and discuss with your excellency, or any other repres@mative of His Imperial Majesty’s Government, the subject of an agreement or special convention between the United States of America and the Empire of Japan having reference to the better protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea. I avail, etc., RIcHARD B. HUBBARD, {Inclosure 2 in No. 393.—Translation-] Count Ito Hirobumi to Mr. Hubbard. No. 8584.] DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Tokio, October 8, 1887. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency’s note of the 6th instant, in which vou are pleased to inclose the copy of a communication from the honorable the Secretary of State in reference to the seal fisheries in Behring Sea, and, in pursuance of instructions contained in that dispatch, invite His Imperial Majesty’s Government to enter into an arrangement with the Government of the United States having for its object the protection of fur-seals in Behring Sea from indiscriminate destruction and conse quent extermination. Vhe unregulated and indiscriminate slaughter of the sea-otter as well as the fur- seal on the coasts of Japan and in their conterminous waters is a subject which has for many years engaged the serious attention of the Imperial Government. The experience of His Imperial Majesty’s Government justifies the belief that the end sought to be obtained can be best secured by means of a codperative interna- tional action, and they therefore cordially approve of the suggestion of the honorable the Secretary of State. His Imperial Majesty’s Government would be willing to enter into an arrangement for the purpose indicated, but they would wish, for the reasons assigned by Mr. Bayard in favor of the protection of the fur-seal in Behri ing Sea, to extend the principle of protection to the sea-otter as well as the fur-seal, and to enlarge the protected zone so as to embrace the known habitat of that animal. I beg that you will bring this proposal to the attention of the Government of the United States, and I would suggest that this be done in advance of any negotiations on the subject. IT avail myself, ete., CounT Iro HiroBuMti. Mr. Bayard to Mr. Hubbard. Mon LT] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washingion, November 21, 1887. Sir: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatches Nos. 588 and 393, dated, respectively, September 29 and October 10, and in reply to e xpress the satisfaction of this Department at the favor able response of the Japanese Government to negotiate for the protection of the seal fisheries in Behring Sea. The Department hopes to be able, at an early day, to instruct you further on the subject. At present, owing doubtless to the shor tness of the time, few replies have been received from foreign Governments to the circuiar invitation of the United States in this regard. And it is thought desirable to await for a time further responses, which might affect the course of the negotiations. I am, ete., T. F. BAYARD. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. 187 Mr. Hubbard to Mr. Bayard. No. 483.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokio, Japan, June 23, 1888, (Received July 16. Str: Respectfully referring to the correspondence between the De- partinent of State and this legation, looking to the conclusion of a con- vention between Japan and the United States and some other powers for the protection of the fur-seal fisheries im Behring Sea, and the pro- tection of the sea otter, as subsequently suggested by Japan, I have the honor to inform the Department that instruction No. 171, of Novem- ber 21, 1887, which has heretofore been acknowledged, is the last that has been received by me from the Department on this subject. I desire to inform the Department that the Japanese foreign office has, in a friendly spirit of inquiry, asked if I could furnish information as to when my Government would be ready (as Japan had been ready for sometime past) to resume the consideration of the proposed convention. I have, in response to this inquiry, forwarded to the foreign office a copy of your said instruction No. 171, dated November 21, 1887, with the accompanying note, dated June 20, tr ansmitting the same. The Japan- ese minister for foreign affairs has been recently advised by the Russian minister to Japan that the United States Government and those of Russia and Great Britain had discussed, at London, the matter of a similar convention for the protection of the fur-seal fisheries and sea otter in Behring Sea. He also communicated the fact that the Govern- ment at St. Petersburg desired to conclude with Japan a convention for the mutual protection of the seal and otter within their own seas and contiguous waters. This fact has been the immediate cause of the inquiry submitted to me, to which the inclosure herewith is in response. I have, ete., LICHARD LB. HUBBARD {Inclosure in No. 483.] Mr. Hubbard to Count Okuma. No. 284.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokio, June 20, 1888. Sm: Referring to my note to his excellency Count Ito, dated October 6, 1887, and his reply the sreto dated November 8, 1887, concerning a proposed arrangement which the United States invited Japan to enter into with the United States and certain other powers, for the protection of the fur-seals in Behring Sea from indiscriminate destruction and consequent extermination, I have now the honor to inclose an instrue- tion' from my Government in response to my dispatch to the honorable the Secretary of State, informing him of Japan’s willingness to enter such an arrangement. It will be observed by your excellency that my Government is awaiting the replies of some other foreign Governments to the invitation of the United States to enter into such a convention. I have not communicated with your excellenecy’s department since my note of the 6th of October, on account of awaiting further instructions from my Government in the premises, to which the instruction herewith inclosed especially refers. The sub- stance of the inclosed instruction lias not been heretofore communicated to your ex- cellency’s Government, hoping that I might, as indicated, ere now have been furnished with final instructions to conclude a convention between our respective Governments, embracing all the points of discussion on which a coimmon and friendly concurrence and understanding had been reached, and of which my Government was advised in my dispatches to which the inclosed instruction is in response. Ll avail myself, ete., RicHaArD B. HUBBARD, 1See supra, Mr. Bayard to Mr. Hubbard, November 21, 1887, 188 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Mr. Hubbard to Mr. Bayard. UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokio, Japan, July 13, 1888. (Received August 8.) Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy, of a note from the Japanese minister for foreign afiairs dated July 7, in which I am re- quested to instruct the United States consuls in Japan not to ship Japan- ese subjects on board American vessels engaged or about to engage in otter or seal hunting. The reasons for such a request are set forth in the minister’s note. In compliance with Count Okuma’s request, I have instrueted the United States consul-general at Kanagawa, and through him the other consular repr esentatives of the United States in Japan, to refrain from shipping any Japanese subjects on any American otter or seal hunting vessels. I have the honor to inclose a copy of my communication to the United States consul-general on the subject, and hope that my action in the premises will meet the approval of the Department of State. In order that the Department may more fully understand the imme- diate causes which have led the Japanese Government to take the course indicated in regard to the shipment of Japanese subjects on otter and seal hunting vessels, I beg to submit a brief account of the attack on the British schooner Nemo, to which Count Okuma refers: The Nemo is a schooner of 150 tons, owned and commanded by one Snow, a British resident of Yokohama, and was manned by Japanese sailors. The schooner is what is known as an “otter and seal hunter.” On the 27th of May last, while the schooner was en route to the hunting grounds, it was, acc cording to the commander’s statement, be- calmed off Copper Island (Russian territory). Early on the morning of May 27, while the schooner was still becalmed, the commander put off in a boat with a crew of 6 J apanese sailors, accompanied or followed by two other boats of Japanese sailors. The commander of the Nemo was the only foreigner in the boats. When about 200 yards from shore, and after the commander of the Nemo had discharged his rifle at one or more otters, his boat was fired upon by an unknown number of men concealed behind the rocks or a bluff of the shore, and using, as the commander of the Nemo supposes, Winchester rifles. The firing was kept up with great rapidity, and all of the men in the boat, ineluding the commander, being wounded, it was with great diffi- culty that the boat was gotten out of reach of the firing, the commander and one sailor being the only occupants of the boat who were able to propel it, and being both wounded, the craft moved very slowly. When the commander’s boat got out of range of the firing (the second boat had one man wounded, but the third had not approached within range of the firing), it was ascertained that one of the Japanese had been killed outright, and two others afterwards died on the Nemo from the wounds tnen received. The commander was wounded in the hand and in the thigh, but he and the other Japanese who were wounded have, I understand, about recovered. The schooner was brought to Yokohama, where an inquiry into the affair was held by the British cousul, who found that the attack was unprovoked. I have, etc., RIcHARD B. HUBBARD. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. 189 [Inclosure 1 in No. 491—Translation. ] Count Okuma to Mr. Hubbard. DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Tokyo, the 9th day, the 7th month, the 21st year of Meiji. Sir: The recent attack at Copper Island upon the British schooner Nemo (with the circumstances and results of which you are doubtless familiar), coupled with the fact that the unlicensed taking of otter and seal within the jurisdiction of His Im- perial Majesty is prohibited by law, has impressed upon the Imperial Government the necessity of adopting more effectual measures on the one hand to protect His Imperial Japanese Majesty’s subjects from the consequences of acts for which as seamen they could hardly be held responsible, and on the other to put a stop to an unlawful occupation. With these objects in view [ have the honor to request that you will instruct the consuls of your country in Japan to refrain, until otherwise advised, from shipping Japanese subjects on board any American vessels engaged or about to engage in otter or seal hunting. T avail, etc., Count SHIGENOBU OKUMA. (For inclosure No. 2, see Senate Ex. Doc. No. 106, Fiftieth Congress, second session, p. 111.) Mr. Hubbard to Mr. Bayard. No. 492.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Tokyo, Japan, July 13, 1888. (Received August 8.) Sir: Referring to the correspondence which has taken place between the Department of State and this legation concerning a proposed con- vention between the United States and Japan and some other powers, looking to the protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea, I have the honor to inclose a copy of a note, dated July 9, from the Japanese minister of foreign affairs, inquiring as to the nature of the consulta- tion now being conducted at London on this subject, with a view of in- structing the Japanese Minister at London to take part in said consul- tation, provided it has assumed the nature of an international conference in which the views of the several powers interested may be interchanged. The note from Count Okuma and my reply to the same, also herewith inclosed, fully explain themselves, and are forwarded to the Depart- ment with the view of eliciting such reply as may be deemed advisable in the premises. There is no doubt that the Nemo affair, to which I had the honor to refer in my dispatch No. 491 of this date, has had the effect of increas- ing Japan’s interest in the proposed convention and her desire to see it concluded at an early day. I have, etc., RICHARD Bb. HUBBARD. .{nclosure 1 in No. 492—Translation.] Count Okuma to Mr. Hubbard. DEPARTMENT FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Tokyo, the 7th day, the 7th month, the 21st year of Meiji. Sir: With reference to the proposal of your Government to enter into a proper arrangement for the purpose of preventing by international codperation indiscrimi- 190 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. nate and unregulated destruction of fur seals in the Behring Sea, the views of the Imperial Government having been communicated to you, your Government intimated that they would approach the subject again upon receipt, of responses from the pow- ers consulted, and consequently the Imperial Government have been awaiting further communication from your Government. In the meantime it has recently been reported to the Imperial Government that the United States minister at London is holding consultation with Her British Maj- esty’s principal Secretary for Foreign A ffairs and the diplomatic representatives of some other power or powers interested in respect to certain matters bearing upon the subject. The Imperial Government are not aware of the nature of the question under dis- cussion. If, however, the negotiation has actually assumed the character of an in- ‘ternational convention, in which the views of the several powers interested may be formally interchanged, the Inperial Government would desire to instruct their rep- resentative at London to take part in such negotiation. I therefore beg leave to request that you will be so good as to ascertain the truth of the report and to communicate to me the result of your inquiry. Layail myself, etc., COUNT SHIGENOBU OKUMA. [Inclosure 2 in No. 492.] Mr. Hubbard to Count Okuma. UNITED STaTES LUGATION, Tokyo, July 12, 1888. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency’s note No. 25, of the 7th instant, in which, referring to the subject of the proposed arrangement between the Governments of the United States and Japan and some other powers, looking to the protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea, your excellency informs me that it has been reported to the Imperial Government that the United States minister at London is holding consultation with Her British Majesty’s princi- pal Secretary for Foreign Affairs and the diplomatic representatives of some other powers interested, in respect to certain matters bearing upon the subject. Your ex- cellency further states that if the negotiations have assumed the character of an international conference, in which the views of-the several powers interested may be formally interchanged, the Lnperial Government would desire to instruct their representative at London to take part in such negotiations; and you request me to ascertain the truth of the report referred to, and to communicate the result of my inquiry to your department. In reply I have the honor to say to your excellency that by the mail leaving for the United States on or about June 20 I had the honor, as suggested by the verbal and informal inquiry of the Foreign Office, to address a dispatch to the honorable the Secretary of State of my Government, requesting to be advised of the present status of the negotiations of the proposed convention; and in pursuance of the subject I will by the next mail leaving for the United States forward a copy of your excel- lency’s note, with the request that my Government will furnish me with full infor- mation respecting the progress of the negotiations. In this connection I beg to say to your excellency that I have been informed in- formally and unofficially, by the representatives at Tokio of one of the powers inter- ested in the said negotiations, that he was in receipt of information to the eftect that the consultation now being conducted at London is of a purely preliminary character. Iam fully persuaded that the consultation to which your excellency refers is of the same nature as has already taken place between the United States minister at Tokyo and the Japanese Foreign Office; and 1 beg to repeat to your excellency what I have already had the honor to assure your Department on previous oceasions that a final decision will not be reached in this matter of the proposed convention until the Imperial Government has been fully advised and has had ample opportunity to express its views in the premises, I avail, ete., Ricuarp B. HubBarpD. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’83. 19a Mr. Bayard to Mr. Hubbard. No. 223.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, July 18, 1888. Sir: I have received your No. 483 of the 25d ultimo, saying that the Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs had informally inquired of you lately concerning the proposed convention between the United States and Japan, looking to the protection of fur seals in Bering Sea, which formed the subject of my instruction No. 171 of November 21, 1887, Negotiation with Japan in reference to the protection of the seals in Behring Sea has been delayed by the unexpected protraction of the ne- gotiation with Great Britain and Russia. It is thought desirable that the arrangement between these countries should be permitted to assume a definite and settled form before other agreements are formulated. It is hoped that the matter will soon be in such shape as to permit the entrance upon formal negotiations with Japan. In the meantime, however, the question might be informally discussed with the Japanese Government, with a view to ascertain just what is desired of the United States in regard to the protection of the sea otter, I am, ete., T. F. BAYARD. Mr. Bayard to Mr. Hubbard. (Contidential.] No. 232.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 9, 1888. Sir: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 492, of the 13th ultimo, in which you transmit a copy of a note from Count Okuma, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan, of the 7th ultimo, in which he states the desire of his Government to instruct its representative in London to take part in the negotiations there pending between the Government of the United States and that of Great Britain for a convention for the protection of scals in Behring Sea, provided the negotiations have reached a stage which would adinit of such participation. In reply you promised his excellency that you would request your Government to furnish you with full information respecting the progress of the negotiations. No change is known to have taken place in the state of the negotia tions at London since the Department last wrote you on the subject. Four months ago strong hopes were entertained here that the conven- ticn would soon be coneluded. But the Department is now informed that the views of Her Britannic Majesty’s Minister for Foreign Affairs have met with obstruction from Canada, where vessels are yearly fitted out for the purpose of preying upon seal life by the use of firearms and other destructive weapons. It is not perceived, therefore, how the participation of Japan in the negotiations at London could promote their suecessful conelusion. There is not known to be any difference of opinion between this Goy- ernment and that of Her Britannic Majesty as to the necessity and pro- priety of the international arrangement, now under consideration, for the protection of the seals in Bening Sea. 192 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. The convention which Japan will seek to make on the same subject will, as you have indicated, have to be shaped in some respects so as to meet the wishes of Japan in regard to the protection of her inter- ests in the sea otter. What this Government deems necessary for the preservation of the seals in Behring Sea is entirely to prohibit the slaughter of them with firearms, nets, and other destructive imple- ments, at a distance from the coasts. The Department would be glad to learn the views of the Japanese Government concerning the meas- ures necessary for the protection of its interests in the otter, and to be furnished with information respecting their territorial and pecuniary extent. I am, etc., T. F. BAYARD. RUSSIA. Mr. Wurts to Mr. Bayard. No. 189.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, St. Petersburg, September 3, 1887. (Received September 17.) Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your instruction No. 99, of the 19th of last month, relating to the measures to be taken for the better protection of the seal fisheries in Behring Sea, and _ to inform you that, in obedience to it, I have communicated the invita- tion of the Government of the United States to that of Russia to enter into such an arrangement as will put a check to the indiscriminate destruction, by the citizens of either country, of the seals in those waters. I am, etc., GEORGE W. WuR‘S. Mr. Lothrop to Mr. Bayard. No. 151.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, St. Petersburg, December 8, 1887. (Received December 27.) Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith the translation of a note fromthe Foreign Office, received at the legation yesterday, on the propo- sition of the United States for an international agreement touching the capture of seals in Behring Sea. The earnestness felt here in the mat- ter is plainly indicated by the language of the note, which speaks of unrestrained seal-hunting as a thing which not only threatens the well- being but even the existence of the people of the extreme northeast coast. This language represents a view which I have heard here in conver- sation, of course not officially, and which is substantially as follows: The seal fishery on our Behring coasts is the only resource our people there have; it furnishes them all the necessaries of life; without it they perish. Now, international law concedes to every people exclusive juris- diction over a zone along its coasts suflicient for its protection; and the PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1887-’88. 193 doctrine of the equal rights of all nations on the high seas rests on the idea that it is consistent with the common welfare e and not destructive of any essential rights of the inhabitants of the neighboring coasts. Such common rights, under public law, rest on eeneral consent, and it would be absurd to affirm that such ¢ onsent had been given, where its necessary result would be the absolute destruction of one or more of the parties. Hence the rule can not be applied blindly to an unforeseen ‘ase, and these alleged common rights must rightfully be limited to ‘-ases where they may be exercised | consistently with the welfare of all. Behring Sea partakes largely of the character of an inclosed sea; two great nations own and control all its inclosing shores. It possesses a peculiar fishery, which, with reference to its preservation, can only be legitimately pursued on land, and even there only under stric t regula- tions. To allow its unrestrained pursuit in the open waters of the sea is not only to doom it to annihilation, but, by necessary consequence, to destroy all its coast inhabitants. Ifthis result is conceded it fol- lows that the doctrine of commonrights can have no application to such a case. I have thought it might not be uninteresting to give this as a view whieh has found expression here, and, if found necessary, [ think it not improbable that Russia would feel that she was driven to act on it. I am, ete., GEO. V. N. Lornror. {Inclosure in No. 151—Translation.] M. de Giers to Mr. Lothrop. MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Asiatic Department, November 25, 1887. Mr. Minister: Mr. Wurts, under date of August 22 [September 2], was good enough to communicate to me the views of the Government of the United States of America upon the subject of the desirableness of an understanding, among the goy- ernments concerned, for the regulation of the taking (la chasse) of the fur se al (loutr es) in the Behring Sea, in order that an end might be put to those inconsiderate practices of extermination which threaten to dry up, at their source, an important branch of international commerce. We concur entirely in the views of the Government of the United States. Like it, we also have been for a long time considering what means could be taken to remedy a state of things which is prejudici: ul not only” to commerce and to revenue, but which will soon work disastrous results, not only to the well-being but even to the exist- ence of our people in the extreme northeast. The establishment of a reasonable rule, and of a lawful system in the use (Verplottation) of the resources, which furnish their only industry, is for those people of vital importance. The pressing interest which the Tnperial Government has been thus called to con- sider had already suggested to it the idea of an international agreement, by which this interest might find its most efficient protection. It is by this w ay that the dif- ferent questions involved can be best resolved, and among w hich there exists, in our opinion, a close connection. The proposition of an accord emanating from the Goverriment of the United States, and which we take pleasure in considering as a step toward that general solution, must, of course, but meet the sincere syipathies of the Imperial Govern- ment, and its active support, and oe I pray you to make known to the Cabinet at Washington. Please receive, ete., 2a GIERS. 194 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE Mr, Lothrop to Mr, Bayard. No. 161.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, St. Petersburg, February 22, 1888. (Received March 12.) Sim: Your dispatch, No. 110, relative to the protection of fur-bearing seals in the Behring Sea, has just reached me, and [ have lost no time in making known to the Imperial Government your wishes respecting the codperation of the Russian Ambassador in Loudon with Mr. Phelps on this subject. Very truly, cte:, Gro. V. N. Lorurop. Mr. Lothrop to Mr. Bayard. No. 164.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, St. Petersburg, March 12, 1888. (Received April 2.) Sir: Immediately upon the receipt of your dispatch No. 110 I com- municated to Mr. de Giers the suggestions therein contained. Inreply he now informs me that the Imperiai Government, acting thereon, has instructed Mr. de Staal, its Ambassador in London, at once to put him- self into communication with Mr. Phelps, and to do his best to promote the common object of the two governments. Iam also requested to make this action known to you. Very truly, ete., GEO. V. N, Lotagor: SWEDEN AND NORWAY. Mr. Magee to Mr. Bayard. No. 118. ] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Stockholm, March 20, 1888. (Received April 9.) Srr: Iam in receipt this p. m. of the response to my note (written under your instruction of date September 17, 1887), inviting the Gov- ernment of the United Kingdoms to join in an arrangement whereby an end would be put to the indiscriminate killing of seals in the Ber- ing Sea. The Royal Government having no interest in seal fisheries, His Maj- esty thinks there is no need to take part in any treaty or arrangement in reference thereto on the part of the United Kingdoms. He, however, expresses the desire that a mutually beneficial accord may be arrived at between the interested powers, and that the same may be maintained with a reservation that powers not at present interested may join in such an arrangement in the future if they desire. At present neither Sweden nor Norway engages in seal-fishing in Behring Sea or adjacent waters, I have, ete., Rurus MAGEE. SEIZURES OF 1889. 195 CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE SEIZURE OF BRITISH SEAL- ING VESSELS IN BERING SEA IN 1889. Mr. Edwardes to Mr. Blaine. BAR HARBOR, August 24, 1889. Srr: In aceordance with instructions which I have received from Her Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, L have the honor to state to you that repeated rumors have of late reached Her Majesty’s Government that United States cruisers have stopped, searched, and even seized British vessels in Behring Sea outside of the three mile limit from the nearest land. Although no official confirma- tion of these rumors has reached Her Majesty’s Government, there ap- pears to be no reason to doubt their authenticity. [am desired by the Marquis of Salisbury to inqnire whether the United States Government are in possession of similar information, and further, to ask that stringent instructions may be sent by the United States Government, at the earliest moment, to their officers, with the view to prevent the possibility of such occurrences taking place. In continuation of my instruction I have the honor to remind you that Her Majesty’s Government received very clear assurances last year from Mr. Bayard, at that time Secretary of State, that pending the discussion of the general questions at issue no fur ther interference should take place with British vessels in Behring Sea. In conclusion, the Marquis of Salisbury desires me to say that Sir Julian Pauncefote, Her Majesty’s Minister, will be prepared on his return to Washington in the autumn to discuss the whole question, and Her Majesty’s Government wish to point out to the United States Government that a settlement can not but be hindered by any meas- ures of force which may be resorted to by the United States. I have, etc., H. G. EDWARDEsS. Mr. Blaine to Mr. Edwardes. BAR HARBOR, August 24, 1889. Str: [ have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communi- cation of this date, conveying to me the intelligence “ that repeated rumors have of late reached Her Majesty’s Government that United States cruisers have stopped, searched, and even seized British vessels in Behring Sea outside the 5-mile limit from the nearest land.” And you add that, “although no official confirmation of these rumors has reached Her Majesty’s Government, there appears to be no reason to doubt their authenticity.” In reply I have the honor to state that the same rumors, probably based on truth, have reached the Government of the United States, but that up to this date there has been no official communication received on the subject. It has been and is the earnest desire of the President of the United States to have such an adjustment as shall remove all possible ground of misunderstanding with Her Majesty’s Government concerning the existing troubles in the Behring Sea; and the President believes thas the 196 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. responsibility for delay in the adjustment can not be properly charged to the Government of the United States. I beg you will express to the Marquis of Salisbury the gratification with which the Government of the United States learns that Sir Julian Pauncefote, Her Majesty’s Minister, will be prepared, on his return to Washington in the autumn, to discuss the whole question. It gives me pleasure to assure you that the Government of the United States will endeavor to be prepared for the discussion, and that, in the opinion of the President, the points at issue between the two Governments are ‘capable of prempt adjustment on a basis entirely honorable to both. I have, etc., JAMES G. BLAINE. Mr. Edwardes to Mr. Blaine. BAR HARBOR, August 25, 1889. Sir: Thad the honor to receive yesterday your note in which you have been good enough to inform me, with respect to the repeated ru- mors which have of late reached Her Majesty’s Government of the search and seizures of British vessels in Behring Sea by United States cruisers, that the same rumors, probably based on truth, have reached the United States Government, but that up to this date there has been no official communication received on the subject. - At the same time you have done me the honor to inform me that it has been and is the earnest desire of the President of the United States to have such an adjustment as shall remove all possible. ground of mis- understanding with Her Majesty’s Government concerning the existing troubles in the Behring Sea; and that the President believes that the responsibility for delay in that adjustment can not be properly charged to the Government of the United States. You request me at the same time to express to the Marquis of Salis- bury the gratification with which the Government of the United States learns that Sir Julian Pauncefote, Her Majesty’s Minister, will be pre- pared, on his return to Washington in the autumn, to discuss the whole question, and you are good enough to inform me of the pleasure you havé in assuring me that the Government of the United States will endeavor to be prepared for the discussion, and that, in the opinion of the President, the points at issue between the two ‘Governments are capable of prompt adjustinent on a basis entirely honorable to both. I shall lose no time in bringing your reply to the knowledge of Her Majesty’ s Government, who, while aw aiting an answer to the other in- quiry L had the honor to make to you, will, I feel contident, receive with much satisfaction the assurances which you have been good enough to make to me in your note of yesterday’s date. I have, ete., H. G. EDWARDES. Mr. Edwardes to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, September 12, 1889. My DEAR Mr. BLAINE: I should be very much obliged if you would kindly let me know when I may expect an answer to the request of Her SEIZURES OF 1889. 197 Majesty’ Ss Government, which I had the honor of communicating to you in my note of the 24th of August, that instructions may be sent to Alaska to prevent the possibility of the seizure of British ships in Behring Sea. Her Majesty’s Government are earnestly awaiting the reply of the United States Government on this subject, as the recent reports of seizures having taken place are causing much excitement both in England and in Canada. I remain, etc., H. G. EDWARDES. Mr. Blaine to Mv. Edwardes. BAR HArpBor, September 14, 1889. Str: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your fareonal note of the 12th instant, written at W ashington, in which you desire to know when you may expect an answer to the request of Her Majesty’s Government, ‘that instructions may be sent to Alaska to prevent the possibility of the seizure of British ships in Behring Dea. 2 I had supposed that my note of August 24 would s satisfy Her Maj- esty’s Government of the President’s earnest desire to come to a tr iendly agreement touching all matters at issue between the two Governments in relation to Behring Sea, and I had further supposed that your mention of the official instruction to Sir Julian Pauncefote to proceed, immedi- ately after his arrival in October, to a full discussion of the question, removed all necessity of a preliminary correspondence touching its merits. teferring more particularly to the question of which you repeat the desire of your Government for an answer, I have the honor to inform you that a categorical response would hav e been and still is impracti- cable—unjust to this pve en, and misleading to the Government of Her Majesty. It was therefore the judgment of the President that the whole subject chad more wisely be remanded to the formal discus. sion so near at hand which Her Majesty’s Government has proposed, and to which the Government of the United States has cordially as- sented. It is proper, however, to add that any instruction sent to Behring Sea at the time of your original request, upon the 24th of August, would have failed to reach those waters before the proposed departure’ of the vessels of the United States, I have, ete., JAMES G. BLAINE. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes. [Left at the Department of State by Mr. Edwardes. ] FOREIGN OFFICE, October 2, 1889. Sir: At the time when the seizures of British ships hunting seals in Behring’s Sea during the years 1886 and 1887 were the subjects of dis- cussion the Minister of the United States made certain overtures to Her Majesty’s Government with respect to the institution of a close 1y¥8 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. time for the seal fishery, for the purpose of preventing the extirpa. tion of the species in that part of the world. Without in any way ad- mitting that considerations of this order could justify the seizure of vessels which were transgressing no rule of international law, Her Majesty’s Government were very ready to agree that the subject was one deserving of the gravest attention on the part of all the govern- ments interested in those waters. The Russian Government was disposed to join in the proposed nego- tiations, but they were suspended for a time in consequence of objec- tions raised by the Dominion of Canada and of doubts thrown on the physical data on which any restrictive legislation must have been based. Ifer Majesty’s Government are fully sensible of the importance of this question, and of the great value which will attach to an interna- tional agreement in respect to it, and Her Majesty’s representative will be furnished with the requisite instructions in case the Secretary of State should be willing to enter upon the discussion. You will read this dispatch and my dispatch No. 205, of this date, to the Secretary of State, and, if he should desire it, you are authorized to give him copies of them. 1 am, etc., SALISBURY. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes. [Left at the Department of State by Mr. Edwardes.] ForrIGN OFFICE, October 2, 1889. Sir: In my dispatch No. 176 of the 17th August last I furnished you with copies of a correspondence which had passed between this Depart: ment and the Colonial Office on the subject of the seizure of the Cana- dian vessels Black Diamond and Triumph in the Bering Sea by the United States revenue-cutter Rush. J have now received and transmit herewith a copy of a dispatch from the Governor-General of Canadato the Secretary of State for the Colo- nies, which incloses copies of the instructions given to the special officer placed on board the Black Diamond by the officer commanding the Kush, and of a letter from the collector of customs at Victoria, together with the sworn affidavits of the masters of the two Canadian vessels. It is apparent from these affidavits that the vessels were seized at a distance from land far in excess of the limit of maritime jurisdiction which any nation can claim by international law. The cases are similar in this respect to those of the ships Caroline, Onward, and Thornton, which were seized by a vessel of the United States outside territorial waters in the summer of 1887. In a dispatch to Sir L. West dated September 10, 1887, which was communicated to Mr. Bayard, I drew the attention of the Government of the United States to the illegality of these proceedings, and expressed a hope that due compensation would be awarded to the subjects of Her Majesty who had suffered from them. I have not, since that time, received from the Government of the United States any intimation of their intentions in this respect, or any explanation of the grounds upon which this in- terference with the British sealers had been authorized. Mr. Bayard did, indeed, communicate to us unofficially an assurance that no further seizures of this character should take place pending the discussion of SEIZURES OF 1889. 198 the questions involved between the two governments. Her Majesty’s Government much regret to find that this understanding has uot been carried forward into the present year, and that instructions have been issued to cruisers of the United States to seize British vessels fishing for seals in Behring Sea outside the limit of territorial waters. The grounds upon which these violent measures have been taken have net been communicated to Her Majesty’s Government, and remain still un- explained. But in view of the unexpeeted renewal of the seizures of which Her Majesty’s Government have previously complained, it is my duty to protest against them, and to state that, in the opinion of Her Majesty’s Government, they are wholly unjustified by international law. I am, etc., SALISBURY. [Inclosure 4.] Captain Shepard to Mr. Hankanson. U.S. REVENUE STEAMER RusSH, BERING SEA, Latitude 56° 22' N., longitude 170° 25' W., July 11, 1889. Sir: You are hereby appointed a special officer, and directed to proceed on board the schooner Black Diamond, of Victoria, British Columbia, this day seized for viola- tion of law (section 1956, Revised Statutes of the United States), and assume charge of the said vessel, her officers, and crew, twenty-five in number, all told, excepting the navigation of the vessel, which is reserved to Capt. Owen Thomas, and which you will not interfere with unless you become convinced that he is proceeding to some other than your port of destination, in which event you are authorized to assume full charge of the vessel. Everything being in readiness, you will direct Capt. Owen Thomas to make the best of his way to Sitka, Alaska, and upon arrival at that port you will report in person to the United States district attorney for the district of Alaska, and deliver to him the letter so addressed, the schooner Black Diamond, of Victoria, British Columbia, her outfit, and the persons of Capt. Owen Thomas and Mate Alexander Galt, and set her crew at liberty. After being relieved of the prop- ~ erty and persons intrusted to your care, you will await at Sitka the arrival of the Tush. Very respectfully, etc., L. G. SHEPARD, Captain U. 8. Revenue Steamer Rush. For the other inclosures see House Ex. Doc. No. 450, Fifty-first Con- gress, first session, pp. 6-9. Mr. Edwardes to Mr. Blaine. BRITISH LEGATION, Washington, October 14, 1889. My DAR MR. BLAINE: When TI had the honor to read to you on Saturday, the 12th instant, the two dispatches addressed to me by the Marquis of Salisbury on the subject of the seizures of British sealers in Behring sea, you inquired of me when I reached the passage which runs as follows, “Mr. Bayard did indeed communicate to us, unoffi- cially, an assurance that no further seizures of this character should take place pending the discussion of the questions involved between the two Governments,” if I could tell you in what way this assurance was officially communicated to Her Majesty’s Government. I replied 200 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. that I believed it had been so communicated in a letter addressed by Mr. Bayard to Sir Lionel West, and that that letter would be found in the printed correspondence on the subject which was laid before Con- gress this year. IT have since learned that the assurance which Lord Salisbury had in mind when writing the dispatch I read was not that to which I referred in my reply to you, but was an assurance communicated unofficially to his lordship by the United States minister in London, and also by Mr. Bayard to Sir Lionel West in the month of April last year. I have, ete., H. G. EDWARDES. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, January 22, 1890. Sir: Several weeks have elapsed since I had the honor to receive through the hands of Mr. Edwardes copies of two dispatches from Lord Salisbury complaining of the course of the United States revenue-cut- ter Rush in intercepting Canadian vessels sailing under the British flag and engaged in taking fur seals in the waters of the Be hring Sea. Subjec ts which could not be postponed have engaged the attention of this Department and have rendered it impossible to give a formal answer to Lord Salisbury until the present time. In the opinion of the President, the Canadian vessels arrested and detained in the Behring Sea were engaged in a pursuit that was in itself contra bonos mores, a pursuit which of necessity involves a serious and permanent injury to the rights of the Government and people of the United States. To establish this ground it is not necessary to argue the question of the extent and nature of the sovereignty of this Goyvern- ment over the waters of the Behring Sea; it is not necessary to explain, certainly not to define, the powers s and privileges ceded by His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia in the treaty by which the Al askan territory was transferred to the United States. The w eighty consider- ations growing out of the acquisition of that territory, with all the rights on ki ind and sea inse parably connected therewith, may be safely lett out of view, while the grounds are set forth upon which this Government rests its justification for the action complained of by Her Majesty’s Gov- ernmelt. It can not be unknown to Her Majesty’s Government that one of the most valuable sources of revenue from the Alaskan possessions is the fur-seal fisheries of the Behring Sea. Those fisheries had been exclu- sively controlled by the Government of Russia, without interference or without question, from their original discovery until the cession of Alaska to the United States in 1867, From 1867 to 1886 the possession in which Russia had been undisturbed was enjoyed by this Government also. There was no interruption and no intrusion from any source. Vessels from other nations passing from time to time through Behring Sea to the Aretic Ocean in pursuit ‘of whales had alw: ys abstained from taking part in the capture of seals. This uniform avoidance of all attempts to take fur seal in those waters had been a constant recognition of the right held and exereised first by Russia and subsequently by this Government. It has also been SEIZURES OF 1889. 201 the recognition of a fact now held beyond denial or doubt that the taking of seals in the open sea rapidly leads to their extinction. This is not only the well-known opinion of experts, both British and Amer- ican, based upon prolonged observation and investigation, but the fact had also been demonstrated in a wide sense by the well nigh total de- struction of all seal fisheries except the one in the 3ebring Sea, which the Government of the United States is now striving to preserve, not altogether for the use of the American people but for the use of the world at large. The killing of seals in the open sea involves the destruction of the female in common with the male. The slaughter of the female seal is reckoned as an immediate loss of three seals, besides the future loss of the whole number which the bearing seal may poate in the successive years of life. The destruction which results from killing seals in the open sea proceeds, therefore, by a ratio which constantly and rapidly increases, and insures the total extermination of the species within a very brief period. It has thus become known that the only proper time for the slaughter of seals is at the season when they betake themselves to the land, ‘because the land is the only place where the necessary dis- crimination can be made as to the age and sex of the seal. It would seem, then, by fair reasoning, that nations not possessing the territory upon "Which seals can increase their numbers by natural growth, and thus afford an annual supply of skins for the use of mankind, should refrain from the slaughter in open sea where the destruction of the species is sure and swift. After the acquisition of Alaska the Government of the United States, through competent agents working under the direction of the best ex- perts, | gave careful attention to the improvement of the seal fisheries. Proceeding by a close obedience to the laws of nature, and rigidly limit- ing the number to be annually slaughtered, the Government succeeded in increasing the total number of seals and adding correspondingly and largely to the value of the fisheries. In the course of a few years of intelligent and interesting experiment the number that could i safely slaughtered was fixed at 100, 000 annually. The Company to which the administration of the fisheri ies V vas intrusted by a lease from this Gov- ernment has paid a rental of $50,000 per annum, and in addition thereto 24 per skin for the total number taken. The skins were regularly transported to London to be dressed and prepared for the markets of the world, and the business had grown so large that the earnings of English laborers, since Alaska was transferred to the United States, amount in the ageregate to more than $12,000,000. The entire business was then conducted peacefully, lawfully, and profitably—profitably to the United States for the rental was yielding a moderate interest on the large sum which this Government had paid for Alaska, including the rights now at issue; profitably to the Alaskan Jompany, which, under governmental direction and restriction, had given unwearied pains to the care and development of the fisheries; profitably to the Aleuts, who were receiving a fair pecuniary reward for their labors, and were elevated from semisavagery to civilization and to the enjoyment of schools and churches provided for their benetit by the Government of the United States; and, last of all, profitably to a large body of English laborers who had constant employment and re- ceived good wages. This, in brief, was the condition of the Alaska fur-seal fisheries down to the year 1886. The precedents, customs, and rights had been estab- lished and enjoyed, either by Russia or the United States, for nearly a 26 202 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. century. The two nations were the only powers that owned a foot of land on the continents that bordered, or on the islands included within, the Behring waters where the seals resort to breed. Into this peaceful and secluded field of labor, whose benefits were so equitably shared by the native Aleuts of the Pribilof Islands, by the United States, and by England, certain Canadian vessels in 1886 asserted their right to enter, and by their ruthless course to destroy the fisheries and with them to destroy also the resulting industries which are so valuable. The Government of the United States at once proceeded to check this movement, which, unchecked, was sure to do great and irreparable harm. It was cause of unfeigned surprise to the United States that Her Majesty’s Governinent should immediately interfere to defend and _en- courage (surely to encourage by defending) the course of the Canadians in disturbing an industry which had been carefully developed for more than ninety years under the flags of Russia and the United States—de- veloped in such a manner as not to interfere with the public rights or the private industries of any other people or any other person. Whence did the ships of Canada derive the right to do in 1886 that which they had refrained from doing for more than ninety years? Upon what grounds did her Majesty’s Government defend in the year 1886 a course of conduct in the Behring Sea which she had caretully avoided ever since the discovery of that sea? By what reasoning did Her Majesty’s Government conclude that an act may be committed with impunity against the rights of the United States which had never been attempted against the same rights when held by the Russian Empire? So great has been the injury to the fisheries from the irregular and destructive slaughter of seals in the open waters of the Behring Sea by Canadian vessels, that whereas the Government bad allowed 100,000 to be taken annually for a series of years, it is now compelled to reduce the number to 60,000. If four years of this violation of natural law and neighbor’s rights has reduced the annual slaughter of seal by 40 per cent, it is easy to see how short a period will be required to work the total destruction of the fisheries. The ground upon which Her Majesty’s Government justifies, or at least defends the course of the Canadian vessels, rests upon the fact that they are committing their acts of destruction on the high seas, viz, more than 3 marine miles irom the shore line. It is doubtful whether Her Majesty’s Government would abide by this rule if the attempt were made to interfere with the pearl fisheries of Ceylon, which extend more than 20 miles from the shore line and have been enjoyed by England without molestation ever since their acquisition. So well recognized is the British ownership of those fisheries, regardless of the limit of the three-mile line, that Her Majesty’s Government feels authorized to sell the pearl -fishing right from year to year to the highest bidder. Nor is it credible that modes of fishing on the Grand Banks, altogether prac- ticable but highly destructive, would be justified or even permitted by Great Britain on the plea that the vicious acts were committed more than 3 miles from shore. There are, according to scientific authority, “ great colonies of fish” on the “Newfoundland banks.” These colonies resemble the seats of great populations on land. They remain stationary, having a limited range of water in which to live and die. In these great “colonies” it is, ae- cording to expert judgment, comparatively easy to explode dynamite or giant powder in such manner as to kill vast quantities of fish, and at the same time destroy countless pumbers of eggs. Stringent laws have SEIZURES OF 1889. 203 been necessary to prevent the taking of fish by the use of dynamite in inany of the rivers and Jakes of the United States. The same mode of fishing could readily be adopted with effect on the more shallow parts of the banks, but the destruction of fish in proportion to the catch, says a high authority, might be as great as ten thousand to one. Would Her Majesty’s Government think that so wicked an act could not be prevented and its perpetrators punished simply because it had been committed outside of the 5-mile line? Why are not the two cases parallel?) The Canadian vessels are en- gaged in the taking of fur seal in a manner that destroys the power of reproduction and insures the extermination of the species. In exter- minating the species an article useful to mankind is totally destroyed in order that temporary and immoral gain may be acquired by a few persons. By the employment of dynamite on the banks it is not prob- able that the total destruction of fish could be accomplished, but a se- rious diminution of a valuable food for man might assuredly result. Does Her Majesty’s Government seriously maintain that the law of na- tions is powerless to prevent such violation of the common rights of man? Are the supporters of justice in all nations to be declared in- competent to prevent wrongs so odious and so destructive? In the judgment of this Government the law of the sea is not law- lessness. Nor can the law of the sea and the liberty which it confers and which it protects be perverted to justify acts which are immoral in themselves, which inevitably tend to results against the interests and against the welfare of mankind. One step beyond that which Her Majesty’s Government has taken in this contention, and piracy finds its justification. The President does not conceive it possible that Her Majesty’s Government could in fact be less indifferent to these evil results than is the Government of the United States. But he hopes that Her Majesty’s Government will, after this frank expression of views, more readily comprehend the position of the Government of the United States touching this serious question. This Government has been ready to concede much in order to adjust all differences of view, and has, in the judgment of the President, already proposed a solu- tion not only equitable but generous. Thus far Her Majesty’s Govern- ment has declined to accept the proposal of the United States. The President now awaits with deep interest, not unmixed with solicitude, any proposition for reasonable adjustment which Her Majesty’s Gov- ernment may submit. The forcible resistance to which this Govern- ment is constrained in the Behring Sea is, in the President’s judgment, demanded not only by the necessity of defending the traditional and long-established rights of the United States, but also the rights of good government and of good morals the world over. In this contention the Government of the United States has no oc- casion and no desire to withdraw or modify the positions which it has at any time maintained against the claims of the Imperial Government of Russia. The United States will not withhold from any nation the privileges which it demanded for itself when Alaska was part of the Russian Empire. Nor is the Government of the United States disposed to exercise in those possessions any less power or authority than it was willing to concede to the Imperial Government of Russia when its sovereignty extended over them. The President is persuaded that all friendly nations will concede to the United States the same rights and privileges on the Jands and in the waters of Alaska which the same friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia. I have, ete., JAMES G. BLAINE. 204 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES FOR THE PROTECTION OF FUR-SEALS—( Continued.) Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, February 10, 1890. Str: Her Majesty’s Government have had for sometime under their consideration the suggestion made in the course of our interviews on the question of the seal fisheries in Behring’s Sea, that it might expedite a settlement of the controversy if the tripartite negotiation respecting the establishment of a close time for those fisheries which was com- menced in London in 1888, but was suspended owing to various causes, should be resumed in Washington. I now have the honor to inform you that Her Majesty’s Government are willing to adopt this suggestion, and if agreeable to your Govern- ment will ‘take steps cone urrently with them to invite the participation of Russia in the renewed negotiations. I have, ete., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Mr, Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Washington, March 1, 1890. My DEAR StR JULIAN: I have extracted from official documents and appended hereto a large ass of evidence, given under oath by profes- sional experts and ofiicers of the United States, touching the subject upon which you desired further proof, namely, that the killing of seals in the open sea tends certainly and rapidly to ‘the extermination of the species. Hf further evidence is desired, it can be readily furnished. I have, ete., JAMES G. BLAINE. (For inclosures see House Ex. Doe. No, 450, Fifty-first Congress, first session, pp. 15-25.) Sir. Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, April —, 1890. (Received April 30.) DEAR Mr. BuAINE: At the last sitting of the Conference on the Behring Sea Fisheries question, you expr essed doubts, after reading the memorandum of the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries, which by your courtesy has since been printed, whether any ari angement could be arrived at that would be satisfactory to Canada. You observed that the proposals of the United States had now been two years before Her Majesty’s Government, that there was nothing further to urge in support of it; and you invited me to make a counter proposal on their behalf. ‘To that task I have most earnestly applied myself, and while fully sensible of its great difficulty, owing to the con- flict of opinion and of testimony which has manifested itself in the course of our discussions, 1 do not despair of arriving ata solution which PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. 205 will be satisfactory to all the Governments concerned. It has been ad- mitted, from the commencement, that the sole object of the negotiation is the preservation of the fur-seal species for the benefit of mankind, and that no considerations of advantage to any particular nation, or of benefit to any private interest, should enter into the question. Such being the basis of negotiation, it would be strange indeed if we should fail to devise the means of solving the diflic ulties which have unfortunately arisen. I will proceed to explain by what method this result can, in my judgment, be attained. The great divergence of views which exists as to whether any restrictions on pelagic sealing are neces- sary for the preservation of the fur-seal species, and if so, as to the char- acter and extent of such restrictions, renders it impossible in my opinion to arrive at_any solution which would satisfy public opinion either in Canada or Great Britain, or in any country which may be invited to accede to the proposed arr: ungement, without a full inquiry by a mixed commission of experts, the result of whose labors and investigations, in the region of the seal fishery, would probably dispose of all the points in dispute. As regards the immediate necessities of the case I am prepared to recommend to my Government for their approval and acceptance certain measures of precaution which might be adopted provisionally and with- out prejudice to the ultimate decision on the points to be investigated by the commission. Those measures, which I will explain later on, would effectually remove all reasonable apprehension of any depletion of the fur-seal species, at all events, pending the report of the commis- sion. It is important, in this relation, to note that while it has been con- tended on the part of the United Sti ites Government that the depletion of the fur-seal species has already commenced, and that even the exter- mination of the species is threatened within a measurable space of time, the latest reports of the United States agent, Mr. Tingle, are such as to dissipate all such alarms. Mr. Tingle, in 1887, reported that the vast number of seals was on the increase, and that the condition of all the rookeries could not be better. In his later report, dated July 31, 1888, he wrote as follows: Iam happy to be able to report that, although late landing, the breeding rookeries are filled out to the lines of measurement heretofore made, and some of them much beyond those lines, showing conclusively that seal life is not being depleted, but is fully up to the estimate given in my report of 1887. Mr. Elliot, who is frequently appealed to as a great authority on the subject, affirms that, such is the natural increase of the fur-seal species that these animals, were they not preyed upon by killer whales (Orea gladiator), sharks, and other subinarine foes, would multiply to such an extent that “Behring Sea itself could not contain them.” The Honorable Mr. Tupper has shown in his memorandum that the destruction of seals caused by pelagic sealing is insignificant in com- parison with that caused by their natural enemies, and gives figures exhibiting the marvelous increase of seals in spite of the ‘depr edations complained of. Again the destructive nature of the modes of killing seals by spears and firearms has apparently been greatly exagger ated as may be seen from the affidavits of practical seal hunters which L annex to this let- ter, together with a confirmatory extract from a paper upon the “ Fur- Seal Fisheries of the Pacific Coast and Alaska,” prepared and pub- lished in San Francisco and designed for the information of Eastern United States Senators and Congressmen. 206 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. The Canadian Government estimate the percentage of seals so wounded or killed and not recovered at 6 per cent. In view of the facts above stated, it is improbable that pending the result of the inquiry, which I have suggested, any appreciable diminu- tion of the fur-seal species should take place, even if the existing con- ditions of pelagic sealing were to remain unchanged. But in order to quiet all apprehension on that score, [ would propose the following provisional regulations. 1. That pelagic sealing should be prohibited in the Behring Sea, the Sea of Okhotsk, and the adjoining waters, during the months of Ma and June, and during the months of October, November, and Decem- ber, which may be termed the “migration periods” of the fur seal. 2. That all sealing vessels should be prohibited from approaching the breeding islands within a radius of 10 miles. These regulations would put a stop to the two practices complained of as tending to exterminate the species; firstly, the slaughter of female seals with young during the migration periods, especially in the narrow passes of the Aleutian Islands; secondly, the destruction of female seals by marauders surreptitiously landing on the breeding islands under cover of the dense fogs which almost coutinuously prevail in that local- ity during the summer. Mr. Taylor, another agent of the United States Government asserts that the female seals (called cows) go out from the breeding islands every day for food. The following is an extract from his evidence: The cows go 10 and 15 miles, and even farther. I do not know the average of it— and they are going and coming all the morning and evening. The sea is black with them round about the islands. If there is a little fog and they get out half a mile from shore we can not see a vessel 100 yards even. The vessels themselves lay arouud the islands there where they pick up a good many seal, and there is where the .1lling of cows occurs when they go ashore. Whether the female seals go any distance from the islands in quest of food, and if so, to what distance, are questions in dispute, but pend- ing their solution the regulation which I propose against the approach of sealing vessels within 10 miles of the islands for the prevention of surreptitious landing practically meets Mr. Taylors complaint, be it well founded or not, to the fullest extent; for, owing to the prevalence of fogs, the risk of capture within a radius of 10 miles will keep vessels off at a much greater distance. This regulation if accepted by Her Majesty’s Government would certainly manifest a friendly desire on their part to codperate with your Government and that of Russia in the protection of their rook- eries and in the prevention of any violation of the laws applicable thereto. I have the honor to inclose a draft of a preliminary conven- tion which I have prepared, providing for the appointment of a mixec commission who are to report on certain specified questions within two years. The draft embodies the temporary regulations above described to- gether with other clauses which appear to me necessary to give proper effect to them. Although I believe that it would be sufficient during the ‘‘ migration periods” to prevent all sealing within a specified distance from the passes of the Aleutian Islands I have out of a deference to your views and to the wishes of the Russian Minister, adopted the fishery line de- scribed in Article V, and which was suggested by you at the outset of our negotiation. The draft, of course, contemplates the conclusion of a further convention after full examination of the report of the mixed PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. 207 commission. It also makes provision for the ultimate settlement by arbitration of any differences which the report of the commission may still fail to adjust, whereby the important element of finality is secured, and in order to give to the proposed arrangement the widest interna- tional basis, the draft provides that the other powers shall be invited to accede to it. The above proposals are, of course, submitted ad referendum, and it only now remains for me to commend them to your favorable consider- ation and to that of the Russian Minister. They have been framed by me in a spirit of justice and conciliation, and with the most earnest de- sire to terminate the controversey in a manner honorable to all parties and worthy of the three great nations concerned. I have, etc., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. (For inclosures see House Ex. Doc. No. 450, pp. 54-60.) ¢ The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauncefote. [Left at the Department of State on June 5 by Sir Julian Pauncefote.] No. 106.] FOREIGN OFFICE, May 22, 1890. Str: I received in due course your dispatch No. 9, of the 23d January, inclosing copy of Mr. Blaine’s note of the 22d of that month, in answer to the protest made on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government on the 12th October last, against the seizure of Canadian vessels by the United States revenue-cutter Rush in Behring Sea. The importance of the subject necessitated a reference to the Goy- ernment of Canada, whose reply has only recently reached Her Maj- esty’s Government. The negotiations which have taken place between Mr. Blaine and yourself afford strong reason to hope that the difficul- ties attending this question are in a fair way towards an adjustment which will be satisfactory to both Governments. I think it right, how- ever, to place on record, as briefly as possible, the views of Her Maj- esty’s Government on the principal arguments brought forward on be- half of the United States. Mr. Blaine’s note defends the acts complained of by Her Majesty’s Government on the following grounds: 1. That “ the Canadian vessels arrested and detained in the Behring Sea were engaged in a pursuit that is in itself contra bonos mores—a pursuit which of necessity involves a serious and permanent injury to the rights of the Government and people of the United States.” 2. That the fisheries had been in the undisturbed possession and under the exclusive control of Russia from their discovery until the ces- sion of Alaska to the United States in 1867, and that from this date onwards until 1886 they had also remained in the undisturbed posses- sion of the United States Government. 3. That it is a fact now held beyond denial or doubt that the taking of seals in the open sea rapidly leads to the extinction of the species, and that therefore nations not possessing the territory upon which seals can increase their numbers by natural growth should refrain trem the slaughter of them in the open sea. Mr. Blaine further argues that the law of the sea and the liberty 208 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE which it confers do not justify acts which are immoral in themselves, and which inevitably tend to results against the interests and against the welfare of mankind; and he proceeds to justify the forcible resistance of the United States Government by the necessity of defending not only their own traditional and long-established rights, but also the rights of good morals and of good government the world over He declares that while the United States will not w vithhold from any nation the privileges which they demanded for themselves, when Alaska was part of the Russian Empire, they are not disposed to exercise in the possessions acquired from Russia any less power or authority than they were willing to concede to the limperial Government of Russia when its sovereig enty extended over them. He claims from friendly nations a re cognition of the same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters ‘of Alaska which the same friendly nations always con- ceded to the Empire of Russia. With regard to the first of these arguments, namely, that the seizure of the Canadian vessels in the Behring’s Sea was justified by the fact that they were “engaged in a pursuit that isin itself contra bonos mores— a pursuit which of necessity involves a serious and permanent injury to the rights of the Government and people of the United States,” it is obvious that two questions are involved: first, whether the pursuit and killing of fur seals in certain parts of the open sea is, from the point of view of international morality, an offense contra bonos mores; aut sec- ondly, whether, if such be the case, this fact justifies the seizure on the high seas and subsequent confiscation in time of peace of the private vessels of a friendly nation. It is an axiom of international maritime law that such action is only admissible in the case of piracy or in pursuance of special international agreement. This principle has been universally admitted by jurists, and was very distinctly laid down by President Tyler in his special message to Congress, dated the 27th February, 1843, when, after ac- knowledging the right to detain and search a vessel. on suspicion of piracy, he goes on to say: “With this single exe eption, no nation has, in time of peace, any authority to detain the ships of another upon the high seas, on any pretext w hatever, outside the territorial Jurisdiction.” Now, the pursuit of seals in the open sea, under whatever cireum- stances, has never hitherto been considered as piracy by any civilized state. Nor, even if the United States had gone so far as to make the killing of fur seals piracy by their municipal law, would this have justified them in punishing offenses against such law committed by any persons other than their own citizens outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. In the case of the slave trade, a practice which the civilized world has agreed to look upon with abhorrence, the right of arresting the vessels of another country is exercised only by special international agreement, and no one government has been allowed that general con- trol of morals in this respect which Mr. Blaine claims on behalf of the United States in regard to seal-hunting. But Her Majesty's s Government must question whether this pursuit ‘an of itself be regarded as contra bonos mores, unless and until, for special reasons, it has been agreed by international arrangement to for- bid it. Fur se als are indisputably animals ferw nature, and these have universally been regarded by jurists as res nullius until they are caught; no person, therefore, can have property in them until he has actually reduced them into possession by capture. It requires something more than a mere declaration thatthe Goyern- PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1800. 209 ment or citizens of the United States, or even other countries interested in the seal trade, are losers by a certain course of proceeding, to render that course an immoral one. Her Majesty’s Government would deeply regret that the pursuit of fur seals on the high seas by British vessels shouid involve even the slightest injury to the people of the United States. If the case be proved, they will be ready to consider what measures can be properly taken for the remedy of suchinjury, but they would be unable on that ground to depart from a principle on which free commerce on the high seas depends. The second argument advanced by Mr. Blaine is that the “fur-seal fisheries of Behring Sea had been exclusively controlled by the Govern- ment of Russia, without interference and without question, from their original discovery until the cession of Alaska to the United States in 1867,” and that ‘‘from 1867 to 1886 the possession, in which Russia had been undisturbed, was enjoyed by the United States Government also without interruption or intrusion from any source.” I will deal with these two periods separately. First, as to the alleged exclusive monopoly of Russia. After Russia, at the instance of the Russian American Fur Company, claimed in 182 the pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing from Bering Straits to the fifty-first degree of north latitude, and not only prohibited all foreign vessels from landing on the coasts and islands of the above waters, but also prevented them from approaching within 100 miles thereof, Mr. Quincy Adams wrote as follows to the United States Minister in Rus- Sia: The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions. That the right of fishing thus asserted included the right of killing fur-bearing animals is shown by the case of the United States brig Loriot. That vessel proceeded to the waters over which Russia claimed exclusive jurisdiction for the purpose of hunting the sea otter, the kill- ing of which is now prohibited by the United States statutes applicable to the fur seal, and was forced to abandon her voyage and leave the waters in question by an armed vessel of the Russian Navy. Mr. For- sythe, writing on the case to the American Minister at St. Petersburg on the 4th of May, 1837, said: It is a violation of the rights of the citizens of the United States, immemorially exercised and secured to them as well by the law of nations as by the stipulations of the first article of the convention of 1824, to fish in those seas, and to resort to the coast for the prosecution of their lawful commerce upon points not already occu- pied. From the speech of Mr. Sumner, when introducing the question of the purchase of Alaska to Congress, it is equally clear that the United States Government did not regard themselves as purchasing a monop- oly. Having dealt with fur-bearing animals, he went on to treat of fisheries, and after alluding to the presence of different species of whales in the vicinity of the Aleutians, said: “No sea is now mare clausun; all of these may be pursued by a ship under any flag, except directly on the coast or within its territorial limit.” I now come to the statement that from 1867 to 1886 the possession was enjoyed by the United States with no interruption and no intrusion from any source, Her Majesty’s Government can not but think that 27 210 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Mr. Blaine has been misinformed as to the history of the operations in Behring Sea during that period. The instances recorded in inclosure 1 in this dispatch are sufficient to prove from official United States sources that from 1567 to 1886 British vessels were engaged at intervals in the fur-seal fisheries with the cognizance of the United States Government. I will here by way ot example quote but one. In 1872 Collector Phelps reported the fitting out of expeditions in Australia and Victoria for the purpose of taking seals in Behring Sea, while passing to and from their rookeries on St. Paul and St. George Islands, and recommended that a steam cutter should be sent to the region of Unimak Pass and the islands of St. Paul and St. George. Mr. Secretary Boutwell informed him, in reply, that he did not con- sider it expedient to send a cutter to interfere with the operations of foreigners, and stated: “In addition, I do not see that the United States would have the jurisdiction or power to drive off parties going up there for that purpose, unless they made such attempt within a marine league of the shore.” 3efore leaving this part of Mr. Blaine’s argument, I would allude to his remark that *‘ vessels from other nations passing from time to time through Behring Sea to the Arctic Ocean in pursuit of whales have always abstained from taking part in the capture of seats,” which he holds to be proof of the recognition of rights held and exercised first by Russia and then by the United States. Even if the facts are as stated, it is not remarkable that vessels pushing on for the short season in which whales can be captured in the Arctic Ocean, and being fitted especially for the whale fisheries, neg- lected to carry boats and hunters for fur seals or to. engage in an en- tirely different pursuit. The whalers, moreover, pass through Behring Sea for the fishing erounds in the Arctic Ocean in April and May as soon as the ice breaks up, while the great bull of the seals do not reach the Pribilof Islands till June, leaving again by the time the closing of the ice com- pels the whalers to retin. The statement that it is ‘a fact now held beyond denial or doubt that the taking of seals in the open sea rapidly leads to their extine- tion” would admit of reply, and abundant evidence could be adduced on the other side. But as it is proposed that this part of the question should be examined by a committee to be appointed by the two Goy- ernments, it is not necessary that I should deal with it here. Her Majesty’s Government do not deny thatif all sealing were stopped in Behring Sea except on the islands in possession of the lessees of the United States, the seal may increase and multiply at an even more ex- traordinary rate than at present, and the seal fishery on the island may become a monopoly of increasing value; but they can not admit that this is sufficient ground to justify the United States in forcibly depriv- ing other nations of any share in this industry in waters which, by the recognized law of nations, are now free to all the world. It is from no disrespect that Lrefrain from replying specifically to the subsidiary questions and arguments put forward by Mr. Blaine. Till the views of the two Governments as to the obligations attaching, on grounds either of morality or necessity, to the United States Govern- ment in this matter, have been brought into closer harmony, such a course would appear needlessly to extend a controversy which Her Majesty’s Government are anxious to keep within reasonable limits. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. 211 The negotiations now being carried on at Washington prove the read- iness of Her Majesty’s Government to consider whether any specia- international agreement is necessary for the protection of the fur-seall ing industry. In its absence they are unable to admit that thecase put forward on behalf of the United States affords any sufficient justifica- tion for the forcible action already taken by them against peaceable subjects of Her Majesty engaged in lawful operations on the high seas. “The President,” says Mr. Blaine, ‘is persuaded that all frieudly nations will concede to the United States the same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters of Alaska which the same friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia.” Her Majesty’s Government have no difficulty in making such a con- cession. In strict accord with the views which, previous to the present controversy, were consistently and successfully maintained by the United States, they have, whenever occasion arose, opposed all claims to exclusive privileges in the nonterritorial waters of Behring Sea. The rights they have demanded have been those of free navigation and fish- ing in waters which, previous to their own acquisition of Alaska, the United States declared to be free and open to all foreign vessels. That is the extent of their present contention and they trust that, on consideration of the arguments now presented to them, the United States will recognize its justice and moderation. [ have to request that you will read this dispatch to Mr. Blaine and leave a copy of it with him should he desire it. Lam, ete., SALISBURY [Inclosure.] In 1870 Collector Phelps reported ‘the barque Cyane has arrived at this port (San Francisco) from Alaska, having on board 47 sealskins.” (See Ex. Doc. No. 83, Forty. fourth Congress, first session. ) In 1872 he reported expeditions fitting out in Australia and Victoria for the pur- pose of taking seals in Behring Sea, and was informed that it was not expedient to interfere with them. In 1874, Acting Secretary Sawyer, writing to Mr. Elliott, special agent, said: “Tt having been officially reported to this Department by the collector of customs at Port Townsend, from Neah Bay, that British vessels from Victoria cross over into American waters and engage in taking fur-seals (which he represents are annu- ally becoming more numerous on our immediate coast) to the great injury of our sealers, both white and Indian, you will give such proper attention to the examination of the subject as its importance may scem to you, after careful inquiry, to demand, and with a view to a report to the Department of all facts ascertained.” (Ditto, May 4, No. 117, p. 114.) "In 1875, Mr. McIntyre, Treasury agent, described how *‘ before proceeding to harsh measures” he had warned the c aptain of the Cygnet, who was shooting seals in Za- padnee Bay, and stated that the captain appeared astonished that he was breaking the law. (Ditto, March 15, 1875, No. 130, p. 124.) In 1880, the fur-seal trade of the Br itish Columbia coast was of great importance. Seven vessels were then engaged in the fishery, of which the greater number were, in 1886 and 1887, seized by the United States Government in Behri ing Sea. In 1884 Daniel and Alexander McLean, both British subjects, took the American schooner San Diego to Behring Sea, and were so successful that they returned there in 1885, from Victoria, with the ery Lillen and the Lavourite. 212 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, May 23, 1890. Str: [have the honor te inform you that a statement having ap- peared in the newspapers to the effect that the United States revenue cruisers have received orders to proceed to Behring Sea for the pur- pose of preventing the exercise of the seal fishery by foreign vessels in nonterritorial waters, and that statement having been confirmed yes- terday by you, I am instructed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state to you that a formal protest by Her Majesty’s Government against any such interference with British vessels will be forwarded to you w ithout delay. I have, ete., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE Mr, Blaine to Sir Julian Pauneefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May 26, 1890. Srr: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 23d instant, in which you inform me that Her Britannic Majesty’s Goy- ernment will formally protest against certain action recently taken by this Government for the protection of the Alaskan seal fisheries. I have, ete., JAMES G. BLAINE. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Washington, May 29, 1890. Srr: Your note of the 23d instant, already acknowledged, informs this Government that you ‘‘have been instructed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state that Her Majesty’s Government would forward with- out delay a protest” against the course which this Government has found it necessary, under the laws of Congress, to pursue in the waters of the Bering Sea. In turn, I am instructed by the President to protest against the course of the British Government in authorizing, encouraging, and protecting vessels which are not only interfering with American rights in the Xehring Sea, but which are doing violence as well to the rights of the civilized world. They are e1 waged i in a warfare against seal life, disre- garding all the regulations which lead to its protection and committing acts which lead ultimately to its destruction, as has been the case in every part of the world where the abuses which are now claimed as British rights have been practiced. The President is surprised that such protest should be authorized by Lord Salisbury, especially because the previous declarations of his lordship would seem to render it impossible. On the 11th day of No- vember, 1887, Lord Salisbury, in an official interview with the Minister from the United States (Ma. Phelps), cordially, agreed that ‘a code of regulations should be adopted for the preservation of the seals in Behr- 92 PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. 205 ing Sea from destruction at improper times, by improper means, by the citizens of either country.” And Lord Salisbury suggested th: ut Mr. Phelps “should obtain from his Government and submit to him (Lord Salisbury) a sketch of a system of regulations which would be adequate for the purpose.” Further interviews were held during the following month of February (1838) between Lord Salisbury and the American Minister, and between Lord Salisbury and the ean Minister ac- companied by the Russian embass ador. Inanswer to Lord Salisbury’s request Mr. Phelps submitted the “regulations” which the Govern ment of the United States desired; and in a dispatch of February 25 Mr. Phelps communicated the following to Mr. Bayard, Secretary of State: Lord Salisbury assents to your proposition, to establish by mutual arrangement be- tween the governments interested, a close time for fur seals, between April 15 and November ar and between 160 degrees of longitude west and 170 degrees of longi- tude east in the Behring Sea. And he will cause an act to be introdue ed into Parlia- ment to give effect to this arrangement so soon asit can be prepared. In his opinion there is no doubt that the act will be passed. He will also join the United States Government in any preventive measures it may be thought best to adopt, by orders issued to the naval vessels of the respective gove ernments in that region. Early in April (1888) the Russian ambassador, Mr. de Staal, advised the American chargé “that the Russian Government would like to have the regulations which might be agreed upon for the Behring Sea ex- tended to that portion of the latter in which the Jommander Islands are situated, and also to the Sea of Okhotsk, in which Robben Island is situated.” On the 16th of April, at Lord Salisbury’s invitation, the Russian am- bassador and Mr. White, the American chargé (Mr. Phelps being absent from London) met at the foreign office ‘for the purpose of discussing with Lord Salisbury the details of the proposed conventional arrange- ment for the protection of seals in Behring Sea.” “ With a view to meeting the Russian Government’s wishes respect- ing the waters surrounding Robben Island, his lordship suggested that beside the whole of Bering Sea those portions of the Sea of Okhotsk and of the Pacific Ocean north of north latitude 47, should be included in the proposed arrangement. His lordship intimated furthermore, that the period proposed by the United States for a close time, from April 15 to November 1, might interfere with the trade longer than absolutely necessary tor the protection of seals, and he suggested Oc- tober 1, instead of a month later, as the termination of the period of seal protection.” Furthermore, Lord Salisbury ‘‘ promised to have a draft convention prepared for submission to the Russian ambassador and the American minister.” On the 23d of April the American chargé was informed by Lord Salisbury that “it is now proposed to give effect to a seal convention by order in council, not by act of Parliament.” It was understood that this course was proposed by Lord Salisbury in order that the regula- tions needed in Behring Sea might be promptly applied. You will observe, then, that from the 11th of November, 1887, to the 23d of April, 1888, Lord Salisbury had in every form of speech assented to the necessity of a close season for the protection of the seals. The shortest period which he named was from the 15th of April to the Ist of October—five and one-half months. In addition, his lordship suggested that the closed sea for the period named should i inelude the whole of the Behring Sea and should also include such portion of the Sea of Okhotsk as would be necessary to protect the Russian seal fish- 214 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. ery on Robben Island; that the closed season be extended as far sonth as the 47th degree of north latitude—120 miles south of the northern boundary of the United States on the Pacific Ocean. He promised further to draft a convention upon the subject between England, Rus- sia, and the United States. These assurances were given to the American minister, to the Amer ican chargé, to the Russian ambassador, and on more than one occasior to two of them together. The United States had no reason, therefore, to doubt that the whole dispute touching the seal fisheries was prac- tically settled. Indeed to have distrusted it would have been to ques- tion the good faith of Lord Salisbury. In diplomatic intercourse between Great Britain and the United States, be it said to the honor of both governments, a verbal assurance from a minister has always been equal to his written pledge. Speaking the same language, there has been no room for misunderstanding between the representatives of the two governments, as may easily happen between those of different tongues. For a period of six months, therefore, without retraction or qualification, without the suggestion of a doubt or the dropping of a hint, the understanding between the two governments, on the assurance of Lord Salisbury, was as complete as language could make it. On the 28th of April, five days after Lord Salisbury’s last pointed assurance, five days after he had proposed to perfect the scheme, not by the delay of Parliament, but by the promptness of an order in council, the American chargé was informed that the act of Parliament would be necessary in addition to the order in couneil, and that neither aet nor order could be drafted ‘until Canada is heard from.” For several weeks following April 28, there were many calls by the American chargé at the foreign office to learn whether “Oanada had been heard from.” He called alone and called in company with the Russian ambassador. Finally, on the 20th of June, Lord Salisbury told him that an urgent telegram had been ‘sent to Canada a week ago with respect to the delay in its expedition,” and that a reply had been “received by the secretary of state for the colonies, saying that the matter will be taken up immediately.” Mr. White, relying entirely upon these assurances, ventured to “hope that shortly after Mr. Phelps’ return the British Government wiil be in a condition to agree upon the terms of the proposed convention. Mr. Phelps returned to London on the 22d of June, two days after Mr. White’s interview with Lord Salisbury, and immediately after the urgent telegram had been sent to Canada. On the 28th of July Mr. Phelps had received no assurances from Lord Salisbury, and_ tele- graphed the Department of State his “fear that, owing to Canadian opposition, we shall get no convention.” In a dispatch to his Govern- ment of the 12th of September, he related having had interviews with Lord Salisbury respecting the convention, which, he says, had been “virtually agreed upon, except in its details.” Mr, Phelps goes on to say: The consideration of it has been suspended for communication by the British Gov” ernment with the Canadian Government, for which yurpose an interval of several months had been allowed to elapse. During this long interval the attention of Lord Salisbury had been repeatedly called to the subject by the American legation, and on those occasions the answer received from him was that no reply from the Canadian authorities had arrived. Mr. Phelps proceeds in the dispatch of September 12 to say: JT again pressed Lord Salisbury for the completion of the convention, as the exter- mination of seals by the Canadian vessels was understood to be rapidly proceeding. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. 215 His lordship, in reply, did not question the propriety or the importance of taking measures to prevent the wanton destruction of so valuable an industry in which, as he remarked, England had a large interest of its own; but his lordship stated that the Canadian Government objected to any such restrictions, and that until its con- sent could be obtained Her Majesty’s Government was not willing to enter into the convention. It was thus finally acknowledged that the negotiation into which Lord Salisbury had cordially entered, and to which he had readily agreed, even himself suggesting some of its most valuable details, was entirely subordinated to the judgment and desire of the Canadian Gov- ernment. This Government can not but feel that Lord Salisbury would have dealt more frankly if, in the beginning, he had informed Minister Phelps that no arrangement could be made unless Canada concurred in it, and that all negotiation with the British Government direct was but a loss of time. When you, Mr. Minister, arrived in this country a year ago, there seemed the best prospect for a settlement of this question, but the Rus- sian minister and the American Secretary of State have had the expe- riences of Mr. Phelpsand the Russian ambassador in London repeated. In our early interviews there seemed to be as ready a disposition on your part to come to a reasonable and friendly adjustment as there has always been on our part to offer one. You will not forget an interview between yourself, the Russian minister, and myself, in which the lines for a close season in the Behring Sea laid down by Lord Salisbury were almost exactly repeated by yourself, and were inscribed on maps which were before us, a copy of which is in the possession of the Russian minister, and a copy also in my possession. A prompt adjustment seemed practicable—an adjustment which I am sure would have been honorable to all the countries interested. No obstacles were presented on the American side of the question. No insistance was made upon the Behring Sea as mare clausum; no objection was interposed to the entrance of British ships at all times on all commercial errands through all the waters of the Behring Sea. But our negotiations, as in London, were suddenly broken off for many weeks by the interposition of Canada. When correspondence was resumed on the last day of April, you made an offer for a mixed commission of experts to decide the questions at issue. Your proposition is that pelagic sealing should be prohibited in the 3ehring Sea during the months of May, June, October, November, and December, and that there should be no prohibition during the months of July, August, and September. Your proposition involved the con- dition that British vessels should be allowed to kill seals within 10 miles of the coast of the Pribilof Islands. Lord Salisbury’s proposition of 1888 was that during the same months, for which the 10-mile privilege is now demanded, no British vessel hunting seals should come nearer to the Pribilof Islands than the 47th parallel ef north latitude, about 600 miles. The open season which you thus select for killing is the one when the areas around the breeding islands are most crowded with seals, and es- pecially crowded with female seals going forth to secure food for the hundreds of thousands of their young of which they have recently been delivered. The destruction of the females which, according to expert testimony would be 95 per cent of all which the sealing vessels might readily capture, would inflict deadly loss upon the rookeries. The de- struction of the females would be followed by the destruction of their young on the islands, and the herds would be diminished the next year 216 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. by this wholesale slaughter of the producing females and. their off spring. The ten-mile limit would give the marauders the vantage ground for killing the seals that are in the water by tens of thousands seare hing tor food. The opportunity, under cover of fog and night, for stealing silently upon the islands and slaughtering the seals within a mile or even less of the keeper’s residence would large ly increase the aggregate destruction. Under such conditions the British vessels could evenly divide with the United States, within the three-mile limit of its own shores and upon the islands themselves, the whole advantage of the seal fish- eries. The respect which the sealing vessels would pay to the ten-mile limit would be the same that wolves pay to a flock of sheep so placed that no shepherd can guard them. This arrangement according to your proposal, was to continue for three months of each year, the best months in the season for depredations upon the seal herd. No course was left to the United States or to Russia but to reject the proposition. The propositions made by Lord Salisbury in 1888 and the propositions made by Her Majesty’s Minister in Washington i in 1890 are in signifi- cant contrast. The circumstances are the same, the conditions are the same, the rights of the United States are the same in both years. The position of England has changed, because the wishes of Canada have demanded the change. The result then with which the United States is expected to be content is that her rights within the Behring Sea and on the islands thereof are not absolute, but are to be determined by one of ler Majesty’s provinces. The British Government would assuredly and rightfully complain if an agreement between her representative and the representative of the United States should, without notice, be broken off by the United States on the ground that the State of Ci Wifornia was not willing that it should be completed. California has a governor chosen. independently of the executive power of the National Government; Canada has a governor appointed by the British Crown. ‘The legislature of California enacts laws with which the executive power of the United States has no right whatever to interfere; Canada enacts laws with which the executive power of Great Britain can interfere so far as absolutely to annul. Can the Government of the United States be expected to accept as final a decision of the Government of Great Britain that an agreement with the United States can not be fulfilled because the province of Canada objects? This review of the circumstances which led to the present troubles on the Behring Sea question has been presented by direction of the President in order to show that the responsibility does not rest with this Government. The change of policy made by Her Majesty’s Gov- ernment without notice and against the wish of this Government, is in the President’s belief the cause of all the differences that have followed. J am further instructed by the President to say that while your pro- _posals of April 30 can not be accepted, the United States will continue the negotiation in hope of reaching an agreement that may conduce to a good understanding and leave no cause for future dispute. In the President’s opinion, owing to delays for which this Government is not responsible, it is too late to conclude such negotiation in time to apply its results the present season. He therefore proposes that Her Majesty’s Government agree not to permit the vessels (which in his judgment do injury to the property of the United States) to enter the Behring Sea for this season, in order that time may be secured for negotiation that shall not be disturbed by untoward events or unduly influenced by PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. Diled popular agitation. If this offer be accepted, the President believes that before another season shall open, the friendly relations existing between the two countries and the mutual desire to continue them, will had to treaty stipulations which shall be permanent, because just and leonorable to all parties. I have, etc., JAMES G. BLAINE. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 2, 1890, My DEAR Sir JULIAN: I have had a prolonged interview with the President on the matters upon which we are endeavoring to come to an agreement touching the fur-seal question. The President expresses the opinion that an arbitration can not be concluded in time for this season. Arbitration is of little value unless conducted with the most careful deliberation. What the President most anxiously desires to know is whether Lord Salisbury, in order to promote a friendly solution of the question, will make for a single season the regulation which in 1888 he offered to make permanent. The President regards that as the step which will lead most certainly and most promptly to a friendly agree- ment between the two Governments. I am, ete., JAMES G. BLAINE. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. British LEGATION, Washington, D. C., June 3, 1890. DEAR MR. BLAINE: In reply to your letter of yesterday evening, touching the fur-seal question, I beg to state that I am in a position to answer at once the inquiry “ Whether Lord Salisbury, in order to pro- mote a friendly solution of the question, will make for a single season the regulation which in 1888 he offered to make permanent.” The words which I quote from your letter have reference no doubt to the proposal of the United States that British sealing vessels should be entirely excluded from the Behring Sea during the seal- fishery season. I shall not attempt to discuss here w hether what took place in the course of the abortive negotiations of 1888 amounted to an offer on the part of Lord Salisbury “to make such a regulation permanent.” It will suffice for the present purpose to state that the further exam- ination of the question which has taken place has satisfied His Lord- ship that such an extreme measure as that proposed in 1888 goes far beyond the requirements of the case. Her Majesty’s Government are quite willing to adopt all measures which shall be satisfactorily proved to be necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species, and to enforce such measures on British subjects by proper legislation. But they are not prepared to agree to such a regulation as is suggested in your letter for the present fishery seaso», as, apart from other considerations, there would be no legal power to enforce its observance on british subjects and British vessels. I have, ete. 98 JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE 218 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 4, 1890. Sir: [have your favor of the 2d instant. The President sincerely regrets that his considerate and most friendly proposal for adjustment of all troubles connected with the Behring Sea should be so promptly rejected. The paragraph in your note in which you refer to Lord Salis- bury’s position needs explanation. I quote it in full: It will suffice for the present purpose to state that the further examination of the question which has taken place has satisfied His Lordship that such an extreme meas- ure as that proposed in 1888 goes far beyond the requirements of the case. I do not know what may have been the “examination of the ques- tion” that “has satisfied Lord Salisbury that such an extreme measure as that proposed in 1888 goes far beyond the requirements of the case.” T only know that the most extreme measure proposed came from Lord Si lisbury himself in suggesting a close season as far south as the forty- seventh parallel of latitude, to last from April 15 to October 1 in each year. At the close of his negotiations with Mr. Phelps in September, 1888, His Lordship, still approving the ‘“‘measures to prevent the wanton destruction of so valuable an industry,” declared, apparently with re- geret, that “the Canadian Gov ernment objected to any such restric- tions” (7. ée., as those which His Lordship had in part proposed and wholly approve d), and that ‘‘until its consent would be obtained Her Majesty’s Government was not willing to enter into the convention.” It is evident, therefore, that in 1888 Lord Salisbury abruptly closed the negotiations because in his own phrase ‘the Canadian Govern- ment objected.” He assigned no other reason whatever, and until your note of the 2d was received this Government had never been informed that His Lordship entertained any other objections than those ex- pressed in September, 1888. It is proper to recall to your recollection that at divers times in per- sonal conversation I have proposed to you, on behalf of this Govern- ment, a close season, materially shorter, in point of time, than was volun- tarily offered by Lor d Salisbury and mue n less extended in pointof space. Tnustead of going as far south as the forty-seventh parallel I have fre- quently indicated the willingness of this Government to take the divid- ing line between the Pacifie Ocean and the Behring Sea—the line which is tangent to the southernmost island of the Aleutian group—being as near as may be the fiftieth parallel of north latitude. Early in April you will remember that you suggested to me the ad- vantage that might follow if the sailing of the revenue cutters for Behr- ing Sea could be postponed till the middle of May. Though that was a matter entirely under the control of the Treasury Department, Secre- tary Windom promptly complied with your request, and by the Presi- dent’s direction a still longer postponement was ordered in the hope that some form of equitable adjustment might be proposed by Her Majesty’s Government. Even the revenue cutter, which annually passes through Behring Sea carrying supplies to the relief station at Point Barrow in the Arctic Ocean—seventy-second degree of north latitude— was held back Jest her appearance in Behring Sea might be misrepre- sented as a nonobservance of the understanding between us. It is perfectly clear that if your claim for British vessels to kill seals within 10 miles of the Pribilof Islands, directly after the mothers are PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. Ze delivered of their young, should be granted, the Behring Sea would swarm with vessels engaged in sealing—not forty or fifty, as now, but many hundreds, thr ough the summer months. If that privilege should be given to Canadian Vessels, it must of course, be conceded at once to American vessels. If the rookeries are to be thrown open to Cana- dians, they would certainly, as matter of common right, be thrown open to citizens of the United States. The seal mothers, which require an area of from 40 to 50 miles from the islands, on all sides, to secure food for their young, would be slaughtered by hundreds of thousands, and. ina brief space of time there would be no seals in the Behri ing Sea. Sim- ilar causes have uniformly produced similar effects. Seal Tookeries in all parts of the world have been destroyed in that way. The present course of Great Britain will produce the same effect on the only seal rookery of any value left in the waters of the oceans and seas of the globe. The ea States have leased the privilege of sealing because only in that way can the rookeries be preserved, and only in “that way an this Civcnmant derive arevenue from the Pribilof Islands. Great Britain would perhaps gain something for a few years, but it would be at the expense of destroying a valuable interest belonging to a friendly nation—an interest which the civilized world desires to have preserved. I observe that you quote Treasury Agent George R. Tingle in your dispatch of April 30 as showing that, notwithstanding the depredations of marauders, the total number of seals had increased in the Bering Sea. The rude mode of estimating the total number can readily lead to mistakes, and other agents have differed from Mr. Tingle. But aside from the correctness or incorrectness of Mr. Tingle’s conclusions on that point, may I ask upon what grounds do the Canadian vessels assert aclaim, unless they assume that they have a title to the increase of the seal herd? If the claim of the United States to the seals of the Pribilof Islands be well founded, we are certainly entitled to the in- crease as much as a sheep-grower is entitled to the increase of his flock. Having introduced Mr. Tingle, who has very extensive knowledge touching the seals in Behring Sea, as well as the habits of the Canadian mar auders, I trust you will not discredit his testimony. The following statement made by Mr. Tingle in his official report to the Treasury De- partment at the close of the season of 1887 is respectfully commended to your consideration. I am now convinced from what I gather in questioning the men belonging to cap- tured schooners and from reading the logs of the vessels, thnt not more than one seal in ten killed and mortally wounded is landed on the boats and skinne d; thus you will see the wanton destruction of seal life without any benetit whatever. T think 30,000 skins taken this year is a low estimate on this basis; 300,000 fur seals were killed to secure that nunber, or three times as many as the Alaska Commercial Com- pany are allowed by law tokill. You can readily see that this great slanghter of seals will in a few years make it impossible for 100,000 skins to be taken on the islands by the lessees. I earnestly hope more rigorous measures will be adopted by the Govern- ment in dealing with these destructive law-breakers. Both of Mr. Tingle’s statements are made in his official capacity, and in both cases he had no temptation to state anything except what he honestly believed to be the truth. The President does not conceal his disappointment that even for the sake of securing an impartial arbitration of the question at issue, Her Majesty’s Government is not willing to suspend, for a single season, the practice which Lord Salisbury described in 1888 as “the wanton de- struction of a valuable industry,” and which this Government has ani- formly regarded as an unprovoked invasion of its established rights. I have, etc., JAMES G. BLAINE. iw) bo > DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Sir Julian Pauneefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, June 6, 1890, Srr: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your official note of the 4th instant, commenting upon the reply which I returned to the inquiry contained i in your letter of the 2d instant, whether the Marquis of Salisbury would, in order to promote a friendly solution of the fur- seal question, agree to the total exclusion of British sealers from the Behring Sea during the present fishery season. You express the regret of the President that “his considerate and most friendly proposal for the adjustment of all trouble connected with the Behring Sea should be so promptly rejected.” I have this day transmitted a copy ef your note to Lord Salisbury, and pending further instructions I will abstain from pursuing the dis- cussion on the various points with which it deals, especially as the views of Her Majesty’s Government on the main questions involved are stated with great precision in Lord Salisbury’s dispatch of the 22d of May, which I had the honor to read to you yesterday, and of which, in accordance with your desire, I left a copy in your hands. I would only observe that as regards the sufficiency or insufficiency of the radius of 10 miles around the rookeries “ within which Her Majesty’s Government proposed that sealers should be excluded” no opportunity was afforded ine of discussing the question before the proposals of Her Majesty’s Government were summarily rejected. I may mention, also, that I fear there has been some misapprehension as regards a request which you appear to have understood me to make respecting the date of the sailing of United States revenue-cutters for Beliring Sea. I have no recollection of having made any suggestion with reference to those revenue-cutters, except that their commanders should receive explicit instructions not to apply the municipal law of the United States to British vessels in Behring Sea outside of territorial , waters. I have, ete., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. [Extract from telegram from the Marquis of Salishury.] (Received June 9, 1890.) Lord Salisbury regrets that the President of the United States should think him wanting in coneilation, but his lordship can not refrain from thinking that the President does not appreciate the difficulty arising from the law of England. It is entirely beyond the power of Her Majesty’s Government to ex- clude British or Canadian ships from any portion of the high seas, even for an hour, without legislative sanction. Her Majesty’s Government have always been w illing,’ without pledging themselves to details on the questions of area and date, to carry on negotiations, hoping the reby to come to some arrangement for such a close season as is nee essary in order to preserve the seal species from extinction, but the provisigns of such an arrangement would always require legislative sanction so that the measures thereby determined may be enforeed. Lord Salisbury does not recognize the expressions attributed to him. He does not think that he can have used them, at all events, in the context mentioned. PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. 221 Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 11, 1890. Srr: I have shown to the President the extract from the telegram of Lord Salisbury of June 9, in which his lordship states that ‘it is be- yond the power of Her Majesty’s Government to exclude British or Canadian ships from any portion of the high seas, even for an hour, without legislative sanction.” Not stopping to comment upon the fact that his lordship assumes the waters surrounding the Pribilof Islands to be the “high seas,” the President instructs me to say that it would satisfy this Government if Lord Salisbury would by public proclamation simply request that ves- sels sailing under the British flag should abstain from entering the Behring Sea for the present season. If this réquest shall be complied with, there will be full time for impartial negotiations, and, as the Presi- dent, hopes, for a friendly conclusion of the differences between the two governments. 1 have, ete., JAMES G. BLAINE. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, June 11, 1890. Sir: Ihave the honor to acknowledge your note of this day with reference to the passage in a telegram from the Marquis of Salisbury, which I communicated to you at our interview of the 9th instant, to the effect that “itis beyond the power of Her Majesty’s Government to exclude British or Canadian ships from any portion of the high seas, even for an hour, without legislative action.” You inform me that without commenting on the fact that his lordship assumes the waters surrounding the Pribilot Islands to be the high seas, the President instructs you to say that it would satisfy your Gov- ernmentif Lord Salisbury would by public proclamation simply request that vessels sailing under the British flag should abstain from entering the Behring Sea for the present season. You add, if this request shall be complied with there will be full time for impartial negotiations, and, as the President hopes, for a friendly conclusion of the differences be. tween the two governinents. I have telegraphed the above communication to Lord Salisbury, and I await his lordship’s instructions thereon. In the meanwhile I take this opportunity of informing you that [ reported to his lordship, by telegraph, that at the same interview I again pressed you for an assur- ance that British sealing vessels would not be interfered with in the Behring Sea by the United States revenue cruisers while the negotia- tions continued, but you replied that you could not give such assur- ance. I trust this is not a final decision, and that in the course of the next few days, while there is yet time to communicate with the com- manders, instructions will be sent to them to abstain from such inter- ference. It is in that hope that I have delayed delivering the formal protest of Her Majesty’s Government announced in my note of the 25d of May. I have, ete., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE, Doe DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, June 14, 1890. Sim: With reference to the note which I had the honor to address to you on the 11th instant, I desire to express my deep regret at having failed up to the present ‘time to obtain from you the assurance, which I had hoped to receive, that during the continuance of our negotiations for the settlement of the fur-seal fishery question British sealing vessels would not be interfered with by United States revenue cruisers in the Behring Sea outside of territorial waters. Having learned from statements in the public press and from other sources that the revenue cruisers Rush and Corwin are now about to be dispatched to the Behring Sea, I can not, consistently with the instruc- tions I have received trom my Goy ernment, defer any longer the com- munication of their formal protest announced in my notes of the 23d ultimo and the 11th instant against any such interference with British vessels. IT have accordingly the honor to transmit the same herewith. I have, ete., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. [Inclosure.] Protest. (Received June 14, 12:35, 1890.) The undersigned, Her Britannic Majesty’s Envoy- Hcinaoninee and Minister P lenipoter nti: ry to the United States of America, has the honor, by instruction of his Government, tomake to the Hon. James G. B laine, Secretary of State of the United States, the following communication : Her Britannic Majesty’s Government have le arned with great con- cern from notices which have appeared in the press, and the general accuracy of which has been confirmed by Mr. Blaine’s statements to the undersigned, that the Government of the United States have issued instructions to their revenue cruisers about to be dispatched to Behring Sea, under which the vessels of British subjects will again be exposed, in the prosecution of their legitimate industry on the high seas, to un- lawful interference at the hands of American officers. Her Britannic Majesty’s Government are anxious to codperate to the fullest extent of their power with the Government of the United States in such measures as may be found to be expedient for the protection of the seal fisheries. They areat the present moment engaged in examin- ing, in concert with the Government of the United States, the best method of arriving at an agreement uponthis point. But the y can not admit the right of the United States of their own sole motion to restrict for this purpose the freedom of navigation of Behring Sea, which the United States have themselves in former years convincingly and success- fully vindicated, nor to enforce their municipal legislation against Brit- ish vessels on the high seas beyond the limits of their territorial juris- diction. Her Britannic Majesty’s Government are therefore unable to pass over without notice the public announcement of an intention on the part of the Government of the United States to renew the acts of inter- ference with British vessels navigating outside the territorial waters of the U nited States, of which they have previously had to complain, PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL MEASURES, 1890. 223 The undersigned is in consequence instructed formally to protest against such interference, and to declare that Her Britannic Majesty’s Government must hold the Government of the United States responsi- ble for the consequences that may ensue from acts which are coutrary to the established principles of international law. The undersigned, etc., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. JUNE 14, 1890. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, June 27, 1890. Str: I did not fail to transmit to the Marquis of Salisbury a copy of your note of the 11th instant, in which, with reference to his lordship’s statement that British legislation would be necessary to enable Her Majesty’s Government to exclude British vessels from any portion ot the high seas “even for an hour,” you informed ine, by desire of the President, that the United States Government would be satisfied ‘if Lord Salisbury would by public proclamation simply request that ves- sels sailing under the British flag should abstain from entering the Behring Sea during the present season.” I have now the honor to inform you that I have been instructed by Lord Salisbury to state to you in reply that the President’s request presents constitutional difficulties which would preclude Her Majesty’s Government from acceding to it,except as part of a general scheme for the settlement of the Behring Sea controversy, and on certain condi- tions which would justify the assumption by Her Majesty’s Govern- ment of the grave responsibility involved in the proposal. Those conditions are: i. That the two Governments agree forthwith to refer to arbitration ine. question of the legality of the action of the United States Govern- ment in seizing or other wise interfering with British vessels engaged in the Behring Sea, outside of territorial waters, during the years 1586, 1887, and 1889. Hs That, pending the award, all interference with British sealing vessels shall absolutely cease. IH. That the United States Government, if the award should be ad- verse to them on the question of legal right, will compensate British subjects for the losses which they may susti un by reason of their com- phiance with the British proclamation. Such are the three conditions on which it is indispensable, in the view ot Her Majesty’s Government, that the issue of the proposed proclama- tion should be based. As regards the compensation claimed by Her Majesty’s Government for the losses and injuries sustained by British subjects by reason of the action of the United States Government against British sealing vessels in the Behring Sea during the years 1886, 1887, and 1889, I have already informed Lord Salisbury of your assurance that the United States Gov- ernment would not let that claim stand in the way of an amicable ad- justment of the controversy, and I trust that the reply which, by diree- tion of Lord Salisbury, I have now the honor to return to the President's inquiry, may facilitate the attainment of that object for which we have so long and so earnestly labored. 1 have, etc., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE, 224 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. 3 CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERINGSEA FORMERLY POSSESS=iD BY RUSSIA AND TRANS- FERRED TO THE UNITED STATES BY THE TREATY OF 1867. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 30, 1890. Sir: On the 5th instant you read to me a dispatch from Lord Salis- bury dated May 22, and by his instruction you left with me acopy. His lordship writes in answer to my dispatch of the 22d January last. At that time, writing to yourself touching the current contention between the Governments « of the United States ‘and Great Britain as to the juvis- diction of the former over the waters of the Bering Sea, I made the fol- lowing statement: The Government of the United States has no occasion and no desire to withdraw or modify the positions which it has at any time maintained against the claims of the Imperial Government of Russia. The United States will not withhold from any nation the privileges which it demanded for itself when Alaska was part of the Russian Empire. Nor is the Government of the United States disposed to exercise any less power or authority than it was willing to concede to the Imperial Government of Russia when its sovereignty extended over the territory in question. The President is persuaded that all friendly nations will concede to the United States the same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters of Alaska which the same friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia. In answer to this declaration Lord Salisbury contends that Mr. John Quincy Adams, when Secretary of State under President Monroe, pro- tested against the jurisdiction which Russia claimed over the waters of Bering Sea. To maintein this position his ee cites the words of a dispatch of Mr. Adams, written on July 23, 1823, to Mr. Henry Middleton, at that time our minister at St. Petersburg. The alleged declarations and admissions of Mr. Adams in that dispatch have been the basis of all the arguments which Her Majesty’s Government has submitted against the ownership of certain properties in the Behring Sea which the Government of the United States confidently assumes. [ quote the portion of Lord Salisbury’s argument which includes the quo- tation from Mr. Adams: After Russia, at the instance of the Russian American Fur Company, claimed in 1821 the pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing from Behring Strait to the fifty- first degree of north latitude, and not only prohibited all foreign vessels from landing on the coasts and islands of the above waters, but also pre evented them from ap- proaching within 100 miles thereof, Mr. Quincy Adams wrote as follows to the United States Minister in Russia: “The United States can admit no part of these claims; the right ofnavigation and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times through- out the whole extent of the Southern Oce: un, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions.” The quotation which Lord Salisbury makes is unfortunately a most defective, erroneous, and misleading one. The conclusion is separated from the premise, a comma is turned into a period, an important quali- fication as to time is entirely erased without even a suggestion that it had ever formed part of the text, and out of eighty-four words, logically and inseparably connected, thirty-five are dropped from Mr, Adams’s paragraph in Lord Salisbury’s quotation. No edition of Mr. Adams's work gives authority for his lordship’s quotation; while the achives of this Depar tuaent plainly disclose its many errors, I requote Lord JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 225 Salisbury’s version of what Mr. Adams said, and in juxtaposition pro- duce Mr. Adams’s full text as he wrote it: [Lord Salisbury’s quotation from Mr. Adams.] The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions. [Full text of Mr, Adams’s paragraph. ] The United States can admit no part ofthese claims. Their right of navigation and of fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions, which so far as Russian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the fifty-fifth degree of latitude, and have no existence on the continent of America. The words in italics are those which are left out of Mr. Adams’s para- graph in the dispatch of Lord Salisbury. They are precisely the words upon which the Government of the United States founds its argument in this case. Conclusions or inferences resting upon the paragraph, with the material parts of Mr. Adams’s text omitted, are of course value- less. The first object is to ascertain the true meaning of Mr. Adams’s words which were omitted by Lord Salisbury. ‘ Russian rights,” said Mr. Adams, “are confined to certain islands north of the fifty-fitth de- gree of latitude.” The islands referred to are as easily recognized to- day as when Mr. Adams described their situation sixty-seven years ago. The best known among them, both under Russian and American jurisdiction, are Sitka and Kadiak; but their whole number is great. If Mr. Adams literally intended to confine Russian rights to those islands, all the discoveries of Vitus Behring and other great navigators are brushed away by one sweep of his pen, and a large chapter of history is but a fable. But Mr. Adams goes still farther. He declares that “ Russian rights have no existence on the continent of America.” If we take the words of Mr. Adams with their literal meaning, there was no such thing as “Russian Possessions in America,” although forty-four years after Mr. Adams wrote these words the United States paid Russia $7,200,000 for these “possessions” and all the rights of land and sea connected therewith. This construction of Mr. Adams’s language can not be the true one. It would be absurd on its face. The title to that far northern territory was secure to Russia as early as 1741; secure to her against the claims of all other nations; secure to her thirty-seven years before Captain Cook had sailed into the North Pacific; secure to her more than half a century before the United States had made good her title to Oregon. Russia was in point of time the first power in this region by right of discovery. Without immoderate presumption she might have c)al- lenged the rights of others to assumed territorial possessions; but no nation had shadow of cause or right to challenge her title to the vast region of land and water which, before Mr. Adams was Secretary of State, had become known as the “ Russian Possessions.” Mr. Adams’s meaning was not, therefore, and indeed could not be, what Lord Salisbury assumed. As against such interpretatian I shall endeavor to call his lordship’s attention to what this Government holds to be the indisputable meaning of Mr. Adams’s entire paragraph. 29 226 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE, To that end a brief review of certain public transactions and a brief record of certain facts will be necessary. At the close of the year 1799 the Emperor Paul, by aukase, asserted the exclusive authority of Russia over the territory from the Behring Strait down to the fifty-fifth degree of north latitude on the American coast, following westward “by the Aleutian, Kurile, and other islands” practically inclosing the Behring Sea. Tothe Russian AmericanCompany‘ which was organized under this ukase, the Emperor gave the right ‘to make new discoveries” in that almost unknown region, and * to occupy the new land discovered” as ‘Russian possessions.” The Emperor was assassinated before any new discoveries were announced, but his suc- cessor, the Emperor Alexander I, inherited the ambition and the purpose of his father, and, in anew ukase of September 4, 1821, asserted the exclusive authority of Russia from Behring Strait southward to the fifty-first degree of north latitude on the American coast, proclaiming his authority, at the same time, on the Asiatic coast as far south as the torty-fiftth degree, and forbidding any vessel to approach within 100 miles of land on either continent. I quote the two sections of the ukase that contain the order and the punishment: SrecTion 1. The transaction of commerce, and the pursuit of whaling and fishing, or any other industry on the islands, in the harbors and inlets, and, in general, all along the northwestern coast of America from Behring Strait to the fifty first paralley of northern latitude, and likewise on the Aleutian Islands and along the eastern coast of Siberia, and on the Kurile Islands; that is, from Behring Strait to the south- ern promontory of the island of Urup, viz, ’as far southas latitude forty-five degrees and fifty minutes north, are exclusively reserved to subjects of the Russian Empire. Src. 2. Accordingly, no foreign vessel shall be allowed either to put to shore at any of the coasts and islands under Russian dominion as specified in the preceding section, or even to approach the same to within a distance of less than 100 Italian miles. Any vessel contravening this provision shall be subject to confiscation with her whole cargo. Against this larger claim of authority (viz, extending farther south on the American coast to the fifty-first degree of north latitude), Mr.Adams vigorously protested. Ina dispatch of March 30, 1822, to Mr. Poletica, the Russian minister at Washington, Mr. Adams said: This ukase now for the first time extends the claim of Russia on the northwest coast of America to the 51st degree of north latitude. And he pointed out to the Russian minister that the only foundation for the new pretension of Russia was the existence of a small settle- ment, situated, not on the American continent, but on a small island in latitude 57°—Novo Archangelsk, now known as Sitka. Mr. Adams protested, not. against the ukase of Paul, but against the ukase of Alexander; not wholly against the ukase of Alexander, but only against his extended claim of sover eignty southward on the con- tinent to the fifty-first degree north latitude. ‘In short, Mr. Adams pro- tested, not against the old possessions, but against the new pretensions of Russia on the northwest coast of America—pretensions to territory claimed by the United States and frequented by her mariners since the peace of 1783 —a specification of time which is dropped from Lord Salis- bury’s quotation of Mr. Adams, but which Mr. Adams pointedly used to fix the date when the power of the United States was visibly exer- cised on the coast of the Pacifie Ocean. The names and phrases at that time in use to describe the geography included within the area of this dispute are confusing and at certain points apparently contradictory and irreconcilable. Mr. Adams’s denial to Russia of the ownership of territory on “the continent of America” is a fair illustration of this singular contradiction of names and places. JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 22% In the same way the phrase “ Northwest Coast” will be found, beyond all possible doubt, to have been used in two senses, one including the northwest coast of the Russian possessions, and one to describe the coast whose northern limit is the sixtieth parallel of north latitude. It is very plain that Mr. Adams’s phrase “ the continent of America,” in his reference to Russia’s possessions, was used in a territorial sense, and not in a geographical sense. He was drawing the distinction be- tween the territory of ‘ America” and the territory of the ‘“ Russian possessions.” Mr. Adams did not intend to assert that these territorial rights of Russia had no existence on the continent of North America. He meant that they did not exist as the ukase of the Emperor Alexan- der had attempted to establish them—southward of the Aleutian penin- sula and on-that distinctive part of the continent claimed as the ter- ritory of the United States. ‘ America” and the ‘“ United States” were then, as they are now, commonly used as synonymous. British statesmen at the time used the phrase precisely as Mr. Adams did. The possessions of the Crown were generically termed British America. Great Britain and the United States harmonized at this point and on this territorial issue against Russia. Whatever disputes might be left by these negotiations for subsequent settlement between the two powers there can be no doubt that at that time they had a common and very strong interest against the territorial aggrandize- ment of Russia. The British use of the phrase is clearly seen in the treaty between Great Britain and Russia, negotiated in 1825, and re- ferred to at length in a subsequent portion of this dispatch. A pub- liclst as eminent as Stratford Canning opened the third article of that treaty in these descriptive words: The line of demarcation between the possessions of the high contracting parties, upon the coast of the continent, and the islands of America tothe northwest, * * * Mr. Canning evidently distinguished “the islands of America” from the “islands of the Russian possessions,” which were far more numer- ous; and by the use of the phrase “ to the northwest” just as evidently limited the coast of the continent as Mr. Adams limited it, in that di- rection, by the Alaskan peninsula. A concurrence of opinion between John Quincey Adams and Stratford Canning, touching any public ques- tion, left little room even for suggestion by a third person. It will be observed as having weighty significance that the Russian ownership of the Aleutian and Kurile Islands (which border and close in the Behring Sea, and by the dip of the peninsula are several degrees south of latitude 55) was not disputed by Mr. Adams, and could not possibly have been referred to by him when he was limiting the island possessions of Russia. This is but another evidence that Mr. Adams was making no question as to Russia’s ownership of all territory border- ing on the Behring Sea. The contest pertamed wholly to the territory on the Northwest Coast. The Emperor Paul’s ukase, declaring his soy- ereignty over the Aleutian and Kurile Islands, was never questioned or denied by any power at any time. Many of the acts of Mr. Adams’s public life received interesting com- mentary and, where there was doubt, luminous interpretation in his personal diary, which was carefutly kept from June 3, 1794, to January 1, 1848, inclusive. The present case affords a happy illustration of the corroborative strength of the diary. During the progress of this corre- spondence Baron Tuyll, who had succeeded Mx. Poletica as Russian Minister in Washington, called upon Mr. Adams at his office on July 17, 1823, six days before the date of the dispatch upon which I have been 228 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. commenting, and upon which Lord Salisbury relies for sustaining his contention in regard to the Behring Sea. During an animated conver- sation of an hour or more between Mr. Adams and Baron Tuyll, the former said: I told Baron Tuyll specially that we should contest the right of Russia to any ter- ritorial establishment on this continent. * It will be observed that Mr. Adams uses the same phrase in his con- versation that has misled English statesmen as to the true scope and meaning of his dispatch of July 23, 1823. When he declared that we should “contest the right of Russia to any territorial establishment on this continent” (withthe word “ any” italicized), he no more meant that we should attempt to drive Russia from her ancient possessions than that we should attempt to drive England from the ownership of Canada or Nova Scotia. Such talk would have been absurd gasconade and Mr. Adams was the last man to indulge in it. His true meaning, it will be seen, comes out in the next sentence, when he declares: I told Baron Tuyll that we should assume distinctly the principle that the Ameri- can continents are no longer subjects for any new European colonial establishments. In the message of President Monroe to the next Congress (the Eight- eenth) at its first session, December 2, 1823, he announced that at the proposal of the Russian Government the United States had agreed to ‘arrange by amicable negotiations the respective rights and interests of the two nations on the Northwest Coast of this continent.” A similar proposal had been made by Russia to Great Britain and had been likewise agreed to. The negotiations in both cases were to be at St. Petersburg. It was in connection with this subject, and in the same paragraph, that President Monroe spoke thus: In the discussions to which this interest has given rise, and in the arrangements by which they may terminate, the occasion has “been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the Sree and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colinization by any Huropean power. This very brief declaration (in fact merely the three lines italicized constitute the famous “‘ Monroe doctrine.” Mr. Adams’s words of the July preceding clearly foreshadowed this position as the permanent policy of the United States. The declaration removes the last doubt, if room for doubt had been left, that the reference made by Mr. Adams was to the future, and had no possible connection with the Russian rights existing for three-quarters of a century before the dispatch of 1823 was written. It was evident from the first that the determined attitude of the United States, subsequently supported by Great Britain, would prevent the extension of Russian territory southward to the fifty- first parallel. The treaties which were the result of the meeting at St. Petersburg, already noted, marked the surrender on the part of Russia of this pretension and the conclusion was a joint agreement that 54 degrees and 40 min- utes should be taken as the extreme southern boundary of Russia on the Northwest Coast, instead of the fifty-fifth degree, hich was pro- claimed by the Emperor Paul in the ukase of 1799. The treaty between Russia and the United States was concluded on the 17th of April, 1824, and that between Russia and Great Britain, ten months later, on the 16th ot February, 1825. In both treaties Russia acknowledges 54 40 as the dividing line. It was not determined which of the two nations owned the territory from 54 40 down to the forty-ninth JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 229 parallel, and itremained in dispute between Great Britain and the United States until its final adjustment by the “ Oregon treaty,” negotiated by Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Pakenham under the administration of Mr. Polk in 1846. The Government of the United States has steadily maintained that in neither of these treaties with Russia was thereany attemptat regulating or controlling, or even asserting an interest in, the Russian possessions and the Behring Sea, which lie far to the north and west of the terri- tory which formed the basis of the contention. This conclusion is in- disputably proved by the protocols which were signed during the prog- ress of the negotiation. At the fourth conference of the plenipoten- tiaries, on the 8th day of March (1824), the American Minister, Mr, Henry Middleton, submitted to the Russian representative, Count Nes- selrode, the following: The dominion can not be acquired but by a real occupation and possession, and an intention (animus) to establish it is by no means sufficient, Now, it is clear, according to the facts established, that neither Russia nor any other European power has the right of dominion upon the continent of America be- tween the fiftieth and sixtieth degrees of north latitude. Stillless has she the dominion of the adjacent maritime territory, or of the sea which washes these coasts, a dominion which is only accessory to the the territorial dominion. Therefore she has not the right of exclusion or of admission on these coasts, nor in these seas which are free seas. The right of navigating all the free seas belongs, by natural law, to every inde- pendent nation, and even constitutes an essential part of this independence. The United States have exercised navigation in the seas and commerce upon the coasts above mentioned, from the time of their independence; and they have a per- fect right to this navigation and to this commerce, and they can only be deprived of it by their own act or by a convention. This is a clear proof of what is demonstrated in other ways, that the whole dispute between the United States and Russia and between Great Britain and Russia related to the Northwest Coast, as Mr. Middleton ex- presses it, between the “fiftieth and the sixtieth degrees of north latitude.” This statement is in perfect harmony with Mr. Adams’s paragraph when given in full. “The United States,” Mr. Middleton insists, *‘ have exer- cised navigation in the seas and commerce upon the coasts above men- tioned, from the time of their independence;” but he does not say one word in regard to our possessing any rights of navigation or commerce in the Behring Sea. He declares that “ Russia has not the right of ex- clusion or admission on these coasts | between the fiftieth and sixtieth de- grees north latitude] nor in these seas which are free seas,” evidently emphasizing “free” to distinguish those seas from the Behring Sea, which was recognized as being under Russian restrictions. Mr. Middleton wisely and conclusively maintained that if Russia had no claim to the coutinent between the fiftieth and the sixtieth degrees north latitude, “ still less could she have the dominion of the adjacent maritime territory,” or, tomake it more specific, “of the sea which washes these coasts.” That sea was the Great Ocean, or the Pacific Ocean, or the South Sea, the three names being equally used for the same thing. The language of Mr. Middleton plainly shows that the lines of lati- tude were used simply to indicate the “‘ dominion ” on the coast between the fiftieth and sixtieth parallels of north latitude. The important declarations of Mr. Middleton, which interpret and enforce the contention of the United States, should be regarded as in- disputable authority, from the fact that they are but a paraphrase of the instructions which Mr. Adams delivered to him for his guidance in 230 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. negotiating the treaty with Count Nesselrode. Beyond all doubt they prove that Mr. Adams’s meaning was the reverse of what Lord Salisbury infers it to be in the paragré aph. of which he quoted only a part. The four principal articles of the treaty negotiated by Mr. Middleton are as follows: Arr. I. It is agreed that, in any part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the Pa- cific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the high contracting powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts, upon points which may not already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following articles: Art. Il. With a view of preventing the rights of navigation and of fishing exer- cised upon the Great Ocean by the citizens “and subjects of the high contracting powers from becoming the pretext for an illicit trade, it is agreed that the citizens of the United States shall not resort to any point where there ‘is a Russian establish- ment, without the permission of the governor or commander; and that, reciprocally, the subjects of Russia shall not resort, without permission, to any establishinent of the United States upon the Northwest Coast. Arr. III. It is moreover agreed that, hereafter, there shall not be formed by the cit- izens of the United States, or under the authority of the said States, any establish- ment upon the Northwest Coast of America, nor in any of the islands adjacent, to the north of fifty-four degrees and forty minutes of north latitude; and that, in the same manner, there shall be none formed by Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, south of the same parallel. Art. LY. It is, nevertheless, understood that during a term of ten years, counting from the signature of the present convention, the ships of both powers, or ‘which be- long to their citizens or subjects, respectively, may reciprocally frequent, without any hindrance whatever, the interior seas, gulfs, harbors, and creeks upon the coast mentioned in the preceding article, for the purpose of fishing and trading with the natives of the country. The first article, by carefully mentioning the Great Ocean and describ- ing it as the ocean ‘‘commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea,” evidently meant to distinguish it from some other body of water with which the negotiators did not wish to confuse it. Mr. Adams nsed the term “South Sea” in the dispatch quoted by Lord Salisbury, and used it with the same discriminating knowledge that prevades his whole ar- gument on this question. If no other body of water existed within the possible scope of the treaty, such particularity of description would have had no logical meaning. But there was another body of water already known as the Behring Sea. That name was first given to it in 1817—according to English author ity—seven years before the American treaty, and eight years before the British treaty, with Russia; but it had been known as a sea, separate from the ocean, under the names of the Sea of Kamchatka, the Sea of Otters, or the Aleutian Sea, at differ- ent periods before the Emperor Paul issued his ukase of 1799. The second article plainly shows that the treaty is limited to the Great Ocean, as separate from the Behring Sea, because the limitation of the “ Northwest Coast” between the fiftieth and sixtieth degrees could apply to no other. That coast, as defined both by American and British negotiators at that time, did not border on the Behring Sea. The third article shows the compromise as to territorial sovereignty onthe Northwest Coast. The United States and Great Britain had both claimed that Russia’s just boundary on the coast terminated at the sixtieth degree north latitude, the southern border of the Aleutian penin- sula. Russia claimed to the fifty-first parallel. They made a compro- mise by a nearly equal division. An exactly equal division would have given Russia 54 30; but 10 miles farther north Prince of Wales Island presented a better ‘geographic al point for division, and Russia accepted a little less than half the coast of which she had claimed all and 54 40 was thus established as the dividing point. JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 231 The fourth article of the treaty necessarily grew out of the claims of Russia to a share of the Northwest Coast in dispute between the United States and Great Britain. Mr. Adams, in the instruction to Mr. Mid- dleton so often referred to, says: By the third article of the convertion between the United States and Great Britain, of the 20th of October, 1818, it was agreed that any country that might be claimed by either party on the Nor thw est Coast of America, westward of the Stony Mountains, should, together with its harbors, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free and open for the term of ten years from that date, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects of the two powers, without prejudice to the claims of either party or of any other state. You are authorized to propose an article of the same import fora term of ten years from the signature of a joint convention between the United States, Great Britain, and Russia. It will be observed that the fourth article relates solely to the “ North- west Coast of America” so well understcod as the Coast of the Pacific Ocean, between the fiftieth and the sixtieth degrees north latitude, and therefore does not in the remotest degree touch the Behring Sea or the land bordering upon it. The several articles in the treaty between Great Britain and Russia, February 16, 1825, that could have any bearing on the pending conten- tion are as follows: Articles Land II. (Substantially the same as in the treaty between Russia and the United States.) ARTICLE III. The line of demarcation between the possessions of the high contract- ing parties, upon the coast of the continent, and the islands of America to the north- west shall be drawn in the manner following: Commencing from the southernmost point of the island called Prince of Wales Island, which. point lies in the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes north Jatitude, and betw een the one hundred and thirty-first and ‘the one hundred and thir ty-third degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwic h), the said line shall ascend to the north along the channel called Portland Channel, as far as the point of the continent where it strikes the fifty-sixth degree of north latitude; from this last-mentioned point the line of demarcation shall follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast as far as the point of intersection of the one hundred and forty- first degree of west longitude (of the same meridian); and, finally, from the said point of intersection the said meridian line of the one hundred and torty-first degree in its prolongation as far as the Frozen Ocean shall form the limit between the Rus- sian and British possessions on the continent of America to the northwest. Article V. (Substantially the same as Articie ITI of the treaty between Russia and the United States.) ArtTicLe VI. It is understood that the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, from whatever quarter they may arrive, whether irom the ocean or from the interior of the continent, shall forever enjoy the right of navigating freely and without any hindrance whatever all the rivers and streams which, in their course towards the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarcation upon "the line of coast described in Article IL of the present convention. ARTICLE VII. It is also understood that, for the space of ten years from the signa- ture of the present convention, the vessels of the two powers, or those belonging to their respective subjects, shall mutually be at liberty to frequent without any hin- drance whatever all the inland seas, the gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast men- tioned in Article III, for the purposes of fishing and of trading with the natives. After the analysis of the articles in the American treaty there is little in the English treaty that requires explanation. The two treaties were drafted under circumstances and fitted to conditions quite simi- lar. There were some differences because of Great Britain’s ownership of British America. But these very differences corroborate the position of the United States. This is most plainly seen in Article VI. By that article the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty were guaranteed the right of navigating freely the rivers emptying into the Pacific Ocean and crossing the line of demarcation upon the line of coast described in now DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Article IIT, 'The line of demarcation is described in Article IIT as fol- lowing “the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast as far as the point of intersection of the one hundred and forty-first de- gree of west longitude.” Article IV, qualifying Article III, specifies that ‘‘wherever the summit of the mountains which extend in a direc- tion parallel to the coast, from the fifty-sixth degree of north latitude to the point of intersection of the one hundred and forty-first degree of west longitude, shall prove to be at a distance of more than ten marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between the British possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia, as above mentioned, shall be formed by a line parallel to the windings of the coast, and shall never exceed the distance of ten marine leagues therefrom.” By both these articles the line of demarcation ceases to have any par- allel relation to the coast when it reaches the point of intersection of the one hundred and forty-first degree of west longitude. From that point the one hundred and forty-first degree of west longi- tude, as far as it extends continuously on land northward, is taken as the boundary between the territories of the two powers. It is thus evi- dent that British subjects were guaranteed the right of navigating only such rivers as crossed the line of demarcation while it Sollowed the line of coast. They were limited, therefore, to the rivers that emptied into the Pacific Ocean between 54 40 and 60 degrees north latitude, the latter being the point on the coast opposite the point where the line of demar- cation diverges—Mount St. Elias. By this agreement Great Britain was excluded from all rivers empty- ing into the Behring Sea, including the great Yukon and its effluent, the Poreupine, which rise and for a long distance flow in British America. So complete was the exclusion from Behring Sea that Great Britian surrendered in this case a doctrine which she had aided in impressing upon the Congress of Vienna for European rivers. She did not demand access to the sea from a river whose source was in her territory. She consented, by signing the treaty of 1825, to such total exclusion from the Bering Sea as to forego following her own river to its mouth in that sea. It shows a curious association of political events that in the Wash- ington treaty of 1871 the United States conceded to Great Britain the privilege of navigating the Yukon and its branch, the Porcupine, to the Behring Sea in exchange for certain privileges conceded to the United States on the St. Lawrence. The request of Great Britain for the privi- lege of navigating the Yukon and Porcupine is asuggestive confession that it was withheld from her by Russia in the treaty of 1825—with- held because the rivers flowed to the Behring Sea. The seventh article is practically a repetition of the fourth article in the treaty between Russia and the United States, and the privilege of fishing and trading with the natives is limited to the coast, mentioned in Article III, identically the same line of coast which they were at liberty to pi iss through to reach British America or to reach the coast from British ‘America. They are excluded from going north of the prescribed point on the coast near Mount St. Elias, and are therefore kept out of Bering Sea. It is to be noted that the negotiators of this treaty, in defining the boundary between the Russian and British possessions, cease to ob- serve particularity exactly at the point on the coast where it is inter- sected by the sixtieth parallel. From that point the boundary is des- ignated by the almost indefinite prolongation northward of the one hundred and forty-tirst degree of longitude west. It is plain, therefore, JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 233 that this treaty, like the Russo-American treaty, limited the “ North- west Coast” to that part of the coast between the fiftieth and six- tieth parallels of north latitude—as fully set forth by Mr. Middleton in the protocols preceding the treaty between the United States and Russia. The negotiators never touched one foot of the boundary of the Behring Sea, whether on continent or island, and never even made areference to it. Its nearest point, in Bristol Bay, was a thousand miles distant from the field of negotiation between the powers. It must not be forgotten that this entire negotiation of the three powers proceeded with full knowledge and recognition of the ukase of 1821. While all questions touching the respective rights of the powers on the Northwest Coast between the fiftieth and sixtieth parallels were discussed and pressed. by one side or the other, and finally agreed upon, the terms of the ukase of 1821, in which the Emperor set forth so clearly the rights claimed and exercised by Russia in the Behring Sea, were un- touched and unquestioned. These rights were therefore admitted by all the powers negotiating as within the exercise of Russia’s lawful authority then, and they were left inviolate by England during all the subsequent continuance of Russia’s dominion over Alaska. These treaties were therefore a practical renunciation, both onthe part of England and the United States, of any rights in the waters of Behring Sea during the period of Russia’s sovereignty. They left the Behring Sea and allits coasts and islands precisely as the ukase of Alexander in 1821 left them—that is, with a prohibition against any vessel ap- proaching nearer to the coast than 100 Italian miles, under danger ef confiscation. The original ukase of Alexander (1821) claimed as far south as the fifty-first degree of north latitude, with the inhibition of 100 niles from the coast applying to the whole. The result of the protest of Mr. Adams, followed by the codperation of Great Britain, was to force Russia back to 54 40 as her southern boundary. But there’ was no renunciation whatever on the part ot Russia as to the Behring Sea, to which the ukase especially and pri- marily applied. As a piece of legislation this ukase was as authorita- tive in the dominions of Russia as an act of Parliament is in the domin - ions of Great Britain or an act of Congress in the territory of the United States. Except as voluntarily modified by Russia in the treaty with the United States, April 17, 1824, and in the treaty with Great Britain, February 16, 1825, the ukase of 1821 stood as the law controlling the Russian possessions in America until the close of Russia’s ownership by transfer to this Government. Both the United States and Great Britain recognized it, respected it, obeyed it. It did not, as so many suppose, declare the Behring Sea to be mare clausum. It did declare that the waters, to the extent of 100 miles from the shores, were re- served for the subjects of the Russian Empire. Of course many hun- dred miles, east and west and north and south, were thus intentionally left by Russia for the whale fishery and for fishing open and free to the world, of which other nations took large advantage. Perhaps in pur- suing this advantage foreigners did not always keep 100 miles from the shore, but the theory of right on which they conducted their business unmolested was that they observed the conditions of the ukase. But the 100-mile restriction performed the function for which it was specially designed in preventing foreign nations from molesting, disturb- ing, or by any possibility sharing in the fur trade. The fur trade formed the principal, almost the sole employment of the Russian American Company. It formed its employment, indeed, to such a degree that it soon became known only as the Russian American Fur Company, and 30 234 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. quite suggestively that name is given to the Company by Lord Salisbury in the dispatch to which I am ‘Yeplying. While, therefore, there may have been a large amount of lawful whaling and fishin g in the Behring Sea, the taking of furs by foreigners was always and under all circum- stances illicit. Highteen years after the treaty of 1825 (in 1843) Great Britain made a commercial treaty with Russia, based on the principle of reciprocity of advantages, but the rights of the Russian American Company, which under both ukases included the sovereignty over the sea to the extent of 100 miles from the shores, were reserved by special clause, in a sep- arate and special article, signed after the principal articles of the treaty had been coneluded and signed. Although British rights were enlarged with nearly all other parts of the Russian Empire, her relations with the Russian possessions and with the Behring Sea remained at precisely the same point where the treaty of 1825 had placed them. Again in 1859 Great Britain still further enlarged her commercial re- lations with the Empire of Russia, and again the “ possessions ” and the Behring Sea were held firmly in their relations to the Russian American Company as they had been held in the treaty of 1843. It is especially notable that both in the treaty of 1845 and the treaty of 1859 itis declared that “in regard to commerce and navigation in the Russian possessions on the Northwest Coast of America the convention concluded at St. Petersburg, February 16, 1825, shall continue in force.” The same distinction and the same restrictions which Mr. Adams made in regard to the Northwest Coast of America were still observed, and Great Britain’s access from or to the interior of the continent was still limited to that part of the coast between 54 40 and a point near Mount Saint Elias. The language of the three Russo British treaties of 1825, 1843, and 1859 correspond with that employed in Mr. Adams’s dispatch to Mr. Middleton, to which reference has so frequently been made. This shows that the true meaning of Mr. Adams’s paragraph is the key, and indeed the only key by which the treaties can be correctly interpreted and by which expressions apparently contradictory or unintelligible can be readily harmonized. Immediately following the partial quotation of Mr. Adams’s dispatch, Lord Salisbury quotes the case of the United States brig Loriot as having some bearing on the question relating to the Behring Sea. The case happened on the 15th of September, 1836, and Mr. For syth, See- retary of State, in a dispatch to the United States minister at St. Petersburg, declared the course of the Russians in arresting the vessel to be a violation of the rights of the citizens of the United States. He claimed that the citizens of the United States had the right immemo- rially as well as by the stipulations of the treaty of 1824 to fish in those waters. Lord Salisbury’s understanding of the case differs entirely from that held by the Government of the United States. The Loriot was not ar- rested in Behring Sea at all, nor was she engaged in taking furs. She was arrested, as Mr. Forsyth in his dispatch says, in latitude 54 55, more than 60 miles south of Sitka, on the “‘ Northwest Coast,’ to which, and to which only, the treaty of 1824 referred. Russia upheld its ac- tion on the ground that the ten-year term provided in the fourth article of the treaty had closed two years before. The case was made the basis of an application on the part of the United States Government for a renewal of that article. This application was pressed for several years, but finally and absolutely refused by the Russian Government, JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 235 Under the claim of Russia that the term of ten years had expired, the United States failed to secure any redress in the Loriot case. With all due respect to Lord Salisbury’s judgment, the case of the Loriot sustains the entire correctness of the position of the United States in this con- tention. -It only remains to say that whatever duty Great Britain owed to Alaska as a Russian province, whatever she agreed to do or to refrain from doing, touching Alaska and the Behring Sea, was not changed by the mere fact of the transfer of sovereignty to the United States. It was explicitly declared, in the sixth article of the treaty by which the territory was ceded by Russia, that ‘‘ the cession hereby made conveys all the rights, franchises, and privileges now belonging to Russia in the said territory or dominions and appurtenances thereto.” Neither by the treaty with Russia of 1825, nor by its renewal in 1843, nor by its second renewal in 1859, did Great Britain gain any right to take seals in Behring Sea. In fact, those treaties were a prohibition upon her which she steadily respected so long as Alaska was a Russian province. It is for Great Britain now to show by what law she gained rights in that sea after the transfer of its sovereignty to the United States. During all the time elapsing between the treaty of 1825 and the ces- siop of Alaska to the United States in 1867, Great Britain never affirmed the right of her subjects to capture fur-seal in the Behring Sea; and, as a matter of fact, her subjects did not, during that long period, attempt to catch seals in the Behring Sea. Lord Salisbury, in replying to my assertion that these lawless intrusions upon the fur-seal fisheries began in 1886, declares that they had occurred before. He points out one attempt in 1870, in which forty-seven skins were found on board an intruding vessel; in 1872 there was a rumor that expeditions were about to fit out in Australia and Victoria for the purpose of taking seals in the Behring Sea; in 1874 some reports were heard that vessels had entered the sea for that purpose; one case was reported in 1875; two cases in 1884; two also in 1885. These cases, [ may say without intending disrespect to his lordship, prove the truth of the statement which he endeavors to controvert, because they form just a sufficient number of exceptions to establish the fact that the destructive intrusion began in 1886. But I refer to them now for the,purpose of showing that his lordship does not attempt to cite the intrusion of a single British sealer into the Behring Sea until after Alaska had been transferred to the United States. I am justified, therefore, in repeating the questions which [ addressed to Her Majesty’s Government on the 22d of last January, and which still remain un- answered, viz: Whence did the ships of Canada derive the right to do, in 1886, that which they had refrained from doing for nearly ninety years? Upon what grounds did Her Majesty’s Government defend, in the year 1836, a course of conduct in the Behring Sea which had been carefully avoided ever since the discovery of that sea? By what reasoning did Her, Majesty’s Government conclude that an act may he committed with impunity against the rights of the United States which had never been attempted against the same rights when held by the Russian Empire? I have, ete. ; JAMES G. BLAINE. 236 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO GREAT BRITAIN’S WILLING- NESS TO ENTER INTO A CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF FUR-SEALS.! Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, June 30, 1890. Sir: In your note of the 29th of May last, which I duly transmitted to the Marquis of Salisbury, there are several references to communi- cations which passed between the two Governments in the time of your predecessor. I have now received a dispatch from Lord Salisbury, copy of which I have the honor to inclose, pointing out that there is some error in the impressions which you have gathered from the records in the State De- partment with respect to those communications. I have, etc., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. [Inclosure.] The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauncefote. No. 126.] FOREIGN OFFICE, June 20, 1890. Str: I have to acknowledge your dispatch No. 85 of the 30th ultimo, inclosing copy of a note from Mr. Blaine dated the 29th ultimo. It contains several references to communications which passed be- tween the two Governments in the time of Mr. Blaine’s predecessor, especially in the spring of 1888. Without referring at present to other portions of Mr. Blaine’s note I wish only now to point out some error in the impressions which he has gathered from the records in his office with respect to those communications. He states that onthe 25d April of that year I informed the American chargé (affaires, Mr.White, that it was proposed to give effect to a seal convention by order in couneil, not by act of Parliament. This was a mistake. It was very natural that Mr. White should not have apprehended me correctly when I was describing the somewhat complicated arrangements by which agree- ments of this kind are brought into force in England. But two or three days after the 25d April he called to make inquiry on the subject, and in reply to his question the following letter was addressed to him by my instructions: FOREIGN OFFICE, April 27, 1888. My Drar Waite: Lord Salisbury desires me to express his regret that he is not yet in a position to make any further communication to you on the subject of the seal fisheries in Behring Sea. After his interview with you and M. de Staal he had to refer to the Canadian Government, the board of trade, and the Admiralty, but has as yet only obtained the opinion of the Admiralty. The next step is to bring a bill into Parliament. Yours, etc., ERIC BARRINGTON. On the 28th Mr. White replied: LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, April 28, 1888. My Drar BARRINGTON: Thanks for your note, respecting the final sentence of which, ‘‘The next step is to bring a bill into Parliament,” I must trouble you witha line. 1 For the earlier correspondence on this subject see ante, pp. 171-183 and 212-217. GREAT BRITAIN’S WILLINGNESS TO PROTECT SEALS. 237 I understood Lord Salisbury to say when I saw him with M. de Staal, and again last week alone, that it is now proposed to give effect to the conventional arrange- ment for the protection of seals by an order in council, not by act of Parliament. When Mr. Phelps left the latter was thought necessary, and last week I receiveda telegram from the Secretary of State asking me to obtain confidentially a copy of the proposed act of Parliament, with a view to assimilating our contemplated act of Congress thereto. I replied, after seeing Lord Salisbury last Saturday, that there would be no bill introduced in Parliament, but an order in council. May I ask now if this be incorrect, as, in that event, I should particularly like to correct my former statement by this day’s mail. To this the following reply was on the same date addressed to Mr. White: FOREIGN OFFICE, April 28, 1888. My Dear Wuite: Lord Salisbury is afraid that he did not make himself under- stood when last he spoke to you about the Seal Fisheries Convention. An act of Parliament is necessary to give power to our authorities to act on the provisions of the convention when it is signed. The order in council will be merely the machinery which the act will provide for the purpose of bringing its provisions into force. The object of this machinery is to enable the Government to wait till the other two powers are ready. But neither convention nor bill is drafted yet, because we have not got the opinions from Canada, which are necessary to enable us to proceed. Yours, etc., Eric BARRINGTON. It is evident from this correspondence that if the United States Gov- ernment was misled upon the 23d April into the belief that Her Majesty’s Government could proceed in the matter without an act of Parliament, or could proceed without previous reference to Canada, it was a mistake which must have been entirely dissipated by the correspondence which followed in the ensuing week. Mr. Blaine is also under a misconception in imagining that I ever gave any verbal assurance, or any promise of any kind, with respect to the terms of the projected convention. Her Majesty’s Government al- ways have been, and are still, anxious for the arrangement of a conven- tion which shall provide whatever close time in whatever localities is necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species. But I have rep- resented that the details must be the subject of discussion, a discussion to which those who are locally interested must of necessity contribute. I find the record of the following conversation about the date to which Mr. Blaine refers: The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. FOREIGN OFFICE, March 17, 1888. Str: Since forwarding to you my dispatch No. 23 of the 22d ultimo, I have been in communication with the Russian ambassador at this court, and have invited his ex- cellency to ascertain whether his Government would authorize him to discuss with Mr. Phelps and myself the suggestion made by Mr. Bayard in his dispatch of the 7th February, that concerted action should be taken by the United States, Great Britain, and other interested powers, in order to preserve from extermination the fur-seals which at certain seasons are found in Behring Sea. Copies of the correspondence on this question which has passed between M. de Staal and myself is inclosed herewith. I request that you willinform Mr. Bayard of the steps which have been taken, with a view to the initiation of negotiations for an agreement between the three powers principally concerned in the maintenance of the seal fisheries. But in doing so you should state that this action on the part of Her Majesty’s Government must not be taken as an admission of the rights of jurisdiction in Behring Sea exercised there by the United States authorities during the fishing seasons of 1886-’87 and 188788, nor as affecting the claims which Her Majesty’s Government will have to present on ac- count of wrongful seizures which haye taken place of British vessels engaged in the seal-fishing industry. I am, etc., SALISBURY. 238 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. In pursuance of this dispatch, the suggestion made by Mr. Bayard, to which I referred, was discussed and negotiations were initiated for anagreement between the three powers. The following dispatch con- tains the record of what I believe was the first meeting between the three powers on the subject: The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. FOREIGN OFFICE, April 16, 1888. Srr: The Russian Ambassador and the United States charge d’affaires called upon me this afternoon to discuss the question of the seal fisheries in Behring Sea, which had been brought into prominence by the recent action of the United States. The United States Government had expressed a desire that some agreement should be arrived at between the three Governments for the purpose of prohibiting the slaughter of the seals during the time of breeding; and, at my request, M. de Staal had obtained instructions from his Government on that question. At this preliminary discussion it was decided provisionally, in order to furnish a basis for negotiation, and without definitively pledging our Governments, that the space to be cov- ered by the proposed convention should be the sea between America and Russia north of the forty-seventh degree of latitude; that the close time should extend from the 15th April to the 1st November; that during that time the slaughter ofall seals should be forbidden, and vessels engaged in it should be liable to seizure by the cruisers of any of the three powers and should be taken to the port of their own nationality for condemnation; thatthe traffic in arms, alcohol, and powder should be prohibited in all the islands of those seas; and that, as soon asthe three powers had concluded a convention, they should join in submitting it for the assent of the other maritime powers of the northern seas. The United States chargé d’affaires was exceedingly earnest in pressing on us the importance of dispatch, on account of the inconceivable slaughter that had been and was still going on in these seas. He stated that,in addition to the vast quantity brought to market, it was a common practice for those engaged in the trade to shoot all seals they might meet in the open sea, and that of these a great number sank, so that their skins could not be recovered. Iam, etc., SALISBURY. It was impossible to state more distinetly that any proposal made was provisional, and was merely made for the purpose of enabling the requisite negotiations to proceed. The subsequent discussion of these proposals was undoubtedly delayed in consequence of the length of time occupied by the Canadian Government in collecting from consid- erable distances the information which they required before their opin- ion on the subject could be thoroughly formed, and after that it was de- layed, I believe, chiefly in consequence of the political events in the United States unconnected with this question. I think it desirable to correct the misconceptions which have arisen with respect to these transactions, though I do not think that, even ifthe view of them which is taken by Mr. Blaine is accurate, they would bear out the argument which he founds upon them. [ shall be glad if you will take the opportunity of informing Mr. Blaine of these corrections. I am, etc., SALISBURY. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. WASHINGTON, June 30, 1890. Sir: I have received a dispatch from the Marquis of Salisbury with reference to the passage in your note to me of the 4thinstant, in which you remark that in 1888 his lordship abruptly closed the negotiations ? GREAT BRITAIN’S WILLINGNESS TO PROTECT SEALS. 239 because “ the Canadian Government objected, ” and that he “ assigned no other reason whatever. ” In view of the observations contained in Lord Salisbury’s dispatch of the 20th of June, of which a copy is inclosed in my last preceding note of this date, his lordship deems it unnecessary to discuss at any greater length the circumstances which led to an interruption of the negotiations of 1888. With regard, however, to the passage in your note of the 4th instant above referred to, his lordship wishes me to call your attention to the following statement made to him by Mr. Phelps, the United States. Minister in London, on the 3d of April, 1888, and which was recorded in a dispatch of the same date to Her Majesty’ s Minister at Washington: ‘“ Under the peculiar political circumstances of America at this mo-- ment,” said Mr. Phelps, ‘with a generl election impending, it would by of little use, and indeed hardly practicable, to conduct any negotia- tion to its issue before the election had taken place.” I have, etc., JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE, Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, July 2, 1890. Sir: Your note of the 27th ultimo, covering Lord Salisbury’s reply to the friendly suggestion of the President, was duly received. It was the design of the President, if Lord Salisbury had been favorably in- clined to his proposition, to submit a form of settlement for the consid- eration of Her Majesty’s Government which the President believed would end all dispute touching privileges in Behring Sea. But Lord Salisbury refused to accept the proposal unless the President should “ forthwith” accept a formal arbitration, which his lordship prescribes. The President’s request was made in the hope that it might lead to a friendly basis of agreement, and he can not think that Lord Salisbury’s proposition is responsive to his suggestion. Besides, the answer comes so late that it would be impossible now to proceed this season with the negotiation the President had desired. An agreement to arbitrate requires careful consideration. The United States is perhaps more fully committed to that form of international adjustment than any other power, but it can not consent that the form in which arbitration shall be undertaken shall be decided without full consultation and conference between the two Governments. I beg further to say that you must have misapprehended what I said touching British claims for injuries and losses alleged to have been in- flicted upon British vessels in Behring Sea by agents of the United States. My declaration was that arbitr ation would logically and neces- sarily include that point. It is not to be conceded, but decided with other issues of far greater weight. I have the honor to be, sir, ete., JAMES G. BLAINE. 240 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. BAR HARBOR, MAINE, July 19, 1890. Sir: I regret that circumstances beyond my control have postponed my reply to your two notes of June 30, which were received on the 1st instant, on the eve of my leaving Washington for this place. The note which came to hand on the forenoon of that day inclosed a dispatch from Lord Salisbury, in which his lordship, referring to my note of May 29, expresses ‘‘a wish to point out some errors” which he thinks I “ had gathered from the records in my office.” The purpose of Lord Salisbury is to show that I misapprehended the facts of the case when I represented him, in my note of May 29, as hav- ing given such ‘verbal assurances” to Mr. Phelps as warranted the latter in expecting a convention to be concluded between the two Gov- ernments for the protection of the seal fisheries in Behring Sea. Speaking directly to this point his lordship says: Mr. Blaine is under a misconception in imagining that I ever gave any verbal as- surance or any promise of any kind with respect to the terms of the proposed con- vention. In answer to this statement I beg you will say to Lord Salisbury that I simply quoted, in my note of May 29, the facts communicated by our Minister, Mr. Phelps, and our chargé (affaires, Mr. White, who are re- sponsible for the official statements made to this Government at differ. ent stages of the seal fisheries negotiation. On the 25th day of February, 1888, as already stated in my note of May 29, Mr. Phelps sent the following intelligence to Secretary Bayard, Viz: Lord Salisbury assents to your proposition to establish by mutual arrangement between the Governments interested a close time for fur-seals between April 15 and November 1, in each year, and between one hundred and sixty degrees of longi- tude west, and one hundred and seventy degrees of longitude east in the Bering Sca. And he will cause an act to be introduced in Parliament to give effect to this arrangement, 80 soon as it can be prepared. In his opinion there is no doubt that the act will be passed. He will also join the United States Government in any pre- ventive measures it may be thought best to adopt by orders issued to the naval ves- sels of the respective Governments in that region. Mr. Phelps has long been known in this country as an able lawyer, accurate in the use of words, and discriminating in the statement of facts. The Government of the United States necessarily reposes implicit confidence in the literal correctness of the dispatch above quoted. Sometime after the foregoing conference between Lord Salisbury and Mr. Phelps had taken place, his lordship invited the Russian Embas- sador, M. de Staal, and the American chargé, Mr. White (Mr. Phelps being absent from London), to a conference held at the Foreign Office on the 16th of April, touchingthe Behring Sea controversy. This con- ference was really called at the request of the Russian Embassador, who desired that Russian rights in the Bering Sea should be as fully recognized by England as American rights had been recognized in the verbal agreement of February 25 between Lord Salisbury and Mr. Phelps. The Russian Embassador reeeived from Lord Salisbury the assurance (valuable also to the United States) that the protected area for seal life should be extended southward to the forty-seventh degree of north latitude, and also the promise that he would have “a draft convention prepared for submission to the Russian Embassador and the American chargé.” GREAT BRITAIN’S WILLINGNESS TO PROTECT SEALS. 241 Lord Salisbury now contends that all the proceedings at the confer- ence of April 16 are to be regarded as only “ provisional, in order to fur- nish a basis for negotiation, and without definitely pledging our Govern- ment.” While the understanding of this Government differs from that maintained by Lord Salisbury, I am instructed by the President to say that the United States is willing to consider all the proceedings of April 16, 1888, as canceled, so far as American rights may be con- cerned. This Government will ask Great Britain to adhere only to the agreement made between Lord Salisbury and Mr. Phelps on the 25th of February, 1888. That was an agreement made directly between the two Governments and did not include the rights of Russia. Asking Lord Salisbury to adhere to the agreement of February 25, we leave the agreement of April 16 to be maintained, if maintained at all, by Russia, for whose cause and for whose advantage it was particularly designed. While Lord Salisbury makes a general denial of having given “ verbal assurances,” he has not made a special denial touching the agreement betsveen himself and Mr. Phelps, which Mr. Phelps has reported in special detail, and the correctness of which he has since specially af- firmed on more than one occasion. In your second note of June 30, received in the afternoon of July 1, you calied my attention (at Lord Salisbury’s request) to a statement which I made in my note of June 4 to this effect: It is evident, therefore, that in 1888 Lord Salisbury abruptly closed the negotia- tion because, in his own phrase, ‘‘the Canadian Government objected.” To show that there were other causes for closing the negotiation Lord Salisbury desires that attention be called to a remark made to him by Mr. Phelps on the 3d day of April, 1888, as follows: “* Under the peculiar circumstances of America at this moment, with a general election impending, it would be of little use and indeed hardly practi- cable to conduct any negotiation to its issue before the general elec- tion has taken place.” I am quite ready to admit that such a statement made by Mr. Phelps might now be adduced as one of the reasons for breaking off the nego- tiation, if in fact the negotiation had been then broken off, but Lord Salisbury immediately proceeded with the negotiation. The remark ascribed to Mr. Phelps was made, as Lord Salisbury states, on the 3d of April, 1888. On the 5th of April Mr. Phelps left London on a visit to the United States. On the 6th of April Lord Salisbury addressed a pri- vate note to Mr. White to meet the Russian ambassador at the foreign office, as he had appointed a meeting for April 16 to discuss the ques- tions at issue concerning the seal fisheries in Bering Sea. On the 23d of April there was some correspondence in regard to an order in council and an act of Parliament. On the 27th of April Under Secretary Barrington, of the foreign office, in an official note, informed Mr. White that “‘the next step was to bring in an act of Parliament.” On the 28th of April Mr. White was informed that an act of Parlia- ment would be necessary in addition to the order in council, but that ‘neither act nor order could be draughted until Canada is heard from.” Mr. Phelps returned to London on the 22d of June, and immediately took up the subject, earnestly pressing Lord Salisbury to come to a conclusion. On the 28th of July he telegraphed his Government ex- pressing the “fear that owing to Canadian opposition we shall get no convention.” On the 12th of September Mr. Phelps wrote to Secretary Bayard that 31 242 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. Lord Salisbury had stated that “the Canadian Government objected to any such restrictions [as those asked for the protection of the seal fisheries], and that until Canada’s consent could be obtained, Her Maj- esty’s Government was not willing to enter into the convention.” lam justified, therefore, in assuming that Lord Salisbury can not recur to the remark of Mr. Phelps as one of the reasons for breaking off the negotiation, because the negotiation was in actual progress for more than four months after the remark was made, and Mr. Phelps himself took large part in it. Upon this recital of facts I am unable to recall or in any way to qualify the statement which I made in my note of June 4th, to the effect that Lord Salisbury “abruptly closed the negotiation because the Ca- nadian Government objected, and that he assigned no other reason whatever.” Lord Salisbury expresses the belief that even if the view I have taken of these transactions be accurate they would not bear out the argument which I found upon them. The argument to which Lord Salisbury refers is, | presume, the remonstrance which [I made by diree- tion of the President against the change of policy by Her Majesty’s Government without notice and against the wish of the United States. The interposition of the wishes of a British province against the con- clusion of a convention between two nations, which, according to Mr. Phelps, ‘“‘ had been virtually agreed upon except as to details,” was in the President’s belief a grave injustice to the Government of the United States. I have, etc., JAMES G. BLAINE. CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA FCRMBRLY POSSHSSED BY RUSSIA AND TRANSFERRED TO THE UNITED STATES BY THE TREATY OF 1867 (Continued). Lord Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauncefote. No. 166.] FOREIGN OFFICE, August 2, 1890. Sir: I have received and laid before the Queen your dispatch No. 101 of the 1st ultimo, forwarding a copy of a note from Mr, Blaine, in which he maintains that the United States have derived from Russia rights of jurisdiction over the waters of Behrings Sea to a distance of 100 miles from the coasts transferred to them under the treaty of the 30th March, 1867. In replying to the arguments to the contrary effect contained in my dispatch 106A of the 22d May, Mr. Blaine draws attention to certain expressions which I had omitted for the sake of brevity in quoting from Mr. Adans’s dispatch of the 22d July, 1823. He contends that these words give a different meaning to the dispatch, and that the latter does not refute but actually supports the present claim of the United States. It becomes necessary, therefore, that 1 should refer in greater detail to the correspondence, an examination of which will show that the passage in question can not have the significance which Mr. Blaine seeks to give to it, that the words omitted by me do not in reality affect JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 243 the point at issue, and that the view which he takes of the attitude both of Great Britain and of the United States towards the claim put forward by Russia in 1822 can not be reconciled with the tenor of the dispatches. ; It appears from the published papers that in 1799 the Emperor, Paul I, granted by charter to the Russian American Company the exclusive right of hunting, trade, industries, and discoveries of new land on the Northwest Coast of America, from Behring’s Strait to the fifty-fifth degree of north latitude, with permission to the company to extend their dis- coveries to the south, and to form establishments there, provided they did not encroach upon the territory occupied by other powers. The southern limit thus provisionally assigned to the company cor- responds, within 20 or 30 miles, with that which was eventually agreed upon as the boundary between the British and Russian possessions. It comprises not only the whole American coast of Bering Sea, but a long reach of coast line in the south of the Alaskan peninsula as far as the level of the southern portion of Prince of Wales Island. The charter, which was issued at a time of great European excite- ment, attracted apparently little attention at the moment and gave rise to no remonstrance. It made no claim to exclusive jurisdiction over the sea, nor do any measures appear to have been taken under it to re- strict the commerce, navigation, or fishery of the subjects of foreign nations. But in September, 1821, the Russian Government issued a fresh ukase, of which the provisions material to the present discussion were as follows: SEcTION 1. The pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing, and of all other indus- try, on all islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the Northwest Coast of America, beginning from Behring’s Strait to the 51st degree of northern latitude; also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring’s Strait to the south cape of the Island of Urup, viz, to 45° 50’ northern latitude, are exclusively granted to Russian subjects. Src. 2. It is therefore prohibited to all foreign vessels not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging to Russia, as stated above, but also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. The transgressor’s vessel is subject to confiscation, along with the whole cargo. By this ukase the exclusive dominion claimed by Russia on the American continent was pushed some 250 miles to the south as far as Vancouver Island, and notice was for the first time given of a claim to maritime jurisdiction which was regarded both in England and the United States as extravagant, or, to use Lord Stowell’s description of it, “ very unmeasured and insupportable.” , Upon receiving communication of the ukase the British and United States Governments at once objected both to the extension of the terri- torial claim and to the assertion of maritime jurisdiction. For the pres- ent I will refer only to the protest of the United States Government. This was made in a note from Mr. John Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State, to the Russian representative, dated the 25th February, 1822, which contains the following statement: I am directed bythe President of the United States to inform you that he has seen with surprise in this edict the assertion of a territorial claim on the part of Russia extending to the fifty-first degree of north latitude on this continent, and a regula- tion interdicting to all commercial vessels other than Russian, upon the penalty of seizure and confiscation, the approach upon the high seas within 100 Italian miles of the shores tp which that claim is made to apply. The relations of the United States with His Imperial Majesty have always been of the most friendly character, and itis the earnest desire of this Government to preserve them in that state. It was expected, before any act which should define the boundary between the territories of the United States and Russia on this continent, that the same would have been arranged 244 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. by treaty between the parties. To exclude the vessels of our citizens from the shore, beyond the ordinary distance to which the territorial jurisdiction extends, has ex- cited still greater surprise. This ordinance affects so deeply the rights of the United States and of their citi- zens that I am instructed to inquire whether you are authorized to give explana- tions of the grounds of right, upon principles generally recognized by the laws and usages of nations, which can warrant the claims and regulations contained in it. The Russian representative replied at length, defending the territorial claim on grounds of discovery, first occupation, and undisturbed pos- session, and explaining the motive ‘‘ which determined the Imperial Goy- ernment to prohibit foreign vessels from approaching the Northwest Coasts of America belonging to Russia within the distance of at least 100 Italian miles. This measure,” he said, “‘however severe it may at first view appear, is after all but a measure of prevention.” He went on to say that it was adopted in order to put a stop to an illicit trade in arms and ammunition with the natives, against which the Russian Government had frequently remonstrated; and further on he observed: I ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, sir, that the Russian posses- sions in the Pacific Ocean extend, on the Northwest Co ast of Ameri ica, from Behrings Strait to the fifty-first degree of north latitude, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent, from the same strait to the forty-fifth degree. The extent of sea of which these possessions form the limits comprehends all the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas (‘‘mers fermées’’), and the Russian Government might, consequently, judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and especially that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners. But it preferred only asserting its essential rights, without taking any advantage of localities. To this Mr. Adams replied (30th March, 1822), pointing out that the only ground given for the extension of the Russian territorial claim was the establishment of a settlement, not upon the continent, but upon a small island actually within the limits prescribed to the RKussian Amer- ican Company in 1799, and he went on to say: This pretension is to be considered not only with reference to the question of ter- ritorial right, but also to that prohibition to the vessels of other nations, including those of the United States, to approach within 100 Italian miles of the coasts. From the period of the existence of the United States as an independent nation their ves- sels have freely navigated those seas, and the right to navigate them is a part of that independence. With regard to the suggestion that the Russian Government might have justified the exercise of sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea, ~ because it claims territory both on its American and Asiatic shores, it may suffice to say that the dis- tance from shore to shore on this sea, in latitude 51° north, is not less than 90° of longitude, or 4,000 miles. The Russian representative replied to this note, endeavoring to prove that the territorial rights of Russia on the Northwest Coast of America were not confined to the limits of the concession granted to the Russian American Company in 1799, and arguing that the great extent of the Pacific Ocean at the fifty-first degree of latitude did not invalidate the right which Russia might have to consider that part of the ocean as closed. But he added that further discussion of this point was unnec- essary, as the Imperial Government had not thought fit to take advan- tage of that right. The correspondence then dropped for a time, to be resumed in the following spring. But itis perfectly clear from the above that the privi- leges granted to the Russian American Company in 1799, whatever effect that may have had as regards other Russian subjects, did not operate to exclude American vessels from any part of the coast, and that the attempt to exclude them in 1821 was at once resisted. Further, that the Russian Government had no idea of any distinction between JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 245 Behring Sea and the Pacific Ocean, which latter they considered as reaching southward from Bering Straits. Nor throughout the whole of the subsequent correspondence is there any reference whatever on either side to any distinctive name for Behring Sea, or any intimation that it could be considered otherwise than as forming an integral part of the Pacific Ocean. I now come to the dispatch from Mr. Adams to Mr. Middleton of the 22d of July, 1823, to which reference has before been made, and which it will be necessary to quote somewhat at length. After authorizing Mr. Middleton to enter upon a negotiation with the Russian ministers concerning the differences which had arisen from the ukase of the 4th (16th) September, 1821, Mr. Adams continues: From the tenor of the ukase, the pretensions of the Imperial Government extend to an exclusive territorial jurisdiction from the forty-fifth degree of north latitude, on the Asiatic coast, to the latitude of 51° north on the western coast of the Ameri- can continent; and they assume the right of interdicting the navigation and the fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the whole of that coast. The United States can admit no part of these claims. Their right of navigation and of fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions which, so far as Russian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the fifty-fifth degree of latitude, and have no existence on the continent of America. Mr. Blaine has argued at great length to show that when Mr. Adams used these clear and forcible expressions he did not mean what he seemed to say; that when he stated that the United States ‘could admit no part of these claims,” he meant that they admitted all that part of them which related to the coast north of the Aleutian Islands; that when he spoke of the Southern Ocean he meant to except Behring Sea; and that when he contended that the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions had no existence, so far as Russian rights were concerned, on the continent of America, he used the latter term not in a geographical but in a “territorial” sense, and tacitly excepted, by a very singular petitio principii, the Russian posses- sions. In order to carry out this theory it is necessary for him also to assume that the negotiators, in the course of the discussions, made indis- criminate use of the term ‘“ Northwest Coast of America,” with a variety of signification which he admits to be “confusing, and, at certain points, apparently contradictory and irreconcilable.” The reputation of the American statesmen and diplomatists of that day for caution and precision affords of itself strong argument against such a view, and even if this had been otherwise, so forced a construc- tion would require very strong evidence to confirm it. But a glance at the rest of the dispatch and at the other papers will show that the more simple interpretation of the words is the correct one. For Mr. Adams goes on to say: The correspondence between M. Poletica and this Department contained no dis- cussion of the principles or of the facts upon which he attempted the justification of the imperial ukase. This was purposely avoided on our part, under the expecta- tion that the Imperial Government could not fail, upon a review of the measure, to revoke it altogether. It did, however, excite much public animadversion in this country, as the ukase itself had already done in England. I inclose herewith the North American Review for October, 1822, No. 37, which contains an article (page 370) written by a person fully master of the subject; and for the view of it taken in England I refer you to the fifty-second number of the Quarterly Review, the article upon Lieutenant Kotzebue’s voyages. From the article in the North American Re- view it will be seen that the rights of discovery, of occupancy, and of uncontested possession alleged by M. Poletica are all without foundation in fact. * * 246 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. On reference to the last-mentioned article, it will be found that the writer states that: A trade to the northwestern coast of America and the free navigation of the waters that wash its shores have been enjoyed as a common right by subjects of the United States and of several European powers without interruption for nearly forty years. We are by no means prepared to believe or admit that all this has been on sufferance merely, and that the rights of commerce and navigation in that region have been vested in Russia alone. Further on he puts the question in the following manner (the italics are his own): It is not, we apprehend, whether Russia has any settlements that give her terri torial claims on the continent of America. This we do not deny. But it is whether the location of those settlements and the discoveries of their navigators are such as they are represented to be; whether they entitle her to the exclusive possession of the whole territory north of 51° and to sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean beyond that parallel. These passages sufficiently illustrate Mr. Adams’s meaning, if any evidence berequired that he used plain language in its ordinary sense. Clearly he meant to deny that the Russian settlements or discoveries gave Russia any claim as of right to exclude the navigation or fishery of other nations from any part of the seas on the coast of America, and that her rights in this respect were limited to the territorial waters of certain islands of which she was in permanent and complete oceupation. Having distinctly laid down this proposition as regards the rights of the case, Mr. Adams went on to state what the United States were ready to agree to as a matter of conventional arrangement. He said: With regard to the territorial claim separate from the right of traffic with the natives and from any system of colonial exclusions, we are willing to agree to the boundary line within which the Emperor Paul had granted exclusive privileges to the Russian American Company, that is to say, latitude 55°. If the Russian Government apprehended serious inconvenience from the illicit traftic of foreigners with their settlements on the Northwest Coast, it may be effectually guarded against by stipulations similar to those.a drait of which is herewith subjoined, and to which you are authorized, on the part of the United States, to BPTCO. The draft convention was as follows: DRAFT OF TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA. ARTICLE I. In order to strengthen the bonds of friendship, and to preserve in futury a perfect harmony and good understanding between the contracting parties, it i agreed that their respective citizens and subjects shall not be disturbed or molested’ either in navigating or in carrying on their fisheries in the Pacific Ocean or in the South Seas, or in landing on the coasts of those seas, in places not already occupied, for the purpose of carrying on their commerce with the natives of the country, sub- ject, nevertheless, to the restrictions and provisions specified in the two following articles. Art. II. To the end that the navigation and fishery of the citizens and subjects of the contracting parties, respectively, in the Pacific Ocean or in the South Seas may not be made a pretext for illicit trade with their respective settlements, it is agreed that the citizens of the United States shall not land on any part of the coast actually occupied by Russian settlements, unless by permission of the governor or commander thereof, and that Russian subjects shall, in like manner, be interdicted from landing without permission at any settlement of the United States on the said Northwest Coast. Arr. III. Itisagreed that no settlement shall be made hereafter on the Northwest Coast of America by citizens of the United States, or under their authority, north, nor by Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, south, of the 55th degree of north latitude. In an explanatory dispatch to Mr. Rush, the American Minister in London, same date, Mr. Adams says: The right of carrying on trade with the natives throughout the Northwest Coast they (the United States) can not renounce. With the Russian settlements at Kodiak, JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. rate ( or at New Archangel, they may fairly claim the advantage of a free trade, having so long enjoyed it unmolested, and because it has been and would continue to be as ad- vantageous at least to those settlements as to them. But they will not contest the right of Russia to prohibit the traffic, as strictly confined to the Russian settlement itself, and not extending to the original natives of the coast. * * * It is difficult to conceive how the term “ Northwest Coast of America,” used here and elsewhere, can be interpreted otherwise than as applying to the Northwest Coast of America generally, or how it can be seriously contended that it was meant to denote only the more westerly portion, excluding the more northwesterly part, because by becoming a Russian possession this latter had ceased to belong to the American continent. Mr. Blaine states that when Mr. Middleton declared that Russia had no right of exclusion on the coasts of America between the fiftieth and sixtieth degrees of north latitude, nor in the seas which washed those coasts, he intended to make a distinction between Behring Sea and the Pacific Ocean. But upon reference to a map it will be seen that the sixtieth degree of north latitude strikes straight across Behring Sea, leaving by far the larger and more important part of it to the south, so that I confess it appears to me that by no conceivable construction of his words can Mr. Middleton be supposed to have excepted that sea from those which he declared to be free. With regard to the construction which Mr. Blaine puts upon the treaty between the United States and Russia of the 17th April, 1824, I will only say that it is, as far as I am aware, an entirely novel one, that there is no trace of its having been known to the various publicists who have given an account of the controversy in treaties.on international law, and that it is contrary, as I shall show, to that which the British negotiators placed on the treaty when they adopted the first and second articles for insertion in the British treaty of the 28th February, 1825, I must further dissent from his interpretation of Article VIT of the lat- ter treaty. That article gives to the vessels of the two powers “liberty to frequent all the inland seas, gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast mentioned in Article III for the purpose of fishing and of trading with the natives.” The expression ‘coast mentioned in Article IL” can only refer to the first words of the article: ‘‘The line of demarcation be- tween the possessions of the high contracting parties upon the coast of thecontinent and the islandof America tothe northwest shall be drawn,” etc. That is to say, it included all the possessions of the two powers on the Northwest Coast of America. For there would have been no sense whatever in stipulating that Russian vessels should have freedom of access to the small portion of coast which, by a later part of the article, is to belong to Russia. And as bearing on this point it will be noticed that Article VI, which has a more restricted bearing, speaks only of “the subjects of His Britannic Majesty” and of “the line of coast described in Article III.” The stipulation of the treaty were formally renewed by articles in- serted in the general treaties of commerce between Great Britain and Russia of 1843 and 1859. But Mr. Blaine states that— The rights of the Russian American Company which, under both ukases, included the sovereignty over the sea to the extent of 100 miles from the shores, were reserved by special clause in a separate and special article signed after the principal articles of the treaty had been concluded and signed. Upon this I have to observe, in the first place, that the ukase of 1799 did not contain any mention whatever of sovereignty over the sea; sec- ondly, that the context of the separate article is such as altogether to preclude the interpretation that it was meant to recognize the objec- tionable claim contained in the ukase of 1821. I will quote the article at length: 248 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. SEPARATE ARTICLE II. Tt is understood in like manner that the exceptions, immunities, and privileges hereinafter mentioned shall not be considered as at variance with the principle of reciprocity which forms the basis of the treaty of this date, that is to say: 1. The exemption from navigation dues during the first three years which is en- joyed by vessels built in Russia and belonging to Russian subjects. 2. The exemptions of the like nature granted in the Russian ports of the Black Sea, the sea of Azof, and the Danube to such Turkish vessels arriving from ports of the Ottoman Empire situated on the Black Sea as do not exceed 80 lasts burden. 3. The permission granted to the inhabitants of the coast of the Government of Archangel to import duty free, or on payment of moderate duties, into ports of the said Government dried or salted fish, as likewise certain kinds of furs, and to export therefrom, in the same manner, corn, rope and cordage, pitch, and ravensduck. 4, The privilege of the Russian American Company. 5. The privilege of the steam navigation companies of Lubeck and Havre; lastly, 6. The immunities granted in Russia to certain English companies, called ‘‘ yacht clubs.” To suppose that under the simple words “the privilege of the Rus” sian American Company,” placed in connection with the privilege of French and German steam navigation companies and the immunities of yacht clubs, it was intended to acknowledge a claim of jurisdiction against which Her Majesty’s Government had formally protested as contrary to international law, and which it had avowedly been one of the main objects of the treaty of 1825 to extinguish, is a suggestion too improbable to require any lengthened discussion. But Her Majesty’s Government did not of course agree to the article without knowing what was the exact nature of the privileges thus ex- cepted from reciprocity. They had received from the Russian ambas- sador, in December, 1842, an explanatory memorandum on this subject, of which the following is the portion relating to the Russian American Company: TVs La Compagnie Russe Américaine a le privilége d’expédier francs de droits de Cronstadt autour du monde et d’Ochotsk dans les colonies russes, les produits russes ainsi que les marchandises étrangéres dont les droits ont déja été prélevés; de méme Wimporter au retour de ces colonies des cargaisons de pelleteries et @autres produits de ces colonies, sans payer aucun droit, si d’apres les lois générales il n’est pas établi d@impdot particulier interieur sur les marchandises de pelleterie. Observation.—D’apreés le tarif en vigueur, importation des fourrures dans les ports de St.-Pétersbourg et d’Archangel, de production russe et sur des vaisseanx russes, est adimise sans droits. It is surely incredible that if the privilege of the Russian American Company did comprise a right of excluding vessels from approaching within 100 miles of the shore it should not even have been alluded to in this explanation. Nor is it possible to agree in Mr. Blaine’s view that the exclusion of foreign vessels for a distance of 100 miles from the coast remained in force pending the negotiations and in so far as it was not modified by the conventions. A claim of jurisdiction over the open sea, which is not in accordance with the recognized principles of international law or usage, may of course be asserted by force, but can not be said to have any legal validity as against the vessels of other countries, except in so far as it is positively admitted by conventional agreements with those countries. I do not suppose that it is necesaary that I should argue at length upon so elementary a point as that a claim to prohibit the vessels of other nations from approaching within a distance of 100 miles from the JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 249 coast is contrary to modern international usage. Mr. Adams and Mr. Canning clearly thought in 1823 that the matter was beyond doubt or discussion. The rule which was recognized at that time, and which has been gen- erally admitted both by publicists and Governments, limits the juris- diction of a country in the open sea to a distance of 3 miles from its coasts, this having been considered to be the range of a cannon shot when the principle was adopted. Wheaton, who may be regarded as a contemporary authority, equally respected in Kurope and America, says: The maritime territory of every State extends to the ports, harbors, bays, mouths of rivers, and adjacent parts of the sea inclosed by headlands belonging to the same State. The general usage of nations superadds to this extent of territorial jurisdic- tion a distance of a marine league, or as far as a cannon shot will reach from the shore along all the coasts of the State. And again: The rule of law on this subject is terre dominium finitur ubi finitur armorum vis ; and since the introduction of firearms that distance has usually been recognized to be about 3 miles from the shore. Chancellor Kent, who is inclined to advocate a more extended limit, still admits that— According to the current of modern authority, the general territorial jurisdiction extends into the sea as far as cannon shot will reach, and no farther; and this is generally calculated to be a marine league. Calvo, one of the most recent text writers, makes a corresponding statement: Les limites juridictionnelles dun Etat embrassent non seulement son territoire, mais encore les eaux qui le traversent ou l’entourent, les ports, les baies, les golfes, les embouchures des fleuves et les mers enclavées dans son territoire. L’usage gé- néral des nations permet également aux Etats d’exercer leur juridiction sur la zone maritime jusqu’d 3 milles marins ou & la portée de cannon de leurs cétes. But [ need scarcely appeal to any other authority than that of the United States Government itself. In a note to the Spanish minister, dated the 16th December, 1862, on the subject of the Spanish claim to a 6-mile limit at sea, Mr. Seward stated :1 A third principle bearing on the subject is also well established, namely, that this exclusive sovereignty of a nation—thus abridging the universal liberty of the seas— extends no farther than the power of the nation to maintain it by force, stationed on the coast, extends. This principle is tersely expressed in themaxim “‘terra@ dominium Sinitur ubi finitur armorum vis. But it must always be a matter of uncertainty and dispute at what point the force of arms, exerted on the coast, can actually reach. The publicists rather advanced toward than reached a solution when they laid down the rule that the limit of the force is the range of a cannon ball. The range of a cannon ball is shorter or longer according to the circumstances of projection, and it must be always liable to change with the improvement of the scienee of ordnance. Such uncertainty upon a point of jurisdiction or sovereignty would be productive of many and endless controversies and conflicts. A more practical limit of national jurdisdiction upon the high seas was indispensably necessary, and this was found, as the undersigned thinks, in fixing the limit at 3 miles from the coast. This limit was early proposed by the publicists of all maritime nations. While it is not insisted that all nations have accepted or acquiesced and bound themselves to abide by this rule when applied to themselves, yet three points involved in the subject are insisted upon by the United States: 1. That this limit has been generally recognized by nations; 2, That no other general rule has been accepted; and 3. That if any State has succeeded in fixing for itself a larger limit, this has been done by the exercise of maritime power, and constitutes an exception to the general ° 1 Wharton’s International Law Digest, vol. 1, § 32. 32 250 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. understanding which fixes the range of a cannon shot (when it is made the test of jurisdiction) at 3 miles. So generally is this rule accepted that writers commonly use the expressions of a range of cannon shot and 3 miles as equivalents of each other. In other cases, they use the latter expression as a substitute for the former. And in a later communication on the same subject of the 10th Au- gust, 1863, he observes: Nevertheless, it can not be admitted, nor indeed is Mr. Tassara understood to claim, that the mere assertion of a sovereign, by an act of legislation however solemn, can have the effect to establish and fix its external maritime jurisdiction. His right to a jurisdiction of 3 miles is derived, not from his own decree, but from the law of na- tions, and exists even though he may never have proclaimed or asserted it by any decree or declaration whatsoever. He can not, by a mere decree, extend the limit and fix it at 6 miles, because, if he could, he could in the same manner and upon motives of interest, ambition, or even upon caprice, fix it at 10, or 20, or 50 miles without the consent or acquisescence of other powers which have a common right with himself in the freedom of all the oceans. Such a pretension could never besuc- cessfully or rightfully maintained. The same principles were laid down in a note addressed to Sir E. Thornton by Mr. Fish, then Secretary of State, on the 22d January, 1875. Mr. Fish there stated: We have always understood and asserted that pursuant to public law no nation ean rightfully claim jurisdiction at sea beyond a marine league from the coast. He then went on to explain the only two exceptions that were appar- ently known to him so far as the United States were concerned: Cer- tain revenue laws which admitted the boarding of vessels at a distance of 4 leagues from the coast, which, he said, had never been so applied in practice as to give rise to complaint on the part of a foreign govern- ment; and a treaty between the United States and Mexico of 1848, in which the boundary line between the two States was described as be- ginning in the Gulf of Mexico 3 leagues from land. As regards this stipulation, he observed that it had been explained at the time that it could only affect the rights of Mexico and the United States, and was never intended to trench upon the rights of Great Britain or of any other power under the law of nations. It would seem, therefore, that Mr. Fish was entirely unaware of the exceptional jurisdiction in Behring Sea, which is now said to have been conceded by the United States to Russia from 1823 to 1867, trans- ferred to the United States, so far as the American coast was concerned, only eight years before he wrote, and which would presumably be still asknowledged by them as belonging to Russia on the Asiatic shore. I must suppose that when Mr. Blaine states that ‘“ both the United States and Great Britain recognized, respected, obeyed” the ukase of 1821, in so far as it affected Behring Sea, he has some evidence to go upon in regard to the conduct of his country which is unknown to the world at large, and which he has not as yet produced. But I must be allowed altogether to deny that the attitude of Great Britain was such as he represents, or that she ever admitted by act or by sufferance the extra- ordinary claim of maritime jurisdiction which that ukase contained. The inclosed copies of correspondence, extracted from the archives of this office, make it very difficult to believe that Mr. Blaine has not been altogether led into error. It results from them that not only did Her Majesty’s Government formally protest against the ukase on its first issue as contrary to the acknowledged law of nations, but that the Russian Government gave a verbal assurance that the claim of juris- diction would not be exercised. In the subsequent negotiations great importance was attached to obtaining a more formal disavowal of the claim in the manner least hurtful to Russian susceptibilities, but so as JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. yARN | effectually to preclude its revival. And this security the British Goy- ernment undoubtedly considered that both they and the United States ROOF had obtained by the conventions of 1824 and 1825. Upon this point the instructions given by Mr. George Canning to Mr. Stratford Canning, when the latter was named plenipotentiary to negotiate the treaty of 1825, have a material bearing. Writing under date of the 8th December, 1824, after giving a sum- mary of the negotiations up to that date, he goes on to say— It is comparatively indifferent to us whether we hasten or postpone all questions respecting the limits of territorial possessions on the continent of America, but the pretensions of the Russian ukase of 1821, to exclusive dominion over the Pacific, could not continue longer unrepealed without compelling us to take some measure of public and effectual remonstrance against it. You will, therefore, take care in the first instance to repress any attempt to give this change to the character of the negotiations, and will declare, without reserve, that the point to which alone the solicitude of the British Government and the jeal- ousy of the British nation attach any great importance is the doing away (in a manner as little disagreeable to Russia as possible) of the effect of the ukase of 1821. That this ukase is not acted upon, and that instructions have long ago been sent by the Russian Government to their cruisers in the Pacific to suspend the execution of its provisions is true, but a private disavowal of a published claim is no security against the revival of that claim; the suspension of the execution of a principle may be perfectly compatible with the continued maintenance of the principle itself. x * * * * * * The right of the subjects of His Majesty to navigate freely in the Pacific can not be held as a matter of indulgence from any power. Having once been publicly ques- tioned it must be publicly acknowledged. We do not desire that any distinct reference should be made to the ukase of 1821, but we do feel it necessary that the statement of our right should be clear and posi- tive, and that it sheuld stand forth in the convention in the place which properly belongs to it as a plain and substantive stipulation, and not be brought in as an in- cidental consequence of other arrangements to which we attach comparatively little importance. This stipulation stands in the grant of the convention concluded between Russia and the United States of America, and we see no reason why, upon similar claims, we should not obtain exactly the like satisfaction. For reasons of the same nature we can not consent that the liberty of navigation through Behring Straits should be stated in the treaty as a boon from Russia. The tendency of such a statement would be to give countenance to those claims of exclusive jurisdiction against which we, on our own behalf and on that of the whole civilized world, protest. * * * * * * * It will of course strike the Russian plenipotentiaries that, by the adoption of the American article respecting navigation, etc., the provision for an exclusive fishery of 2 leagues from the coasts of our respective possessions falls to the ground. But the omission is, in truth, immaterial. The law of nations assigns the exclusive sovereignty of 1 league to each power off its own coasts without any specified stapulation, and though Sir Charles Bagot was authorized to sign the convention with the specific stipulation of 2 leagues in igno- rance of what had been decided in the American convention at the time, yet after that convention has been some months before the world, and after the opportunity of reconsideration has been forced upon us by the act of Russia herself, we can not now consent, in negotiating de novo, to a stipulation which, while it is absolutely unim- portant to any practical good, would appear to establish a contract between the United States and us to our disadvantage. Mr. Stratford Canning, in his dispatch of the 1st March, 1825, inclos- ing the convention as signed, says: With respect to Behring Straits I am happy to have it in my power to assure you, on the joint authority of the Russian plenipotentiaries, that the Emperor of Russia has no intention whatever of maintaining any exclusive claim to the navigation of these straits or of the seas to the north of them. These extracts show conclusively (1) that England refused to admit any part of the Russian claim asserted by the ukase of 1821 to a mari- time jurisdiction and exclusive right of fishing throughout the whole 252 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. extent of that claim, from Behring Straits to the fifty-first parallel; (2) that the conyention of 1825 was regarded on both sides as a renun- ciation on the part of Russia of that claim in its entirety, and (3) that though Behring Straits was known and specifically provided for, Behring Sea was not known by that name, but was regarded as part of the Pacific Ocean. The answer, therefore, to the questions with which Mr. Blaine con- cludes his dispatch is that Her Majesty’s Government have always claimed the freedom of navigation and fishing in the waters of Behring Sea outside the usual territorial limit of 1 marine league from the coast; that it is impossible to admit that a public right to fish, catch seals, or pursue any other lawful occupation on the high seas can be held to be abandoned by a nation from the mere fact that for a certain number of years it has not suited the subjects of that nation to exercise it. It must be remembered that British Columbia has come into existence as a colony at a comparatively recent date, and that the first consider- able influx of population, some thirty years ago, was due to the dis- covery of gold, and did not tend to an immediate development of the shipping interest. I have to request that you will communicate a copy of this dispatch, and of its inclosures, to Mr. Blaine. You will state that Her Majesty’s Government have no desire whatever to refuse to the United States any jurisdiction in Behring Sea which was conceded by Great Britain to Russia, and which properly accrues to the present possessors of Alask: in virtue of treaties or the law of nations; and that if the United States Government, after examination of the evidence and arguments which I have produced, still differ from them as to the legality of the recent captures in that sea, they are ready to agree that the question, with the issues that depend upon it, should be referred to impartial arbitration. You will in that case be authorized to consider, in concert with Mr. Blaine, the method of procedure to be followed. I have, etc., SALISBURY. [Inclosure 1.] Lord Londonderry to Count Lieven. FOREIGN OFFICE, January 18, 1822 The undersigned has the honor hereby to acknowledge the note addressed to him by Baron de Nicolai, of the 12th November last, covering a copy of an ukase issued by His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, and bearing date the 4th Sep- tember, 1821, for various purposes therein set forth, especially connected with the territorial rights of his Crown on the northwestern coast of America bordering upon the Pacific and the commerce and navigation of His Imperial Majesty’s subjects in the seas adjacent thereto. This document, containing regulations of great extent and importance, both in its territorial and maritime bearings, has been considered with the utmostattention and with those favorable sentiments which His Majesty’s Government always bears to- ward the acts of a State with which His Majesty has the satisfaction to feel himself connected by the most intimate ties of of friendship and alliance, and having been referred for the report of those high legal authorities whose duty it is to advise His Majesty on such matters, the undersigned is directed, tillsuch friendly explanations can take place between the two governments as may obviate misunderstanding upon so delicate and important a point, to make such provisional protest against the en- actments of the said ukase as may fully serve to save the rights of His Majesty’s Crown, and may protect the persons and properties of His Majesty’s subjects from molestation in the exercise of their lawful callings in that quarter of the globe. The undersigned is commanded to acquaint Count Lieven that, it being the King’s constant desire to respect and cause to be respected by his subjects, in the fullest JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 253 manner, the Emperor of Russia’s just rights, His Majesty will be ready to enter into amicable explanations upon the interests affected by this instrument in such manner as may be most acceptable to His Imperial Majesty. In the meantime, upon the subject of this ukase generally, and especially upon the two main principles of claim laid down therein, viz, an exclusive sovereignty alleged to belong to Russia over the territories therein described, as also the exclusive right of navigating and trading within the maritime limits therein set forth, His Britannic Majesty must be understood as hereby reserving all his rights, not being prepared to admit that the intercourse which is allowed on the face of this instrument to have hitherto subsisted on those coasts and in those seas can be deemed to be illicit; or that the ships of friendly powers, even supposing an unqualified sovereignty was proved to appertain to the Imperial Crown, in these vast and very imperfectly occu- pied territories could, by the acknowledged law of nations, be excluded from navi- gating within the distance of 100 Italian miles, as therein laid down, from the coast, the exclusive dominion of which is assumed (but, as His Majesty’s Government con- ceive, in error) to belong to His Imperial Majesty, the Emperor of all the Russias. LONDONDERRY: [Inclosure 2.] Memorandum by the Duke of Wellington.—(September 11, 1822.) In the course of a conversation which I had yesterday with Count Lieven, he in- formed that he had been directed to give verbal explanations of the ukase respect- ing the northwestern coast of America. ‘These explanations went, he said, to this, that the Emperor did not propose to carry into execution the ukase in its extended sense; that His Imperial Majesty’s ships had been directed to cruise at the shortest possible distance from the shore in order to supply the natives with arms and ammu- nition, and in order to warn all vessels that that was his Imperial Majesty’s domin- ion, and that His Imperial Majesty had besides given directions to his minister in the United States to agree upon a treaty of limits with the United States. [Inclosure 3.] Mr. G. Canning to the Duke of Wellington. FOREIGN OFFICE, September 27, 1822. My Lorp DuKE: Your grace is already in possession of all that has passed, both here and at St. Petersburg, on the subject of the issue, in September of last year, by the Emperor of Russia, of an ukase, indirectly asserting an exclusive right of sover- eignty from Bering Straits to the fifty-first degree of north latitude on the west coast of America, and to the forty-fifth degree north on the opposite coast of Asia, and (as a qualified exercise of that right) prohibiting all foreign ships, under pain of confiscation, from approaching within 100 Italian miles of those coasts. This ukase having been communicated by Baron Nicolai, the Russian chargé d’affaires at this court, to His Majesty’s Government, was forthwith submitted to the legal authori- ties whose duty it is to advise His Majesty on such matters, and a note was in con- sequence addressed by the late Marquis of Londonderry to Count Lieven, the Russian ambassador, and also communicated to His Majesty’s ambassador at St. Petersburg, protesting against the enactments of the said ukase, and requesting such amicable explanations as might tend to recoucile the pretensions of Russia in that quarter of the globe with the just rights of His Majesty’s Crown and the in- terests of his subjects. As such explanations will probably be offered to your grace during the conferences about to take place at Vienna, I hasten to signify to you the King’s commands as to the language which you will hold on the part of His Maj- esty upon this subject. The opinions given in November and December last by Lord Stowell and by His Majesty’s advocate-general (copies of which are already in your possession) will fur- nish you with the best legal arguments in opposition to the pretensions put forward in the Russian ukase; and as in both these opinions much stress is very properly laid upon the state of actual occupation of the territories claimed by Russia, and the different periods of time at which they were so occupied, I have obtained from the governor of the principal company of His Majesty’s subjects trading in that part of the world the information of which your grace will find in the inclosed papers. 254 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. That information will enable you sufficiently to prove to the Russian Minister not only that the point of prior discovery may be fairly disputed with Russia, but that the much more certain title of actual oceupation by the agents and the trading servants of the Hudson’s Bay Company extends at this moment to many degrees of higher latitude on the northwest coast of America than is claimed as the territory of Russia by the ukase in question. Enlightened statesmen and jurists have long held as insignificant all titles of ter- ritory that are not founded on actual occupation, and that title is, in the opinion of the most esteemed writers on public law, to be established only by practical use. With respect to the other points in the ukase which have the effect of extending the territorial rights of Russia over the adjacent seas to the unprecedented distance of 100 miles from the line of coast, and of closing a hitherto unobstructed passage, at the present moment the object of important discoveries for the promotion of general commerce and navigation, these pretensions are considered by the best legal author- ities as positive innovations on the rights of navigation; as such they can receive no explanation from further discussion, nor can by possibility be justified) Common usage, which has obtained the force of law, has indeed assigned to coasts and shores an accessorial boundary to a short limited distance for the purposes of protection and general convenience, in no manner interfering with the rights of others and not ob- structing the freedom of general commerce and navigation. But this important qualification the extent of the present claim entirely excludes, and when such a pro- hibition is, as in the present case, applied to a long line of coasts and also to inter- mediate islands in remote seas, where navigation is beset with innumerable and un- foreseen difficulties and where the principal employment of the fisheries must Le pursued under circumstances which are incompatible with the prescribed courses, all particular considerations concur, in an especial manner, with the general principle in repelling such a pretension as an encroachment on the freedom of navigation and the unalienable rights of all nations. I have, indeed, the satisfaction to believe, from a conference which I have had with Count Lieven on this matter, that upon these two points—the attempt to shut up the passage aitogether, and the claim of exclusive dominion to so enormous a dis- tance from the coast—the Russian Government are prepared entirely to waive their pretensions. The only effort that has been made to justify the latter claim was by reference to an article in the treaty of Utrecht, which assigns 30 leagues from the coast as the distance of prohibition. But to this argument it is sufficient to answer that the assumption of such a space was, in the instance quoted, by stipulation in a treaty, and one to which, therefore, the party to be affected by it had (whether wisely or not) given its deliberate consent. No inference could be drawn from that transaction in favor of a claim by authority against all the world. I have little doubt, therefore, but that the publie notification of the claim to con- sider the portions of the ocean included between the adjoining coasts of America and the Russian Empire as a mare clausum, and to extend the exclusive territorial juris- diction of Russia to 100 Italian miles from the coast, will be publicly recalled; and I have the King’s commands to instruct your grace further to require of the Russian Minister (on the ground of the facts and reasonings furnished in this dispatch and its inclosures) that such a portion of territory alone shall be defined as belonging to Russia as shall not interfere with the rights and actual possessions of His Majesty’s subjects in North America. Iam, ctc., Gro. CANNING. {Inclosure 4.] Memorandum on Russian ukase of 1821. In the month of September, 1821, His Imperial Majesty, the Emperor of Russia is sued an ukase asserting the existence in the Crown of Russia of an exclusive right of sovereignty in the countries extending from Bering’s Straits to the fifty-first de- gree of north latitude on the west coast of America, and to the forty-fifth degree of north latitude on the opposite coast of Asia; and. as a qualified exercise of that right of sovereignty, prohibiting all foreign vessels from approaching within 100 Italian miles of those coasts. After this ukase had been submitted by the King’s Government to those legal au- thorities whose duty it is to advise His Majesty on such inatters, a note was addressed by the late Marquis of Londonderry to Count Lieven, the Russian Ambassador, pro- testing against the enactment of this ukase, and requesting such amicable explana- tions as might tend to reconcile the pretensions of Russia in that quarter of the globe with the just rights of His Majesty’s Crown and the interests of his subjects, JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 205 We object, first, to the claim of sovereignty as set forth in this ukase; and, sec- ondly, to the mode in which it is exercised. The best writers on the laws of nations do not attribute the exclusive sovereignty, particularly of continents, to those who have first discovered them; and although we might on good grounds dispute with Russia the priority of discovery of these continents, we contend that the much more easily proved, more conclusive, and more certain title of occupation and use onght to decide the claim of sovereignty. Now, we can proye that the English Northwest Company and the Hudson’s Bay Company have for many years established forts and other trading stations in a coun- try called New Caledonia, situated to the west of a range of mountains called Rocky Mountains, and extending along the shores of the Pacific Ocean from latitude 49° to latitude 60°. These companies likewise possess factories and other establishments on Mackenzie’s River, which falls into the Frazer River, as far north as latitude 66° 30’, from whence they carry on trade with the Indians inhabiting the countries to the west of that river, and who, from the nature of the country, can communicate with Mackenzie’s River with more facility than they can with the posts in New Caledonia. ‘Thus, in opposition to the claims founded on discovery, the priority of which, however, we conceive we might fairly dispute, we have the indisputable claim of occupancy and use for a series of years, which all the best writers on the laws of nations admit is the best-founded claim for territory of this description. Objecting, as we do, to this claim of exclusive sovereignty on the part of Russia, I might save myself the trouble of discussing the particular mode of its exercise as set forth in this ukase. But we object to the sovereignty proposed to be exercised under this ukase not less than we do to the claim of it. We can not admit the right of any power possessing the sovereignty of a country to exclude the vessels of others from the seas on its coasts to the distance of 100 Italian miles. We must object likewise to the arrange- ments contained in the said ukase conveying to private merchant ships the right to search in time of peace, etc., which are quite contrary to the laws and usages of nations and to the practice of modern times. WELLINGTON, VERONA, October 17, 1822, To Count NESSELRODE. [Inclosure 5.—Mémoire confidentiel.] Count Nesselrode to the Duke of Wellington. VERONE, le 11 (23) novembre 1822. Le Cabinet de Russie a pris en mfire considération le Mémoire confidentiel que M. le Duc de Wellington lui a remis le 17 octobre dernier, relativement aux mesures adoptées par Sa Majesté l’Empereur, sous la date du (4) 16 septembre 1821, pour déterminer |’étendue des possessions russes sur la céte nord-onest de Amérique, et pour interdire aux vaisseaux étrangers l’approche de ces possessions jusqu’a la dis- tance de 100 milles d’Italie. Les ouvertures faites 4 ce sujet au Gouvernement de Sa Majesté Britannique par le Comte de Lieven au moment ot cet Ambassadeur allait quitter Londres doivent déja avoir prouvé que l’opinion que le Cabinet de St. James avait congue des mesures dont il s’agit n’était point fondée sur une appréciation entierement exacte des vues de Sa Majesté Impériale. La Russie est loin de méconnaitre que usage et occupation constituent le plus solide des titres d’apréslesquels un Etat puisse réclamer des droits de souveraineté sur une portion quelconque du continent. La Russie est plus loin encore d’avoir voulu outrepasser arbitrairement les limites que ce titre assigne & ses domaines sur la céte nord-ouest de VAmérique, ou ériger en principe général de droit maritime les. regles qu’une nécessité purement locale Vavait obligée de poser pour la navigation étran- gere dans le voisinage de la partie de cette céte qui lui appartient. C’était au contraire parce qu’elle regardait ces droits de souveraineté comme légi- times, et parce que des considérations impérieuses tenant al’existence méme du com- merce qu’elle fait dans les parages de la céte nord-ouest de Amérique, la forgaient a établir nn systéme de précautions devenues indispensables, qwelle a fait paraitre Voukase di (4) 16 septembre 1821. La Russie serait toujours préte 4 faire part des motifs qui en justifient les disposi- tions; mais pour le moment elle se bornera aux observations suivantes :— M. le Duc de Wellington affirme, dans son Mémoire confidentiel du 17 octobre, que des établissements anglais, appartenanta deux compagnies, celle de la Baie de Hud- son et celle du Nord-Ouest, sc sont formés dans une contrée appelée la Nouvelle-Calé- 256 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. donie, qui s’étend le long de la céte de ’Océan Pacifique, depuis le 49° jusw’ au 60° degré de latitude septentrionale La Russie ne parlera point des établissements qui peuvent exister entre le 49° et le 5le parallele; mais quant aux autres, elle n’hésite pas de convenir quelle en ignore jusqu’aprésent existence, pour autantau moins qwils toucheraient ’Océan Pacifique. Les cartes anglaises, méme les plus récentes et les plus détaillées, n’indiquent abso- lument aucune des stations de commerce mentionnées dans le Mémoire du 17 octobre, sur la céte méme de l’ Amérique, entre le 51° et le 60° degré de latitude septentrionale. D’ailleurs, depuis les expéditions de Behring et de Tchirikoff, c’est-a-dire depuis pres dun siecle, des établissements Russes ont pris, & partir du 60° degré, une exten- sion progressive, qui des année 1799 les avait fait parvenir jusqu’au 55° paralleéle, comme le porte la premiére charte de la Compagnie Russe Américaine, charte qui a recu dans le temps une publicité officielle, et qui n’a motivé aucune protestation de la part de ’ Angleterre. Cette méme charte accordait 4 la Compagnie Russe le droit de porter ses établisse- ments vers le midi au dela du 55° degré de latitude septentrionale, pourvu que de tels accroissements de territoire ne pussent donner motif de réclamation & aucune puis- sance étrangere. L’Angleterre n’a pas non plus protesté contre cette disposition; elle n’a pas méme réclamé contre les nouveaux établissements que la Compagnie Russe Américaine a pu former au sud du 55° degré, en vertu de ce privilege. La Russie était done ple inement autorisée A profiter d’un consentement qui, pour étre tacite, n’en était pas moins solennel, et & déterminer pour bornes de ses domaines le degré de latitude jusqu’auquel la Compagnie Russe avait étendu ses opérations depuis 1799. Quoiqwil en soit, et quelque force que ces circonstances prétent aux titres de la Russie, Sa Majesté Impériale ne déviera point dans cette conjoncture du systeme habituel de sa politique. Le premier de ses veux sera toujours de prévenir toute discussion, et de consolider de plus en plus les rapports damitié et de parfaite intelligence qu’elle se félicite d’entretenir avec la Grande-Bretagne. En conséquence l’Empereur a chargé son Cabinet de déclarer a M. le Duc de Wel- lington (sans que cette déclaration puisse préjudicier en rien A ses droits, si elle w était point acceptée) qwil est prét a fixer, an moyen d’une négociation amicale, et sur la base des convenances mutuelles, les degrés de latitude et de longitude que les deux Puissances regarderont comme dernieres limites de leurs possessions et de leurs établissements sur la céte nordouest de Amérique. Sa Majesté Impériale se plait 4 croire que cette négociation pourra se terminer sans difficulté a la satisfaction réciproque des deux Etats; et le Cabinet de Russie peut assurer des & présent M. le Duc de Wellington que les mesures de précaution et de surveillance qui seront prises alors sur Ta partie russe de la céte d’Amé- rique se trouveront entierement conformes aux droits dérivant de la souveraineté, ainsi qu’aux usages établis entre nations, et qwaucune plainte légitime ne pourra s’élever contre elles, {Inclosure 6.] The Duke of Wellington to Mr. G. Canning. VERONA, November 28, 1822. Str: I inclose the copy of a confidential memorandum which I gave to Count Nes- selrode on the 17th October, regarding the Russian ukase, and the copy of his answer. I have had one or two discussions with Count Lieven upon this paper, to which I object, as not enabling His Majesty’s Government to found upon it any negotiation to settle the questions arising out of the ukase, which have not got the ‘better of these difficulties; and I inclose you the copy of a letter which I have written to Count Lieven, which explains my objections to the Russian ‘‘ Mémoire confidentiel.” This question, then, stands exactly where it did. I have not been able to do any- thing upon it. Ihave, &c., WELLINGTON. JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 250 {Inclosure 7.] The Duke of Wellington to Count Lieven. VERONA, November 28, 1822. M. te Comte: Having considered the paper which your excellency gave me last night, on the part of his excellency Count Nesselrode, on the subject of our discus- sions on the Russian ukase, I must inform you that I can not consent, on the part of my Government, to found on that paper the negotiation for the settlement of the question which has arisen between the two Governments on this subject. We object to the ukase on two grounds: (1) That His Imperial Majesty assumes thereby an exclusive sovereignty in North America, of which we are not prepared to acknowledge the existence or the extent; upon this point, however, the memoir of Count Nesselrode does afford the means of negotiation; and my Government will be ready to discuss it, either in London or St. Petersburg, whenever the state of the discussions on the other question arising out of the ukase will allow of the discussion. The second ground on which we object to the ukase is that His Imperial Majesty thereby excludes from a certain considerable extent of the open sea vessels of other nitions. We contend that the assumption of this power is contrary to the law of nations; and we can not found a negotiation upon a paper in which it is again broadly asserted. We contend that no power whatever can exclude another from the use of the open sea; a power can exclude itself from the navigation of a certain coast, sea, etc., by its own act or engagement, but it can not by right be excluded by another. This we consider as the law of nations; and we can not negotiate upon a paper in which a right is asserted inconsistent with this principle. I think, therefore, that the best mode of proceeding would be that you should state your readiness to negotiate upon the whole subject, without restating the ob- jectionable principle of the ukase which we can not admit. I have, etc., WELLINGTON, {Inclosure 8.] The Duke of Wellington to Mr. G. Canning. VERONA, November 29, 1822. Sir: Since I wrote to you yesterday I have had another conversation with the Russian Minister regarding the ukase. It is now settled that both the memoran- dums which I inclosed to you should be considered as non avenus, aud the Russian Ambassador in London is to address you a note in answer to that of the late Lord Londonderry, assuring you of the desire of the Emperor to negotiate with you upon the whole question of the Emperor’s claims in North America, reserving them all if the negotiation should not be satisfactory to both parties. This note will then put this matter in a train of negotiation, which is what was wished. I have, etc., WELLINGTON. [Inclosure 9.] Count Lieven to Mr. G. Canning. A la suite des déclarations verbales que le soussigné, Ambassadeur Extraordi- naire et Plénipotentiaire de Sa Majesté VEmpereur de toutes les Russies, a faites au Ministere de Sa Majesté Britannique, le Cabinet de St. James a di se convaincre que si des objections s’étaient élevés contre le réglement publié au nom de Sa Majesté V’Empereur de toutes les Russies sous la date du 4 (16) septembre 1821, les mesures ultérieures adoptées par Sa Majesté Impériale ne laissent aucun doute sur la pureté de ses vues et sur le désir qu’elle aura toujours de concilier ses droits et ses intérets avec les intéréts et les droits des Puissances auxquelles l’unissent les liens @une amitié véritable et Vune bienveillance réciproque. Avant de quitter Vérone, le soussigné a regu l’ordre de donner au Gouvernement de Sa Majesté Britannique une nouvelle preuve des dispositions connues de ’Empereur, en proposant 4 son excellence M. Canning, Principal Secrétaire d’Etat de Sa Majests Britannique pour les Affaires Etrangeres, sans que cette proposition puisse porter atteinte wx droits de Sa Majesté Impé 1h. ary Rie tye ag ay, ot kill seals, HES IT) “hie mmoaraar Alias jm Ehrs TES ty ish Raiir Mm OVvor PAG AQY BAe. Any penaltios baa ie bing oy toy , mppAly tiv BLE fer octane Vv a This Crovorns ? any par T ol ait nm fl rely a he Goveruotl Pan, * Diaciae ssdtiot ops | May SRE. 6 Senet Wiroaiaae Aalnetl I “ya Yau aend EY vid i NEW ZEALAND. 437 tories, Islands, and Countries lying between the One hundred and sixty- second Degree of East Longitudeand the One hundred and seventy-third Degree of West Longitude, and between the Thirty-third and Fifty-third Parallels of South Latitude. NEW ZEALAND ACT, 1878. [42 Vict., No 43. 2nd November, 1878.] AN ACT for the Protection and Preservation of Seals. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by authority of the same, as follows: 1. The Short Title of This Act shall be “The Seals Fisheries Protection Act, 187s.” 2. Section two of “The Protection of Animals Act Amendment Act, 1875,” is hereby repealed. 3. No person shall hunt, catch, or attempt to catch or kill seals between the days hereinafter mentioned (which inter- val is herein referred to as “the close season”), that is to say, between the first day of October and the first day of June following, both inclusive; and any person acting in con- travention of this section shall forfeit any seal caught by him, and shall in addition thereto incur a penalty not exceeding fifty pounds, and a further penalty not exceeding ten pounds in respect of each seal so eaught. ; 4, The Governor may, by Order in Council, from time to time extend or vary the time during which it is prohibited to hunt, catch, or kill seals, and may from time to time vary the , Close season may be close season so extended, and may prescribe that any such order shall take effect in the whole colony or only in particular parts thereof, to be defined in such order. 5. If he shall think it necessary for the preservation of seals to do so, the Governor may, in a similar manner, extend the time during which it is prohibited to hunt, catch, or kill ,¥ishery may pe seals over any term not exceeding three years, and ~ may at any time before the expiration of any such term further extend the same. 6. Any penalties imposed by this Act for the purpose of prohibiting the catching or killing of seals during the close season. 4: wry enalties to apply Shall apply to such season, however the same may be to extended seasons: varied or extended. 7. The Governor may, by Order in Council, from time to time ex- clude any part of the colony from the operation of this 5)... its may beox stricts may be ex- Act. cluded from Act. Short title. Repeal. Close season for seals NEW ZEALAND ACT, 1884. (48 Vict., No. 48. 10th November, 1884.] AN ACT to Provide for the Conservation of Fisheries. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows : 1. The Short Title of this Act is “The Fisheries Con- _ short title. servation Act, 1884,” ee 113" ‘fe — ion ga J i ree | tee se i | ‘Middleton Rf. +. Kermadeclslands 50 | - Elizabeth Rf. - | *Lord Howe l. —_ I ie | i | f q | o z 1] i | : | ce | | | «Bounty I. 4 | ~< __»Antipodesls. + iE Sat = ~ ae oa an) a whe: eae ~N 2 ss i zish 2 = | NEW ZEALAND | » Judge and Clerk . ‘ d iss {Macquarie [ . Sutbaaen ke ato oe Prepared at the Office of the U. §.Coast | ‘Bishop and Clerk . fetes ss and Geodetic Survey | 7 L. Windeuthall a Superintendent. 1} 160° jaz —1—— —— — SS _ —— 165 110° 178° East fromm Grommich 180" Loagite2e Vos frown Grewescich Ms oe eer ve MF ia . Seah. Mea ae 4 ie , mh A J). eos sf ae ee 438 FOREIGN STATUTES. . The several Acts hereunder mentioned, and all Acts passed in Acts incorporated amendment thereof respectively, are hereby incorpo- A Ca eee rated with this Act, That is to say— ‘The Oyster Fisheries Act, 18665” “The Fish Protection Act, 1877;” “The Fisheries (Dynamite) Act, 1878 ;” “The Seals ae Protection Act, 1878,” . Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to— ee eer Att. ee (1) Any person using a landing-net to secure fish vaught with ‘a rod and line, nor to any person using hand shrimp net; nor to (2) Any person taking fish in water of which he is the owner; nor to (3) Any person authorized by such owner to take fish in such water; nor to (4) Any person with the written permission of the Collector or other person duly authorized by the Commissioner of Trade and Customs to grant such permission, taking fish or ova, or oysters or oyster brood, for the bona fide purpose of ascertaining and verifying the existence or increase of such fish or oysters, or of removing them to stock other waters; nor to (5) Any nets, tackle, or boats used, or fish or oysters taken by such person; nor to (6) Any person who, having unintentionally taken any fish or oysters contrary to the provisions of this Act, shall imme- diately return the same with as little injury as possible to the water. 4. In this act, if not inconsistent with the context— ‘¢Collector” means a Collector of Customs or other principal officer of Customs at any port. “(Mommissioner” means the Commissioner of Trade and Customs. “Olose season” means the time during which it is declared un- lawful to take any species of fish, oysters, or seals; and applies to such season, however the same may be varied or extended. “Tish” means and includes all fish and mammalia inhabiting the waters of the colony, whether indigenous or not, their young or fry and spawn. “Oysters” means and includes shore oysters, rock oysters, and mud oysters. esata means prescribed by this Act or by regulations. ‘Seals” ineludes all kind of seals and their young. wPake” means and includes “kill,” or “catch,” or “dredge for,” or “‘raise,” or “hunt.” “Phis Act” includes the Acts incorporated herewith and all reg- wations made thereunder. “Use” includes “ attempt to use” or “ assist in the use of.” ‘ Vessel” ineludes any ship or Vessel of any tonnage, construc- tion, or deseription. “ Waters” means any salt, fresh, or brackish waters in the eget or on the coasts or bays thereof; includes artificial waters but does not include waters the property of any private per: son. Interpretation. NEW ZEALAND. 439 5. The Governor in Council may, from time tot me, nake, alter, and revoke regulations which shall have force and eect | only in any waters or places specified therein— Res cer ie (1) Providing for the more effectual protection pee Se ee and improvement Oe ish. ame the manare. —.2 42 2 ieee ment of any waters in which fishing may be carried on. (2) In respect of any species of fish, oysters, or Seals, respec- tively— (a) Prescribing a “close season” or “close seasons” in any year, month, week, or day, as may be most suitable for the whole or any part or parts of the colony, during which it shall be unlawful for any person to take any fish, oysters, or seals of such species respectively, or in any way to injure or dis- turb the same; or (b) Extending or varying any close season so prescribed, or varying any close Season so extended; or (c) Extending any such close season over any term not exe eeding three years, and, before the expiration of such term, further extending the same. (3) Prohibiting the buying, selling, exposing for sale, or having in possession any fish , oyster, or Seal, or any skins, oul, or blub- ber from any seal, in any manner in contravention of this Act. (4) Prescribing the minimum size or weight of any fish, oyster, or seal that may be taken. (5) Limiting the size, when wet, of the mesh on the square, or in extension from knot to knot of nets and seines to be used in fishing, or altogether prohibiting the use of nets of any sort. (6G) Prescribing that all nets containing fish shall be emptied in the water, and prohibiting the dragging or drawing on to the dry land any such net. (7) Fixing the time or times during which dredging shall be pro- hibited, or prohibiting the use of any particular engines, tackle, or apparatus for taking any fish or oysters. (8) Reserving from public use any ; natural oyster beds, so as to prevent their destruction. (9) Setting apart within any harbor any bay or bays frequented by fish for the purpose of propagation, and prohibiting the use of nets of any kind in any such bays during such time as Shall seem fit, or setting apart any river or other fresh or salt waters for the natural or artificial propagation of fish, oysters, or seals. (10) For the protection of young fish, or fry, or spawn, at all times, andespecially for the preserv ation and pr opagation thereof upon its importation into the colony. (11) Prohibiting or restricting from time to time, for any period which the Governor thinks necessar y, fishing inany waters, river, or stream in which young fish or spawn is placed or deposited, or at the mouth or entrance of any such waters, river, or stream. (12) Prohibiting the casting of saw dust or any saw-mill refuse into any waters, river, or stream. 440 FOREIGN STATUTES. The Governor may, by such regulations, impose any penalty not ex- ceeding fifty pounds, to be recovered in asummary mnan- ner before any two or more Justices of the Peace, and also appoint the minimum penalty for the breach of any such regulations; and all such regulations shall be gazetted, and there- upon Shall be binding and conclusive upon all persons as if the same had been contained in this Act. 6. Any penalties prescribed by any such regulations as aforesaid for THe terre iials taking, buying, selling, exposing for sale, or having to extended close sea) 1N pOSSeSsion any fish, or oysters, or any seal or seals, spuaice during any close season for the same respectively, shall apply to such season however the same may be varied or extended. 7. All fish, oysters, or seals unlawfully taken, and any skins, oil, or Fish. ete. anafisn. Liubber from seals taken as aforesaid, and the baskets ing gear to be for- or other receptacles thereof, and also all nets, gear, agile tackle, or other apparatus used in any unlawfui fishing or taking of oysters or seals, whether found on shore or in any vessel or boat, shall be forfeited, and shall be disposed of as the Commissioner may think fit. 8. It shall be the duty of the Collectors of Customs within the colony to EnTR . a... See that the provisions of this Act and of the several ollectors of Cus- ; 5 5 : : toms to see Act car. Acts incorporated herewith are duly carried into effect, sedi ence: and for that purpose they severally shall have and may exercise all the powers granted by this Act and the aforesaid Acts in that behalf. 9. The Commissioner may, from time to time, appoint such assist- eae — ants to the Collectors and such other officers, servants, Commissioner may _ y 5 / d appoint necessary ofi- and other persons aS may appear to him to be neces- aes sary for the effective administration of this Act; all of whom shall, as well as the Collectors aforesaid, be deemed to be officers appointed under this Act. 10. In respect of any species of fish, oysters, or seals, respectively, to Repeal of enact. De, affected thereby, all regulations prescribed under tepeal of enact- 2 Fi : y : ments at variance this Act shall, on their coming into operation as to any Bore yweath waters or place, supersede therein all enactments at va- riance with such regulations in so far as they are so at variance but not further in any way whatsoever. 11. Nothing in this Act shall allow fish to be taken during close sea- Fish may only be SON in any waters except for the purpose of pisciculture. taken in close season for purpose of pisci- culture. Penalty for breach of regulations. NEW ZEALAND ACT, 1887. (51 Vict., No. 27. 23rd December, 1887.] AN ACT to amend ‘‘The Fisheries Conservation Act, 1884.” Be It Enacted by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: 1. The short title of this Act is ‘The Fisheries Con- servation Act 1884 Amendment Act, 1887.” Woberead withthe 2° “Lhe Fisheries Conservation Act, 1884,” is herein Act of 1884. referred toas “the said Act,” and this Act shall be read with the said Act. Short Title. CANADA. 441 3. The penalty that may be imposed under the provisions of section five of the said Act shall, in respect of the breach of any regulations respecting seals, be any sum not exceeding five hundred pounds, and a further penalty of not ex- ceeding twenty pounds for every seal illegally taken. 4, If any person shall be found in the possession of any Seal, or the unmanufactured product of any seal, during the close possession of seals, season, Such possession shall, for the purposes of said ete., during close sea- Act and this Act, be deemed to be, in the absence of jne been’ taken ile. satisfactory evidence to the contrary, sufficient proof $!!y. that such seal, or the seal from which such unmanufactured product has been obtained, has been illegally taken during the close season. 5. Any vessel or boat the crew of which, or any part of the crew of which, shall be engaged in illegally taking seals, and Vessels _and_ boats any vessel or boat on board of which any seal so ille- fygized. Ih UpSaly gally taken, or the skin, oil, blubber, or other product: feited’ of a seal 80 illegally taken, shall be found, shall, together with the boat:', furniture, and appurtenances of such vessel or boat, be forfeited to Her Majesty, and shall be disposed of as the Commissioner may think fit. 6. The officer in command of any vessel in Her Majesty’s navy, or any officer of Customs, or the master or other person in — Commander of ves- command of any vessel belouging to Her Majesty in sel belonging to Mer 6 : ajesty or Colonial the colony, or which may be in the employ of the Gov- Government and Cus- ernment of the colony, may, either with or without eee ie Sailors, marines, or police officers, or such other per- tobe forfeited. son or persons aS he may think fit to employ, enter upon, take, and seize any vessel so liable to be forfeited as aforesaid, if found within the jurisdiction of the Government of the Colony of New Zealand. 7. Kivery such officer, master, or person in command as aforesaid, or any officer of Customs shall, with or without sailors, power to search marines, or police officers, or such other person or vessels. persons as he may think fit to employ, have power at any time, and from time to time, to enter upon and search any vessel within the juris- diction of the Government of the Colony of New Zealand for any seal or the product of any seal; and any person refusing to allow sach search to be made, or obstructing or impeding auy such search, shall be liable, on summary conviction of such offense: For the first offence to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for any term not less than three nor more than Six months, and for the second or any subsequent offense to any term not less than six nor more than twelve months. Penalty for breach of regulations. Penalty for ob- structing search. CANADA. [Chapter 95, Revised Statutes of Canada, 1886.] AN ACT respecting Fisheries and Fishing. WHALE, SEAL, AND PORPOISE FISHERY, SECTION 6. Every one who hunts or kills whales, seals, or porpoises by means of rockets, explosive instruments, or shells shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding three hundred dollars, and, in default of pay- ment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, 06 4492 FOREIGN STATUTES. SECTION 7. Every one who, with boat or vessel, during the time of fishing for seals, knowingly or wilfully disturbs, impedes, or injures any sedentary seal- fishery, or prevents, hinders, or frightens the shoals of seals coming into such fishery, shall, for each offense, be liable to a penalty not ‘exceeding sixty dollars, and, in default of payment, to im- prisonment for a term not exceeding one month; and shall also be liable to pay such damages as are assessed by the fishery officer or justice of the peace before whom the person injured complains. 2. Disputes between occupiers of seal fisheries concerning limits and the mode of fishing or setting nets shall be decided summarily by any fishery officer or justice of the peace, by whom arbitrators may be appointed to assess damages; and any damages assessed, or which arise out of a repetition or continuance of the difficulty ordered to be remedied, may be levied under the warrant of any fishery officer or justice of the peace. NEWFOUNDLAND. [42 Vict., cap. 1. February 22, 1879.*] ACT of the Government of Newfoundland, respecting the Prosecution of the Seal Fishery. Be it enacted by the Governor, Legislative Council and Assembly, in Leg- islative Session convened, as follows: 1. The act passed in the 56th year of the reign of Her present'Majesty, entitled “An Act to regulate the Prosecution of the Seal Fishery,” is hereby repealed. No steamer shail leave port for the seal fishery before the 10th day of Marchi in any year, under the penalty of 2,000 dollars, to be recovered ‘from the owner or other person on whose account the steamer shall have been sent to the seal fishery. 3. No sailing vessel shall leave port for the seal fishery before the Ist day of March in any year, under the penalty of 400 dollars, to be recovered from the owner or other person on whose account such. vessel shall have been sent to such fishery. 4. No seals shall be killed by the crew of any steamer or sailing-ves- sel before the 12th day of March in any year, under a penalty of 4 dol- lars for every seal so killed, to be recovered from the owner or other person as aforesaid, or from the master or crew of the said vessel, or from the parties receiving the same, Respeuiveles Provided, In case of the owner or other person as aforesaid, that such owner or other person received such seals with notice or knowledge that the same had been killed before the 12th day of March in any year. 5. No immature seals, known as cats, shall be killed by the crew of any steamer or sailing- vessel at any time, under a penalty of 4 dollars for every such seal so killed, to be recovered from the receiver of such seals, or from the master or crew of auy such steamer or vessel. And it is hereby declared a young seal pelt of less weight than 28 pounds shall be considered an immature or cat seal: Provided, That no party or parties referred to in this section shall be liable to the penalties or *Amended by act, 46 Vict., cap. 1, March 3, 1883. NEWFOUNDLAND. 443 fines herein stated unless it be proven that over 5 per cent in number of seals taken on board or landed from such vessel are of less weight, each, than 28 pounds aforesaid. The fines and penalties mentioned in this section to apply to the excess over such 5 per cent. 6. No action shall be brought by any person to recover any penalty provided by this Act after 12 months from the time such penalty shall have been incurred. 7. No officer of Her Majesty’s Customs in this Colony shall clear any steamer for a sealing voyage before the 9th day of March, or any sailing- vessel for a sealing \ voyage before the last day of Febr wary: Provided, That in the event of either of these days falling on Sunday, such ves- sels may be cleared on the preceding Saturday. 8. All penalties incurred under the provisions of this Act shall be sued for and recovered in a Summary manner before a Stipendiary Magistrate by any person who may sue for the same; one-half of such penalty shall go to the party who shall sue for and prosecute the same, and the re- mainder to the Receiver-General for the use of public hospitals. 9. If any person shall feel himself aggrieved by any judgment of a stipendiary magistrate under this Act, he shall have liber ty to appeal therefrom to the then next sitting of Her Majesty’s Supreme Court at St. John’s: Provided, That notice of the same be given to the magistrate within 24 hours after such judgment shall have been delivered and within five days thereafter recognizances or other security, with or without sureties, at the option of such Magistrate, shall be entered into to prosecute the same without delay, and. pay such amount as may be awarded, with costs. ACT of the Government of Newfoundland, to amend an Act passed in the 42nd year of the reign of Her present Majesty, entitled “An Act respecting the Prosecution of the Seal F ishery.””* (46 Vict.,c.1. March 3, 1883.] Be it enacted by the Administrator of the Government, Legislative Coun- cil and Assembly, in Legislative Session convened, as follows: 1. The 2nd and 3rd sections of the Act passed in the 42nd year of the Reign of Her present Majesty, entitled ““An Act respecting the Prose- cution of the Seal Fishery,” are hereby repealed. 2. No steamer shall leave port for the seal fishery before the hour of 6 o’clock in the forenoon on the 10th day of March in any year, under the penalty of 2,000 dollars, to be recovered from the owner or other person on whose account such steamer shall have been sent to such fishery: Provided, That in the event of the said 10th day of Mareh fall- ing on Sunday, any steamer may leave port for such fishery at any time after 6 o’clock in the forenoon of the previous day. 3. No sailing vessel shall leave port for the seal fishery before the hour of 6 o’clock in the forenoon on the 1st day of March in any year, under the penalty of 400 dollars, to be recovered from the owner or other person on whose account such vessel shall have been sent to such fishery: Provided, That in the event of the said Ist day of March falling on Sun- day, any sailing vessel may leave port for such fishery at any time after 6 o’clocix in the forenoon of the previous day. * NOL xX, ps O00. 444 FOREIGN STATUTES. Act of the Government of Newfoundland to Regulate the Prosecution of the Seal Fishery. [55 Vict. April, 1892.] Be it enacted by the Governor, the Legislative Council, and House of As- sembly in Legislative Session convened, as follows: (1) No steamer shall leave any port of Newfoundland or its Depend- encies for the prosecution of the Seal Fishery betore the hour of six o’clock in the forenoon of the twelfth day of March in any year under a penalty of five thousand dollars, to be recovered from the master, owners, or other person on whose account such steamer shall have been sent to such fishery; provided, that in the event of the twelfth day of March falling on Sunday, any steamer may leave port for such fishery at any time after four o’clock in the afternoon of the previous day. (2) No seals shall be killed by any crew of any steamer or by any member thereof before the fourteenth day of March or after the twen- tieth day of April in any year, nor shall seals so killed be brought into any port of this colony or its dependencies, as aforesaid, in any year under penalty of four thousand dollars, to be recovered from the mas- ter, owner, or other person on whose account such steamer shall have been sent to such fishery. (3) No steamer shall proceed to the seal fishery from any part of this colony or its dependencies on a second or subsequent trip in any year under a penalty of four thousand dollars, to be recovered from the master, owner, or other person on whose account such steamer shall have been sent to such fishery; provided, that if it be shown to the satisfaction of the collector, subcollector, or other customs officer of the port from which such steamer sails that she has been forced by any ac- cident to return to port during the first trip she shall not be deemed to have gone upon a second subsequent trip if she leaves port before the twenty fifth day of Marchin any year. (4) For the purposes of this Act steamers which have been on a first trip shall be deemed to be on a second or subsequent trip if they shall engage at any time during the same year in killing seals at any place within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland after returning from such first trip. And the master and owners shall be liable to the same penalties as provided in the third section of this Act. Any complaint or information under this section shall be made within three months next after the return of the said steamer to a port of this Island. (5) Sealing masters violating any of the preceding sections of this act shall be ‘Incompetent tor two years after commission of any offense thereunder to be employed to command steamers at the seal fishery or to be cleared at the custom-heuse as master of such steamers. (6) No officer of Her Majesty’s customs in this colony shall clear any steamer for a sealing voyage before the eleventh day of March in any year, provided that in the event of the said eleventh day of March falling on a Sunday such steamers may be cleared on the pre- ceding Saturday. (7) Noaction shall be taken for the penalties provided by the fourth section after twelve months from the time such penalty shall have been curred. if 4 akony Gene oso tone Se o . 7 : 20 30 “0 se 4h 20° 20 30 Sackett A Wilhetins Lino RUSSIA. 445 RUSSIA. CODE OF RUSSIAN LAWS GOVERNING RURAL INDUSTRIES. (Translation.] (Vol. XII, Part II. Edition of 1885. St. Petersburg.] THE USTINSK SEALING INDUSTRY IN THE WHITE SEA. Src. 233. The Ustinsk industry consists in the killing of seals on the ice of the Gulf of Mesensk. Notr.—The limits of the Gulf of Mesensk, to which these rules apply, are de- scribed by a straight line running from Cape ‘Voronof to Cape Kautin, through the southeastern extremity of the island Morshovtsa. Ssc. 234, The management of the killing as well as the division of products is left to the hunters. . Sec. 235. For the purpose of determining the time for beginning the killing and to see to the preservation of order and system, over- seers are selected every three years from the following districts of the town of Mezen: Koida, Nishe, Dolgoi Shtchel, Semshi, Lamposhni, and Kargopol. For every twenty boats an overseer must be appointed, and for this purpose the districts are combined as follows: Koida with Nishe, Dolgoi Shtchel with Kargopol, Mezen with Semshi and Lam- poshni. If after division by twenty boats ten or more boats are left over a Special overseer must be appointed, but if the number of boats left over numbers less than five no overseer need be selected. SEC. 256. The overseers assemble in the town of Mezen about the twentieth of March and appoint the day when the sealers are to put to sea. The day of departure must be determined and publicly an- nounced in the townships named above (in sec. 235) not later than the 25th of March. SEC. 237. The places of departure for the Ustinsk sealing are Cape Abramof and Cape Nerinsk, where those desiring to engage in sealing must assemble on the appointed day. SEc. 238. The day appointed for departure for the Ustinsk sealing grounds from Cape Nerinsk must always be four days earlier than that set for Cape Abramof, so that if, for instance, the 10th day of April has been set for Abramof, the sealers must set out from Nerinsk on the 6th of April. SEc. 239. During the continuance of the hunt it is strictlyfobidden to light fires to windward of the groups or hauling grounds of seals, or to alarm them in any way. Sec. 240. Persons guilty of violation of the above rules are liable to prosecution under ar ticle 57 of the Penal Code for Rural Courts and to confiscation of the whole catch. The boat to which the violator of the law belongs will be held responsible for the penalty imposed. * * * * * * * THE FISHING AND SEALING INDUSTRIES IN THE CASPIAN SEA. Sec. 432. The catching of fish and killing of seals in the waters of the Caspian Sea included in the Russian Empire, are free to all who desire to engage in the same, except in certain localities hereafter de- fined in section 439, under observance of the rules herewith established. * * * * * * * Sec. 435, For the right of fishing in the sea a license fee will be ‘ED eat GA ae AAG FOREIGN STATUTES. collected from each boat for the benefit of the Imperial Treasury. For the right to kill seals a license fee is collected from each sealer, and in addition the seal oil shipped from the sea to the Lower Volga is subject to a fixed duty per pood. Src. 436. The amount of license fee for fishing and sealing, as well as of the duty on oil, will be determined by the Minister of Imperial Property, subject to rey ision by the Imperial Council. SEc. 437. To defray the ee of enforcing the rules herewith established, a certain percentage 1s set aside from every ruble collected for the Government from fishing and sealing licenses and duties on seal oil. * * * Sec. 458. The Minister of Imperial Property is charged with the forma- tion, publication, and enforcement of rules for the protection of the fishing and sealing industries. SEc. 439. The rules and regulations herewith promulgated do not affect the following coastwise localities: (1) The waters lying opposite the shores of the Ural Cossack Territory, for a distance of seventy six versts from the west side and of eighty eight versts from the east side, the catch of fish and killing of seals in these waters being reserved to the Corps of Ural Cossacks, as Specified in sections 607 to 611 of this code; (2) the waters extending twenty five versts north and twenty five versts west of Cape Tuck-Karagansk, of a surface area of six hundred and twenty five square versts from the Cape, which has been reserved for the settlers on the Manguishlak Peninsula; (5) the waters reserved by section 612 of this code to the Tersk Corps of Cos- sacks for a distance of seventy six versts from the shore; (4) the waters south of this tract to the Persian boundary for a distance of fifty versts from the shore. Norr.—If in the future any of the waters just named should become available for free fishing and hunting, the Minister of Imperial Property will issue regulations and publish the same accordingly. Sec. 440. The administration of all matters relating to fisheries and ealing industries in the localities mentioned in sections 432 and 435 is fab usted to the Department of Agriculture and Rural Industries of the Ministry of Imperial Property. Sec, 441. The local management of these industries is placed in the hands of special bureaus in the city of Astrakhan, under the title of ‘Administration of Fishing and Sealing Industries; The Committee on Fisheries and Sealing Industries, and the Fishery and Sealing Police.” Notrn.—The vessels of the Astrakhan Bureau of Fishing and Sealing Industries are entitled to carry a special flag and pennant to distinguish them from merchant vessels. Src. 442. The Bureau of Fishing and Sealing Industries consists of a Chief, three Inspectors (one senior and two juniors), and the necessary clerical force. In the absence of the Chief the senior Inspector takes his place. Src. 443. The Chief of the Bureau is subject to Highest Orders ; the Inspectors to the orders of the Minister of Imperial Pri operty; the other officials to the Bureau of Fishing and Sealing Industries. Sic. 444. The Bureau stands in the same relation to the Ministry of Imperial Property and to the Governor of Astrakhan as the Provincial Bureau Me ae Property. Src. 445. The Bureau is charged with the general Supervision of the eee of the regulations promulgated in sections 432 to 599 of this Code, but if cir cumstances should arise which are not specially re- RUSSIA. 447 ferred to in these regulations, and deferred action on which would cause injury and loss to the Government or private individuals, the Bureau of Fishing and Sealing Industries may take the necessary steps and report to the Governor of Astrakhan, who in his turn will immediately assemble the Committee on Fishing and Sealing Industries, to act under the provisions of sections 486 and 487. * * * * * * * Src. 448. The Bureau is charged with stationing, through its Inspec- tors, light-ships and buoys to determine the limits of the reserved waters belonging to the Corps of Ural and Tersk Cossacks. Sec, 449. The Bureau, under Instructions of the Ministry of Imperial Property, will issue licenses for fishing or killing seals (tin plates with a number to be affixed to the bow of the boats or to the forward part of the sleds used for sealing on the ice). The necessary blanks, re- ceipts, etc., will be furnished by the Public Treasury, upon requisition and statement as to the number required. * * * * * * * Src. 455. The Bureau of Fishing and Sealing Industries is charged with the collection of fees and fines and with the sale by auction of all confiscated property. If such property has been seized outside of Astrakhan and its shipment to that place is not convenient, the local fiscal authorities nearest to the place of seizure may be entrusted with such sale, in the presence of one of the officials of the Bureau. The Bureau receives the reports of the Police of Fishing and Sealing Industries of all violations of the regulations, and inaugurates proceed- ings against offenders in accordance with the respective sections of this Code. * * * * * * * Src. 498. Of the three Inspectors of the Sealing Industry one is sta- tioned on Kulali Island, where the principal killing is done, to enforce compliance with the protective regulations. Src. 499. The principal duty of the other two Inspectors consists in the collection of the duties on seal oil shipped to Astrakhan for trans- mission to the interior provinces of Russia. BS * * * * * * Suc. 535. The sealing industry is free over the whole extent of the Caspian Sea specified in section 432. Suc. 536. The sealers may winter on the sealing grounds, with the ex- ception of the localities where seals haul up for breeding. All who desire to make use of this privilege must procure an annual license. Suc, 537. The killing of seals must be begun by all sealers at one and the same time, and for this purpose they will assembie at a certain point for consultation, duly notifying the Inspector at Kulalinsk to en- able him to be present. From the point selected all sealers depart to- gether, accompanied by the Inspector, without waiting for any who nay fail to appear in time. Src, 538. The so-called “driving” of seals, 7. e., driving them into stationary nets by shouting and discharging firearms, is prohibited on all islands and coasts where the seais haul up for breeding. At all other places driving is permitted, unless it interferes with other fish- eries. a * * * * * * * Suc. 540. The killing of seals in the winter, the old as well as the young, or white seals (for which the men go out on the ice with horses) 448 FOREIGN STATUTES. is forbidden, but on the breaking up of the ice, seals may be killed frem boats. * * ¥* * * * * Sec. 580. For killing seals before the appointed time each boat is fined fifty rubles and the whole catch confiscated. Sec. 581. For killing seals on the ice in the winter the offender is fined two rubles for each seal killed and the whole catch is confiscated. Sec. 582. For secretly disposing of seal oil, and evading the payment of duty at Astrakhan, the fine is three times the value of the oil thus illegally sold. * cd ¥ * % % * URUGUAY. LETTER STATING THE CONTENTS OF CERTAIN STATUTES OF URUGUAY, BY THE CUS- TODIAN OF THE ARCHIVES AT MONTEVIDEO. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT OF STATE. To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting: I certify that the document hereto annexed is a true copy from the files of this Department. In testimony whereof I, John W. Foster, Secretary of State of the United States, have hereunto subscribed my name and caused [SEAL.] the seal of the Department of State to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington this second day of August, A. D. 1892, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and seventeenth. JOHN W. FOSTER. Senor OrriciAL Mayor: Encumplimiento del decreto que antecede, debo informar 4 SS*. que la pesca de lobos en las islas de ‘“ Lobos,” “ Polonio,” “Castillos Grandes,” y “Coronilla,” y las costas del “Rio de la Plata” y océano adyacente 4 los departamentos de “ Maldonado” y “Rocha,” se hace por contratistas que la obtienen por periodos de diez aios, pagando anualmente al tesoro ptiblico siete mil pesos oro y ademas el derecho departamental de veinte centésimos por cada piel de anfibio y cuatro centésimos por arroba de aceite, que fué creado, asi como su destino, por las leyes de 23 de Julio de 1857, y 28 de Junio de 1858 (Caraira, tomo 1, paginas 446 y 488, coleccion de leyes). El Estado les garante 4 los contratistas el tranquilo ejercicio de la industria, no perinitiendo el arribo 4 dichas islas de buques de ningun género, ni la construccion de obras que pudieran ahuyentarlos. Las faenas empiezan el primero de Junio y terminan el 15 de Octubre. (Decreto de 17 de Mayo de 1876, pagina 1480 de la Legislacion Vigente, por Goyena.) Es cuanto tiene que informar el infrascrito. Dios guarde a SS*. m*, a’, (Firmado) Arturo E. Gonzalez, Encargado del archivo. Montevideo, Abril 2 de 1892. Es copia conforme. ; OscAR HORDENANA, Ofl. Mayor. JAPAN. 449 (Translation.] Mr, CHteF CLERK: I have to inform you, in compliance with the foregoing decree, that the taking of seals on the islands called Lobos, Polonio, Castillos Grandes, and Coronilla, on the coasts of the Rio de la Plata and in that part of the ocean adjacent to the Departments of Maldonado and Rocha, is done by contractors who obtain their con- tract for periods of ten years each, paying annually into the public treasury seven thousand dollars in gold, and also the departmental duty of twenty cents on each seal skin and four cents on each arroba of oil. This duty was established (and provision made for the object to which it was to be applied) by the act of July 23rd, 1857, and that of June 28th, 1858 (Caraira, vol. 1, pages 440 and 488, Digest of Laws). The State guarantees to the contractors that they shall carry on their in- dustry without molestation. It does not permit vessels of any kind to anchor off any of the said islands, and does not allow any works to be con- structed that might frighten the sealsaway. The catch begins June Ist and ends October 15th. (Decree of May 17th, 1876, page 1480 of *‘ Laws now in Force,” by Goyena.) Thisis all that the undersigned has to coi- municate. God guard you many years. (Signed) ARTURO EK. GONZALEZ, Custodian of the Archives. MONTEVIDEO, April 2d, 1892. A true copy. (Signed) Oscar HORDENANA, Chief Clerk. JAPAN. Laxtract from the regulations numbered sixteen of the seventeenth year of Meiji (1885 ). ‘Promulgated on the 23rd of May, 1885, by the Minister of State for Agriculture and Commerce.] [Translation.] K * * * * * * Src. 14. Hereafter the hunting and killing of seals and sea otter in the Hokkaido (Yesso and the islands to the north belonging to Japan), except as hereinafter provided, is prohibited. Any person who shall be convicted of a violation of this regulation shall be punished in accordance with the terms of Section 372 of the Criminal Code,* and, in addition, the skins or other fruits of such un- lawful hunting shall be summarily confiscated. IRfsuch skins, ete., shall have been sold, the offender shall be liable to the payment of a fine equal to the total amount received therefor. The Minister of State for Agriculture and Commerce shall be em- powered to grant to such persons as he may deem fit, and for such compensation as may be determined upon, the exclusive privilege of *Section 372 of the Criminal Code has reference to the theft of standing crops, grain, vegetables, ete. It provides a minimum punishment of one month’s anda maximum punishment of one year’s imprisonment at hard labor. 57 A450 FOREIGN STATUTES. hunting seals and sea otter in the Hokkaido. And in such case tie provisions of the foregoing prohibition shall not apply. A true translation. D. W. STEVENS, Counsellor of Legation. GREAT BRITAIN AND CANADA. A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE LAWS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND AND OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA, RELATING TO THE PROTEC- TION OF GAME, BIRDS, AND FISHES. Over one hundred statutes have been enacted by the Parliaments of Great Britain and Canada during the last two centuries for the protection of game, wild birds, and fishes. For convenience of treat- ment these statutes may be divided into four groups, as follows: First, those which are designed to promote the regular breeding of these wild creatures by the establishment of annual close seasons, pub- lic breeding grounds and hatcheries, and other methods. Second, those statutes which prohibit their destruction by the use of wasteful or dangerous methods and instruments. Third, those statutes which limit the number of persons authorized to hunt and kill them by the establishment of license systems. Fourth, those statutes which prescribe the methods by which such protective regulations shall be enforced. I. At the present time in England there are statutes in force prescrib- ing a close season for all kinds of birds and freshwater fish, for nearly all kinds of game, and for many marine fish. The game laws of England are of very ancient origin, but down to 1869 there was no time of year during which it was unlawful to kill birds not included in theGame Acts. In consequence of the great decrease of sea birds by their being killed dur- ing the breeding season, ‘The Sea Birds Preservation Act was passed in 1869, which established a close time lasting four months (April 1-Aug. 1) tor thirty- three distinct species of sea bir rds, In 1872 and 1876 similar statutes? were passed for the protection of wild land birds. Highty different species of birds were mentioned in these acts, and a close season of five and a half months prescribed for them. In 1880 “The Wild Birds Protection Act” was passed, which repealed the three acts above mentioned and prescribed one uniform close season lasting from March 1 to August 1, for all birds whatsoever, in every part of the United Kingdom. Under this act, which is in force at the present time, it is unlaw “ful during the close time prescribed * to shoot or attempt to shoot any wild bird; or to use any boat for shooting or causing to be shot any wild bird; or to use any lime, trap, snare, or other instrument for taking any wild bird.746 sits also illegal under this act, as modified subsequently,° to sell or to have in one’s possession any wild bird, unlawfully killed during the close time, between March 15 and August 1. Provision is also made in Section 6 for the trial of 132 and 33 Vict., es 735 and 36 Vict., c. 78; 39 and 40 Vict., c. 29. *43 and 44 Vict., ODe 4Sec. 3. See Supls ment to Oke’s ‘‘Game Laws,” 3d Edit., page 7. 544 and 45 Vict., ¢. 51. 3 GREAT BRITAIN AND CANADA, (461 offences against the act committed on the High Seas within the jurisdic- tion of the Admiralty, no mention being made of any limit to this juris- diction. Under Section 8 power is given to the Home Office to extend or vary the close season for particular localities under certain circum- stances. Under the present fishery laws of the United Kingdom and Canada close seasons are prescribed for nearly all kinds of fish. By the Salmon Fishery Acts of 1865, 1873, and 1876! close seasons are designated for salmon, trout, and char, and for all other kinds of freshwater fish (which prior to 1878 might be caught freely at all seasons of the year) by the Freshwater Fisheries Act of 1878.2. Theact of 1875% farther protects the salmon in rivers by forbidding all persons from fixing any baskets, nets, traps, or devices for taking eels in a salmon river between Jan. 1 and June 24, and from placing any wheels or leaps for taking lamperns between March 1 and August 1. By the Revised Statutes of Canada (18386) close seasons are prescribed for certain fish, and authority is conferred upon the Governor in Council to prescribe such close seasons for others. By reference to the accom- panying table of close seasons the nature and extent of the diiterent close seasons now in force in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Treland and the Dominion of Canada can be readily ascertained. In both countries the laws forbidding the killing of game and fish during the close seasons are further enforced by other laws prohibit- ing all persons from dealing in the forbidden articles or having them in their possession during such close seasous.° Table of Close Seasons for Game and Wild Birds now in forec. sosserea —— ee r 0 . pect game ge Name of country. Close season. Statutes Black game.....-. United Kingdom. ...-- Dec. 10 to Aug. 20.....- 1 and 2 Win. IV, ¢. 32, Sec. 3. Bustar “d, or Wild | § England ...--....-.-. Mia elecOpSepbialc ce \= are 21 and 2 Win. IV, c. 32, Sec. 3; 27 Tur key. WrisgNeMGle socsnGnaassas Jan. 10 to Sept. 1 -...--. § George ILI, c. 35, Sec. 4. EGE: (TMAIO))<.....<.-2|'.0. 2: (Oise eee June 10:to Oct. 28....--- 5 Us5e Ie DMeer(tallow)).=.-.|---=-- CO Sae eae eee Michaelmas to June 20. 10 Wm. IIT, ¢. 8, Sec. 6. COTS Gy eee | United Kingdom... --. | Dec. 10 to Aug. 12...--- | 4 and 2 Wm. IV, c. 32, Sec. 3. Hicresand habbrtis!= 220). .eeeccieeae eck On moorlands and unin-| 43 and 44 Vict., c. 47, Sec. 1. closed lands, Apr. 1 to mE DEC TO: Heath fowl ...-.. Scotland) occ eceee~ Dec. 10 to Aug. 20 ...-.-| 13 George III, c. 54, Sec. 1. Partridge... ..--- Hine land! es one 2 sea [Hehe li toisepte ibs... 22. land 2 Wm. LV, e. 32, Sec. 3 Scotland eee eee ase (Or toma avicetenic ese 13 George ILI, ce. 54, Sec. 1. Tirelamdle is. ose - 2 37 George IIT, c. 21, Sec. 2. 1 DPIKeA CH CUES in aces land 2 Wm. IV, c. 32, Sec. 3. Scotland =ca-2 sec eevee laase 13 George ITT, c. 54, Sec. 1. al\firelamal 22 peers te : 28 and 29 Vict., c. 54. -| England and Scotland} ‘ 43 and 44 Vict., c. 35, Sec. 3. Irelands. 22) eee Jan. 10 to Sept. 20 .--.--- | 37 George III, ©. 21, Sec. 2. All Enric of wild | United Kingdom...-..- poMfar: a torAtion 1. sa 22 | 43 and 44 Vict., ¢. 35, Sec. 3. birds. | 128 and 29 Vict., c. 121; 36 and 37 Vict., c. 71; 39 and 40 Vict., ¢. 19. 241 and 42 Vict. c. 39. 336 and 37 Vict., c. 71, Sec. 15. #R. S., c. 95, Secs. oo 16. 51 and 2 Win. IV., c. 32, Sec. 4; 41 and 42 Vict., c. 39, Sec, 11; 43 and 44 Vict.,c. 35, Sec. 3; R.S, of Canada, . 95, See. 12. 452 ~ Name of fish. Freshwater fish (except pollen, trout, andchar.) Herring Lobsters Oystersi--= ese Pickerel Pollen Salmon Do Do Trout (brook). -- Trout (speckled) FOREIGN STATUTES. Table of Close Seasons for Tish now in force. Name of country. Ontario and Quebec. -. England and Wales... West coast of Scotland - New Brunswick (south coast), Nova Scotia (west coast). New Brunswick (north coast), Nova Scotia (north coast), Que- bee. New Brunswick, Nova | Scotia, Prince Ed- ward Island, Quebec. Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec. ireland oss. ase United Kingdom...---| Quebecisessececoesee | BOO) cjsacienee oseee si New Brunswick, Nova Scotia. | New Brunswick ...--- | Manitoba, and North- west Verritory. England and Wales .-.- Ontario and Quebec --- Ontario Prince Edward Island. test of Canada | Sept. 1 to Feb. 1 ; Aug. Close season. Apr. 15 to June 15 Oct. 1 to Feb. 1 Mar. 15 to June 15 Day fishing prohibited between June 1 and Oct. 1. ATI OL LOP ADI ene eeee Aug. 20 to Apr. 20....... June 1 to Sept. 15 Apr. 15 to May 15 Nove! to daniel ee s=.2 z Aug. 1 to May 1 (net fishing) ;sept.lto M ay 1 (angling). 15 to Mar. 1 (net fishing). Sept.15 to Feb. 1 (angling)| Mar. 1 to Oct.1 Apr. 15 to May 15 ......- Aug. 31 to May 1 May 1 to June 15 Octulsho Hebe. sssees j Sept. 15 to Jan. 1 Sept. 15 to May 1 Oct. 1 to Dee.1 Oct.1 to Jan.1 | Statutes. By Governor in Council under Revised Statutes, ¢. 95, Sees. 11, 16, 28 and 29 Vict., c. 121, Sec. 64. “The Freshwater Fisheries Act, 1878,” 40 and 41 Vict., c. 39, See. ils “The Herring F isheries (Scot- 1: md) Act, 1889,” 52 and 53 Vict. c.,23, See. 5. By Governor in Council, under "R.’S., c. 95, Sec. 16. (See Statistical Record of Canada, 1886, p. 326. ) (See Statistical Record of Canada, 1886, p. 326,) and R.S., ¢. 95, Sec. int 44 and 45 Vict., c. 66. 36 and 37 Vict., ¢. 71, Sec. 19. || Revised Statutes of Canada, ¢. 95, Sec. 8. (See Statistical Record of Canada, 1886, p. 325.) By Governor in Council, under ‘B.S. , c. 95, Secs. 11, 16. Do. Do. Do. 28 and 29: Vict., c. 121, Sec. 64. R. S., ¢. 95, Sec. 9. In addition to the general fishery acts which have been passed at dif- erent times by Parliament, special acts prescribing regulations for par- ticular counties or rivers have been enacted from a very early period. Instances of such acts are the statutes of 4 Anne and 1 George I, for “The Preservation of Salmon and other Fish in the Counties of South- ampton and Wilts” (amended by 37 George III, c. 95); and the statute of 18 George III for “the better Preservation of Fish and Regulating the Fisheries in the Rivers Severn and Verniew.”! Under this first section, in the general division of the subject, may be cited the following British and Canadian statutes, which have for their object the prevention of acts prejudicial to the processes of breed- ing of game, birds, and fish, viz: That which prohibits the taking of the eggs of any game bird, swan, wild duck, teal, or widgeon.° That which prohibits the destruction of either the eggs or nests of any partridge, pheasant, grouse, quail, duck, or other wild fowl! That which imposes a penalty upon any one who shall buy, sell, or have in his possession any salmon, trout, or char roe, or who shall use any kind of fish roe as bait.* 1 Oke’s ‘‘ Fishery Laws,” pp. 31, 32. 21 and 2 Wm. IV, ec. 32, Sec. 24. 310 Wm. III, c. 8, Sec. 8. 424 and 25 Vict., c. 109, Sec. 9. GREAT BRITAIN AND CANADA. 453 That which forbids the taking of young salmon;} Or catching or disturbing salinon when spawning or near the spawn- ing beds.’ Or interfering with the free passage of salmon up a river.’ Or placing a device in any non-tidal water to obstruct any fish de- scending the stream.! That which prohibits the taking, buying, or selling, or having in pos- session pollen less than eight inches in length.® The Revised Statutes (1886) of Canada provide— That no salmon of less than three pounds shall be caught or killed. § That. no salmon shall be captured within two hundred yards of the mouth of any tributary, creek, or stream which salmon frequent to spawn.’ That no one shall catch, buy, sell, or possess, the young of any fish protected by the statutes.’ The Report on the Fisheries Protective Service of Canada for 1889 (pp. 8, 10), recommends the passage at an early date of similar laws to check the depletion of the lobster and mackerel fisheries of Canada. The establishment of close seasons, and the adoption of stringent laws against the destruction of spawn and young fish are strongly urged. An extensive system of hatcheries tor the artificial breeding of fish is mnaintained by the Canadian Government. At these hatcheries there are raised, by artificial processes, salmon, white fish, salmon trout, brook trout, pickerel, black bass, and (since 1891) lobsters.2 Experi- ments have recently been begun with great success in the artificial breeding of cod and oysters.” The gross output of young fish from the thirteen public hatcheries of Canada for the year 1890 was 90,213,000, and the number of eggs of fresh and salt water fish placed in the incu- bators, 144,613,000; while the total number of young fish turned out of the hatcheries into the waters of Canada since the inception of artificial fish culture by the Government in 1868, is 799,757,900." As the result of the fostering care thus exer ‘cised, and other causes, the total export product of Canadian fisheries increased during the fifteen years succeeding that date (1868-18383), from $3,357,510 to $8,809,118. II. Next in order of treatment are those statutes which have for their object the prevention of wasteful and destructive methods of kill- ing game, birds, and fishes. In this group may be placed the British statutes forbidding poaching by night, either on private land,’ or on the public highways; 4 also— Those which prohibit the placing of poison in exposed places, for Mibid., Sec. 15. 2Tbid., Sec. 16. 336 and 37 Vict., c.71, Sec. 16. 4Ibid., Sec. 15. 6«The Pollen Fisheries Act, (Ireland) 1891,” 54 and 55 Vict., c. 20, Sec. 3. Bajos.) Ca 9D, SECs (Os TIbid., Sec. 8. ®R.S., c. 95, Sec. 14. 9Report of the Superintendent of Fish Culture for the Dominion of Canada, 1890, pp. 7—9. Report of the Superintendent of Fish Culture for the Dominion of Canada, 1889, pp. 75—81. UTbid., 1890, page 5. 2 Johnson’s Graphic Statistics of Canada, 1887, page 4, 1310 Win. III, c. 8, Sec. 16; 27 Geo. LII, c. 35, Sees. , »3, 9 Geo. LV, c. 69; 11 and’12 Vict., c. 29, See. 5. “7 and 8 Walcts, €.29) 1 and 2 Wm. IV, ec. 32, Sec. 3; 11 and 12 Vict., c. 30, Sec. 4; 26 and 27 Vict., c, 113, Sec. 3 AA FOREIGN STATUTES. the purpose of catching game, and the sale of poisoned grain, seed, or meal for any purpose! Those statutes which prohibit the use of poison, lime, and noxious sub- stances for the killing of freshwater fish,? and the discharge of substances into salt? or fresh water such as would be likely to injure marine or rivex fish.* The English “Ground Game Act, 1880”° prohibits the general use of spring traps for catching ground game, and limits narrowly the num- ber of persons authorized to kill such game with firearms. “The Fisheries (Dynamite) Act, 1877” prohibits the use of dynamite and other explosives for the catching of fish in a public fishery, and “The Freshwater Fisheries Act, 1878 extends this prohibition to private waters.’ In the Dominion of Canada, the use of explosive instruments in the hunting of whales, seals, and porpoises is forbidden by statute;*® and a bill has been introduced into the Canadian House of Commons this pres- ent year, by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, extending this prohibition to all other kinds of fish.° Those statutes have a similar object which prohibit the use of nets of less than a certain size in order to prevent the needless destruction of fish too small for consumption.!° Other statutes prohibit the use of nets altogether in certain canes: either directly or through the instrumentality of a Fishery Board," especially in localities where they would interfere with the breeding of the fish.” The British Salmon Fishery Acts prohibit the taking of salmon, trout, or char by means of lights, laths, jacks, wires, snares, spears, g affs, strokehalls, snatches, and other like instruments.” The use of fixed engines for taking salmon is also forbidden," as well as the breaking of dams or flood-g gates with the intention to take salmon or other fish.!° To protect clam and other bait beds from injury another act empow- ers the British Board of Trade to restrict or prohibit the use of the beam trawl for any assigned period.!® The history of British legislation on the subject of the protection of sea fisheries is instructive. Thirty years ago these fisheries were regulated by an elaborate system of protective. measures which were all substantially repealed in 1868 upon the recommendation of a Royal Commission. Owing to the unrestricted fishing in the sea which there- upon ensued, there resulted such a serious depletion of the fisheries that another Commission appointed in 1883 recommended a return to 126 and 27 Vict., ¢. 113 Sec. 2; 27 and 28 Vict., ce. 115; 43 and 44 Vict., e. 47 Sees. ib, (8, "224 and 25 Vie t., c. 97, Sec. 32; ce. 109, Sec. 5; 36 and 37 Vict., c. 71, Sec. 13. 351 and 52 Vict., 54, Sees. 1, 2. 4R.S. Canada, -c. 95, See. 15. 543 and 44 Vict., c. 47, Secs. 1, 6. 640 and 41 Vict., c. 65. 741 and 42 Vict., c. 39, Sec. 12. 8R.S., c. 95, Sec. 6. ° House of Commons Debates, 1892, Vol. 24, page 119. 1024 and 25 Vict., c. 109, Sec. 10; R. S. Canada, ec. 95, Secs. 8, 10, 14. 147 and 48 Vict., c.11, Sec. 1; R. 8. Canada, c. 95, Secs. 8, 14; amended by 54 and 5D Vict., c. 43, Sec. 1. 2R.S., c. 95, Sec. 10. 1324 and 25 Vict.,c. 109, Sees. 8, 9; 23 and 29 Vict., c. 121, Sec. G4. 1424 and 35 Vict., c. 109, See. 11. 1524 and 25 Vict., c. 97, Sec. 32. 644 and 45 Vict., (Pies ly GREAT BRITAIN AND CANADA. A55> the former restrictive measures; since which time a number ot stat- utes have been passed to accomplish the end in view. Thus, in 1885, “The Sea Fisheries (Scotland) Amendment Act”! was passed, which conferred upon the Fishery Board of Scotland power to make by-laws restricting or prohibiting any method of fishing for sea fish which they might deem injurious (subject to the approval of the Home Office), in any part of the sea adjoining Scotland within the fishery limits of the British Islands. In 1888 “The Sea Fisheries Regulation Act”? for England and Wales was passed, which provided for the establishmentof sea fisheries districts and local fisheries committees and empowered these committees to make by-laws restricting or prohibiting the use of any injurious instrument in taking sea fish, and other rules and regulations. “The Herring Fishery (Scotland) Act, 1889,”° empowered the Fishery Board of Scotland to prohibit by appropriate by-laws methods of fishing known as beam trawling aud otter trawling on any part of the coast of Scotland within three miles of Jand, and within any of the bays en- closed by headlands specified in a schedule annexed to the act. Pro- vision* was also made in Section 7 extending the authority of the Board over asection of the sea Lying within a line drawn from Dancansby Head in Caithness to Rattray Point in Aberdeenshire. A similar provision occurs in “The Steam Trawling (Ireland) Act, 1889,”* which empowers the Inspectors of Irish Tisheries to make by-laws prohibiting beam trawling or otter trawling, “within three miles of low- water mark of any part of the coast of Ireland, or within the waters of any other defined areas specified in any such by-law.” Ill. An elaborate system of licenses to restrict and regulate the kill- ing of game, birds, and fish has been in vogue in the United Kingdom for a long time past. Thus, under the English Game Acts,? an excise license is required before any person (other than the owner) can legally kill deer or any other game with certain limited exceptions. Other statutes restrict the killing of game even further. Thus no one is per- mitted in England to kill hares, except an occupier of land, and one other person authorized by him in writing.® Under the “Gun License Act,”7 a license i is required before any per- son can use or carry a gun for any purpose. Aun elaborate system of licenses is also in operation regulating the selling of game, and under it penalties are imposed upon all persons who sell game without a license, or who shall sell to a dealer not licensed, or who buy game from an unlicensed dealer.® “The Freshwater Fisheries Act, 1878,”° authorizes the Boards of Tish Conservators to issue licenses, by the day, week, season, or part thereof, to take salmon, trout, orchar. Similar authority to issue fishing licenses is conferred upon the Minister of Marine and Fisheries of the Dominion of Canada, by the Revised Statutes of that country.” The license sys- tem in the case of other fish has proved to be so successful that a bill has just been introduced into the Dominion Parliament to place the 148 and 49 Vict., c. 70, Sec. 4. 251 and 52 Vict. te BA, Sees. 1, 2. 352 and 53 Vict. ,¢. 23, Secs. 6, 7. 452 and 53 Vict., c. 74, Sec. 3. 51 and 2 Wm. LV, ec. 32; 23 ae 24 Vict. c. 90. 611 and 12 Vict., c. 29, Sec. 2 733 and 34 Vict., c. 57. 1 and 2 Wm. IV, ec. 32, Secs. 25, 27. 941 and 42 Vict., c. "30, Sec. 7, and acts cited therein, WC. 95, Sec. 4. A5G6 FOREIGN STATUTES. lobster fishery under license, for the reason, as stated by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries in the course of debate, that the industry is in imminent danger of extermination through excessive and indiscrimi- nate fishing.! IV. Very extensive powers are conferred upon the owners of property and upon officers of the law in Great Britain to aid the enforcement of statutes designed to protect game, birds, and fish. Thus the owner of game can warn off poachers by day’ or night,’ and require them to tell their names and addresses, and if they refuse or return on the land, to arrest them and take them before a justice. Game recently killed may be seized and taken by force from trespassers by {ihe owner for his own use,! and under the decisions of the English House of Lords the owner can seize game which has been illegally caught on his land, even when in the hands of an innocent purchaser, for value.° Gamekeepers are permitted to seize dogs, nets, and engines found on the owner’s land which belong to persons not licensed to kill game,® and a dog or implement so seized becomes thereby forfeited to such owner, who may destroy it or not, as he thinks fit.’ By statute any one who, without right, hunts deer on inclosed ground is guilty of felony, and any one who commits a second offense of any kind relating to deer, whether similar to the first offense or not, is also guilty of felony.® By “The Poaching Prevention Act, 1862,”° any constable may stop and search on the highway any person suspected of having been unlaw- tully on land in search of game, and having game, nets, or guns in his possession, and also persons suspected of having aided and abetted such poaching; and he may also stop and search any cart suspected of containing such game or implements, and seize and detain them, and proceed against the offender before a justice, where upon conviction he shall be liable to a fine and the forfeiture of the game. The fisheries of the United Kingdom and Ireland are protected through the instrumentality of a series of Fishery Boards, of which there are in England three sets at the present time, viz, the Salmon Fishery Boards, under the acts of 1865 and 1873;'° the Trout and Char Fishery Boards, under the act of 1878;"! and the Freshwater Fishery Boards, un- der the acts of 1878 and 1884,” “The Fishery Board (Scotland) Act, 1882,” established a fishery board for Scotland to take cognizance of everything relating to the coast and deep-sea fisheries of Scotland.” The Revised Statutes of the Dominion of Canada provide that fishery officers shall be appointed by the Governor in Council, and very large powers are entrusted to that official to make and alter regulations for the sea-coast and inland fisheries, which have the same force and effect as if enacted by the Canadian Parliament." 1 Debates of House of Commons of Canada, 1892, vol. 24, page 119. 21 and 2 Wm. IV, ec. 32, Sec. 31. 39 Geo. IV, c. 69, Sec. 2. * 41 and 2 Wm. IV, ec. 32, Sec. 36; for Scotland, 2 and 3 Wm. IV, ec. 68, See. 5. 5Blades »v. Higgs, 11 H. L. C., 621. 51 and 2 Wm. LV, c. 32, Sec. 13; 24 and 25 Vict., c. 96, Secs. 15, 16. 7Kinesworth v. Bretton, 5 Taunt., 416. 894 and 25 Vict., c. 96, Secs. 12, 13. 9 25 and 26 Vict., c. 114, Sec. 2. 1098 and 29 Vict., c. 121, Sees. 4, 5, 19, 38; 36 and 37 Vict., c. 71, Sees. 5-8. 1141 and 42 Vict., c. 39, Sec. 6. 1241 and 42 Vict., c. 39, Sec. 6; 47 and 48 Vict., c. 11, Sec. 2. 1345 and 46 Vict., c. 78. 4h. 8., c. 95, Secs. 2, 16. 5, a P . re '> eS : 5 ' a . ” ee ¥ Ls . M6 8 ey A see J ; z 3S pe Gat Say é ’ i: ne 1 ee - > . : - e sad 2 = - — 7 re es ee ees St a es a ee eT st om gmcreee 8 Auten angpmlnaatn amcat | §enG)% 13 49 “Ne TNO oh dm Shout: ae: 5 ASS Oe i sit, oehosd yite Ya uashosgnet | 5: ey i Jnshesineagnt: os TM ATH AE 9 “ ‘ er im ete MC mn tp nt ea nes basie1! Jo jeso) mtotesa a ort no sok. . B08. 9A e2oinsileia B9G sit yd bawvoo : io led aw ee ail ‘ f : i. fe , GREAT BRITAIN AND CANADA. 457 In England the owner of land or any one in his employ, may seize the implements of any person angling for fish without right, or may prosecute him by criminal proceedings; and both remedies may be en- forced concurrently against any one who fishes unlawfully by any means other than angling.! Under “The Salmon Fishery Act, 1865,” any water bailiff may stop and search the boats of any person suspected of illegal fishing, and may search his baskets, and seize any fish and implements, and appre- hend the offeuder without a warrant. Justices of the Peace may issue warrants to search places for illegal instruments and fish illegally caught and seize the Same, which upon the conviction of the offender shall be forfeited.? “The Herring Fishery (Scotland) Amendment Act, 1890,”4 provides for the punishment of persons convicted of illegal fishing for herring, and that every net illegally set may be seized and destroy red, or other- or otherwise disposed of, “The Pollen Fisheries (Ireland) Act, 1891,”° provides that constables and water bailiffs may without a warrant open and examine all boxes and baskets in search of pollen illegally caught, and may stop and search all boats, and seize fish and instr uments as to which there has been an infraction of the law. By a recent act® the use of purse seines for catching any fish in any of the waters of Canada has been absolutely prohibited, and the penalty imposed consists of a fine and the confiscation of the offending vessel and all the apparatus used in connection with the illegal catching of fish by the method in question, GREAT BRITAIN. STATUTE OF, RELATING TO THE OYSTER FISHERIES OF IRELAND. “THE SEA FISHERIES ACT, 1868,” [81 and 32 Vict., cap. 45. July 13, 1868.] * * * * * * * 67. The Irish Fishery Commissioners may from Time to Time lay before Her Majesty in Council Byelaws for the Purpose of restricting or regulating the dredging for Oysters on any Oyster Bedsor Banks situate within the Distance of Twenty Miles measured from a straight Line drawn from the Eastern Point of Lambay Island to Carnsore Point on the Coast of Ireland, outside of the Exclusive Fishery Limits of the British Islands, and all such Byelaws shall apply equally to all Boats and Persons on whom they may be binding. 124 and 25 Vict., c. 96, Sees. 24, 25. 228 and 29 Vict., c. 121, Secs. 31, 36. $41 and 42 Vict., c. 39, Secs. 9, 11; 51 and 52 Vict., c. 54, Sec. 7; R.S. Canada, ec. 95, Sees. 12, 17. 453 and 54 Vict., c. 10, Sec. 3. 554 and 55 Vict., c. 20, Sees. 5, 6, 654 and 55 Vict., Cc. 43, Sec. 1. 08 - 19 9 *CGE > °49TA ZTE VIE (B98T IOV Setasysty PAS 9YL Aq pasaao0o a” pureed] Jo Seog usejsey 9Yy) uo PoIW aNvVTdda! quepurxpursadng WAG VOPMOML D9 LL APALUG PYPPOP) PUD PSDOP'S 2 PY) JO PYJQ FY) 7? pamdol] quweennneseeetet et erg, Ss aTrur gz a AY teyenL o Id au0s ule a) ae 458 FOREIGN STATUTES. Tt shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by (rder in Council, to do all or any of the following Things, namely: (a) To direct that such Byelaws shall be observed; (b) To impose Penalties not exceeding Twenty Pounds for the Breach of such Byelaws; (c) To apply to the Breach of such Byelaws such (if any) of the Enaciments in force respecting the Breach of the Regulations respecting Irish Oyster Fisheries within the Exclusive Fishery Limits of the British Islands, and with such Modifications and Alterations as may be found desirable; (d) To revoke or alter any Order so made, provided that the length of Close Time prescribed by any such Order shall not be shorter than that prescribed for the Time being by the Irish Fishery Commissioners in respect of Beds or Banks within the exclusive Fishery Limits of the British Islands. Every such Order shall be binding on all British Sea-Fishing Boats, and on any other Sea-Fishing Boats in that Behalf specified in the Order, and on the Crews of such Boats. STATUTE RELATING TO THE SCOTCH HERRING FISHERY. “HERRING FISHERY (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1889.” (52 and 53 Vict., cap. 23. 26th July, 1889.] Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Hxcellent Majesty, by and with the ad- vice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as Jollows: 1. This Act may be cited as the Herring Fishery (Scotland) Act, 1889. 2. This Act extends only to Scotland, and tothe parts of the sea adjoining Scotland. 3. In this act ‘“ Herring Fishery (Scotland) Acts” means the Herring Eero Fishery Acts enumerated in Schedule I to the Fishery 45 and 46 Vict.,c.78. Board (Scotland) Act, 1882, and includes any enact- ments amending those acts or any of them. 4. Any person buying, selling, delivering, or receiving fresh herrings in the Scotch herring fishery shail be entitled to use toe eet ranoranar- for the purpose thereof the measure known as the cran, or a quarter cran measure, being a measure of such capacity that four times its contents, when filled with herrings, shall be equal to one cran; and such measure shall be made of wood, or of such other material as the Fishery Board for Scotland shall direct, and shall be made and branded or otherwise marked in accordance with any regulations for the time being in force of the Fishery Board for Scot- land, which regulations that Board are hereby authorized to make, and from time to time to alter and revoke as they see fit. These measures, made, branded, or otherwise marked in all respects in conformity with the regulations for the time being in force of the said Board, shall be the only legal measures for use in buying, selling, delivering, or receiving fresh herrings in the Scotch herring fishery; and any person using any box, basket, or other measure not so made, branded, or otherwise marked shall be liable, on conviction under the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts, to a fine not exeeeding five Short Title. Extent of act. ay. oT a fet es inet ioerptact vd mod es f her opetibve wet cas Chrclen tla walay id Aeavgnast i072) | roltsibaria | vuneaaball i i qdamaen: co d , lg See jer : i) rot ebwthod {) San a Doe 7 eors hea: dirt peed ene! . baoansa od ledale a} joe ad oF t > et al ~ ke ] de> clear 5 ; ’ waren tl oe tae = eer ett ware are ee tes Sacre: aceaes EN BE ER De os oe es eT at 0 eT ener enna unnatggy cere mane erunnah such method of fishing, in contra- be liable, on conviction under the Extract fr CHAPTER |) Acts, toa fine not exceeding five : _ id not exceeding twenty pounds for An Act to amend the Herring ret of and every aed set, or = a : ntion of any such byelaw, may be and fcr other purposes relajce disposed of as in the sixth sec- Sackett & Wilhelms Lathe Co NY GREAT BRITAIN AND CANADA. 459 pounds for the first offence, and not exceeding twenty pounds for the second or any subsequent offence; and also to the forfeiture of the measure or measures which may be seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of by any superintendent of the herring fishery or other officer employed in the execution of the Herring Fishery (Scotland) Acts: Pro- vided always, that nothing in this Act contained shall prevent the sale of herrings by weight or number or in bulk. 5. It shall not be lawful to set or shoot any herring net on any day > ee between sunrise and one hour before sunset on any day and Sunday fishing between the first day of June and the first day of prohibited on west October, nor between sunrise on Saturday morning and one bour before sunset on Monday eveuing, on the West Coasts of Scotland, between thepoints of Ardnamurchan on the north and the Mull of Galloway on the south. Any person acting in contravention of this section shall be liable, on conviction under the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts, to a fine not exceeding, for the first offence, five pounds, and for the second or any subsequent offence, twenty pounds; and every net set or at- tempted to be set in contravention of this section shall be forfeited and -imay be seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of by any superin- tendent of the herring fishery, or other officer employed in the execu- tion of the Herring Fishery (Scotland) Acts. 6. (1) It shall not be lawful to use the method of fisning known as rs beam trawling or otter trawling within three miles of eam and otter Eee trawling within cer. low-water mark of any part of the coast .of Scotland tainlimitsprohibited. yoy within the waters specified in the schedule hereto annexed, save only between such points on the coast or within such other defined areas as may from time to time be permitted by by-laws of the Fishery Board for Scotland and subject to any conditions or regu- lations made by those by-laws; provided that this section shall not ap- ply to the Solway Firth nor to the Pentland Firth; and provided, also, that nothing herein contained shall affect the powers of the fishery board under section four of the Sea Fisheries (Scotland) Amendment Act, 1885. (2) The Fishery Board may from time to time make, alter, and revoke by-laws for the purposes of this section, but a by-law shall not be of any validity untilit is confirmed by the Secretary for Scotland. (3) Any person who uses any method of fishing in contravention of this enactment or of any by-law of the Fishery Board, shall be liable, on conviction under the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts, to a.fine not exceeding five pounds for the first offence, and not exceeding twenty pounds for the second or any subsequent offence; and every net set or attempted to be set, in contravention of this section shall be forfeited, and may be seized and destroyed or otherwise dis- posed of by any superintendent of the herring fishery or other officers employed in the execution of the Herring Fishery (Scotland) Acts. 7. (1) The Fishery Board may, by by-law or by-laws, direct that the _. methods of fishing known as beam trawling and otter pe ower fo bremit trawling shall not be used within a line drawn from op ee Duncansby Head, in Caithness, to Rattery Point, i ; Aberdeenshire, in any area or areas to be defined in such by-law, and may from time to time make, alter, and revoke by- laws for the purposes of this section, but no such by-law shall be of any validity until it has been confirmed by the Secretary for Scotland. (2) Any person who uses any such method of fishing in contraven- tion of any such by-law shall be liable, on conviction under the Sum- mary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts, to a fine not exceeding five pounds 4. and 49 Vict., c. 70. Fish: rect 4 fishing, in contra- The (2.) Any person who uses any such method of ing, + hin epee ae caniin ~ a ee vention of any such byelaw mat 3 es ee Bolg — Extract i pod pollen my ~ from Duncansby Head, in jean 74 | Jurisdiction (Scotlan ri a oan ee R 23 i aot Te mead my i heamicenaire, in any area orareas pounds = the a a I ad Lig _ dn = aged CHAPTE . + Soe eet ey such byelav, and may from time to time make, alter, the Bog nd or any eee ay svc Bycany wey hc saith oy caged tot ply i — and cig a cigar acing een re tas ben coeitenad ty the seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of as in the sixth sec- and for other purposes relating thereto. } byclaw = i ee f way Se : = tion of this Act mentioned. : Secretary for $ s [26th July 1889.] Secretary Ne tS . Ose MOUME Findét f ; ¢! SrA . Dar a bay OR Aa ————$——— ee NORTH EASTERN SECTION OF SGOTLAND. ae ce 460 FOREIGN STATUTES. for the first offence, and not exceeding twenty pounds for the second or any subsequent offence; and every net set, or attempted to be set, in contravention of any such by-law may be seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of as in the sixth section of this Act mentioned. 8. It shall not be lawful to land or to sell in Scotland any fish caught in contravention of this Act, or of any by-law made ,..,, ‘ ; = ; aa : ishillegally caught thereunder, and all superintendents and other officers not to be landed or employed in the execution of the Herring Fishery (Scot- *°! land) Acts, are hereby empowered and required to prevent the landing or sale of any fish so caught. SCHEDULE. Wigtown Bay, within a line drawn from Great Ross Point, near Little Ross Lighthouse, on the east to Isle of Whithorn on the west. Luce Bay, within a line drawn from a point near Port William on the east to Killyness Point, near Drummore, on -the west. Loch-in-dail, within a line drawn from Rudhana Cathair (Mull of Oe) on the south to the Rhynns, near Rhynns of Islay Lighthouse, on the north. Loch Snizort, within a line drawn from Vatternish Point on the west to Dunlea on the east. Broad Bay, within a line drawn from Tolsta Head on the north to Tiumpan Head on the south. Stornoway Bay, within a line drawn from Kebock Head on the south to Bayble Head on the north. Thurso Bay, within a line drawn from Brimsness on the west to Dunnet Head on the east. Sinclair Bay, within a line drawn from Noss Head on the south to Duneausby Head on the north. Scapa Bay, within a line drawn from St. Mary’s Point on the east to Houton Heads on the west. St. Magnus Bay, within a line drawn from Esha Ness on the north to a point near Sandness on the south. The waters inside a line drawn from Corsewall Point, in the county of Wigtown, to the Mull of Cantyre, in the county of Argyll. The waters inside a line from Port Askadel, near Ardnamurchan Point, on the west to Ru-Cisteach, near Arasaig, on the east. The waters inside of a line from Ru-geur, Slate Point, on the south to a point near Ru-an-dunan on the north. The waters inside a line from Ru-na-nag, Loch Torridon, on the south to a point at Long Island, Gareloch, on the north. The waters outside Loch Tarbert, Harris, from Toe Head on the south to Camus-Huisnish on the north. East and west Loch Roag, from Gallon Head on the west to Coul Point on the east. The waters inside a line from Greenstone Point on the west to a point near Meal-Sgreaton, Ru-Cooygach, on the east. The waters inside a line from Ru-Stoer on the west to a point at Scourie Bay on the east. Dornoch Firth. ) Fraserburgh Bay. Montrose Bay. Moray Firth (upper parts of). }> Aberdeen Bay. Saint Andrew’s Bay. Firth of Forth. All as specified in the existing by- laws of the Fishery Board. ee = ene Sn ee ee ee a = get ae or Oi aaa ——- ee a SSeS ve rd CEYLON. 461 CEYLON. REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES OF CEYLON. Regulation No. 3 of 1811. FOR THE PROTECTION OF HIS MAJESTY’S PEARL BANKS OF CEYLON. Whereas there is reason to suspect that depredations are commit- ted in the pearl banks of this Island by boats and other vessels frequenting those places in the calm sea- son without any necessity or lawful cause for being in that situation: For the protection of His Majesty’s property and revenue, His Ex- cellency the Governor in Council is pleased hereby to enact and de- clare: That if any boat or other vessel shall hereafter, between the 10th of January and the end of April, or between the Ist of October and the end of November in any year, be. Penalty on vessels found within the limits of the pearlbanks, as described fOUy¢ hin thepearl in the schedule hereunto annexed, anchoring or hovering and not proceeding to her proper destination as wind and weather may permit, it shall be lawful for any person or persons hold- ing a commission or warrant »from His Excellency the Governor for the purposes of this Regulation to enter and seize such boat or other vessel, and carry the same to some convenient port or place in this island for prosecution. And every such boat or other vessel is hereby - declared liable to forfeiture by sentence of any court having revenue jurisdiction of sufficient amount, and shall be condemned accordingly ; two-thirds thereof to the use of His Majesty and one-third to the per- SONS seizing or prosecuting, unless such boat or other vessel shall have been forced into the situation aforesaid by accident or other necessary cause, the proof whereof to be on the party alleging such defence. Colombo, 9th March, 1811. By order of the Council. Preamble. JAMES GAY, Secretary to the Council. By His Excellency’s command. JOHN ROpNEY, Chief Secretary to Government. SCHEDULE REFERRED TO. Vessels navigating the inner or alongshore passage are not to hover or anchor in deeper than four fathoms water. Vessels navigating the outer passage are not to hover or anchor within twelve fathoms water. No. 4.—1842. FOR THE PROTECTION OF HER MAJESTY’S RIGHTS IN THE DIGGING FOR DEAD CHANKS. Whereas it is necessary to make provision for the more effectual pro- tection of the deposits of chanks called ‘dead chanks” in the Crown lands in the Northern Province: 1. It is therefore hereby enacted by the Governor of Ceylon, with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council 4. wii, tor aicoine thereof, that from and after the passing of this Ordi- for dead chanks with: nance any person who shall dig for dead chanks inany ©v® Permit. jand belonging to the Crown, without the permission in writing of the Preamble. AN 09 Ourty SameulIy, BANIeS ’ N H i 3 i : ; 4 ‘0681 4° ‘SI “ON aouvurp.g hg PI4PAOD VILY BY S82 PIL P2L0]09 VILV FYT Ri2yusw 24vPag ‘IGT 4° ‘GE ON U0:IQVe?Nbey Aq ‘paseao7 ‘uopheD yo JSDOD 2Say ayT Om 2u2eevl[ po PYeauv mp s2IwIIpUI FIRLINS PINEG SHIYHHSIA THVdd NO'TAd) 462 FOREIGN STATUTES. Government agent or other person duly authorized by him in that be- half, or contrary to the terms of such permit, shall be liable to a penalty, for the first offence not exceeding three pounds, and in default of pay- ment to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for a term not ex- ceeding three months; and for the second or any subsequent offence to a penalty not exceeding five pounds, and in default of payment to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for a term of five months. 2. And it is further enacted that the dead chanks obtained by dig- Wain ging in the Crown lands shall, on first being dug up, Sena Raa ee be taken to and kept only at such stores or place s in Boorge without per- the immediate neighbourhood of the lands whence the dead chanks were dug up as may be approved of by the Government agent as places for storing said dead chanks, and that they shall not be thereafter removed from such stores or places without the permission in writing of the Government agent, or of some person duly authorised by him on that behalf; and that the taking or remov al of dead chanks contrary to the provisions of this clause shall be an offence, and shall be punished by the confiscation of all dead chanks so taken or removed. 3. And it is further enacted that one-half of all fines hereinbefore directed to be levied and one-half of the produce of all confiscations under this Ordinance, shall goto Our Lady, the Queen, and the other half to ‘the person in conse- quence of whose information the offender is convicted. Provided al- ways, that in the event of the inability of any defend- ant to pay any such fine, and sentence of imprisonment being awarded for any such offence, the district judge shall neverthe- less pay to such informer the amount to which he would have been en- titled if such fine had been paid. Passed in Council the Fifteenth day of August, One thousand Hight hundred and Forty-two. Penalty. Fines, how to be dis- posed of. Proviso. KENNETH MACKENZIE, Acting Clerk to the Council. Published by order of His Excellency the Governor. P. ANSTRUTHER, Colonial Secretary. No. 5.—1842. FOR THE PROTECTION OF HER MAJESTY’S CHANK FISHERY. Whereas it is necessary to make provision for the protection of Her Majesty’s Chank Fishery: 1. It is therefore hereby enacted by the governor of Ceylon, with the : advice and consent of the Legislative Council thereoi, Pena hy tes aa ivr that from and after the passing of this Ordinance every chanks without boat, canoe, raft, or vessel whatsoever which shall be censetobvconseated found employ ed in the fishing for, or in any way for the collection of, chanks, without the written license for its so being employed of the Gov ernment agent of the province on the coasts of which it shall be so found, or of some person duly authorized by him to grant suc +h licenses, or contrary to the terms thereof, ia Hold Sued an shall, together with all its appurtenances, be confis- offence a Hable to cated, and every person found therein shall be guilty of an offence, and be liable on conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding one pound, and in default of payment to imprison- Preamble. CEYLON. 463 ment, with or without hard labour, for a period not exceeding one month. 2. And it is further enacted that all persons found fishing for, or otherwise attempting to collect chanks without a license for that purpose from the Government agent of the ee spurns province on the coast of which they shall be so found, tempting to collect or from some person duly authorised by him to grant ¢havks without He such license, or contrary to the terms thereof, shall be euilty of an offence and be liable on conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding one pound, and in default of payment to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for a period not exceeding one month. 3. And it is further enacted that all chanks shall be landed at some place on the coasts of this Colony, within such time after their being fished up or otherwise collected as ,,Chimhste belanded shall be stipulated in their license, and every person colony within astipu- {niling so to land any chanks in the fishing or collec. “* Pe tion of which he shall have been employed shall be guilty of an offence, and be liable on conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding one pound, and in default of payment to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for a period not exceeding one month. And ever person procuring, instigating, or assisting another to commit the said last-mentioned offence shall be liable to the same pun- ishment as a person actually committing it. 4. And it is further enacted that the possession of chanks at any place on the coasts of this Island, other than a port of 5)... so orenank é z = ae ; nia ssession of chanks entry, without the permit of the Government agent Of without permit an of- the province, or some person authorised by him to grant '"°* such permits, or contrary to the terms of any permit for such possession that may have been granted, shall be an offence, and all chanks found so possessed shall be confiscated. 5. And it is further enacted that all headmen, officers of police or cus- toms, and all persons specially appointed for that pur- pose by the Government agent shall be, and they are, Ofticers empowered hereby, empowered to demand of all persons fishing for duct inol teases or attempting to collect chanks, or having them in their possession, the production of any license or permit required of them by this Ordinance; and in case the same shall not be produced, or, being produced, shall not be deemed satisfactory, to seize and take such per- sons beforethe district court, and detain and in safe custody keep any boat, canoe, raft, or vessel employed, or chanks possessed by them un. lawfully, until they shall receive the dirctions of the — persons resisting said court for their disposal; and every person mak- such officers or init ing or inciting any resistance to such officers or other to fine and imprison. persons in the exercise of their duty shall be liable to ™e™ imprisonment, with or without hard labor, or fine, or both, at the dis- cretion of the district court. 6. And it is turther enacted that no dredge or other apparatus for the purpose of collecting chanks shall be used; and that any such apparatus that may be found on board _, Penalty for using a 3 = dredge or apparatus any boat, canoe, raft, or vessel shall, together with ofatike nature. such boat, canoe, raft, or vessel be confiscated and the tindal and crew of such boat, canoe, raft, or vessel shall be liable to im- prisonment at hard labour for a period not exceeding three months. 7. Andit is further enacted that one-half of all fines recovered, and one-half of the produce of all confiscations made under this Ordinance shall gu to Our Lady, the Queen, and the other half to the person in consequence of whose Penalty. Fines, how to be disposed of. 464 FOREIGN STATUTES. information the offender is convicted. Provided, always, that in the event of the inability of any defendant to pay the fines above directed, and sentence of imprisonment being awarded in consequence thereof, the agent of the province shall never- theless pay to such informer the amount to which he would have been entitled if such fine had been paid. Passed in Council the Twenty-ninth day of August, One thousand Hight hundred and Forty-two. Proviso. KENNETH MACKENZIE, Acting Clerk to the Council. Published by order of His Excellency the Governor. P. ANSTRUTHER, Colonial Secretary. No. 18.—1843. AN ORDINANCE TO DECLARE ILLEGAI, THE POSSESSION OF CERTAIN NETS AND INSTRUMENTS WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITS. ©. CAMPBELL. Whereas it is expedient to prohibit the possession within certain limits of certain nets and instruments which might otherwise be used to the detriment of Her Majesty’s pearl banks: 1. It is therefore hereby enacted by the Governor of Ceylon, with the Possessionofeertain @dVIce and consent of the Legislative Council thereof, nets, dredges, and that from and after the passing of this Ordinance the other instruments Oy tare: r SYahe within certain limits POSSession on land of any drifting net or other net not geo being such as are used by men walking in the sea, or of any dredge or similar instrument, at any place within twelve miles of Tallaville or Talmanar, or at any place within twelve miles of any part . of the shore at low water mark between Tallaville and Talmanar, shall be unlawful, and every such net, dredge, or instrument that shall at any time be found within such limits shall be forfeited, and every person who shall at any time have had any such net, dredge, or instrument in his possession, or shall have moved or concealed or assisted in or procured the movement or concealment of any such net, dredge, or instrument within such limits, shall be guilty of an offence, and be liable on conviction thereof to a fine not exceed- ing ten pounds, or to imprisonment with or without hard labour for any period not exceeding six months. 2. And it is further enacted that it shall be lawful for every officer ' of the Customs and every peace officer to search any nee otheets mY house or premises within any such limits as aforesaid make search for nets, pre es W any C asa € &e., and seize oltend- where he shall have good reason to believe any such i net, dredge, or instrument as aforesaid to be kept or concealed, and to take the same into his charge, and to seize and take every person offending against this Ordinance before any competent court or justice of the peace, to be dealt with according to law. Passed in Council the Thirtieth day of November, One Thousand Hight Hundred and Forty-three. Preamble. Penalty. KENNETH MACKENZIE, Acting Clerk to the Couneil. Published by order of His Excellency the Governor. P. ANSTRUTHER, Colonial Secretary. CEYLON. 465 No. 18.—1890. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO CHANKS. A. EK. HAVELOCK. Whereas it is expedient to amend the Laws relating to Chanks and to prohibit the diving for and collecting of Chanks, Béche-de-mer, Coral, or Shells in the seas between Man- nar and Chilaw: Be it therefore enacted by the Governor of Ceylon, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council ther eof, as follows: 1. This ordinance may be cited for all purposes as “The Chanks Or- _ dinance, 1590,” and it shall come into operation at such yy, t Short title and date time as the Governor in Executive Council shall, by proc- of operation. lamation in the Government Gazette, appoint. 2. The Ordinance No. 4 of 1842, intituled ““An Ordinance for the pro- tection of Her Majesty’s rights in the digging for Dead Chanks,” and the Ordin: unce No. 5 of 1842, inti- tuled ‘‘An Ordinance for the protection of Her Majecty’s Chank Fish- ery,” are hereby repealed, but such repeal shall not affect the past operation of either of the said enactments, or anything duly done or suffered, or any obligation, or liability, or penalty accrued or incurred under them or either of them. Where any unrepealed Ordinance incorporates or refers to any pro- vision of any Ordinance hereby repealed, such unrepealed Ordinance Shall be deemed to incorporate or refer to the corresponding provisions of this Ordinance. 3. In this Ordinance, uniess the context otherwise re- penfiitions. quires— ““Chanks” includes both live and dead chanks. ‘‘ Person” includes any company or association or body of. per- sons whether incorporated or not. _ 4, (1) There shall be levied and paid on all chanks entered for expor- tation a royalty at such rates not exceeding one cent on each chank, as the Governor, with the advice of the Executive Council, shall, from time to time by notification in the Government Gazette, appoint. (2) No chanks shall be exported save and except from any port men- tioned in the schedule A hereto, or from any other port which the Governor in Exeentive Council may appoint by notification in the Government Gazette. 5. (1) The person entering outwards any chanks to be exported from any port shall deliver to the collector a bill of the en- try thereof, expressing the name of the ship and of the master, and of the place to which the chanks are to be exported, and of the person in whose name the chanks are to be entered, together with the number and value thereof, anything in the Ordinance No. 17 of 1869 to the contrary notwithstanding, and shall at the same time pay to the collector any sum which may be due as royalty upon the exportation of such chanks. (2) Such person shall also deliver at the same time one or more copies of such entry, and the particulars to be coun- tained in such entry shall be written and arranged in such form and manner, and the number of such copies shall be such as the collector shall require, and such entry being duly signed by the 59 Preamble. Repeal. Duty on chanks. Ports of entry. Bill of entry. Collector’s warrant. 466 FOREIGN STATUTES. collector shall be the warrant for examination and shipment of such chanks. 6. Every person who shall export chanks from this Island, except from any port mentioned in Schedule A, or from any _ Penalty for export- port appointed by the Governor in Executive Council ing conirary to the dnder section 4, or contrary to the requirements of sec- tion 5, shall be guilty of an offence punishable with simple or rigorous imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months, or with a fine not exceeding one hundred rupees, or with both. 7. If any chanks subject to the payment of any sums due as royalty in respect of exportation shall be laden or water-borne Chanksladen before to be laden on board any ship before due entry shall have enity Hable to be for. Deen made and warrant granted, or before such chanks ; shall have been duly cleared for shipment, or if such chanks shall not agree with the bill of entry, the same shall be liable to forfeiture together with the pavkage in which they are contained. 8. It shall not be lawful for any person to use any dredge or other oe ee . apparatus of a like nature for the purpose of fishing Ise of dredge in o collectingchanks pro. for or collecting chanks, and every person using any hibited dredge or other apparatus of a like nature for such purpose shall be guilty of an offence punishable with simple or rigorous imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months, or with fine not exceeding one hundred rupees, or with both; and every dredge or apparatus of a like nature so used as afore- said shall be forfeited. 9. It shall not be lawful for any person to fish for, dive for, or collect R _ .. chanks, béche-de-mer, coral, or shells in the seas within ollection of chanks, Baye eae cn ; béche-de-mer, coral, the limits defined in Schedule B hereto, and every per- or shells in the seas son who shall fish for, dive for, or collect, or who shall Chilaw prohibited. use or employ any boat, canoe, raft, or vessel in the collection of chanks, béche-de-mer, coral, or shells in the said seas, shall be guilty of an offence punishable with simple or rigorous imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months, or with fine not exceeding one hundred rupees, or with both; and every boat, canoe, raft, or vessel so employed as aforesaid, together with all chanks, béche-de-mer, coral, or shells un- lawfully collected, shall be forfeited. Provided, that nothing in this section contained shall prevent any person from collecting coral or shells from any portion of the said seas in which the water is of the depth of one fathom or less. Provided also that it shall be lawful for the Governor in Executive Council from time to time or at any time, by notifica- tion in the Government Gazette, to alter the limits de- fined in Schedule B hereto, or exempt any portion or portions of the seas within the said limits from the operation of this Ordinance. 10. (1) Any chank, béche-de-mer, coral, shell, boat, canoe, raft, vessel, dredge, or apparatus liable to forfeiture under this Or- wo fafature inay be Ginance may be seized by any officer of the customs or Belge Henagesaiccn 2 police, or by any headinan, or by any person appointed TOael tor that purpose in writing by the government agent of the province or the assistant government agent of the district within which such seizure is made, and when seized shall be conveyed to the custom-house nearest to the place of seizure and there detained until the court having jurisdiction in the matter has deter- mined whether the same shall or shall not be forfeited, Penalties. Penalties. Proviso. Proviso. AUSTRALIA. 467 (2) If any such officer, headman, or person shall neglect to have any chank, béche-de-mer, coral, shell, boat, canoe, raft, ves- sel, dredge, or apparatus ‘seized by him conveyed to SMa tibiae such custom-house within a reasonable time, he shall convey seizure to cus- be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine of one hun- fomhouse within a dred rupees. 11. (1) Every prosecution under this ordinance may be instituted in the police court of the division in which the offence was ; committed or where the offender is found, and such ,,hougefourt te have court may by its order declare and adjudge any chank, béche-de-mer, coral, shell, boat, canoe, raft, vessel, dredge, or apparatus seized and detained under this Ordinance to be forfeited, and such for- feiture may be in addition to any other punishment hereinbefore pre- scribed, anything in the Criminal Procedure Code to the contrary not- withstanding. (2) All forfeitures may be sold or otherwise disposed of in such manner as the police court may direct. 12. It shall belawful for the court imposing a fine under this Ordinance to award to the informer any share not exceeding a moiety of so much of the fine as is actually recov- ered and realised. Informer’s share. SCHEDULE A, Kankésanturai Jaffna Kayts Peésalai SCHEDULE B. Eastward of a straight line drawn from a point six miles westward of Talaimannar to a point six miles westward from the shore two miles south of Talaivilla. Passed in Council the Nineteenth day of November, One thousand Hight hundred and Ninety. H. L. CRAWFORD, Acting Clerk to the Couneil. Assented to by His Excellency the Governor, the Twenty-fifth day of November, One thousand Hight hundred and Ninety. EE. NoEL WALKER, Colonial Secretary. AUSTRALIA. AN ACT to regulate the Pearl Shell and Béche-de-mer Fisheries in Australasian Waters adjacent to the Colony of Queensland. (Reserved, 20th January, 1888; Queen’s assent proclaimed 19th July, 1888.] WHEREAS by certain Acts of the Parliament of the Colony of Queensland provision has been made for regulating the Wand Pearl Shell and Béche-de-mer Fisheries in the terri- The Queensland torial waters of that Colony; And whereas, by reason Pearl Shell and Béche- of the geographical position of many of the Islands {raterritorial). mee forming a portion of that Colony, vessels employed in °f 788. such Fisheries are, in the prosecution of their business, sometimes within and sometimes bevond the territorial jurisdiction of Queensland: Aud whereas it is expedient that the provisions of the 468 FOREIGN STATUTES. said Acts should extend and apply to such vessels during all the time during which they are so employed, and that for that purpose the pro- visions of said Acts, so far as they are applicable to extra-territorial waters, should be extended to such waters by an Act of the Federal Council of Australasia: 3e it therefore enacted by the Queens Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Federal Council of Australasia, assem- bled at Hobart, in the Colony of Tasmania, and by the authority of the same, as follows: 1. This act may be cited as “The Queensland Pearl Shell and Beche- Short titleandcom. de-mer Fisheries (Extra territorial) Act of 1888,” and OER, shali commence and take effect on and from the date of Her Majesty’s assent thereto being proclaimed in Queensland. Interpretation, 45 2+ IM this Act the following terms shall, unless the ae, Bios iQtecos: context otherwise indicates, have the meanings set aa” against them respectively; that is to say— “Australasian waters adjacent to Queensland.” All Australasian ne sees > WaveLs within the limits described in the Schedule to adjacent toQueens- this Act, exclusive of waters within the territorial land.” (Sehedule.) jurisdiction of the Colony of Queensland ; Nore.—The Sections of this Act which are omitted contain further definitions of terms, and minute provisions as to licenses, contracts with seamen, the payment of wages, the reporting of deaths and desertions, and the legal process for the enforce- ment of the Act. * * * * * * * - Sonne ae 19. This act applies only to British ships, and boats imitation of act. ; yD See attached to British ships. THE SCHEDULE. All waters included within a line drawn from Sandy Cape northward to the southeastern limit of the Great Barrier Reefs, thence following the line of the Great Barrier Reefs to their northeastern extremity near the latitude of nine and a half degrees south; thence in a north-westerly direction, embracing East Anchor and Bramble Cays, thence from Bramble Cays in a line west by south (south seventy- nine degrees west) true, embracing Warrior Reef, Saibai and Tuan Islands, thence diverging in a north-westerly direetion so as to embrace the group known as the Tal- bot Islands, thence to and embracing the Deliverance Islands and onward, in a west by south directiou (true) to the meridian of one hundred and thirty eight degrees of east longtitude, and thence by the meridian southerly to the shore of Queensland. AN ACT to regulate the Pearl-Shell and Beche-de-mer Fisheries in Australasian Waters adjacent to the Colony of Western Australia. [Reserved 4th February, 1889; Queen’s assent proclaimed 18th January, 1890.] ee tyre sae ete eet ~— WHEREAS byeertain Acts ofthe Legislative Council Shell. and Bee, of Western Australia provision has been made for reg- territorial) actof1s89. ulating the Pearl-shell Fishery in the territorial waters oa ae: of that Colony; And whereas vessels employed in such Fishery are, in the prosecution of their business, sometimes within and sometimes beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Western Australia; And whereas it is expedient that the provisions of the said Acts should extend and apply to such vessels during all the time during which they are so employed, and that for that purpose the provisions of the said Acts, so far as they are applicable to extra territorial waters, should be ex- tevded to such waters by an Act of the Federal Counc il of Australasia; Prepared at the Office of the C. §.Coast and Geodetic Survey 7 C. Htudentall Superintendent. Sacketl& Wilheims Litho Co N Y —— ee le od) -_ rm % _ ur e : oo ois " i . ES. NS qs a3 7 ; 16 7 - : oe. >< te oe 2 es | ed gai Sey oe ® eS ias o B wt ‘oi 4 _ - ~ ~ ia “eae ws a ee ae ERIA Coral Fisheries St oO Algeria. 37°00 FRANCE. 469 And whereas it is desirable that the provisions of the said Acts should apply to persons and vessels engaged in the Beche-de-mer Fishery in like manner as to the Pearl-shell Fishery: Be it enacted by the Queen’s Most Hucellent Majesty, by and with the ad- vice and consent of the Federal Council of Australasia, assembled at Ho- Hames in the colony of Tasmania, and by the authority of the same, as fol- ow 1. This Act may be cited as ‘The Western Australian Pearl-shell and Beche-de-mer Fisheries (Extra-territorial) Act of 1889,” gia. eB a ei and shall take effect on and from the date of Her mencement. Majesty’s assent thereto being proclaimed in Western Australia, 2. This Act applies only to British ships and boats attached to British ships. 3. In this Act the following terms shall, unless the context other- wise indicates, have the meanings set against them re- spectively; that is, to say: “Australasian Watersadjacent to Western Australia.” All Austral- asian waters within the limits deseribed in the schedule to this Act, exclusive of waters within the territorial jurisdiction of the colony of Western Australia: * * * * * * * Limitation of act. Interpretations. Nore.—Tbe sections of this act which are omitted contain further definitions of terms, and minute provisions as to licenses, the employment and discharge of sea- men, and the legal process for the enforcement of the act. SCHEDULE. A parallelogram | of which the Northwestern corner is in longitude 112° 52’ Kast, and latitude 13° 30’ South, of which the Northeastern corner is in longitude 129° East and latitude 13° 30’ south, of which the Southwestern corner is in longitude 112° 52’ East, and latitude 35° 8! South, and of which the Southeastern corner is in longitude 129° East, and latitude 35° 8’ South. FRANCE. DECRET DU DIX MAT, 1862. ART. 2. Sur la demande des prud’ hommes des pécheurs, de leurs délégués, et, a défaut, des syndies des gens de mer, certaines péches peuvent atre temporairement interdites sur une étendue de mer au dela de trois milles du littoral, si cette mesure est commandée par Vintérét de la conservation des fonds ou de la péche de poissons de passage. DECREE OF MAY 10, 1862, BY THE GOVERNMENT OF FRANCE, (Translation. ] : ARTICLE II. Upon the request of the expert fishermen, of their representatives, or, for the want of them, of the syndicates (organizations) of sea-faring men, certain fisheries may be temporarily forbidden over an extent of sea situated beyond three miles from the shore, if such measure is required in the interest of the preservation of the bed of the sea or of a fishery composed of migratory fishes. of Prepared at the Office of the C.S.Coast and Geodetic Survey 7 CL. THtudeuhale Superintendent. ALGERIA Area of the Coral Fisheries on the Coast of Algeria. 470 FOREIGN STATUTES. TTALY; STATUTES AND DECREES. [From “Codice per la Marina Mercantile del Regno d’ Italia, pro- mulgato con R. Decreto 25 giugno 1865, n. 2360, in base alla Legge per V unificazione giudiziaria in : data 2 2 aprile 1865, nh. 2215. Milano ee * 1865,.”] _ * * * % * * * 142. La pesea del corallo nei mari dello Stato sara sott?oposta al pagamento di un’ annua somma da stabilirsi con decreto reale. Le navi estere, le quali non sieno per trattati ammesse a pescare alle stesse; condizioni delle nazionali, pagheranno il doppioe del canone da stabilirsi come sopra. LESGE CHE REGOLA LA PESCA NELLE ACQUE DEL DEMANIO PUBBLICO, E NEL MARE TERRITORIALE. [N.3706 (Serie 28), del 4 marzo 1877.] * * * * * * * TITOLO I. Disposizioni generali. ART. 1. La presente legge regola la pesca nelle acque del demanio pubblico e nel mare territoriale. * * * * * * * Rimangono inalterate le disposizioni contenute nel Codice della marina mercantile e in altre leggi sulla polizia delle acque e della navigazione, sul trattamento da usarsi verso gli stranieri e sulle con- cessioni di pertinenze del demanio pubblico e di mare territoriale. ART. 2. I regolamenti per la esecuzione di questa legge e le succes- sive loro modificazioni saranno approvati per decreto Reale sopra pro- posta del Ministro di agricoltura, industria e commercio, previo il pa- rere dei Consigli provinciali, delle Camere di commercio e dei capitani di porto, nelle cui circoscrizioni le disposizioni regolamentari dovranno essere applicate, e previo il parere del Consiglio superiore dei lavori pubblici e del Consiglio di Stato. Essi determineranno: 1. I limiti entroi quali avranno vigore le norme riguardanti la pesca marittima e quelle riguardanti la pesca fluviale e lacuale nei luoghi ove le acque dolci sono in comunicazione con quelle salate; 2. Le discipline e le proibizioni necessarie per conservare le specie dei pescie degli animali acquatici e relative ai luoghi, ai tempi ai modi, agli strumenti della pesca, al loro commercio e a quello dei prodotti della pesca e al regime delle acque; 3. L limiti di distanza dalla spiaggia o di profondita di acque, in cui Saranno applicate le discipline rig uardanti la pesca marittima, che spe- cialmente mirano a tutelare la conservazione delle specie; 4, Le distanze e le altre norme che i terzi debbano osservare nell’ esercizio della pesca in genere, 0 di certe pescagioni speciali, rispetto alle foci dei fiumi, alle tonnare, alle mugginare, alle valli salse ed agli stabi.limenti di allevamento dei pesci e degli altri viventi delle acque; 5. Le prescrizioni di polizia necessarie per garantire il mantenimento Prepared at the Office o and Geodetic Survev ve. TA . | eee oe C.Gramtola &— Ce _— 2/ Miles re a4) On14 Miles? a ieee of om Coral Fisher »..;ax 14,21 &32 mil Discovered 1 » at oo wes NR 0 we eR eee ee a a ~ - & Ustica Prepared at the Office of the U. 8.Coast and Geodetic Survey 7 LC. Metudiutall Superintendent. C.Granitola ‘les DISCOIVERED (875 Or ~~ .2/ Miles QL nso mi DISCOVERED 1878 14,21 &32 miles Discovered 1875 LIPARI OR ZZOLIAN ISLANDS e Q c patiarana C.Passaro > ee A a Cj Pies = dee TY sy Xe eA i) Sp enamel MEPPAMES SOON Sy auty ish noe O TY ‘sre Saves gir pcg ane, | l E f | : p ep élojJuzarO aaippdeitl taro) ia e1o0nde om 2dlierSéA IS Af ITALY. A7T1 dell’ ordine e la sicurezza delle persone e della proprieta nell’ esercizio della pesca; 6. Tutte le altre norme e sanzioni riservate espressamente da questa legge ai regolamenti. * * * * * * * ART. 7. Potranno essere concessi, per durata non maggiore di 99 anni tratti di spiaggia, di acque demaniali e di mare territoriale a coloro che intendano intraprendere allevamenti di pesci e di altri animali acquatici, non che coltivazioni di coralli e spugne. ‘Tali concessioni saranno subordinate alle condizioni richieste dagli interessi generali; ed inoltre a quelle necessarie ad assicurare I’ effettuazione ed il costante esercizio delle intraprese per cui le concessioni saranno state accordate. ART. 8. E abolita le tassa speciale sulla pesca del corallo, stabilita dalla prima parte dell’ art. 142 del Codice della marina mercantile. ART. 9. Le discipline sui modi e tempi della pesca del corallo sarrano stabilite in appositi regolamenti. ART. 10. Lo scopritore di un banco di corallo nelle acque dello Stato, facendone la denunzia nei modi prescritti dai regolamenti e curandone la coltivazione, avra il diritto esclusivo di sfruttarlo fino al termine delle due stagioni successive a quella in cui sarra avvenuta la scoperta. I regolamenti indicheranno come e in quali casi questo diritto esclusivo possa essere prolungato. * * x * * * * TrroLo III. Delle infrazioni delle pene e dei giudizi, * * * * * * * ART. 18. I regolamenti per V esecuzione della presente legge po- tranno stabilire pene pecuniarie sino a lire 50, e, per quanto riguarda le disposizioni sulle tonnare e sulla pesca del corallo, sino a lire 500, salve le particolari sanzioni penali portate da altri articoli del presente titolo. ART. 19. Se vi é stata recidiva entro l anno, le pene stabilite dagli articoli precedenti dovranno aumentarsi senza pero che arrivino al doppio. La seconda recidiva, commessa non oltre un anno dopo la prima, sara punita eziandio colla sospensione dall’ esercizio della pesca per un tempo non minore di quindici giorni, né maggiore di un mese. * * * * * * * ART. 21, Alle infrazioni alla presente legge, riguardanti la pesca ma- rittima, sono applicabili le norme di competenza e di procedura stabi- lite pei reati marittimi dal Codice della marina mercantile. * * * * * * * ART. 23. Salve le disposizioni contenute nella presente legge, saranno applicabili alle infrazioni le norme generali del Codice penale, quelle del Codice di procedura penale e Vart. 414 del Codice della marina mer- cantile. * % * * * * td TITOLo IV. Disposizioni transitorie. ART. 24. Le disposizioni finora vigenti sulle materie della presente legge cesseranno di avere vigore di mano in mano che verranno pub- 472 FOREIGN STATUTES. blicati i regolamenti per la esecuzione della legge medesima, e non pitt tardi di due anni dalla pubblicazione di essa. * * * * * * * Data a Roma addi 4 marzo 1877. VITTORIO EMANUELE, Majorana-Calatabiana. REGOLAMENTO PER L’ APPLICAZIONE DELLA LEGGE 4 MARZO 1877, N. 3706, SERIE 2°, SULLA PESCA, NELLA PARTE, RIGUARDANTE LA PESCA MARITTIMA, AP?RO- VATO CON REALE DECRETO DEL 13 NOVEMBRE 1882, N. 1090. TTTOLOs I Disposizioni generali. ART. I. La pesca marittima é disciplinata dalla legge 4 marzo 1877, n°. 3706, serie 2*, e dal presente regolamento. * * * * * * * TiroLoe I. Disposizioni relative alla pesca dei pesct in generale. Capo I. Mezzie istrumenti adoperati per la pesca. ART. 16. Dal 1° dicembre di ciascun anno al 1° maggio dell’ anno successivo @ vietata la pesca con reti ed altri apparecchi a strascico, tirati da galeggianti, nelle acque del mare sino a tre chilometri da qualsiasi punto della costa o dal lido. HH del pari vietata, nelle stesso periodo di tempo, la detta pesca, oltre tale limite, a profondita minore di otto metri. * * * * * * * ART. 20. Durante l esercizio delle tonnare € proibito ai terzi di eser- citare qualsiasi specie di pesca, compresa quella del corallo, e di accen- dere fuochi ad una distanza minore di cinque chilometri sopra vento, ed un chilometro sotto vento delle tonnare medesime, salvi i maggiori diritti che potessero competere ai proprietari di queste in forza di con- cessioni antecedenti all’ entrata in vigore del presente regolamento. * * ¥* * * * * Capo ITI. Pesca del corallo. ART. 26. Nel mare territoriale la pesca del corallo pud effettuarsi in tutti i tempi dell’ anno, salve le restrizioni sancite dal presente rego- lamento. ART. 27. Chiunque intenda armare una o pit barche e adoperarle alla scoperta di banchi di corallo, dovra, agli effetti dell ’articolo 29, comma 2°, del presente regolamento, farne dichiarazione scritta alla autorita marittima del luogo in cul eseguisca ? armamento, od a quella delluogo in cui intenda attuare le esplorazioni. La detta autorita prendera nota di tale dichiarazione in apposito SARDINIA CORAL Prepared at th and Geodetic Survey 7 0. Htudenhale e Office of the T. S.Coast | Superintendent | Sackett BWilhelms uitho Co N ee sie PRON A 9 PN AEN A I I i a SE I aT : , < 4 5 Ree Ol a me = a a . a i a a Pe 7 i - ¢ on 7 : ell ee ae als a, Fe SS er ees -_* : — ae i ee {aa ae cn ME i a a — _ ai Ca AP ate? ¢ ed id ae apts 7 e a cen et LN eee 8 | a Sy | ae el 0 Re a a ot ea ee 2 ’ ‘ d r ” . ; : i 7 = y = 7 +4 1 - tea , 7) : % - a : . : 7 ql = i a - - a y i ane 7 i - i : = = = > = fl ” = an] os 2 j ‘ : : i. ” » *s : 7 * as = A ' += ¢ ) » i ael 7 ‘ - a : t bd * 4, b r a . - ; : 7 7 ; ¢ : 7 Fi - » } 7 pA. rane, 7 pet : ; * ~ *- cS f a © ‘ 3 ot a | bh ; = me “ 2 “= < 2 y rr 7 F es } : = =s = : ' iB : : 4 - ‘Av oae 1 - ? : i iy 7 : i => 4 - i y 7 a ‘ f . - Ss } ‘ 7 if = =< _ ; : 7 ‘ a * ’ a = =" = - Y ay . « me act a, [i 4 1 « am : ~ , oy - » A 7 Yr 7 7 - : Vy ‘ ~ Ss a e c- ‘ a ‘ 7 y , = n- 7 ¢. vy a . a =< a ‘ : - = aL 7 r x = Ls + at” 7 a _ _ « "7 7 i = 7 j t i a i @ . f os SARDINIA CORAL FISHERIES C. Bellavista ard Geodetic Survey 7 CL. Meudeuhall Superinten dent | Prepared at the Office of the U. S.Coast | - a Lanes CASE QEALCROEVE “SEL wee A OFS OAS + Secon TUALLY, 473 registro, e ne dara atto al dichiarante, sulla licenza di pesca prescritta dall’ articolo 144 del Codice della marina mereantile. Quando il dichiarante avra scoperto effettivamente un banco di co- rallo, dovra farne denunzia all’ autorita marittima locale. ART, 28. Colui che avra, anche senza aver fatto dichiarazione pre- ventiva, scoperto un banco di corallo, godra i benefizi di cui all arti- colo 10 della legge, purcheé faccia la denunzia indicata nell ultimo alinea dell’ articolo precedente. ART. 29. Quando non sia provato a chi, frai diversi contendenti, debbasi la precedenza nella scoperta di un banco di corallo, si reputera scopritore, nei rispetti amministrativi, colui che primo ne avra fatto denunzia, salvo il ricorso all’ autorita giudiziaria, nei sensi dell’ arti- colo 32. Nel caso di simultanea denunzia, e salvo sempre il sopradetto ricorso, si reputera scopritore colui che per primo abbia fatto tale preventiva dichiarazione, a norma del 1° e 2° comma dell’ articolo 27. ART. 30. Non saranno considerati come nuovi banchi quelli che fos- sero diramazione o parte di altri precedentemente sfruttati ed abban- donati, oppure in attualita di sfruttamento. ART. 31. La denunzia, di cui agli articoli precedenti, dovra contenere le indicazioni necessarie per precisare la situazione e-’ estensione del banco scoperto, e le dichiarazione della volonta di esercitare il diritto concesso dalla legge. L’ autorita marittima prendera nota della denunzia nel registro indi- cato nell’ articolo 27, e ne dara atto sulla licenza di pesca. La denunzia sara pubblicata per mezzo di avviso all’ ufficio di porto ed all’ albo pretorio del comune pitt prossimo al luogo della scoperta, nonché all’ albo della capitaneria di porto e del comune capoluogo del compartimento. . Nell’ avviso saranno diffidati coloro che possono avervi interesse a presentare entro un mese le loro opposizioni. ART. 32. Decorso il termine indicato nel? articolo precedente, il ca- pitano di porto trasmettera Ja denunzia, i relativi documenti e le op- posizioni che fossero state presentate al Ministero di agricoltura, in- dustria e commercio, il quale, riconosciuta la qualita di scopritori, né rilascera apposito attestato, salvo alle parti il ricorso dell autorita giu- diziaria. ART. 33. Qualora non insorgano contestazioni, lo scopritore, anche prima che sia rilasciato l’ attestato ministeriale, potra struttare eselu- sivamente il bance scoperto, purché ne abbia fatto la denunzia. Nel caso di contestazione, ’ autorita marittima del luogo impedira tale esercizio finche l uno o I altro frai contendenti non abbia ottenuto il riconoscimento della qualita di scopritore per parte del ministero. ART. 34, Ogni cessione del diritto esclusivo spettante allo scopritore dovra essere notificata all’ autorita marittima competente, coll indica- zione del nome, cognome e domicilio. del cessionario. AR'r. 35. Durante Vl esercizio del diritto esclusivo lo scopritore di un banco di corallo dovra mantenere a proprie spese, e possibilmente nel centro della periferia del banco medesimo, un galleggiante validamente assicurato, sul quale sara fermata una piastra, rilasciata dall autorita marittima, indicante il compartimento marittimo, il nome dello scopri- tore, ed il giorno della scandenza del diritto. Tale piastra sara rilasciata dall’ autorita marittima a spese dell’ esercente. La rimozione di tale gaticgiante, per caso indipendente dalla volonta dello scopritore, non pregindichera il sto diritto, purché egli lo rista- bilisca al pit: presto. 60 A7A. FOREIGN STATUTES. Art. 36. I] diritto esclusivo si esercita nella periferia di cinquecento metri intorno al galleggiante, di cui all’ articolo precedente. Entro questa periferia é vietato ai terzi la pesca del corallo. ART. 37. Le stagioni della pesca del corallo, indicate all articolo 10 della legge, hanno principio col 1° marzo e finiscono col 10 ottobre. Nel tempo intermedio, fra una stagione e l’ altra, non resta interrotto il diritto di esclusivio esercizio. ART. 38. Qualora I’ esercizio di un baneo di corallo sia impedito da naufragio, incendio, guerra, blocco ed altri casi d’ infortunio o di forza maggiore per una parte ragguardevole di una stagione, il Ministerio di agricoltura, industria e commercio, sopra domanda dell’ interessato, potra prorogare lo esercizio per una stagione successiva oltre a quelle cui aveva diritto. Qualora Y impedimento perduri per tutto il periodo stabilito dalla legge, questo potra essere protratto per due altre stagioni successive. La relativa domanda dovra essere corredata da una relazione fatta e certificata dinanzi alle autorita e nei modi indicati dagli articoli 339 e 340 del Codice di commercio. TITOLO IV. Disposizioni di carattere locale. ART. 39. Sono considerati come distretti di pesca, agli effetti dei pre- sente regolamento, quelli stabiliti dal regio decreto 10 febbraio 1878, n°, 4294, serie 2°. Arr. 40. In ciaseun distretto saranno osservate le disposizioni spe- ciali contenute in questo titolo, nonostante qualunque disposizione diversa o contraria dei titoli precedenti. * * * * * * * ART. 84. E proibita la pesca del corallo fino a 500 metri dale tonna- relle, e fino aun chilometro dai luoghi in cui si pesca il pesce spada per tutto il tempo in cui queste pesche saranno in pieno esercizio, salvo il caso di particolari convenzioni fra gli interessati. * % * * * = 2 TITOLo V. Infrazioni e pene. ART. 90. Le contravvenzioni agli articoli 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 16, 22, 23, 24, 44, 45, 46, 48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 66, 68, 71, 72, 73, 74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 88, 89 del presente regolamento saranno punite con pena pecuniaria estensibile a lire cinquanta. ART. 91. La distruzione, le rimozioni e le mutazioni ai segnali gal- leggianti di cui nell’ articolo 35 fatte da terzi, saranno punite con multa da lire 51 a 300. Arr. 92. Lo seopritore dei nuovi banchi di corallo, che, con lo sposta- mento dei segnali galleggianti di eui all articolo 35, si adoperi per es- tendere il suo esclusivo esercizio oltre i limiti assegnati nell articolo 86, sara punito con multa da lire 51 a 200. Ogni altro contravventore alle disposizioni dell articolo 36 sara pu- nito econ multa da lire 400 a 500, ed il corallo pescato in contravven- zione sara sequestrato e devoluto all’ avente diritto. » ¥ * * * * * a7 s ITALY. AT5 REGIO DECRETO CON CUI E FATTA UN’ AGGIUNTA ALL’ ARTICOLO 84 DEL REGOLA- MENTO SULLA PESCA MARITTIMA, APPROVATO CON REGIO DECRETO 13 NOVEMBRE 1882, n. 1090 (SERIE 3"), NELLA PARTE RIGUARDANTE LA PESCA DEL CORALLO. (21 aprile 1887.] * * * * * * * ART. 1. All articolo 84 del regolamento di pesca marittima, appro- vato con regio decreto 13 novembre 1882, n. 1090 (serie 3*), sono ag: giunti i seguenti comma: ‘La pesca del corallo nei mari di Sciacca é regolata dalle seguenti disposizioni: “Hproibita, fino a tutto il 1891, sul banco scoperto nel 1875; gli altri banchi saranno divisi in zone e il turno di esercizio della pesca su ciascuna di esse sara fissato a cura dei ministeri della marina e dell’ agricoltura, industria e commercio, secondo che sara riconosciuto con- veniente, in armonia alle condizioni coralligene dei banchi stessi. Della rizoluzione sara data notizia al pubblico a mezzo di notificazione delle capitanerie di porto del Regno. “Terminata col 1891 la proibizone di pesca sul banco scoperto nel 1875, la pesca stessa sara su di esso esercitata per turno come é pre- seritto per gli altri banchi.” Ordiniamo che il presente decreto, munito del sigillo dello Stato, sia inserto nella raccolta ufficiale delle leggi e dei decreti del Regno d’ Ita- lia, mandando a chiunque spetti di osservarlo e di farlo osservare. Dato a Roma, addi 21 aprile 1887. UMBERTO, REGIO DECRETO CHE MODIFICA IL 1° COMMA DELL’ ARTICOLO 84 DEL REGOLA- MENTO SULLA PESCA MARITTIMA. [29 dicembre 1888.] * * * * * * * ART. 1. Al 1° comma dell’ articolo 84 del regolamento di pesca marit- tima approvato con regio decreto 13 novembre 1882, n. 1090 (serie 3?), é aggiunto il seguente comma: La pesca del corallo nel mare di Sciacca @ proibita temporaneamente. ART. 2. Le disposizioni del regio decreto 21 aprile 188/, n. 4485 (serie 3*), sulla pesca del corallo nel mare di Sciacca sone abrogate. Ordiniamo che il presente decreto, munito del sigillo dello Stato, sia inserto nella raccolta ufficiale delle leggi e dei decreti del Regno d’ Ita- lia, mandando a chiunque spetti di osservarlo e di farlo osservare. Dato a Roma, addi 29 dicembre 1888. UMBERTO. REGIO DECRETO CHE REVOCA IL DIVIETO TEMPORANEO PER LA PESCA DEL CARALLO NEL MARE DI SCIACCA. (7 gennaio 1892.] * * * * * * * ART. 1. A decorrere dalla campagna di pesca del 1893 é revocato il divieto temporaneo per la pesca del corallo nel mare di Sciacea stabilito coll’ articolo 1° del nostro decreto 29 dicembre 1888, n. 5838 (serie 3*), ATG FOREIGN STATUTES. fermo restando quanto preserive V articolo 84 del regolamento di pesca ae approvato col regio decreto 13 novembre "1882 , . 1090 (serie 3 Ordiniams che il presente decreto, munito del sigillo dello Stato, sia inserto nella raccolta ufficiale delle leggi e dei decreti del Regno d’ Ita- hia, mandando a chiunque spetti di osservarlo e di farlo osservare. UMBERTO. CODE FOR THE MERCHANT MARINE OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY. [Published by Royal Decree of June 25, 1865, No. 2360.] [ Translation. ] * * * * * * * Sec. 142. The coral fisheries in the seas of the State shall be subject to the payment of an annual sum, the amount of which shali be fixed by Royal Decree. Foreign vessels which are pot entitled by treaties to fish on the same conditions as the national vessels shall pay double the amount contem- plated by the preceding clause. LAWS OF ITALY REGULATING THE CORAL FISHERIES IN THE WATERS OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN AND IN THE TERRITORIAL SEA, [No. 3706 (2d series). March 4th, 1877.] (Translation. ] SECTION I. General Provisions. Ant. 1. The present law regulates the fisheries in the waters of the public domain, and in the territorial sea. * * * * * * * The provisions contained in the Merchant Marine Code, and in other laws relating to the water police and navigation, remain unchanged, as regards the treatment of foreigners, and as regards grants in the public domain and the territorial sea. Art. 2. The regulations for the execution of this law and of their successive modifications shall be approved by Royal Decree upon the proposition of the Minister of Agriculture, Industry, and Commerce, after the Provincial Councils, the Chambers of Commerce, and the Harbor masters, in whose districts the regulation shall apply, have been heard, and after the Superior Council of Public Labors and the Council of State have been consulted. These regulations shall determine— 1. The limits within which shall be in force the regulations regard. ing the sea fisheries and those regarding the river and. lake fisheries, in places where the fresh waters communicate with the salt waters. 2. The disciplinary and prohibitory measures which are necessary for the preservation of the various species of fish and other aquatic an- imals, as regards localities, seasons, methods of fishing and fishing apparatus; as regards trade in fish and fishery products, and the ad- ministration of the waters. 5. The limits of distance from the coast, and of the depth of water within which the disciplinary measures specially tending to the protec- tion and preservation of the various kinds of fish shall apply. rj ITALY. 477 4, The distances and rwes which outsiders shall observe in carry- ing om fisheries in general, or certain special fisheries, with regard to the mouths of rivers, the funny fisheries, the mullet fisheries, and with regard to establishments for raising fish and other aquatic animals. 5. The police regulations which are necessary, in order to guarantee the maintenance of order and the security of persons and apparatus whilst employed in the fisheries. 6. Any other rules and regulations expressly reserved by this law for the regulation of its exec ution. * * * * * * * ART. 7. Tracts of coast, of the domain waters, and of the territorial sea may es granted fer a term. not exceeding 99 years, to any person who intends to engage in the raising of fish and other aquatic animals, except the cultivation of corals and sponges. Such grants shall be subordinate to the conditions which the general interests require, and which are necessary for effecting the constant exercise of the measures for which these grants have been made. ART. 8. The special tax on the coral fisheries, established by the 1st part of Article 142 of the Merchant Marine Code, is abolished. AR’. 9. Prohibitory measures as regards the coral fisheries will be established by the regulations. - ArT. 10. The discoverer of a coral bank in the waters of the State who makes an announcement of his discovery according to the manner prescribed in the regulations, and who intends to cultivate this bank, shall have the exclusive right to reap the fruits of the same during two successive seasons following the one during which the discovery has been made. The regulations will show in what manner and in what cases this exclusive right may be extended. * * * * * % * Section III. Infractions and Penalties. % * * * * 3 % ArT. 18. The regulations for the execution of the present law may fix fines up to 50 lire, as regards violations of the provisions relating to the tunny fisheries and the coral fisheries, and up to 500 lire, subject to the special penal regulations contemplated by other articles of the present section. ART. 19. If the violation occurs a second time within a year, the fines fixed by the preceding article may be increased, but shall not reach double that amount. The second violation which occurs within one year from the first shall be punished by a suspension of the fishing rights for a period not less than two weeks, and not exceeding one month. ART. 21. The rules and modes of procedure fixed by the Merchant Marine Code for cases of maritime crimes shall apply to infractions of the present law regarding the sea fisheries. * * * * * * * ART, 23. Subject to the provisions contained in the present law, the general regulations of the Penal Code, the Code of Penal Procedure, and of Article 144 of the Merchant Marine Code, shall apply to the in- fractions of the law. . % * * : * * *% * 478 FOREIGN STATUTES. Srecrion IV. Temporary Provisions. Art. 24. The provisions relating to the subject-matter of the present law shall cease to be effective at such dates as shall be published from time to time in the regulations for the execution of the law, and not later than two years from the publication of such regulations. Given at Rome, March 4, 1877. Victor EMANUEL. REGULATIONS FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE LAW OF MARCH 4TH, 1877, NO. 3706, 2D SERIES, RELATING TO THE FISHERIES, AS REGARDS THE SEA FISHERIES. [Approved by Royal Decree of November 13, 1882. No. 1090.] SECTION I. General Provisions. Art. 1. The sea fisheries are regulated by the law of March 4th, 1877, No. 3706, and. by the present regulations. * * * * * * *& SEcTION II. Provisions relating to the Fisheries in general. CHAPTER I. Means and Apparatus used in the Fisheries. ART. 16. From the 1st December in each year till the Ist May in the following year fishing with nets or any other floating apparatus is prohibited in the waters of the sea at a distance of less than three kilo- meters from any point on the coast. During the same period this kind of fishing, outside the limits indicated, is prohibited at a depth of less than 8 meters. * * * * * * * ART. 20. During the tunny fisheries it is prohibited for other per- sons to carry on any kind of fishery, including coral fisheries, and to light fires at a distance of less than five kilometers to the leeward, or one kilometer to the windward from the tunny fishery, the only excep- tions being made in case of grants and privileges belonging to owners, issued prior to the present regulations. ; CuaPTeR III. Coral Fisheries. Arr. 26. Coral fisheries may be carried on in Italian waters at all times of the year, subject to the restrictions of the present regulations. Arr. 27. Any one who intends to fit out one or more boats for coral- fishing on the banks must, in accordance with article 29, 2nd clause, of ITALY. 479 the present regulations, make written declaration to that effect to the maritime authorities of the place where he intends to fish, and of the place where he fits out his boats. The authorities referred to shall make a record on their books of said declaration, and issue the license prescribed by Article 144 of the Mer- chant Marine Code: When the person who has made said declaration has discovered a coral bank he must announce the fact to the local maritime authorities. — ART, 28. Any one who, without having made the declaration referred to, discovers a coral bank shall enjoy the privileges accorded by article 10 of the law, provided he makes the announcement referred to in the last paragraph of the preceding Article. ART. 29. If it cannot be proved to whom, among the various claim- ants, belongs the precedence in having diseovered a coral bank, the person who first made tbe announcement shall, for administrative pur- poses, be considered the discoverer, subject to recourse to the judicial authorities in the sense of article 32. In case of simultaneous announcement by several persons, he shall be considered the discoverer who first makes the declaration mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2 of article 27. ART. 30. Banks forming branches or parts of banks iaach have been formerly worked and have been abandoned are not considered as new banks. ART. 31. The announcement referred to in the preceding articles must contain the indications necessary to define the location and extent of the discovered bank, and a declaration that it is the intention of the discoverer to comply with all the provisions of the law. The maritime authorities will enter this announcement on the records referred to in Article 27, and will issue the fishery license. The announcement shall be published by means of a notice posted at the port office and at the town hall of the township nearest to the place of discovery, as well as at the harbor master’s office and at the town hall of the capital of the district. In this notice it shall be stated that anyone who may have any objections to offer shall offer the same within one month. AR‘. 32. After the period indicated in the preceding article has elapsed, the harbor master shall transmit the announcement, the doc- uments relating thereto, and any objections which may have been offered to the Minister of Agriculture, Industry, and Commerce, who shall, after having examined into the character of the discoverer, approve the announcement, leaving to parties who may object the recourse to the judicial authorities. ART. 33. If no contests have arisen the discoverer, after having re- ceived the ministerial approval, has the exclusive right to work the bank which he has discovered, ‘provided the proper notice has been given. In contested cases the local maritime authorities will stop the work- ing of the bank until one or the other of the contestants has been recognized by the Minister as the discoverer. ART. 34, The granting of an exclusive right to the discoverer must be notified to the proper maritime authorities, with the full name and residence of the discoverer. ART. 35. During the exercise of the exclusive right, the discoverer of a coral bank shall keep, at his own expense, and as far as possible in the centre of the cireumference of said bank, a boat securely anchored displaymg a sign issucd by the maritime authorities, indicating the 480 FOREIGN STATUTES. maritime department, the name of the discoverer, and the date when the right will terminate. This sign will be issued by the maritime au- thorities at the expense of the person exercising the right. The remoyal of this boat by any action independent of the will of the discoverer will not prejudice his right, provided he replaces it as soon as practicable. ArT. 36. The exclusive right is exercised within a circumference of 500 meters from the boat mentioned in the preceding Article. Within this circumference no other person is allowed to engage in coral-fishing. Art. 37. The season of coral-fishing, indicated in article 10 of the law, begins on the ist of March and ends on the LOth of October. The right of the exclusive exercise of the coral fisheries is not inter- rupted by the interval between one season and the next. Art. 38. If the working of a coral bank has been impeded by ship- wreck, conflagrations, war, blockades, or other misfortunes, or by the interference of a Higher Power, during a season or part of a season, the Minister of Agriculture, Industry, and Commerce, at the request of the person ‘interested, shall extend the right for another season beyond the term of the original grant. If these impediments continue throughout the entire period fixed by the law, the period may be prolonged by two successive seasons. The request must be accompanied by a report duly certified by the proper authorities, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 339 and 340 of the Commercial Code. SECTION LV. Provisions of a Local Character. ART. 39. The divisions established by Royal Decree of February 10th, 1878, No. 4294, Series 2, are considered as fishing districts as regards the present regulations. Art. 40. In each district the special provisions contained in this sec- tion shall be observed, even if some of them conflict with those of the _preceding section. Art. 84. Coral-fishing is prohibited within 500 meters from tunny: fisheries, and within one kilometer from the places where swordfish are caught, during the entire period when these fisheries are going on, Cseent ‘in cases where by special agreement between the persons inter. ested other arrangements have been made. * * * * * * * SECTION V. Infractions and Fines. ART. 90. Infractions of Articles 3, 4, 7,8, 9, 11, 12, 16, 22, aes ay 44, 45, 46, 48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62. 63, 66 68, 71, 72, 73, id, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82) St. 85, 88, and 89 of the present regal will be punished by ‘a fine not exceeding 50 lire. Art. 91. The destruction, removal, or damaging of the floating signs mentioned in article 35 will be punished by a fine of from 51 to 300 lire, Art. 92. Persons who have discovered new coral banks, and who place the floating signs mentioned in article 35 in such a manner as to ITALY. 481 unlawfully extend the limits assigned to them by article 86 will be pun- ished by a fine of from 51 to 200 lire. Any infraction of the provisions of Article 36 will be punished by a fine of 400 to 500 lire, and the coral which has been fished unlawfully will be seized and returned to the person having a right thereto. * * * # * * * ROYAL DECREE OF APRIL 21ST, 1887, MAKING AN ADDITION To AR- TICLE 84 OF THE REGULATIONS FOR THE SEA FISHERIES, AP- PROVED NOVEMBER 13TH, 1882, AS REGARDS THE CORAL FISHERIES. [No. 4485.] ArT. 1. The following clause is added to Article 84 of the regulations for the sea fisheries: The coral fisheries in the Sea of Sciacca are regulated by the fol- lowing provisions: Coral fishing is prohibited till the end of the year 1891 on the bank discovered in 1875. The other banks will be divided into districts, each having its turn during which fishing can be carried on. The order of these turns shall be fixed by the Minister of Marine in conjunction with the Minister of Agriculture, Industry, and Com- merce, as they shall deem convenient, in accordance with the coral- producing conditions of these banks. The public will be advised of these turns by a notice from the Chief Harbor Officer of the Kingdom. When, at the end of the year 1891, the prohibition to fish on the bank discovered in 1875 ceases, fishing on this bank will be carried on by turns, as on the other banks. Given at Rome, April 21, 1887. HUMBERT. ROYAL DECREE OF DECEMBER 29TH, 1888, MODIFYING THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 84 OF THE REGULATIONS FOR THE SEA FISHERIES. [No. 5888.] ART. 1. The following is added to Paragraph 1 of Article 84 of the Regulations for the Sea Fisheries approved November 15th, 1882: “ Coral fishing in the sea of Sciacca is temporarily prohibited.” ART. 2. The provisions of the Royal Decree of April 21st, 1887, No. 4485 (3rd Series), relative to the coral fisheries in the sea of Sciacca, are abrogated. Given at Rome December 29, 1888. HUMBERT. ROYAL DECREE OF JANUARY 7TH, 1892, REVOKING THE TEMPORARY PROHIBITION ON THE CORAL FISHERY IN THE SEA OF SCIACCA. ART. 1. The temporary prohibition placed upon the coral fishery in the sea of Sciacca by Article 1 of the Decree of December 29, 1888, No. 5888 (Series 3), is revoked, to date from the close of the fish- ing season of 1893; the provisions of Article 84 of the regulations re- specting the marine fisheries, approved by the Royal Decree of Novem- ber 13, 1582, No. 1090 (Series 3), will remain in force. 61 HUMBERT. 4&2 FOREIGN STATUTES. NORWAY. 19 Juni. No.2. 1880. [From ‘‘ Norsk Loytidende, 1880,”’ page 313.] Lov angaaende Fredning af Hval ved Finmarkens Kyst (*) (7). Vi Osear, 0. 8s. v. Gjére vitterligt: At Os er bleven Pee det nu forsamlede ‘ordentlige Storthings Beslutning af 15 de Juni dette Aar, saaly dende: “Src. 1. Det skal vere forbudt paa den Havstrekning ved Fin- markens Kyst, som Kongen bestemmer, at driebe eller jage Hval i Tidsrummet fra 1Iste Januar til Udgangen af Mai; dog ca “Hyal, der er auskudt udenfor Fredningsfeltet, dreebes eller tilgo ‘degjpres idenfor dettes Greendser. Src. 2. Hvo, som overtreder det i Sec. 1 fastsatte Forbud, eller paa eee Maade gigr sig delagtig i saadan Overtriedelse, str aftes med Bégder fra 4,000 til 8 8,000 Kroner for hver Hval, som jages eller dreebes. Dog skal af et Skibs Besretning ingen anden end F/reren straffes, naar Overtredelsen er skeet enten efter hans Bef ling eller med hans Vidende og uden at han har giort, hvad der stodi hans Magt for at hindre den. Bestemmelsen i Kriminalloven af 3 die Juni 1874, 2 det Kapitel, See. 40, sidste Passus, Kommer ikke til Anvendelse. (’) Sno. 3. Sager, der reise sig af Overtraedelse af narverende Lov, be- handles ved Politiret. For Byder, hvormed Frer eller Reder bliver anseet, hefter Skibet. SEC. 4, Nerverende Lov skal ikke vere til Hinder for, at man kan bemegtige sig Hval, som findes lauddreven eller i saavet Tilstand dri- vende | is gen. Src. 5. Denne Lov treder i Kraft 1lste Januar neste Aar og skal gjeldei5 Aar.” Thi have Vi antaget og bekrzftct, ligesom Vi herved antage og bekriefte denne Beslutning som Loy. 5 JANUAR 1881. {From ‘‘Norsk Lovtidende, 1881,” page 7.] Plakat indeholdende Bestemmelser om Fredning af Hval ved Fin- markens Kyst. (°) Vi Oscar, 0. 8. v. Gjgre vitterligt: I Kraft af Lov angaaende Fredning af Hval ved Finmarkens Kyst af 19de Juni 1880, See. 1, og under Henvisning til samme Lovs, Secs, 2, 3, 4 og 5 fastsiettes herved : Paa Havstrekningen ved Finmarkens Kyst i en Afstand af indtil en geografisk Mil fra Ky sten, regnet fra den yderste ) eller Holme, som ikke OV ersky lles af Havet, skal detandtil Videre vere forbudt at drebe eller. jage Hval i Tidsrummet fra Iste Januar til Udgangen af Mai. For Varangerfiordens Vedkommende bliver Griendsen for den fredede Strekning udad mod Havet en ret Linie tr rsa fra Kibergnes til G ) Bekjendtgj . 22 Juni i Lovt., Iste Afd., No. 20. ()Se Sth. Dok. No. 31 og 41 og Indst. VO: "No. 14 for 1879 samt Sth. tid. for s. A., Forh. i Oth., 8. 497-99; Sth, Prp. No. 23, Indst. O. No. 40 og Dok. No. 41 og 54 for 1880 samt Sth. tid. for s. A., Forh. i Oth., S. 891-422 og 536 og i Lth., 8. 88 99 og 114, 2) Cfr. L. om Fredn. af Sel i Nordishavet af 18 Mai 1876, Sec. 2. (*) Bekiendtgj. 8 Januar 1881, i Lovt. iste Afd., No. 1. NORWAY. 483 Grendse-Jakobselv, dog saaledes, at det ogsaa udenfor denne Linie skal vere forbudt i den ovenanf¢rte Tid at dreebe eller jage Hvali kortere Afstand fra Kysten ved Kibergnes end 1 geografisk Mil. (') Hvoneiter alle Vedkommende sig underdanigst have at rette. LAW OF NORWAY OF JUNE 19, 1880, RELATING TO THE PROTECTION OF WHALES. {Translation. ] Src. 1. It shall be prohibited on that part of the sea on the coast of Finmarken which the King will define to kill or chase whales during the period extending from the 1st of January till the end of May; but whales which have been wounded outside of the limits of protection may be killed or be utilized within these limits. Sec. 2. Any one violating the provisicns of Section 1 or becoming party to such violation will be punished by a fine of from 4,000 to 8,000 kroner for each whale which is chased or killed. Of a ship’s crew, however, none but the captain shall be punished, if the law has been vio- lated either by his order or with his knowledge and if he has not done everything in his power to prevent such violation. The provisions of the last clause of section 40 of chapter 2 of the Criminal Law of June 3rd, 1874, shall not apply.* SEC. 3. Cases arising from violations of the present law are treated before the police courts. For fines to which the captain or the owner of a vessel has become liable the vessel is held as a pledge. Sec. 4. The present law shall net prevent any one from taking possession of a whale which has been driven ashore or which is found floating in the sea in a wounded condition. Sec. 5. This law shall go into operation on the Lst of January of next year and shall remain in force for five years. PROCLAMATION CONTAINING THE REGULATIONS RELATIVE TO THE PROTECTION OF WHALES ON THE COAST OF FINMARKEN, JANU- ARY 5, 1881. Referring to the law of June 19th, 1880, relative to the protection of whales on the coast of Finmarken, it is her eby ordered: In the sea on the coast of Finmarken, at a distance not exceeding one geographical mile from the coast, counted from the outermost islands or rocks which are never cover ed by the sea, it shall, until fur- ther notice, be prohibited to kill or chase whales during the per iod from the Ist of January till the end of May. As regards the Varangerfjord, the limit for the protected tract and towards the sea shall be a stra ight line drawn from Kibergnos to the boundary, the Jakobselv, but it ‘shall also be prohibited outside of this line, during the season of protection mentioned above, to kill or chase whales at a distance of less than one eeographical mile from Kib- bergnos. t (*) Ifr. Resol. 22 Febr. 1812, Og 16 Oktbr. 1869. *See Law of May 18, 1876, see 2, relating to the protection of seals in the Polarf ea tSee Decrees of February 22 22, 1812 , and October 16, 1869, 484 FOREIGN STATUTES. COLOMBIA. [From Gaceta de Panama, February 6th, 1896, No. 324.] DECRETO NUMERO 6 DE 1890. [De 29 de enero.] SOBRE BUSERIA CON MAQUINAS EN EL DEPARTAMENTO. El Gobernador del Departamento. En uso de sus atribuciones, y considerando: 1°. Que la buseria con maquinas de la concha madre perla se pro. hibio en este Departamento, por considerarse perjudicial al fomento de esta industria del pais; 2°, Que el Supremo Gobierno facult6 4 esta Gobernacion para per- mitir la buseria en determinados lugares de las costas del departa- mento, mediante el pago del impuesto por cada tonelada de las conchas de madre perla extraidas con maquina; 3°, Que la recaudacion de este impuesto, en la forma establecida, pre- senta inconvenientes por no ser facil averiguar con precision el ntimero de toneladas de tal molusco que se extraigan con cada maquina; y 4°. Que esta Gobernacion esta obligado 4 asegurar los intereses del Tesoro. DECRETA: ART{CULO 1°. Permitese la buseria con maéquinas en las costas del Departamento, comprendidas de las Puntas ** Mariato” a * Burica,” siem- pre que previamente se obtenga la respectiva patente. ARTICULO 2°. Las patentes, se daran por cada una maquina que se emplée en la buseria, seran por un ano; las expedira el Administrador General de Hacienda, y las visara el Secretario General de la Gober- nacion del Departamento. ARTICULO 3°. El valor de cada patente sera de doscientos pe os, que se consignaran en la Administracion General de Hacienda antes de su expedicion. ARTICULO 4°, No se dara patente para busear con maéquinas en cl Golfo de Panama, desde las Puntas “ Mala” hasta ‘Garachiné.” ARTICULO 5°, Los contraventores sufriran las penas de comiso de las maquinas con sus accesorios empleadas en la extraccion dela concha madre perla, y de una multa igual al cuadruplo de la cantidad que como derecho debia pagarse por la patente anual. En caso de insol- vencia del multado, la multa se coumutara por arresto, 4 razon de un dia por cada dos pesos. ARTICULO 6°. Los Prefectos de las Provincias del Departamento, comunicaran a los empleados de su dependencia las ordenes con- ducentes 4 impedir que se busée con maquinas, sin que se tenga la patente respectiva. ARTICULO 7°. El Comandante de la Catonera Boyacé inspeccionara con frecuencia las costas del Departamento, para impedir que se busce con maquinas en los lugares prohibidos, y que en los permitidos se haga sin dar cumplimiento 4 las disposiciones del presente Decreto. Comuniquese y publiquese. Dado en el Palacio de Gobierno de Panama, 429 de enero de 1890, J. V. AYCARDI. El Seeretario General, : S. McKay, @ a ———— a -—___— a 30" 1B hes B le H Le lf I fies t a | — << 6. Se eS I a PIRES Se cathe ease et aa So ~~ at he eae at care 1 aad ee ee = ot ‘ o S ‘ = ~ le ~ Pee ee ee ke re et ei : ee fee's on a a Sea : 7 *« t ; 7 iy , 1] A i ‘ . “ay | i> | - a = Key - ’ ny . os ue | = f j . ‘ 7 ‘ AOet ! ; ti lp » * : ‘ rp Wt 7 4 Ps ' ? Zz = 7 ao 7% { — ( a ae 4 ) * ' ~ 7 i} 7 - ’ ® “7 3) as - bs 7 - v ue = Sin ull ' 1 atte, -_ . Ge « aT) ter l _ - + iar . 5 . \ = 7 i ae -_ r ° 6 ’ = : = nr A “ . ’ 74 q aoe i ca 2 : ’ ‘ 7 ‘ -- ‘ a - a we ' 7 7 ‘ Tae = 7 ~ bs 4 be : 7 7 < Ps ’ = “ * re 7 = n 5 P) - > yes ' as J 7 7 ened 7 mp et . : AS » 4" ae ‘ j a ad _ 4 , a - a? . 7 - s 7 « = , 7 - - - < a . a 2s y oa ‘ 7 > ‘ che . i, ; ; ; ‘ = - al 7 — 1 ° —— 7 a < = 7 | moe - = ‘ _ : a eA m 7 an - ha a - f - : ‘ _ 7 - 7 he - ‘ : - is. 7 PANAM PEARL FISHERY Use of Diving Machines prohibited over colored. area marked A. gulated over colored area marked B by Decree Wo. 6G. 1890. | Prepared at the Office of the C.S.Coast and Geodetic Survey 7 C. Mhundenhall Superintendent & Se AMAIA yaenlart sang ayo Insts dxslorwg ae s& No sed ~svo bekolsygal .A/ Sossieanocs wes Sesnohoo oA soron. ef A Joost | Les, nsvwloes Neands 2, 24h shee & ae asnaniet to Syewvoartl spit) Yai a at = > ee ae Se + 4 x Bt COLOMBIA. ASS DECREE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PANAMA, NO. 6 OF 1890. [From Gaceta de Panama, 6th February, 1890, No. 324.] ON DIVING WITH MACHINES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. [Translation. ] The Governor of the Department, in the use of his attributes, and considering: 1. That the diving for mother-of-pearl shells with machines has been prohibitel in this department, it being considered prejudicial to the progress of the industry of the country: 2. That the Supreme Government authorized this Government (dept’l) to permit this diving in designated places on the coasts of the department on the payment of a tax for every ton of mother-of-pearl shells obtained by each machine; 3. That the collection of this tax under the established conditions was attended with many difficulties, it not being easy to ascertain with correctness the number of tons of the said mollusk obtained by each machine; and 4, That this Government, being obliged to protect the interests of the Treasury, DECREES: ART. 1, The diving with machines will be permitted on the coasts of the department between Points ‘ Mariato” and “ Burica,” whenever the respective patent be previously obtained. ART. 2, The “patents” will be issued to each machine employel in this diving for the term of one year; they will be issued by the Gen- eral Administrator of Finance, and will be viséd by the Secretary-Gen- eral of the Departmental Government. ARt. 3. The cost for each “ patent,” or permit, will be $200, which will be paid in to the General Adininistrator of Finance prior to its despatch. Art. 4. No permits will be issued for diving with machines within the Gulf of Panama from Points Mala to Garachine. ART. 5. The transgressors will suffer the penalty of confiscation of their diving machines and all accessories used in the diving for mother-of-pearl shells, and also a fine equal to four times the amount which should have been paid for the annual “ patent.” In case the fined person be insolvent the fine will be commuted by arrest at the rate of one day’s arrest for every two dollars. ART. 6. The Prefects of the Provinces of the Department will in- struct the employés under their jurisdictions, by requisite orders, how to prevent diving by unlicensed machines. ART. 7. The captain of the gunboat Boyaca will inspect the coasts of the Department whenever practicable, and prevent diving with machines in prohibited places, and in others, where diving with machines is permitted, will see that the diving is done in accordance with the terms of this Decree. Be it made public. Given in the Palace of the Governor of Panama, this 29th of Janu- ary, 1890. J. V. AYCARDI. The Secretary General, S. McKay, A486 FOREIGN STATUTES. MEXICO. (Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Hacienda y Crédito Piblico, Seccion 1.] Habiendo pedido instrucciones 4 esta secretaria el administrador de Ja aduana del Progreso sobre la manera en que debe proceder respecto de las costas de la “Repiblica, el Presidente ha tenido 4 bien, en uso de las facultades que le concede la fraccion 1 del articulo 85 de la Consti- tucion, determinar que se les comuniquen las siguientes reglas, que son extensivas 4 todas las costas de la nacion: J. Bs libre para todos los habitantes de la Reptblica la pesea en sus aguas territoriales, el buceo de perlas, y el approvechamiento de todos los productos maritimos. Il. Los buques nacionales podran ocuparse de trasportar dichos pro- ductos, libres de derechos, sin otra condicion, que de la de inscribir el nombre de la embarcacion y los de los tripulantes en la aduana mart- tima mas inmediata, de altura 6 cabotaje, cuyo administrador queda facultado para expedir la patente respectiva. III. Dicho patente se renovara anualmente, y luego que fuere expe- dida, se dara conocimiento de ella 4 la secretaria de hacienda. IV. Los buques extranjeros solo podran ocuparse de este trafico, pre- sentandose préeviamente 4 la aduana maritima respectiva, de altura o -abotaje, en la que pagaran el derecho de tonaladas establecido 6 que se establezea sobre buques extranjeros, que ahora es 4razon de un peso por cada tonelada, y recibiran un permiso temporal, que no excedera de seis meses. V. Para obtener este permiso sera indespensable registrar el nombre del buque, el del capitan y de los tripulantes. VI. El ntimero de los tripulantes de buques extranjeros nunca ex- cedera de veinticinco. VII. Las patentes y permisos we que habla este reglamento, habili- tan 4 los que les obtengan, para establecer en la costa habitaciones provisionales, que sirvan para reunite los productos de la pesca y prepararlos convenientemente. VIII. Para establecer dichas habitaciones recabaran préviamente licencia de la autoridad municipal mas inmediata, quedando les tripu- laciones de los buques sujetas a las leyes del pais, desde el momento que se solicite el permiso. Dicha autoridad no podra conceder la licen- cia, sino en vista de la patente 6 permiso de la aduana maritima re- spectiva. IX. La autoridad municipal hara el senalamiento material del lugar en que puedan establecerse, por tiempo del permiso. X. Los resguardos maritimos podran visitar en qualquier momento los establecimientos de pesca 6 buceo, y registrar los buques destinados 4 este trafico, 4 fin de impedir que ‘ la sombra de la concesion se veri- fique el contrabando de efectos extranjeros en contravencion de la Ordenanza de aduanas. XI. Caso de delito infranganti de contrabando, seran decomisados los utiles de la empresa y las embarcaciones, procediendose al juicio respectivo y 4 la imposicion de penas, conforme a lo prevenido en el arancel de aduanas maritimas. XII. Los administradores de las aduanas, de acuerdo con peritos y personas practicas y conocedoras, determinaran el tiempo en que deba sosecharse la perla, no permitiendo que esta operacion se verifique cuando haya peligro de destruirse la cria. XILL. Los mismos administradores senalaran la extension 6 espacio Qyrortuga la. ARCOS ITA. = —— = —— —— 4 vy ro sac ii Me ‘pe Par oO wwe PRB a ee eS ce as ee A 2 wt : a eed al El ee ne EE -e pare 3 — ae Hh Ss> Bla * A 4 ——— 7 Stee Se eS ee ——— i AAs Ne ae TG A TES MEE Ba ap iat) ui is i Aa i) Ln tit) hy On rs i niet ; i h pert ; \ i i | mie Heal: a 4 vil Ra WAKA Wd sauoNsQ= Vi OLNYS OL1idsa ‘wl asor NWS | : 2 E g F ° : » wo Fl s | ; ; 2 ¢ ze ®, F : 3 % é / - = x é 2 i 5 co “ oO 7 § ito J a z FS / 5 > # we . 4 F 3 a Fr’ rf Ff on s YPM 1 SHRMOTIY OAL, YI PLO SUNSSIPUDD GY PUD Pet YT 7 Pei diy: roy aoe a (Geet, ee Deed ~ Ts MEXICO. 487 que cada concesionario deba verificar la pesca, buceo 6 explotacion, limitandolo con algunas senales que no dén lugar 4 perjuicio de ter- cero. Dicha extension 6 espacio quedaraén consignados en la patente respectiva. XIV. Los buques nacionales 6 extranjeros que se empleen en el tra- fico de pesca 0 buceo, sin sujetarse 4 este reglamento y 4 las leyes ge- nerales de la Republica, seran multados por el administrador de la, aduana maritima més cercana al punto en que fueren aprehendidos, con la cantidad determinada por las leyes, deteniéndose este en el puerto, miéntras que no satisfaga dicha multa. XV. Este reglamento se fijara escrito en castellano, francés, inglés y aleman, en un lugar visible, en cada una de las aduanas maritimas. México, Marzo 16 de 1872. ROMERO. [Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Hacienda y Crédito Publico. Seccion 3’. Mesa 5:.] E] ©. Presidente de la Republica se ha servido dirigirme el decreto que sigue: Sebastin Lerdo de Tejada, Presidente Constitucional de los Estados- Unidos Mexicanos, 4 sus habitantes, sabed: Que el Congreso de la Union ha tenido 4 bien decretar lo siguiente: El] Congreso de la Union decreta: ART. I. La zona perlifera en el litoral de Baja-California sera divi- dida en cuatro secciones, cuyos limites marcaraé el Poder Ejecutivo. ART. II. La pesca de concha y perla, podra hacerse alternativa- mente cada dos anos en una sola de las secciones, ho permitiendose por motivo alguno la extraccion de la concha cria. Los infractores de este articulo incurrarian en una multa de cien 4 quinientos pesus. ART. III. El Ejecutivo modificara, conforme a este ley, el reglamento sobre pesca, expedido el 16 de Marzo de 1872. Palacio del Poder Legislativo de la Union, México, Abril 21 de 1874. R. G. Guzman, diputado presidente. A. Riba y Echeverria, diputado secretario. S. Nieto, diputado secretario. Por tanto mando se imprima, publique, circule y se le de debido cumplimiento. Dado en el Palacio del Gobierno Federal de México 4 veintiuno de Abril de mil ochocientos setenta y cuatro. (I*mdo.) SEBASTIN LERDO DE TEJADA. Al C. Francisco Mejia, Secretario de Estado y del Despacho de Ha- cienda y Crédito Publico. Y lo comunico 4 Vd. para su inteligencia, Independencia y libertad. México, Abril 21 de 1874. Mrstfa. [Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Hacienda y Crédito Ptiblico. Seccion 32. Mesa 5*.] Reglamento para el Buceo de la Concha Porla conforme al Decreto de 21 de Abril de 1874. I.—Buceo. I. El] bueceo de la coneha perla es libre en la costa de la Reptiblica Mexicana, tanto para los habitantes de ella, como para los extranjeros, A88 FOREIGN STATUTES. siempre que se sujeten 4 las leyes del pais y 4 las disposiciones de este reglamento. IL. Desde el momento que una persona quiere establecer una armada, pedira permiso al administrador de la aduana mas inmediata, el cual no podra negarlo. Iil. El buceo durara desde el 15 de Mayo hasta el 15 de Noviembre de cada ano, no pudiendose ampliar este plazo por ningun motivo. IV. Ningun armador puede impedir a persona alguna que vaya a visitar los” lugares en que se bucea, y aun a comprar perlas, siempre que sean de la propiedad de las que venda, quedando en caso contrario, tanto el comprador como el vendedor, sujetos 4 lo que previenen las leyes sobre efectos robados. Il.—Zonas. V. Se divide el litoral perlifero de la Baja-California, en cuatro zonas. segun lo previene el supremo decreto de 21 de Abril del corriente ano. * * * * * * * IV .—Buques extranjeros. XIII. Todo buque mercante extranjero puede venir 4 las costas de la Republica a la pesca de la concha perla, siempre que cumpla con las leyes vigentes y con las prescripciones que siguen: 1. Pedir el premiso previo. 2. Pagar el derecho de toneladas establecido 6 que se establezea y el de faro donde lo haya. 3. Hacer registrar el nombre del buque, el del capitan y el de su tripulacion. 4. Que no exceda de veinticinco el ntimero de tripulantes extranjeros. 5. Traer su lista de rancho con todos los requisitos que previene el arancel de aduanas. 6. Pagar los derechos establecidos 6 que se establezcan sobre los viveres que traigan de exceso. V.— Visitas. XIV. Los administradores de las aduanas dispondran que se visiten las armadas por lo ménos seis veces durante la temporada. XV. Las visitas tendran por objeto investigar si se cumple con lo pre- venido en el supremo decreto antes mencionado, y en este reglamento. XVI. El empleado 4 quien encomiende estas visitas el administrador, rendira informe circunstanciado de todo lo que ocurra y sea conve- niente tener en conocimiento. VI.—Inspectores de armada. XVIT. La aduana nombrara uno 6 dos inspectores para cada armada. XVIII. Estos inspectores disfrutaran un sueldo de $20 mensuales, el cual, lo mismo que su manutencion, seran costeados por los armadores. XIX. Son atribuciones de los inspectores, como auxiliares de la justi- cia y de la policia: 1. Practicar por de pronto las diligencias conducentes por los deli- tos 6 infracciones que pueden cometerse en las armadas, remitiendo a los infractores bien asegurados 4 la autoridad competente. 2. Impedir el contrabando. MEXICO. 489 3. Impedir que se bucée fuera de la zona permitida. 4, Impedir la pesea de la ceria. 5. Impedir que los armadores maltraten 4 los buzos 6 abusen de su trabajo. 6. Avisar violentamente 4 la aduana de cualquier caso grave que occurra, para el cual tendran Ja facultad de ocupar una embar cacion pequena y el ntmero de tripulantes necesario, todo de la misma armada. VIII.—Penas. XX. Por cualqniera infraccion de este reglamento que cometan los armadores, impondran los administradores una multa que no baje de $5 ni exceda de $200, excepto en los casos de contrabando en que se observaran las prevenciones del arancel vigente. XXI. Estas multas ingresaran en calidad de depoésito, hasta que el ministerio resuelva Si estuvieren bien aplicadas, para lo cual el admi- nistrador informara en cada que se aplique alguna, Transitorio. Se derogan los reglamentos anteriores, México, Junio 24 de 1574. MEJIA. LAWS RELATING TO MEXICAN PEARL FISHERIES. REGULATION OF MARCH 16, 1872. {Translation.] TREASURY DEPARTMENT. &ce., First Section. The collector of customs at Progreso having requested from this De- partment instructions as to the proper method of procedure regarding fishery interests along the coast of the Republic, the President has seen fit, in the exercise of the faculties upon him conferred under par. 1 of Art. 85 of the constitution, to determine that the following regu- lations, applicable along the entire coast of the nation, shall be com- municated to him: I. The privilege of fishing in the waters of the Republic, as well as that of searching for pearl, and the benefit of all maritime products, is free to all inhabitants of the Republic. Il. Foreign vessels can engage in the transportation of such pro- ducts, free of duty, and without any other condition than the register, at the nearest maritime custom-house, of the name of the vessel and the names of the crew, such custom-house, whether a high sea port or trading post, through its managers, shall issue the respective permit. Tif. Such permit is renewable annually, and upon issue thereof due advice shall be served upon the treasury department. IV. Foreign vessels can only engage in this traffie of transportation, reporting previously to the aforesaid maritime custom-house, where they shall pay the tonnage dues established, or which may be estab- lished, for foreign shipping, which is now at the rate of one dollar per ton; and they shall receive a temporary permit good only for six months. V. To obtain such permit it shall be necessary to register the name of the vessel, that of the captain, and those of the crew. 62 490 FOREIGN STATUTES. VI. The number of the crew on foreign vessels shall never exceed twenty-tive. VII. The warrants and permits mentioned in these regulations author- ize their holders to set up along the coast provisional buildings to store the products of the fishing and for their preparatiou. VIII. In order to set up said buildings it shall be necessary first to secure license from the most available municipal authority, the crews of the vessels being subject to the laws of the land from the moment such permission is requested. The said municipal authority ean not grant the license save when the warrant or permit of the respective maritime house is produced. IX. The municipal authority shall assign the place where such build- ing can be erected for the time covered by the permit. X. The maritime customs guards are at liberty at any time whatso- ever to visit the fishing or diving establishments and to inspect the ves- sels assigned to that service, to the end that under cover of the conces- sion there may be no smuggling of foreign goods as against the provi- sions of the generai customs ordinance. XI. Incase of smuggling discovered delito infranganti, the belongings of the company and the vessels shall be confiscated, while, in accord- ance with the stipulations of the maritime customs ordinance, the req- uisite judicial proceedings shall be had and the imposition of the fines. XI. In accord with experts and practical intelligent persons, the collectors of customs shall determine the time when pearl fishing may be engaged in, such fishing not to be permitted when there is any dan- ger of injuring or destroying the mother shell. XI. The customs collectors shall designate the territory or space wherein any concessionaire may conduct fishing g, diving, or other like operations, placing requisite signs or marks to the end that the inter- ests of any third party shall not be injured. The extent of such terri- tory shall be designated in the permit issued. XIV. Mexican or foreign vessels which may engage in fishing or div- ing traffic in violation of this regulation and the general laws of the Republic Shall be fined, such fine ‘being imposed by ‘the collector of cus- toms at the point nearest to the scene of arrest, the fine to be in the sum stipulated under the law, the offending vessel to be held in the port until such fine be satisfied. XV. These regulations written in Spanish, French, English, and Ger- man shall be posted up in a Conspicuous plac ein each of the maritime custom-houses. : Mexico, March 16, 1872. RoMERO. DECREE OF APRIL 21, 1874, { Translation. | DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, ETC., Section 3, Table 5. The President of the Republic has been pleased to address me the following decree: Sebastian Lerdo De Tejada, Constitutional President of the United Mexican States, to the inhabitants thereof: Know Ye, That the Congress of the Union has seen fit to decree the following: The Congress of the Union decrees: ART. 1. The pearl fisheries along the coast of Lower California shal] a MEXICO. 491 be divided into four districts, the limits whereof shall be designated by the Executive. ART. 2. The fishing for shell and for pearl can be carried on alter- natively each two years in any one of the districts, but under no con- sideration shall the mother shell be removed. Violators of the rule are liable to a fine of from $100 to $500, ART. 3. In conformity with this law, the Executive shall modify the Fishery Law of March 16, 1872. Palace of-the Legislative Power of the Union, April 21, 1874. kh. G. GUZMAN, Speaker of the House. A. RipA Y ECHEVERRIA, Clerk of the House. S. NIETO, Clerk of the House. I therefore order that the same may be printed, published, and cir- culated and given due compliance. Given at the Palace of the Federal Government of Mexico, on the 21st of April, the year one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four. SEBASTIAN LERDO DE TEJADA. To C. FRANcIScO MEGIA, Secretary of the Treasury, ete. And I communicate, ete. Independence and liberty. Mexico, Aprik 21, 1874. MEGIA. ORDINANCE OF JUNE 24, 1874. { Translation. ] DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, &e., &c. Section 3, Table 5. REGULATIONS TO GOVERN PEARL DIVING UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE DECREE OF APRIL 21, 1874. I.— Diving, ete. 1. Diving for pearl is free along the coast of the Mexican Republic, alike for the inhabitants thereof as well as for foreigners, provided they always are obedient to the laws of the land and to the regulation stipu- lations. . 2. Whenever any person desires to open up fishing grounds he may apply for permission to the nearest customs collector, who can not deny him. 3. The fisheries shall last from May 15 to November 15 of each year, and under no conditions whatsoever can this term be extended. 4, No pearl cruiser can prevent any person whatever from frequent- ing the fishing grounds, and even purchasing pearls, provided always that the latter are the legitimate property of the vendor; in contrary event the vendee and the vendor alike being subject to the law govern- ing stolen property. 492 FOREIGN STATUTES. II. — Districts. 5. The pearl fisheries along the coast of Lower California shall be divided into four districts in accordance with the Supreme Decree of April 21 of the present year. Nore.—The sections of the law which are omitted relate to the boundaries of the , fishing districts, the equipment of divers, and the collection of debts due by divers to the cruisers. * * * * * ® * IV.— Foreign Vessels. 13. All foreign merchant vessels can come to the coast of the R epub- lic to engage in pearl fishing, provided they comply with the laws in — ce and with the following provisions, to wit: . The prior request for permission. ii. The payment of tonnage dues established or to be established, ee the payment of light- house charges wherever such are required. iil. The record upon the register of the name of the vessel, that of the saptain, and of his crew. That the number of foreigners in any crew shall not exceed nies five. v. That the list of provisions shall be made out in accordance with the requisites provided under the customs ordinance. vi. The payment of duties established or to be established upon food and provisions in excess. V.—Inspections. 14. The collectors of customs shall arrange that the fleets of the fish- ermen shall be inspected at least on six occasions during the fishing season. 15, The inspectors shall investigate whether compliance is had with the provisions of the Supreme Decree hereinbefore meutioned, as well as with these regulations. 16. The employé or officer charged by the customs collector with the inspection shall render a detailed report of all that may oceur and which it may be expedient to remember. V1I.—Inspectors of Fleets. 17. The custom-house shall appoint one or two inspectors for each fleet. 18. These inspectors shall draw a salary of twenty dollars a month, which, with their board, shall be paid by the cruisers. 19. The following are the duties of the inspectors in connection with the police and the courts: i. To take immediate action in case of crimes or offenses committed upon the vessels, committing the trespassers, under safe guard, to the competent authorities. i. To prevent smuggling. ili. To prevent fishing outside of the district allowed. iv. To prevent the extraction of mother shell. v. To prevent cruisers from ilitreating the divers or taking undue pera of their work. To advise instantly the custom-house regarding any serious case hich may occur, to which end they may oceupy a small vessel, with the necessary crew, drawn from the fleet. HOVERING ACTS. 493 VII.— Penalties. 20. Any transgression against these regulations committed by the eruisers shall be | punished Dby the customs ‘collec tors with a fine of not less than five dollars nor exceeding two hundred dollars, except in sases of smuggling, in which case the customs regulations shall be en- forced. 21. These fines shall be deposited, and held in deposit, until the De- partment (Treasury Department) shall decide upon their legality, to which end the customs collector shall in each case submit a report. Transitory. All foregoing regulations are annulled. Mexico, June 24, 1874, MEGIA. HOVERING ACTS. GREAT BRITAIN. (9. Geo. LI, Cap. 35. A. D.1736.] An act for indemnifying persons who have been guilty of offenses against the laws made for securing the revenues of customs and excise, and for enforcing those laws for the future. XXIL. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the said twenty-fourth day of June, one thousand seven hun- dred and thirty-six, where any ship or vessel whatsoever coming or arriving from foreign parts, and having on board six pounds of tea, or any foreign brandy, arrack, rum, strong waters, or other sprits whatso- ever, in casks under sixty gallons (except only for the use of the sea- men then belonging to and on beard such ship or vessel, not exceeding two gallons for each seamen) shall be found at anchor or hovering within the limits of any of the ports of this Kingdom, or within two leagues of the shore, or shall be discovered to have been within the limits of any port, and not proceeding on her voyage, wind and weather permitting (unless in case of unavoidable necessity, and distress of weather, of which necessity and distress the master, purser, or other person having or taking the charge or command of such ship or vessel shall give notice to, and make proof of before the collector or other chief officer of the customs of such port as aforesaid immediately after the arrival of such ship or vessel into the said port) all such tea, foreign brandy, arrack, rum, strong waters, and spirits, together with the chests, boxes, and casks, and other package whatsoever, containing the same goods, or the value thereof, shall be forfeited and lost (whether bulk shall then have been broken or not) and the same goods and package shall and may be seized and prosecuted, or the value thereof sued tor by any officers of the customs or excise in such manner and form as hereinafter is expressed; any law, statute, or custom to the contrary nothwithstanding. XXIII. And whereas foreign goods are frequently taken out of ships at sea without the limits of any port, with intent to be fraudulently landed in this kingdom; for preventing thereof, be it further enacted by the au- thority aforesaid, that in case any foi reign goods, wares, or merchan- dizes shall, after the twenty ninth day ot September, one thousand 494 FOREIGN STATUTES. seven hundred and thirty-six, by any ship, boat, or vessel whatsoever, be taken in at sea, or put out ‘of any ship or vessel whatsoever, within the distance of four leagues from any of the coasts of this kingdom (whether the same be within or without the limits of any of the ports thereof) without payment of the customs and other duties due and pay- able for the same (unless in case of apparent necessity or some other lawful reason, of which the master or other person having charge of such ship, vessel, or boat so taking in the same shall give immediate notice to and make proot before the chief officer or officers of the cus- toms of the first port of this kingdom where he shall arrive), such goods, wares, and merchandizes shall be forfeited and lost, and the master or other person having charge of such ship, vessel, or boat so taking in the same and all such persons who shall be aiding, assisting, or otherwise concerned in the unshipping or receiving of the said goods, wares, or merchandizes shall forfeit treble the value thereof; and the ships, boats, or vessels into which the said goods, wares and merchandizes shall be unshipped and taken in shall also be forfeited and lost, any ship, boat, or vessel, so to be forfeited and lost not exceeding the bur- then of one hundred tuns; and the master, purser, or other person tak- ing charge of such ship or vessel out of which such goods shall be taken (unless in case of such apparent necessity or other lawful reason, where- of notice shall be given by him, and proof be made as aforesaid) shall also forteit treble the value of the goods so unshipped as aforesaid ; which forfeitures shall be divided and recovered in such manner as is hereinafter mentioned. UNITED STATES. SEC. 2760. The officers of the revenue-cutters shall respectively be deemed officers of the customs, and shall be subject to the direction of such collectors of the revenue, or other officers thereof, as from time to time shall be designated for that purpose. They shall go on board all vessels which arrive within the United States or within four leagues of the coast thereof, if bound for the United States, and search and exam- ine the same, and every part thereof, and shalldemand, receive, and certify the manifests required to be on board certain vessels, shall afiix and put proper fastenings en the hatches and other communications with the hold of any vessel, and shall remain on board such vessels until they arrive at the port or place of their destination. SEC. 2867, If after the arrival of any vessel laden with merchandise and bound to the United States, within the limits of any collection- district or within four leagues of the coast, any part of the cargo of such vessel shall be unladen, for any purpose whatever, before such vessel has come to the proper place for the discharge of her cargo, or some part thereof, and has been there duly authorized by the proper officer of the customs to unlade the same, the master of such vessel and the mate, or other person next in command, shall respectively be lable to a penalty of one thousand dollars for each such offense, and the merchandise so unladen shall be forfeited, except in case of some un- avoidable accident, necessity, or distress of weather. In case of such unavoidable accident, necessity, or distress the master of such vessel shall give notice to, and, together with two or more of the officers or mariners on board such vessel, of whom the mate or other person next HOVERING ACTS. 495 in command shall be one, shall make proof upon oath before the col- lector, or other chief officer of the customs of the district, within the limits of which such accident, necessity, or distress happened, or be- fore the collector, or other chief officer of the collection-district within the limits of which such vessel shall first afterward arrive, if the acci- dent, necéssity, or distress happened not within the limits of any dis- trict, but within four leagues of the coast of the United States. The collector or other chief officer is hereby authorized and required to administer such oath. SEC. 2868. If any merchandise, so unladen from on board any such vessel, shall be put or received into any other vessel, except in the case of such accident, necessity, or distress, to be so notified and proved, the master of any such vessel into which the mer chandise shall be so put and received, and every other person aiding and assisting therein, shall be liable to a penalty of treble the value of the merchandise, and the vessel in which they shall be so put shall be forfeited. ST. HELENA ACT. (56 Geo. IIT, Cap. 23. 11th April, 1816.] AN ACT for regulating the Intercourse with the Island of St. Helena, during the time Napoleon’ Bnonapar ié shall be detained there; and for indemnifying Persons in the Cases therein mentioned. * * * * * * * IV. And be it further enacted, That it shall and may be lawful to and for the Governor, cr in his Absence the Deputy Governor of the said Island for the time being, or for the Commander for the time being of His Majesty’s Naval or Military Forces stationed off or at the said Island, respectively, and the Persons acting under his or their Orders and C om. mands, respectively, by all necessary Ways and Means to hinder and prevent any Ship, Vessel, or Boat, Ships or Vessels or Boats, (except Ships and Vessels of and belonging to or chartered by the said United Company of Merchants, and also duly licensed by the said Company for that Purpose, as hereinbefore mentioned,) from repairing to, trading, or touching at the said Island, or having any Communication with the same; and to hinder and prevent any Person or Persons from landing upon the said Island from such Ships, Vessels or Boats, and to seize and detain all and every Person or Persons that shall land upon the said Island from the same; and all such Ships, Vesseis or Boats (except as above excepted) as shall repair to, or trade, or touch at the said Island, or shall be found hovering within Hight Leagues of the Coast thereof, and which shall or may belong, in the Whole or in Part, to any Subject or Subjects of His Majesty, or "to any Person or Per sons owing Allegiance to His Majesty, shall and are hereby declared to be forfeited to His Majesty, and shall and may be seized and detained, and brought to England, and shall and may be prosecuted to Condemnation by His Majesty’s Attorney General, in any of His Majesty’s Courts of Record at Westminster, in such manner and form as any Ship, Vessel or Boat may be seized, detained, or prosecuted for any Breach or Violation of the Navigation or Revenue Laws of this Country; and the Offence for which such Ship, Vessel or Boat shall be proceeded against shall and may be laidand charged to have been doneand committed in the County of Middlesex; and if any Ship, Vessel or Boat not belonging, in the Whole 496 FOREIGN STATUTES. or in Part, to any Person or Persons the Subject or Subjects of or owing Allegiance to His Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, shall repair to, or trade or touch at the said Island of Saint Helena, or shall be found hovering within Eight Leagues of the Coast thereof, and shall not de- part from the said Island or the Coast thereof when and so soon as the Master or other Person having the Charge and Command thereof shall be ordered so to do by the Governor or Lieutenant Governor of the said Island for the time being, or by the Commander of His Majesty’s Naval or Military Foree stationed at or off the said Island for the time being, (unless in case of unavoidable Necessity, or Distress of Weather, ) such Ship or Vessel shall be deemed For feited, and shall and may be seized and detained and prosecuted in the same manner as hereinbefore en- acted as to Ships, Vessels or Boats of or belonging to any Subject or Subjects of His Majesty. QUARANTINE ACT OF 1825. (6 Geo. LV, C. 78, Secs. 2,8,9. 27th June, 1825.] AN ACT to repeal the several Laws relating to the Performance of Quarantine, and to make other Provisions in lieu thereof. * * * * * * * II. And be it enacted, That from and after the First Day of June, One thousand eight hundred and twenty-five, all Vessels, as well His Maj- esty’s Ships of War as others, coming from or having touched at any Place from whence His Majesty, His “Heirs or Successors, by and with the Advice of His or Their Privy Council, shall have adjuds ed and de- elared it probable that the Plague or other infectious Disease or Distem- per highly dangerous to the Health of His Majesty’s Subjects may be brought, and all Vessels and Boats receiving any Person, Goods, Wares and Merchandize, Packets, Packages, Baggage, Wearing Apparel, Books, Letters, or any other Article whatsoever, from or out of any Vessel so coming from or having touched at such infected Place as aforesaid, whether such Per sons, “Goods, Wares and Merchandize, Packets, Pack. ages, Baggage, W earing Apparel, Books, Letters, or other Articles, shall have come or been brought in such Vessels, or such Person shall have gone, or Articles have been put on board the same, either before or after the Arrival of such Vessels at any Port or Place in the United Kingdom, or the Islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, Sark, or Man, and whether such Vessels were or were not bound to any Port or Place in the United Kingdom or the Islands aforesaid, and all Persons, Goods, Wares and Merchandize, Packets, Packages, Baggage, Wearing Appare el, Books, Letters, 0 “any other Ar ticle whatsoever on board of any Vessels 50 coming from or haying touched at such infected Place as aforesaid, or on board of any such Receiving Vessels, or Boats as aforesaid, shall be and be considered to be liable to Quarantine within the Meaning of this Act, and of any Order or Orders which shall be made by His Majesty, His Heirs and Successors, by and with the Advice of His or Their Privy Council, concerning Qu: wantine and the Prevention of Infection, from the Time of the Departure of such Vessels from such infected Place as aforesaid, or from the time when such Persons, Goods, Wares, Mer- chandize, Packets, Packages, Baggage, Wearing Apparel, Books, Let- ters, or other Articles shall have been received on board respec- LIVELY... = ot ioe HOVERING ACTS. 497 VIII. And be it further enacted, That every Commander, Master, or vther Person having the Charge of any Vessel Hable to the Per formance of Quarantine, shall be and is ‘hereby required, at all Times, when such Vessel shall meet with any other Vessel at Sea, or shall be within Two Leagues of the Coast of the United Kingdom, or the Islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, Sark, or Man, to hoist a Signal to denote that his Ves- sel is liable to the Performance of Quarantine, which Signal shall in the Day Time, if the said Vessel shall have a clean Bill ef Health, a large Yellow Flag of Six Breadths of Bunting at the Maintop Masthead; and; it such ¥ Tessel Shall not have a Clean Bill of Health, then alike Yellow Flag with a circular Mark or Ball entirely Black in the Middle thereof, whose Diameter shall be equal to Two Breadths of Bunting; and in the Night Time the Signal shall in both Cases be a large Sion: al Lanthorn with a Light therein (such as is commonly used on board His Majesty’s Ships of War), at the same Masthead; and such Commander, Master, or other Person shall keep such Signals respectively, as the Case shall be, hoisted. during such Time as the said Vessel shall continue within Sight of such other Vessel, or within Two Leagues of the said Coasts or Islands, and while so in Sight, er within such Distance, until such Vessel so liable to Quarantine as aforesaid shall have arrived at the Port or Place where it is to perform Quarantine, and until it shall have been legally dis- charged from the Performance thereof; on Failure whereof such Com- mander, Master, or other Person having Charge of such Ship or Vessel so liable to the Performance of Quarantine shall forfeit and pay for every such Offense the Sum of One hundred Pounds. IX. And be it further enacted, That every Commander, Master, or other Person having the Charge of any Vessel on board whereof the Plague or other infectious Disease or Distemper highly dangerous to the Health of His Majesty’s Subjects shall actually be, shall be, and is hereby required at all Times when such Vessel shall meet with any other Vessel at Sea, or shall be within Two Leagues of the coast of the United Kingdom, ‘or the Islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, Sark, or Man, to hoist a Signal to denote that his Vessel has the plague or other infectious Disease or Distemper highly dangerous to the Health of His Majesty’s Subjects actually on board thereof, which Signal shall be in the Day Time a Flag of Yellow and Black, borne Quarterly, ot Hight Breadths of Bunting, at the Maintop Masthead; and in the Night Time the Signal shall be Two large Signal Lanthorns, such as are com- monly used on board of His M: ijesty’ s Sl hips of War, one over the other at the same Masthead; and such Commander, Master, or other Person shall keep such Signal hoisted during such Time as the said Vessel so having the Plagueor such other infectious Disease or Distemper as afore- said on board thereof shall continue within Sight of such other Vessel, or within Two Leagues of the Coast or Islands aforesaid, while so in Sight or within such Distance, until such Vessel so having the Plague or such other infectious Disease or Distemper as aforesaid on board thereof, shall have arrived at the Port or Place where it is to perform Quaran- tine, and until it shall have been legally discharged from the Perform- ance thereof; on failure thereof such Commander, Master, orother Person having C Sharge of such Vessel shall forfeit and pay for every such Offense the Sum of One hundred Pounds. 63 OFFICIAL REPORTS. REPORT TO SECRETARY OF TREASURY BY C.L.HOOPER, CAPTAIN UNITED STATES REVENUE MARINE. PELAGIC SEALING. UNITED STATES REVENUE STEAMER CORWIN, St. Paul, Kodiak Island, Alaska, June 14, 1892. Hon. SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, Washington, D. C.: Str: [I have the honor to transmit herewith the following additional notes upon pelagic sealing, trusting that it may prove of interest to the Departinent. The duties of the vessel, when constantly cruising, re- quire so much of my time that I have been unable to make a full report upon this subject as I had hoped to do. During my cruise, which began March 9 and ended May 16, I en- deavored by every means at my command to give information in regard to pelagic sealing, and while the time has been much too brief to give the matter a thorough and comprehensive investigation, I have been able to gather some facts. The affidavits of more than 200 men, more or less familiar with pelagic sealing, were taken and transmitted to the Department, and while these affidavits differ some in different locali- 5 ties, they are in the main the same and confirm my own fap pservations eon; observations. Among these 200 men whose statements were taken under oath, many of whom had spent their life hunting fur seal, not one was found who had ever known of a fur seal hauling out upon the land or outlying rocks or cosets do notland on islands upon the coast of California, Oregon, Washing- ton, British Columbia, or Alaska, except upon the Pribilof Islands. Neither have they ever known a fur seal to bring forth its young upon the kelp or in the water or upon any of the coasts mentioned, except the Pribilof Islands. My observations of the fur seal began on the Pribilof Islands in 1869, and I have visited the islands since at intervals. Last year, 1891, IT cruised during July and August in the vicinity of the islands, and examined the rookeries carefully from the vessel and trom the shore. To the best of my belief there were not one-fourth part fo ete sae’ asmany seals there last year as when I first visited the islands in 1869 and 1870. That the fur seals both in Bering Sea and the Pacifie Ocean are becoming less each year there can be no doubt, and unless the indiscriminate slaughter is stopped, they will soon become extinct in the waters named. 498 C. L. HOOPER, CAPTAIN, U. 8. R. M. 499 In this connection [wish to state that in my judgment by far the greater slaughter and waste of seal life takes place in | ip aes the Pacific Ucean, where they are constantly hunted ,Slaushter in Pacitio and harassed from the time they arrive off the coast of 7 California in January until they enter Bering Seain — | June and July. There are this season probably 700, Sealing of Califor boats or canoes engaged in hunting fur seals in the Pacific Ocean along the American coast; many of them commenced hunting in January or February off the coast of California and Oregon, and have kept it up continually, following the seals in their movements northward until at the present time they are in the Alaskan Gulf be- tween the St. Elias region and the Aleutian Island passes, toward which the seals are making their way, frightened and exhausted after four months’ constant effort to escape the spear and shotgun of the hunter. The seal catch in the Pacific Ocean ot the Victoria sealing fleet alone up to the 12th instant was estimated at 30,000. Victor | arge catch in Pa- Jacobson, master of the British sealing schooner Mary citic. Ellen, one of the oidest sealers out of Victoria, who 447 Ellen. farnished me with this estimate, declared it as his belief, based upon what he knew about sealing, that the 30,000 seals taken represent a loss of over 100,000 seals on account of the killing of unborn young, and the loss by sinking and wounding past recovery. The American sealers have probably been equally de- structive. This destruction is increasing yearly, not only in the ratio of the increase in the number of vessels, but by reason of the increased experience and knowledge of the habits of the seal by the hunters, and each vessel is able to take more seals ,,P¢l8si¢ Sealing on than formerly, notwithstanding the fact that seals are becoming less each year. The route of the fur seal after it first appears off the coast of California in January is well known; all their feeding places are known and carefully watched; indeed, the entire route of travel is carefully watched and patrolled every day that the condition of wind and waves will permit. Long practice has made the eyesight of the hunter keen, and his knowledge of the habits of the fur seal per- fect. If but one seal attempted to. follow the route usually taken by the seal herds, I doubt if it could escape capture, so thorough is the watch that is kept for them. Until recently the old bulls that inhabit the breeding rookeries have not been killed by the hunters, as the skin is of no value; now, however, a use has been found for the old bull, its skin brings the same price as any other, and it is being hunted and killed with the rest. They are found in large numbers off Yakutat and the vicinity of Middleton Island. The American schooner Henry Dennis, previously reported by me as takin gold male seals of Yakutat, arrived at this place a few days since with over 1,600 skins, having taken about 1,000 since we spoke her on the 23d of "April between the points named. Of these I am told that many were very large old males. The breeding females, pups, and young males are hunted and killed from the time they reach the coast of California until they euter Bering Sea, and the older males and old bulls that inhabit the breeding rook- eries are being killed upon their feeding grounds in the Alaskan Gulf. With this condition of affairs existing in the Pacific Ocean, it is easy to understand that no amount of protection to the fur seal in Bering Sea will prevent their becoming ex- tinct in a few years. They must be protected in the Pacific Ocean also, or the day of the fur seal is numbered. Waste of life. Henry Dennis, 1892. Sealing off coast. Protection in Pa- cific Ocean necessary, 500 OFFICIAL REPORT'S. The sealing on the coast of California and Oregon is done by schooners manned by white men and pr operly fitted for remain- ing at sea in all weathers. Many of these schooners are part of the Bering Sea fleet. There appears to be no fixed rate of compensation for the crews of these vessels, each owner makes his own bargain. The hunters are paid by the skin. The master, as a rule, is paid by the month at $75 or $100, although some receive a share of the catch. Many of the larger vessels carry two mates, who receive $60 and $45 per month, respectively. The cook receives $50 or $60, accord- ing to the size of the vessel; the hunters receiving from $3.50 to $4 per skin this year. The boats’ Crews, called boat: pullers and boat- steerers receive B25 to $30 per month, or 25 cents per skin, and $15 per month, or 60 cents per skin without monthly pay. The vessel furnishes food, and, it is said, feed the men fairly well. The hunters live in the sabin with the master. Their duty consists entirely in shooting seals. They have nothing to do with the working of the vessel, and do not even take off or salt skins of the seals caught by themselves. The boat in general use by the sealers is what is known as an otter boat, as it was first used by the sea-otter hunters. It is from 18 to 24 feet in length, sharp ends, with rounded bottom, and easy, graceful lines to enable it to go throug h the water with as little noise as possible. The boat is fitted with two pairs of short oars or seulls and two sails. A mainsail; which is fitted to hoist and lower on the mast, and a jib. The latter impress me as being in the huntet’s way and altogether inconvenient, but they are invariably used. Al- though they cruise under sail a ereat deal, the hunter has a prejudice against the centerboard, and very few boats are fitted that way. It is claimed that the centerboard makes a noise, and in approaching a sleeping seal silence is of the first importance. A boat’s crew consists of three men, the hunter who stands forward, the boat-puller who sits amidships and pulls, and the boat- steerer who stands or sits near the stern of the boat facing forward and pushes and steers the boat with the sculls at the same time, as directed by the hunter by word or sign. Each boat is furnished with two shotguns, and many in addition carry a Winchester rifle. Only the best breech-loading shotguns are used. The 10-gauge hammerless Parker is a favorite. The charge is 4 to 5 drams of powder and 21 No.2 or 28 No.3 buckshot in br ass shells, paper shells being kept in the boat absorb moisture, swell up, and will not enter the gun. In getting our sealing outfit in San Francisco I bought paper shells, but soon found that they would not answer the purpose, for this reason, the guns and ammunition are generally furnished by the vessel, but some hunters prefer to use their own guns and to prepare their own ammunition. The larger vessels carry six regular boats on deck, and a boat hoisted at the stern, which in moderate weather and when seals are near the vessel is used by the master. In weather suitable for sealing, all boats are lowered about 6 a. m., to give them an opportunity to separate and get well away from the vessel before the seals begin to sleep. If there is a breeze, sail is made at once; if not, oars are used, the rowers bending to their oars with a will, while the hunter stands erec tin the bow of the tiny craft, his gun ae — in hand, scanning the sea carefully in every direction, eo bent upom phe destruction of any Seal that fate might throw in his way, whether old, young, male, or female, it matters not to the hunter, he is paid so many dollars for a seal skin, Wages of sealers, cte. Sealing boats. Crews. Shotguns. Mode of sealing. C. L. HOOPER, CAPTAIN, U. 8. R..M. 501 and all count. Upon leaving the vessel the boats always work to wind- ward, as sleeping seals can only be approached trom the leeward side. If under sail and a sleeper is seen sail is immediately taken in and the sculls used. The vessel follows the boats under short sail, and endeay- ors to keep them in sight, or at least know in what direction they are. In this they are not always successful, as the boats sometimes get separated from the vessel and are picked up by other vessels after several days’ possessive exposure, and cases are not wanting of boats having been lost entirely. Sealing boats seldom leave the vessel without a supply of food and water sufficient for a day or two. They are also fitted with a compass. Traveling or playing seals are shot at and occasionally secured, but a large majority of seals taken are killed while asleep. Se: us sleep in the daytime and in good weather only. The time of day they go to sleep depends upon the state of the weather and condition of the sea then and in the immediate past. If they have been kept awake by bad weather they go to sleep earlier than they do ina long spell of geod weather. Generally on a moderate day they are found sleeping if found at all from 9 to 11 o’clock in the forenoon, and until 5 or 6 o’clock in the afternoon, and some- times later. After they are awake if the weather is particularly fine, they remain rolling and playing on the water, and are not diffic ult to kill if approached very cé autiously. But they are exceedingly wary, either sleeping or waking, and great skill and caution is required to secure them. The seal lies upon his back while sleeping, with his nose out of water, his flippers folded or slightly raised, and his head to leeward; his mus. cles are apparently relaxed, and his head swings from side to side with each undulation of the waves. Whether he keeps his head to leeward of his body from choice, or his head being the only part exposed he as- sumes that position in obedience to the action of the wind, T am unable tostate. Iamassured by all hunters that such is the fact, and that when sleeping during light baffling airs the seal changes his position with each change of the wind, no matter how slight, ‘and without showing any signs of conscious action. As stated, the boat ap- proaches tle seal from the leeward side, rowing up to him as silently as possible. With a light breeze blow- ing, the seal sleeping soundly, and all the conditions favorable, the hunter can select his own distance. He approaches within 10 to 20 yards and shoots the seal in the side of the head as it is moved from side to side by the action of the sea, and easily kills it. The boat being so near the seal and head-to, and the men all ready to “ give way,” only a few seconds of time are required to get the seal into the boat, and but few are lost. But the conditions are not always so favo rable. The seal is a very light slesperat bestandawakesat theslightest sound, and during a long-continued spell of fine weather, it becomes exceedingly wakeful, and it is with difficulty that it is approached near enough to kill. As a hunter is trying to get within shooting distance, if the sleep- ing seal shows signs of waking, he does not hesitate to shoot bee: ause he may possibly miss it or because the seal is so far away thatrif killed it may sink before the boat can reach it; he gives himself the benefit of the doubt, and shoots whenever in his mind there is a possibility of killing, no matter how remote the possibility may be. An accidental shot may kill the seal and bring to the hunter $4. “A seal has no value until he is captured” is a common saying among the sealers. A miss costs the hunter nething. Seals sleeping. Method of taking seals. 502 OFFICIAL REPORTS. Neither do they confine themselves to shooting at sleeping seals, but shoot at everything that comes within possible range, and remain above water long enough for the hunter to get his gun to his shoulder. If the distance is too great for the shot- gun the rifle is substituted. The chances of missing entirely or only wounding a seal increase with the increased distance, and if killed the chances of the seal sinking before it can be reached by the boat also increase with the distance, on account of the greater time required to get to it. Therefore, while the percentage of loss by sinking of seals shot while sleeping is comparatively small, the lost by sinking and wounding past recovery of seals shot at in the water under all conditions is considerable. The estimated per- centage of loss of seals in this way, as shown by the eee of the affi- davits of sealers, both white and Indian, is about 374 per cent. The sty al percentage of loss by us by sinking and wounding of seals shot ras 46 per cent. The estimated loss as shown by the affidavits of the cnc rs vary greatly, some claiming little or no loss and others admit- ting as high as 50 per cent. I account for these discrepancies by sup- posing , first, that the percentage of loss differs with different men and under different conditions. That the sealers are not close observers, and are only interested in those they secure, and that those who claim no losses do not tell the truth. We know positively by our own experi ence that there are losses—some seal shot by our hunters sunk immedi- ately. On the coast of Washington sealing begins in March and is ear- ried on in small schooners manned by Indians. They hunt in canoes, ach canoe containing twomen. They are propelled by sail and paddles, and while they all earry shotguns and rifles they depend almost entirely upon the spear, with which they are very expert. The schooners take from eight to fifteen canoes on deck, according to the size of the vessel. hey remain at sea as long as the weather re- inains suitable for sealing, and cruise within a radius of 80 or 100 miles of Cape Flattery. The Indians fur- nish canoes and outfits, spears, paddles, guns, ammunition, and their own food, fuel, and water, and receive two-thirds of the eateh, the vessel taking one-third and buying the other two-thirds from the Indians. Some of these vessels, after the close of the sealing season off Cape Flattery, fit out for Bering Sea. The schooner Lotta, of about 30 tons, owned and commanded by an In- dian crew, has been three seasons in Bering Sea; she carried six canoes, and made a good catch each time. Many of the Neah Bay Indians are in good circumstances, the result of successful seal hunting. Two of the Indian hunters taken on board the Corwin at Neah Bay, Kla- hosh and his son Schuyler Colfax, while at Sitka bar- gained for the ee Ethel, seized by this vessel in Bering Sea last year, now owned at Sitka and named the Clara. She is to be delivered to ‘them on Puget Sound at the end of the present sealing season on the coast for the sum of $750. Later in the season the Indians at Quillehute and Neah Bay go out from the land sealing in their canoes; also from the harbors on the south and west coast of Vancouver. The Vancouver Indians go out somewhat earlier than the others, for the reason that the seals come nearer the coast, and are not compelled to venture so far from shore in the treacherous weather of early spring. Two men constitute a crew fora Vancouver Island or Cape Flattery canoe. They seldom remain out over night. ‘The Quellehute canoes carry three men, Reckless shooting. Waste of life. Sealing off coast Lotta. Ethel. Clara. Indian sealing. al C. L. HOOPER, CAPTAIN, U. S. R. M. 503 and on account of the much greater distance they are compelled to go to find seal are often kept out over night. Many of the Vancouver Island Indians are taken out as sealing crews on the Victoria sealing schooners. The schooner Rosie Olsen, boarded by us May 13, had a crew consisting of Vancouver Indians. Each canoe receives $3 for each skin taken by her, or $1.50 per man, and a bounty of $25 a canoe for the season. The chief or head man receives $120 for engaging the canoes. Owing to the later arrival of spring and pleasant weather farther north, the sealing season there begins later. At Sitka they made the first sealing trips in canoes about May 1. On account of the uncertainty of the weather they dared not venture out earlier. We saw numerous seals off the entrance to Sitka Sound early in April, and so reported to the Indians at Sitka, but even this was not enough to tempt them out- side until the arrival of settled weather. At Hooniah about the mid- dle of April we were told that hunters were out after hair-seal and fish for use on a Seal and sea-otter hunting trip which they proposed to un- dertake some weeks later. On our arrival at Capes Chacon and Muzon, on the north side of Dix- on’s Entrance about May 11, we found large numbers of Indian seal-hunters from various parts of Alaska, and from British Columbia and Queen Charlotte Island encamped waiting for moderate weather to begin sealing. They arrived on the ground about May 1, and said they would return to their home some- time in June, as the seal would then be gone. But three seals had been taken at Cape Chacon, and two at Cape Muzon. A crew for a hunting canoe at Cape Chacon consists of four mén. The Cape Muzon canoes, which are larger and go farther to sea in search of seals, carry six men. The hunter is in char ge, and employs the othermen. Theyuse the spear but little, depending almost entirely upon the gun, and what seems most remarkable, they use the Hudson Bay musket, a single-barreled muzzle-loader of large bore, instead of the fine double-barreled breechloader in use by the white hunters and the Neah Bay and other Indians. In regard to the migration of the seal, from all I have learned I am of the opinion that the seals upon leaving the Pribilof Islands, make their way to the coast of California and Oregon in much less time than is generally supposed. The females and young leave first, commencing in October. The younger males follow, and, [ am convinced, join and remain with tle females until they return to the islands, although it appears that they do not haul out at the same time as the females. We found the females, yearlings, and two-year- olds of both sexes together at all times. Ihave been told by seal hun- ters that it is no unusual thing to find a young male keeping watch near a sieeping female; that when but two seals are seen together one is a young male and one a fem: ale, and that, H either, it is the female that is asleep. It is well known that many seals, expueitilly males, remain on the islands well into the winter. According to the statement of a hunter who was on board at the time, the British ‘schooner Bore: alis, Hansen, master, raided Southwest rookery on St. Paul Island on the night of November 27, 1891, and took 480 seals, which would indicate that at that time seals were still plentiful on the island. I visited the Pribilof Islands about January 23, 1886, in command of the revenue steamer Rush, and was told that a“ drive” had been made Rosie Olsen, 1892. Indian sealers. Migration. Borealis, 1891. 504 OFFICIAL REPORTS. the ey previous to our arrival and 1,000 seals killed. Quite a large number of seals were on the rookeries at that time—all males I was told. We sailed on that cruise January 2 via Puget Sound about January 9. During the passage from Puget Sound to Unimak Pass, after clearing the land we saw fur-seals nearly every day. These were probably some of the last to leave the islands, and were on their way to the American coast in search of food and a milder climate. Those which left earlier were already upon the coast. As shown by the affi- davits of the sealers, they begin to take seals on the coast of California in January. The climate and food supply undoubtedly control the migration of the seals as they do other animals. The old males being hardier and stronger can withstand the climate and secure food under conditions that would be unendurable for females and young. Male seals remain upon and around the islands until the ice appears. The natives say the codfish also disappears with the first appearance of ice. Many of these males, I believe, remain upon the fishing banks in Bering Sea during the rest of the winter Some of them go to the banks outside of the Aleutian chain, and others to the banks farther east. Old bulls are rarely seen south of Cross Sound, while we found them plentiful and apparently 1 in peaceful possession ‘of a liberal supply of red-rock fish about 75 miles off Yakutat. As the cold weather approaches, the females and young leave Bering Sea, and about two months later appear “off the Ameri- can coast, where they find a genial climate and an abundance of food. They appear on the coast of California and Oregon simultaneously with the smelt and herring. As I previously reported, we learned upon our arrival at Astoria, March 18, that the smelt had come and gone; that they were unusually early this year. We were told by the sez ers off the coast at that time, and our observations confirmed it, that the seals were moving north unusually early. On the coast of Alaska in April and May, when according to our observations and the testimony of the Indians seals are most plentiful, we found the bays filled with herring, smelt, and eulachon. I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, idly HOOPER, Captain, United States Revenue Marine. Sealing off coast. Migration. REPORT OF JOHNSTONE H. QUINAN, SECOND LIEUTENANT UNITED STATES REVENUE MARINE. PELAGIC SEALING. UNITED STATES REVENUE STEAMER CORWIN, Sitka, Alaska, May 4, 1892. Japt. C. L. HooPER, U..S. BR. M., Commanding : Sir: I herewith respectfully offer the following notes relative to pe- lagiec sealing derived from observation and personal experience, In obedience to your orders I accompanied two Neah Bay Indians, — Ohad and Wilton by name, May Ist and 2d, off Sitka regatbunting with Sound, to hunt seal. The canoe we used is of the Neah Bay type, hollowed out of white cedar, 24 feet long, 33 feet beam, and 20 inches deep, braced by thwarts secured to the sides Experience. WEAH BAY SEALING CANOE. 4FEET €INCHES LONG. =) ay THWARTS \ es THWART CONTAINING HOLE FOR MAST. 24 FEET LONG. SFEET6IN WIDE. OINCHES DEEP. <= HANDLE SPEAR-HEADS. Length of spear, 12 feet. oar randie: 6 inches, 7 “ '* Long prong, 2 feet 6 inches. 4 Spear head, 6 inches. ~— ee , aT Ora 15 feet 6 inches. ea t Paes. ree Line! 72 fathoms. F r pe SARE ae Diameter of Spear, 2 inches. SECOND LIEUT. J. H. QUINAN, U. S. R. M. 505 by cedar twigs, the stern rising spr apoly 10 inches and stem projected forward and rising gradually to 2 feet above the gunwale, the latter terminating in a RoCueneea: which, with the long prow, resembles some fanciful animal, not unlike a gir afte. In this head is eut a noteh, on which the spear rests when ready for use. A rifle, Shotgun, spear and line, mast and sail, two paddles, a pair of oars, gaff pole, short club, a prismatic-shaped wooden bailer, and a box of ammunition and bread completed the outfit. After leaving the ship, the Indians, one sitting in the stern with his paddle, and the other in the bow with his oars pulled to windward, this being invariably the rule, as it is in this diree- tion the seal must be approached. We had pulled several miles with- out seeing anything, when suddenly the steersman gave the canoe a shake and pointed in silence to a seal 75 yards distant, lying onits back in the water, apparently asleep. Its flippers were raised in the air and moving listlessly from side to side, as if fanning itself. The bowman took in his oars and substituted the pad- dle, and the canoe glided noiselessly toward the unconscious seai. When within 40 yards of it the after paddle alone was used, and the bowman stoody ready with the shotgun. It was soon seen that the seal’s head was under water. The Indians told me afterward that it was only drowsing and looking for fish. Whether this be a fact or not I do not know. In this position a seal is said to be “ finning.” During all this time not a word was spoken, and so noiselessly did the canoe glide that we got within 10 yards of it and the hunter fired, pouring a charge of buckshot into its breast. The seal, to my great astonishment, was not killed, but gave us one surprised look and instantly dived out of sight. It rose again 50 yards off, gave us another look and a second time disappeared. Then followed a chase to windward, the Indians dexterously apply- ing their paddles in that direction. Three times it disappeared and reappeared before it was finally shot and captured. Even then it was necessary to use the club to kill it. One hook with the gaff, a sudden pull, and the unfortunate seal was in the canoe. The oars and paddles were again used and we continued on our way. The next seals we sighted were three in number, asleep on their sides and backs on a bunch of kelp, their favorite re sting place. Their fore and hind flippers were visible, the former closed on their breasts; their heads were lying to leeward, and moving slowly from side to side. In this position a seals sleeps soundly. When its head ceases to move, it is an indication that it is waking up, and this is the time to shoot. The canoe this time approached from a point nearly at right angles to the wind, so as to geta good shot. The most vulnerable place is inthe neck just back of the head. One of the three was instantly killed, another shot and killed after diving and re-appearing, and the third escaped. The first one was allowed to float until the second was secured, occupying a space of about twenty seconds. The time it requires a seal to sink depends upon the character of the seal and the place in which it is shot. Some sink in- stantly, while others float for two or three minutes, and possibly longer. Gravid cows, that is, cows that are heavy with young, sink more slowly than males, and seals that are lean more rapidly than those that are fat. If the lungs of a seal which has been killed retain air it will float for quite a while. The best time for hunting seal is a good day following a protracted Spell of bad weather. In a very rough sea seals can not sleep, but 64 Seal floating. Method of killing. Sinking of seals. 506 OFFICIAL REPORTS. merely lie on the surface and lazily roll over and over; hence the term “roller.” After securing our third seal we set the sail, which consists of a sprit- sail bent toa mast which can be easily stepped and unstepped. Aftersail- ing a few miles we e sighted several more seal asleep on kelp, and took in the sail and pr oceeded under paddle alone. This is always done, as the canoe is more easily handled and the flapping of the sail is liable to frighten the seal. We succeeded in getting within 40 yards, when one of the group, which was awake, gave the alarm. Instantly the Indian fired, wounding it in the head, but they all escaped. As arule it is an easy matter, especially for a canoe, to get within 10 yards of a sleeper. Sometimes the hunters can almost touch them with the spear. Out of sixteen seals which we saw, twelve were asleep, and four playing. We killed and captured three, all of which were cows, wounded three, which escaped, and missed two. The shotgun was used exclusively in all cases but one, when the rifle was used at longrange. The Indian hunter, Wilton, who did the shooting, is considered a good shot, and this is about the percentage, he tells me, which he usually gets. The Indians are more expert with the spear and seldom miss with that weapon. They use it, however, only on sleepers. They were very anxious to use the spear instead of the gun, but IT would not allow them, in accordance with your instructions, since white hunters use the gun exclusively, and it was desired to learn what percentage of those shot escaped and are lost by sinking. For the information of those who do not know I will describe the spear and manner of usingit. Irefer youto the draw- ing. The spear is made of wooed and consists of four parts, viz, (a) made of fir, 12 feet long, 1 inch in diame- ter, handle (b) and two prongs (e) and (c') made of the branches of crab apple, one 30 inches, and the other 15 inchesin length. Over the ends of these prongs fit spearheads (d) and (d') made of elk horn and old files. To each spearhead is fastened a stout sinew or cord (e), pro- cured from the tail of the whale and served with twine. These are only a few feet long, and form a bridle to which is attached a stout cod- line (/) 12 fathoms long. The horn of the spearheads, to which this sinew is attached, is covered with a thick coat of spruce gum to keep out water and prevent rotting. When the spear is used the line is ~ drawn taut along the spear, a kind of hitch or slipknot taken over a cleat or lug (q) and the end of the line made fast toa thwart in the head sheets of the canoe, the rest of the line coiled down neatly for running. The bowman rests the spear in the notch at the head of the sanoe until almost within spearing distance; he then raises it with his left hand, grasping it at the handle (b) with his right, the first two fin gers in the notches, which are set in a plane perpendicular to that of the prongs. The longer prong is always uppermost, so that in case it misses its prey the shorter will do its cruel work. As soon as a seal is struck the spear detaches itself from the line and spearheads and floats on the water. Then commences a struggle and a seene such as follows the catching of a shark or other large fish. If the seal is not a formidable one it soon tires itself out and is dragged to the canoe to be clubbed to death. If it be of a larger growth, an old bull, for instance, and show fight, it is necessary to shoot him before he can be captured, On one occasion an old bull, in his terrible fury, bit a small piece out of the side of the canoe. No shotgun used. Percentage caught. Hunting with spears. Shooting necessary. LEVI W. MYERS, U. S. CONSUL AT VICTORIA, B. Cc. 507 The Indians do not like to resort to the gun unless absolutely neces- sary, as firing frightens other seal which may happen to be in the vicinity. I inclose rough drawings showing canoe, with mast and sail, paddle, thwarts, spear, and line. Very respectfully, JOHNSTONE H. QUINAN, Second Lieutenant, United States Revenue Marine. Subscribed and sworn to on this 5th day of May, 1892. A. W. LAVENDER, United States Treasury Agent. REPORT OF LEVI W. MYERS, UNITED STATES CONSUL AT VIC. TORIA, BRITISH COLUMBIA. CANADIAN PELAGIC SEALING INDUSTRY. No. 156.] CONSULATE OF THE UNITED STATES, Victoria, British Columbia, April 29, 1s 392. Hon. WILLIAM FI’. WHARTON, Assistant Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.: Srr: In obedience to your instruction No. 31, I have prepared a re- p ort showing the extent of the Canadian industry engaged in pelagic sealing during the season of 1891. It includes the names of the vessels, their tonnage, number of men in the crews, white and Indian, and the value of the vessels as nearly as could be estimated by experts, two of whom certify to the fairness of the estimates, and whose certificates are attached and made a part of the report. These experts, I may say, ave both past middle lite and have been actively engaged in vessel-building for more than a quarter of a century. They are fair, impartial mechanics, who have no special in- terest either in under or over-valuation, and I regard their judgment as fair and reasonable. Mr. Stevens, especially, is often employed by the Government in examining and reporting on vessels and is regarded an authority. One expert consulted placed the value 5 att igo of the fleet of 1891 at less than $170,000, saying several Mn of the vessels were so old that they were hardly worth ; anything beyond what their tackle could be sold for, but I did not think best to confuse the report with two valuations. In order to get the judgment of experts, I consulted Samuel Turpel, the proprietor of Turpel’s Ways, but he at once said he could not cer- tify to any list of valuations, for the reason that he built and repaired schooners, and that any valuation within reason, that could be made, would be sure to give offense to some one, and that he did not want to do that. He hastily glanced over the list I showed him and reported to the sealers that I was placing prices too low, saying I had valued the May Belle at $4,000, while the price I give in the report is $5,500. No other of ny estimates are known, nor is it known for what purpose I sought values at all, yet I learn that to-day the sealers are getting up aprotest against my estimates, although they do not know what they are, and that it is to be sent to Ottawa. When Turpel gave his statement to the press yesterday, two report- ers came to my office, and caricatured what was said in a short conver- Summary of report. 5O8 OFFICIAL REPORTS. sation, in the Daily News of this morning, which I make Exhibit A* of this dispatch. The exceeding sensitiveness of the sealing interest can hardly be appreciated by one who has not touched it. We have been cautious and prudent in all our movements and shall continue to be. J think the excitement of the day will pass away without further result. The report for 1891, and the statement of previous years are made in- closures herewith. Tam, sir, your obedient servant, LEVI W. MYERS, Consul. (Inclosures 2: Report for 1891; statement of previous years.) BRITISH COLUMBIA SEALING INDUSTRY FOR THE YEAR 1891. To the DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, D. C.: In order to show the extent and value of the Pacifie Ocean and Ber- ing sea fur-sealing industry, represented at Victoria, and in the Prov- ince ot British Columbia, I have prepared three tables of facts and statistics. These tables have been prepared with great care, and wherever it was possible are based on official information obtained at the custom-house in Victoria. They are as nearly accurate as they can be made. The first gives the names of the British vessels that cleared from this port, and four others clearing from the port of Vancou- ver, with their tonnage and crews. The second table gives the name of each vessel and the ‘‘Coast,” “‘Sand Point,” “ Bering Sea,” and “total” catch of seals of each for the year 1891. The third table gives the names of vessels, their age, where built, and their esti- mated value. Contents of tables. *NoTe.—It has not been deemed necessary to print the exhibit above referred to, it being merely a criticism in the Victoria Daily News, of April 29, 1892, of the Consul. LEVI W. MYERS, U. S. CONSUL AT VICTORIA, B. c. +509 —— Table of vessels, tonnage, and crews. | Number of crews. Names of vessels. | Tonnage. ae cae Tndians. | Whites. Total. | NCHOONCHAVOGDUNEOM ac css cee set emer emaascisec uo scisccs omer ale 48 18 4 oy MB OOis- 6 sSo5 Foaessopreckhacecd sseSbeceeesosesaass | 40 18 5 23 Witynen®) WGK = 25 shetc soscseasSossaretogassc5cnensaSe) Of |e eee ee 23 23 IGM seqsescqsos segs cescoesosqeesesescpesadansoeehe 67 20 5 25 Abin ON, cooaaseasccoesiase ce se eeene saoscececceseace Ws looosesobse 23 23 Sh WO 528 ssc Sena cneadsacoeseosdrenacascdessaese ACR |B erenerey ore 19 19 ISjapniaKes (Woke) — 5 aao eo ne enee ao se ceosssnetenas 66 20 5 25 JXUIROGE) j= 5han sae ocoDnoos Sones eaebeenuesoserocdaa as 41 20 4 24 Penelope. -..--...----------------------------------- GW lseseacesce 20 20 Carmolitere--sooe-h een eee ae ae ae OOo Sere Se ce 23 23 (OyearmudSiallee eben doncmecnaasasesesanocsesssocesuane By OOO SA5 23 23 Keathanin@ rs = oc seen ctn oats cue beeeeeeerhceseenee 82 20 5 25 PASTITTOL OC uVEOOL Oe folsa a mise sake atte ee tarts ote either ete fora US Seceee tec 23 23 IMoumbamne Chieti 24 ps aa acs fo ates Se is fore = eters wert 23 12 2 14 Vila JEL Sy Went saeco aoc oses Seed sbacecoscesasesccese 60 22 5 27 SRY MME. sae qeemnesteose cf eassoteScosonesaasogsecoae 124 28 6 34 IWETTHS) = Shee oeaseeesSAS SY S5rr casncesse scasosesecoe 46 20 5 25 Osh Gils Shae onenaKessoonqeceocuodsssasesgos Wis |e Geer 24 24 {MOES Bicls we oSogeasocbabo ce nSeeseeagua ses I560-8ene sae G3ulee eee. 25 25 Nun) oda cabo ae bedenes enabees occcogpHopesdedocnas 1 PAd aoe 5 5 MAST OMG v2 vee ate ac epee rchee aye soe See Slorase aro Tenioter- a wlaaeteae ree 90 24 8 32 ISHN Sep Se ae EO SECe TEE Beaeesa: - SAcoocuoosos ss 665). ceeee. 23 25 Wile WIG aoe cepa se teoecodeds stccdséaorsasoeesess 63 24 8 32 Mary laylor=-—ss-2---- Sagas discabddssenseasesone¢ 43 |Eee eee 18 18 Nahi: seus ceosecsso Ronee Asosee secUaoossoesocasan ac QOH lee est eye er 23 23 IROSte, OISGneprre soci) cee ene St l-inae we eae, Bak 39 20 6 26 ANAC KG G20) Soe DASE at AEE e ee Se ee oe ee ee 25 12 4 16 Ti gotive dobre Ge Sao ORE ASE ee oe Bane as eee 58 24 5 29 DucamM=s ChOOner WHISbLO cece =m el= eee ne Seine ee eee = = oie ale P47 [es ee 27 o7 SOHOCHEIe Ma VOTILG) series yaee ote ae to wis stra - fe clate e winie min iyo'a noel 80 24 6 30 WVGib dered ly RaW, See GaAs sas oa aC Rea Me Rae aeecas TAB S| orca eo atctet 22 22 (Onis, Wim IR - see soes eserasosasee - Sdcohocecsoercus OY) lsassosonce 24 24 Oscar andellashie.. 26 soce wp ek cee eee we eel eee emer 81 26 6 32 Gh dla rei Cc KOLO» ae Goes ASS Or Ss eae ORMORaS oso On| sae ee 20 20 (GNA? eseonoO Hone tier a cpa sc eon opeatonanaSanene ia ere ay 23 De MG DLGTA: Sow Sa se sant- coe tee vie cie melee ete atetoree 28 10 ee es eee 11 LOhgiiliyenh NC eee SAP A oe eon Aeon ce Dan oO eases OB oe = eer 23 2 (STU et 62 Nat nee ee ee i I ee 25 12 2 14 Iteny ING SaaS So Shoop seen sessed qoovsonesse2os0nse5 = Bri |ia=ciacin se ee 21 21 Wannpired= =i. 0. .sSsah Se ace c cece nee ee ee ete wee G3) eu dee 8 8 Walbrador!. 4 y on LEVI W. Table of values. MYERS, U. 8. CONSUL AT VICTORIA, B. C. 511 Schooner Venture Names of vessels. WMbseob «fess keds ee Mageie Mac..........-. <. Lilly. Lboocodbenudaoneccesase SeM LOW sao sae ae cee ees PATUP OLR ssc ase raincoat oe Penelope Garmolite® .-2- 42.322 eee QceantBellle® 2-3. essen: Katharine. <.225-esseeeses Anmie:@, Moore-2=.- sc-5- > Mountain Chief W.P. Sayward Sapphire Minnie IPAONEERs fee sere creole aoe Mary llenia 2-23. < se. st sa Mary Palon2 = aos-==-eeee Viva (ROSE OSen! a )25)- = s\-< m= Wanderer Kiatetes.scasneshe sentiecen Steam schooner Thistle...........-.-. Schooner Favorite Walter: Te sRich =: toe see Ora. Lup pel so-c = oases Oscar aml Hattie Carlotta: G.(Coxss. -2225-- =. GOneOvVa:ascece- 2 seco seeeees Wsevibia. 222.2525 Saasseeeeee (Uimibnina: 226 <4. eee Sierras Se cee beet May Bele: s--a2-2s52 scree Wanmnttned | 22. is.22-e see Labrador MAM ONS eia5 os ease eseee ee IDE it pee eee nce sone Ainoko Oite bat ecohales ene eeeeeese Steam schooner Eliza Edwards. ..-.-- Schooner Vancouver Belle........_-. = (CaO) Ui Sones sa cco Ss cane Ton- nage. Approx- Approximate age. Where constructed. inate value. EUG) Somodoodeae Umited States’. -2.--25-.---- $3, 500 14 years .--.-.... British Columbia. --.......-. 2, 000 GiyeanSterere treet INOvie SCOUT = eee eee 6, 000 Wieny old= sess In United States ..---...... 2, 500 UOviearss semen ee INOW STH nh ie eee cacane 5, 500 2) (eNom onceaa nc British Columbia..---...--- 4,500 Gyiearsscr - o5e- ccc pee es Gharles Spring? 2-2cecfies J. 2ex el GL Oscar & Hattie ..-...-.- Pacific Sealing Co., lmited; head offices, Victoria, British Columbia. 64 @ccan Belle=-<-25.--.-- Hall & Goepel, joint owners...-...--. i Ae Welliame@ sl cary ee s=.2s.2-'s o-oo 10 Jiohn Ken oman ees ee eee 34 64 iahharine: = 3222-322 <1<2 Pacific Sealing Co., limited ; head 64 offices, Victoria, British Columbia. Uni See ee eee Robert¢ByMelseil)s: <27 eek Aa 2 RRs ‘Thomas HeeBrowns —-e-s-eece erase a— 7 Wallitamydie smirbhr sess eee as Sas 10 WalliamehSBro wD) 222s secsseeeeece == 19 JohmoR st Hordes 2 =< oye oe oem ee 10 BeaamMoniwboOr ose — asses ee ee 5 Mlenmye AC Vig = seein ela ape one Rese ot ie tet A us : Dre Mee Shh Og: i fae Tats roy ' - “e Tas ees ae eines + _ (Mo sv ait aa ee ats Fae, inte git sere Bing Slt Flite is GLO IS REAR AR TON a aeeah sd ghigepe io bt: Petes Trek hey che oy ats haces yer ae ie Samy Pal tet 3 gett. “S eg iedmabesooaes 5. Le ecru tty ter aes Rye: Oe tae 5 Apis Meme fs ‘eto ehh L pea adele Petty Wereacds fen. eae punts Paatnces Sg htaay ay ieeutr Gt EA Bee: what NAD Bone eA ELLE aie a6, Us deeY ts fu pier 6 ya a Bou as a ee eae yes cs bee rene 5 BY ¥ iis Bc Sete aE eoxd CY Rts sia Tea RE Avis Favored ana aipae : ne aie at Aes Aut. tee ELAS bogs Sh Vit Hee an rere <2 ws: fats i voy had Ce ener ee ‘ee ae igh a at fupiay} athe, ime te Role STD we Hos: esi hie TE eW Ke AY Ae Aire i ita: hie Piacekey MaSage ty SO NEGA SCE Sar Pie) ga) be ditide pekte [hentepaes ¥ireuS: ti Semana Ret OR to oe Sit rte NG: VSPA oS EMRE Panter ‘he Weatebey se uaaigee UK T at ties 2 vaaeepmep aati’ [ft shee inn ite ts age aes At tuge) {e72 $F Satta Fea s7> fey y nis: Saf Wegthy ib rit a8 7 a Si PAPAL eR) at maith 407. Heaniiiee suki ar Saree pie AF h Py Pease Te Poe Nig Coes eet ie leer iis aay Bem iri t Jantde teagiuh, Tit Te eC aes dA ete Tee $3 ae ies Rhea! 7 Spun ghee it? ATA Ar rept Pa OC es ie Ai PET Pam TAthy ehh Sere a pa pmpiaee far ered Eee ects lise Lee priags a Vidoesiseu hy wahtet amet ce oa at cE ge sen tases fon eke as Celia pea tt kt br yale #31 Rku en os Sanka rey ey ies so AAA ee abana ee phe Pugead of a ene auras Erte 2 Gut] che ers i Age lg Tlapdes deiaab a paaherk Chasey. Bois a a) Wea ett is hisstt Gti gig a5 canbe tes ee Geter tiiten be ler ‘Luwards aed ie: arenes i el omelets Se eae Te Bo TeS, pee + Pitt bry se oa O (Sunpadgeatet ath Mie ra Fat bare Ne 25 1b "Whe alr RL Bee BS Burana dai Wd ver ish 0 ib Me a3 | 6 high Sc rediorenn Saget Pugigyes Piss” eh a es heey: Tia Manag tal (bes ¢ AKC Cag idle: ig PRG tae and thet aia bes yeaa cco 3 . (Hater feats siel aii Aa) pissy sts he aa Reiser 4 ij Ms wus Fann Sai odes a Ur ni Re baa Oy, ie aa ars Ge Sde Wee = ge te iat % ul eT ah ee 1ah ayn hy es a beao eae wa: = fo Anes a, ie ry Se oe | al ae’ + "i . ae ee ; , . é Rt At 2 se a.) +. wir a yaar? (vt OP AP es "S, ae ke Eanes ae " ' ; Rr oe wey ‘e - ot aa : } 52 Th IL) eemrt hss seceye Rais Matloihas: att th: vitor eat ab bs 6) at Dat += ead Wp Aell Asan ielit aaa ese Sep tse beh le > es | _ 4" gue Poss we ‘Va ws * a | +4 L babs acnoouts ES tHe ae Wey yes : Sow > 5 | * ‘ OU Site chap tr Woworanr Awe Tye We . ivi. or. » as < Sys GSB f 2) 2498 ho 4 - Go 12s ‘ * SOLUS OF o > ue ve sue, CUE s eve er neg ee : ~ eed as Ww é ae a ' ; } WEL = ie -aerrt ~“o wee ” =) bat wa ¥ r 4 a i ; ay had eS 4} ® lA 4 2 . = (ae : + 4 ~ esis Scio Remnants Sees RONEN SR j 7 5 7% 7 | 7 i ov in (is 7 | pay, a ‘quapuayursadns WIP YPM, “9 LL boT pivs wos pardoo OS]D S1‘AJIDP UTZYD) s7PaS yO saquinu FYT ‘Avp Vas 24) JO pus eyi 7D (S27O7G panuy ay? fo uorssassod ul Mou pu_ pazies) BoT 1ay Ur uUaarh sp Buoy puv yy ay) wor paq07d auv JINNY OOSIONVUA NVS WOU HINNY WANOOHOG *S'f) AHL dO ASINUD ‘T 4eppureny) ibn ‘J 08.1099 4g SANV'TISI ] PyseuNn, oe HOTLaAIYNd LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 531 Aug Ist This day commences with strong W.S.W. wind. middle part wind moderated. 8am boats went out and brought in 9 seal. day ends with rain. Teu Aug 2nd This day commences moderate. middle part breezed up sharp from N. W. bore up for the land at 10 am. anchored under Ounimac Island. so ends the day. Wed Aug 3rd This day commences with strong N.W. wind. vessel lying under Ounimace Jsland filling water. So ends the day with heavy squalls. Thu Aug 4th This day commences with strong W.S.W. wind, and squalls. 2 pm wind died out. 4 pm got under way and stood off shore. at 6 am put boat out. at tenam wind breezed up from EK. 11.30 am one boat came on board with 5 seal. so ends the day. Fri Aug 5th This day commences with strong breeze from E with rain squalls. . at 4 pm stood in for the land. at 8 pm anchored under the land. at 4am sighted the Revenue steamer steering East. at 9am hove up anchor and stood off shore. at 10 am boats went out and took 12 seal. so ends this day. [No.1. July 28, 1892, Washington, D. C. L. G. SHEPARD, Captain, U. S. Revenue Marine.] LOG OF SCHOONER ANNIE. From San Francisco towards Hunting & fishing. Friday, 24 March, 1887. H.1; Winds, N.W.; at 2 P. M. got schooner under way and proceeded to sea. Strong N.W. winds & Sharp sea at 6, P.M. cleared the heds Stood of Shore till6 am _ tacked in Shore. 25 Day of March, 1887. H.1; Winds, N.W.; this 24 hours Strong Breezes & fine weather Vessel under easy sails Noon tacked ship & stood of shore North Rocks N by E10 miles Dis Midnight Dito tack to Northard 26 Day of March, 1887. H.1; Winds, N.W.; this 24 hours Strong Breezes & heavy sea Vessel under Easy sail. at 12 hours midnight tack ship to Northard Noon tack Ship to Southard North Rocks Bareing N E by E 3 miles 27 Day of March, 1887. H.1; Winds, N.W.; this day 24 hours first part Strong Breeze & fine weather. Noon Point Strong Breeze & fine weathr Pont Rays Bares ES E Dis6 miles Midnight pont Rayes Bare 8 E 12 mils From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 28 Day of March, 1887. H.1; Winds,W S W;; this 24 hours first part Strong Breeze & fine weathr Noon of Port Royal Midnight Blowing Gale hove to under 2 Reefd Fore Sail P. M. H. 3, Winds, N by W. H. 12, Noon. Course, S. W. 29 Day of March, 1887. H. 1; Winds, N.W.; this 24 hours first part Blowing Gale from N W & heavey Sea Vessel hove to under Easy AN SUPT BTN FONE PS quapuaypu24adns WIIYrIrrml, “9 a A boT pips wou, pardoo ospp si ‘AjIWp Usyv} s7Ves yO saqQuinu IY] kop vas 24) Jo pus eyi qv (sazoIg pep) FY) 40 uoissassod ui mou puv pazias) BoT say ur Uuaarh sv buoT puv oT 247 Woy pazo7d 21D JINNY wINOOHIS ey) fo suomsod 24) yoy; PUP ‘sommuoyInen 78270) 2) 07 Gurp10990 7994409 $2 puvo ayo Saaing azepoag puv 7800] '§ i) ayn 7 pauvdaid som dou sup yoy; Apipsa2 T 6 Arne, nee 6z Ang Lgst 40 NOSVAS Va4S ONIUAG NI OOSIONVUA NYS WOU aINNY YUANOOHOS 'S'*Q AHL SO ASINUD Gotan ‘T 08.1099 4g SGNV'ISI 7 " aa vy , i. i) 532 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Sail Noon Dito. Later Part Dito H.12 P.M., Noon. Course, 8 W; Distance, 54; Diff. of Lat., 38; Departure, 38; Lat. by D. R., 38°. 21; Lat by Ob., 38.21 Diff. of Long., 49; Lon. in 124.21. 30 Day of March, 1887. H.1; Courses, WS W; Winds, N W;; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & heavy Sea & fine weather hove to under 2 Reefd Fore Sail H. 7; Courses, N NE; at6am Set Fore Stay Sail & 2 Reef Main Sail & stood to Northard H.2, P. M.; Courses, N by W. Midnight Moderate. H12, Noon. Course, N E by E34 E; Distance, 7; Diff. Lat., 3; Departure, 6; Lat by D. R. 38.24; Lat by Ob. 38.24; Diff. of Long. 6; Lon. in 124.21. 31 Day of March, 1887. this 24 hours first part Modrate Breeze & calms Noon Calms poot out Boats Post Boat got 3 Seal Midnight Calm hove too H.12; Noon. Lat. by Ob. 38.30; Lon. in 124.50. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 1 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours light airs & calms at 6.30 am 3 Boats started hunting Noon Boats come long Sides Post Boat one small seal after Noon foggy & fresh Breezes no Boats out H. 12 A. M., Winds, West. at 8 hours P M tack ship to westward & hove two un- der 2 Reefed Fore Sail Blowing heavy. H.10, P. M., Winds, N N W. Lat. by Ob. 38.35. Long. by Ob. 125°.00. 2 Day of April,1887. H.1; Courses, W; Winds, N N W; this 24 hours Blowing Gale & heavy sea hed Reaching under 2 Reefd Fore Sail Midnight Dito H.12, P.M., Noon. Lat by D. R. 39.30; Lat. by Ob. 38.30; Lon. in 125.00; Lon. by Ob. 124.45, 3 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, N N W; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & Ruff sea at 2.30 a m ware ship to Northard atS8a m modrate set Main sail & jib Midnight Calms H. 11, P. M., Winds, NW. H.12; Noon. Lat. by Ob. 38.18; Lon. by Ob. 125°.41. 4 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first part light airs & calms at8am poot 3 Boats out to hunt at 2 PM took Boats onboard & Shaped course for Cape Flatery H.»9; Courses, North; Winds, SE. at Midnight past Cape Mendicone H.3; Courses NNW; WindsSSE. H.12; Noon. Lat by Ob. 39.10. Lon. by Ob. 124°,40. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 5 Day of April, 1887, H.1; K.6; Courses, NNW; Winds,S E; this 24 hours first part fresh Breezy & foggy all sails set. H.2; K.6. H.3; K.6; Courses, NW. H.4; K.6, H.5; K.6. North Modrate Breezes & fine weathr H.6. K.6. H.7; K.6. H.8; K.6; after Noon mod- rate Breezes & calm. H.9; K.6. H. 10; K. 6, H.11; K.6. H. 12; K.6. H.1; K.5. H.2; Ki 4, H.3; K.4, Hi. 450K. 4° SMG Strong Breezes & Cloudy all Sails set H.5; K.4. H.6; K.5. H. 7; K. 6. HH. 83K 6, AO): KG 10s KR Boe I SK eed ee 7; Noon. Lat. by Ob. 41.14; Lon. by Ob. 1259, 15. 6 Day of April, 1887. H.1; K.8; Winds, SE; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & Rainy Squalls at 4am took in Main Sail Has KS) 8: KK. 8. p43 Ki 8s “ee -os) Ke 8S) BGK Gm ie aeons H. 8; K.8; H.9; K. 8; Winds, SW; at 9 am heavy squall wind hauld to SW Raining hard H. 10; K. 7; 2 Reeft Fore Sail & jib 10 am Two Reeft manesail & set it. H.11; K.6. H.12; K.6; Noon. unsetld weather H.1; K.6. By2; Kid. H. 3:0 Kio. 2 ae: LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 5338 Pei ocr OO. cet Koo. HO: Kid. BOs 16, 52. A. 11; K.5. H. 12; Noon; Midnight Tee Breeze & Raine “Squalls. Course, N 28 W; Distance, 159; Diff. of Lat. 140; Departure, 75; Lat. by D. R. 43°.35; Diff. of Lon. 18; Lon. by Ob. 1260, 50. From San Francisco towards North Fishing & Hunting. 7 Day of April, 1887. H.1; K.4; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fin weather all sails st. Noon calms & heavesea H. 2; K.4; NW. Courses; Winds, WS W.. H.3; K 4; H.5; K. 4. H. 6; Ki 43 Mes KK. 3.0 HSK 35 SUS SS hn ues Winds, N° WaG Hing kee 3: mil. Kaeo) edt KK. 26 12 K. 2. A, s ico Ee 35 Ke Bes Ko 2) Bi 4s K.2; H.5; K.2, Pe Gk 2i6 Hot 4K I. 8; eee s SS a, Tab iee HOS RE 25 eis Ds K. 2. a 12; Noon; Midnight fresh Breezes & fine weathr all sails st. Lat. by Ob. 45°.28. Lon. by Ob. 126°.55. 8, Day of April, 1887. H.1; K. 2; Courses, N by W; Winds, a this 24 hours first part fresh Breezes & fine weathr all sails set H. 2 2; eer ls hee Sed HK Ee Kea 26s) Ko 2.0 7 Kae He8s. AK, 3; Courses, North; Winds, ONUESL-O EL Ke) ED, 10: Keo. ie livck, 5: Es 12; K..5;, Courses: N..N2 W. Noon ae Hp 15 Keb: Eine aK 2D. SDS) IK. So) Bhs K. GE 16. ERG Ke 6: Winds, NeW Hows K. 65 2.8; K. 53: Courses, NNE. H. oO; (1s ik He 10: K.—. H.12; Noon; Midnight Blowing ‘heavey & heavey sea Ship head Reaching 2 Reeft Fore Sail & jib. “Lat by Ob. 47.26; Lon. by Ob. 126.29. t From San Francisco towards North Fishing & Hunting. 9 Day of April, 1887. H.1; K.—; Courses, North; Winds, W N W; this 24 hours Strong Gales & heavey sea. Noon Flatery Bares E by N 20 miles Dis H.1i2; Noon. Lat by Ob. 48.26. Lon. by Ob. 125.51. 10 Day of April, 1887. this 24 first part Strong Breeze 4 fine weathr & Strong Breezes & fine weather Noon light airs & calms at 4 Pm anchored at Barclay Sound From Snd Barckley towards Sound Monday 11th 1887 5am hand on Beach & cleand on Side Tuesday 12, Raining coud not Paint Wensday 13 fine weather Paintd one Side Thursday 14th fine weathr Painted anthr sid over hauld blocks & fild water Friday 15 hauld off Calms Satrday 16, Blowing Strong Gale from S W Sunday 17 Blowing strong from the westard hove up & pro- ceeded to sea 18 Day of April, 1887. H. 1; Winds, S W; Strong Gales & clear weathr Later part Raining. H1(P.M.) Winds, S E. H.12; Noon. Lat by Ob. 49.14. Lon. by Ob. 126.14. From San francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 19 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & Rain Noon Calms Midnight moderate Breezes & fine weathr H.12 (P.M.) Noon. Lat by Ob. 48.42. Lon. by Qb. 127.02. 534 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 20 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours fine weather & and light Verable & calms hove Tow at 7am poot out Boats hunting Noon Dito H.3 (A. M.) Winds Hast. Midnight, Calms. Lat by Ob. 49.015. Lon. by Ob. 127.28. 21 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, ES E; this 24 hours first part calms & fine weathr Noon fresh Br eezes & cloudy Boats not out after Noon Gerorge Kiges 1 Seal Midnight Calms H.12(P.M.) Noon Lat. by D. R. “480, 35. Lon. in 1279, 44, 22 Day of April, 1887. this 24 hours fine weather & Strong Breezes No Boats out Midnight Dito H.12; Noon. Lat.-by Ob. 49.54. Lon. by Ob. 1279.54. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing 23 Day of April, 1887. H. 1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours modrate Breeze & Cloudy at 7am _ all Boats out 10am took Boats in Blow- ing & Raineing hove two Midnight winds hauld to W NW & Cloudy H.10; Winds W NW _ H. 12; Noon. Lat. by D. R. 49.45. Lon. in 128.24. 24 Day of April, 1887. H. 1; Winds, W N W;; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & Cloudy hove two H. 12; Noon. Course N 54K. Distance 26. Diff. Lat 15°. Departure, 21. Lat. by D. R. 50.00. Diff. of Lon. 83. Lon. in 1279.51. 25 Day of April, 1887. H. 1; Courses,S S W; Winds, W N W; this 24 hours first part light air & calms Noon blowing Gales & Raineing hove two 2 Reeft Fore Sail H. 2 (PM) Courses, South; Winds, ES E. H.12; Noon. Course 8 45 W; Distance 40; Diff. of Lat. 28: Departure 23; Lat. by D. R. 49.23; Diff. of Long. 43: Lon. in 128°, 34. 26 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours first part Strong winds & Rain & heavey sea Midnight Dito H. (P.M.) Winds, ES HEH. H.12; Noon. Course, S 68 HE. Distance 24. Diff. of Lat. 9. Departure 22. Lat. by D. R. 49.14. - Diff. of Lon. 30. Lon. in 128.44, From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 27 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds,SS E; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & Raining. Noon Dito Midnight Calms & Rains Hf. 95, Winds, WoNY We): EE. ‘12; Noon. Course, N 39 E. Distance 29. Diff. of Lat. 22. Departure 18. Dat, by D.R. 48.52. Diff. of Lon. 24. Lon. in 127.40. 23 Day of April, 1887. H.1; Winds, W N W;; this 24 hours first part light airs & Calms Noon fresh Breezes & Cleare & fine weather after Noon poot out Boats to hunt No Seals H.12; Noon. Lat. by Ob. 49.46. Lon. by Ob. 127.28 29 Day of April, 1887. ‘this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & cloudy & threatining weathr. Noon, Dito. Midnight, Dito. 30 Day of April, 1887. this 24 hours first part Strong Breeze & cloudy Noon Dito Run in to Runukout Sound at 4 P.M. anchord Biowing & Raineing hard. 1 day of May 1887, Blowing & Raineing. Wind S E. aay oo May, A887, Blowing & Raineing wind SE. 3 Raineing winds S E 4 é¢ (74 (7 5 66 6 cee & Calms & Southerly winds 6 és Cloudy & Calms got under way & Proceed to Sea Noon strong westly winds midnight calins. LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 53 From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 7 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Winds, ES E; Courses, South; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & hard Hale squalls. at 5 am Blowing Furious Gale poot schooner under Balance Reeft main sail H. 10; Bar 29.10. H. 12; Bar. 28.80; Noon modrating set 3 Reeft sails headed off shore to make sea Room 6 P M hove two under 3 Reeft Fore Sail Midnight Strong Breezes & Raine squalls. Lat. by DR. 49.40. Lon. in 128.104 8 Day of May, 1887. H. 1; Courses, S E; Winds,S S BE; this 24 hours Strong Breezes & Cleare & squally weather H. 2; Bar. 29.50. at 6am wore Ship to Hastward H.7; Courses, East. Noon Dito. Midnight Calm. Lat. by D. R. 49.35. Lat. by Ob. 49.34. Lon. in 129°. 12. Lon. by Ob. 129.104. 9 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Winds, Calms; this 24 hours first part Light airs & calms. at 6 am poot out Boats Noon Boats came on board Starboard after Boat 2 Seals Thomas, hunter. after noon fresh Breezes Boatsout Noseals. H.1; Winds, West. Midnight Strong Breezes. H.12; Noon. Lat. by D. R. 49.37. Lon. in 128.4, 10 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Winds, N W; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & squally. Noon Dito at 6 P. M. went on board schooner. Midnight Calms. Lat by D. R. 49.35. Lon. in 128.92. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Eishing. 11 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Winds, Calms; this 24 hours first part Calm & fine weather at6am Boats out Hunting 3 masted Schooner inCo Thomas, one seal; George, one seal. H.9; Winds, south. H. 4; (P.M.) Winds, 8 E. Lat. by D. R. 49.37. Lon. in 127.50. 12 Day of May, 1887- H.1; Winds, East; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fine weather Boats out Hunting from Noon No Seals afternoon one seal H. 5; Winds, N. KE. H. 12; Noon; Mid- night fine weather. Lat..by D. R. 49.49. Lat by Ob. 49.49. Lon. in 128.36. 13 Day of May, 1887. H. 1; Winds, N E; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fine weath Boats out hunting Calm foure noon H. 6; Winds, Calms. afternoon modrate Breezes Tow Boats came on board H. 3; Winds, NNE. H. 4; Winds, NN E. 6.30 PM one Boat 2 seals. Captains Boat out all night. Set Masthead light & Burnt torch every 10 or 15 minutes. Day light no Boat in site Sent Boats out to hunt for missing Boat. Lat. by Ob. 509.19. Lon. by Ob. 1289.55. 14 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Winds, NN; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fine weather. - Boat out ail knight H.5; Winds, NE. 6.30 am Boats out hunting for missing Boat Noon Boats came on board No Boat in site Run for land to see if Boat went that way H. 12; Noon; Midnight, Calm. Lat. by Ob. 509.02. Lon. by Ob. 128.56. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 15 Day of May, 1887. H. 1; Winds, N. W. & Calms; first part calms & fine weather Noon, Dito. H. 6; Courses, N N E. H.8; Courses, NN E. H. 2(P. M.) Courses, NN BE. H.4; Courses, N N EH; at 4 P. M. Breeze Run in to land found Boat & men ali wright at 6 P. M. came on board stood off shore H. 7; Courses S W. H. 9; Courses, WS W. H.12; Noon. Lat. by Ob. 50.28. Lon. by Ob. 125.05. ‘ 536 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 16 Day of May, 1887. H. 1; Courses, WS W; Winds, N WY tliis 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fine weather Noon fresh Breeze & foge Midnight Blowing strong poot schooner under 2 Reeft Fore- sail & hed Reaching Diff. of Lat. 19. Departure, 86. Lat. by D. R. 50.09. Diff. of Lon. 2 29,14. Lon. in 130°.17. 17 Day of May, 1887. H. 1; Courses, W S W; Winds, N W;; this 24 hours first part strong Gales & cloudy headreaching under 2 Reeft Fore Sail. Noon Dito Noon Dito. H.12; Leeway 2 Points. H. 11; Noon. Lat. by D. R. 50°.14. Diff of Lon. 1319.34, 18 Day of May, 1887. H.1; K. 2; Courses, WS W; Winds, N W; Leeway 3 points; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & cloudy head. reaching under 2 Reeft Fore Sail. H.2; K.2.H.3; K. 2. H. 4; K. 2. HW. Ki. 2s, 65K. 2.0 Be 3K 2: 85 Kes GeO Ke 2 eee Ko 2: B. 11; K.2. 292; K. 2.1; Kid: SMidnicht Dito; Coomee 8 56W. Distance, 48. Diff. of Lat. 26. Departure, 40. Lat. by D. R. 49°,48. Diff. of Lon. 1°.03. Lon. in 132°.37, From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 19 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Courses, WS W; Winds, N W; Leeway 3 Points; this 24 hours first part Strong Breeze & Cloudy hove to” 2 Reeft Fore Sail Noon Dto Midnight Dito H.12; Noon. Course. S56 W. Distance, 48. Diff.of Lat.26. Departure, 40. Lat. by D. RB. 49,22. Diff. of Lon. 19.62. Lon. in 133.39. 20 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Courses, W S W; Winds, N W; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & cloudy at6am set all plaine sails & tack ship to Northard. H.7; Courses, N W; Winds, WS W. Noon Dito. H.12; WN W Courses; Winds,S W. Midnight Calm. Course, N 37 W. Distance 32. Diff. of Lat.19. Departure 26. Lat. by D. R. 49°.41. Diff. of Lon. 40. Don. in 134.19. 21 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Courses, W; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part light airs & calms & fogey. Noon strong Breezes & cloudy 1 5 Fa Be Courses, W; Winds, South. Midnight Stroug Breezes & Rain Squalls. Course, N60 W. Distance 77. Diff, of Lat. 39. Departure 66. Lat. by D. R. 50°.20. Diff. of Lon. 19.45. Lon. in 135°.02. 22 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Courses, W; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & cloudy & Raine Squalls. at 6am wind hauld to Northard & modrate H. 7; Courses SW by W;_.+inds, N W; tack ship Southard. Noon, Calms. Midnight Dito. H. 12; Noon. Course, N 68 W. Distance 155. Diff. of Lat. 58. Departure 144, Lat. by D. R. 51°.38. Diff. of Lon. 5°.49. Lon. in 139.22. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. H. 1; Courses, West; Winds, Northrly, this 24 hours first part calms & fine weather Noon Dito H. 12; Courses, West; Winds, E. Mid- night fresh Breezes & Cloudy. H. 12; Noon Course, N 68 W. Dis- tance 24. Diff. of Lat. 9. Dera 22. Lat. by D. BR. 57°.47. Lat. by Ob. 51.51. Diff. of Lon. 28. Lon. in 139.50. Lon. by Ob. 1399.24. 24 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Courses, West; Winds, East; this 24 hours Strong Breezes & cloudy & Raine ‘Squalls H.6; Courses, W by S; atO6am B lowing hard Reett Maine & Fore Sails. Noon Blowing Gale and high sea “Bar. 29.20 Midnight modrate & Raine Course, N75 W. Distance 113. Diff. of Lat. 29. Departure 109. Lat. by D. Rk. 52.20. Diff. of Lon. 29.57. Lon. in 1429.21. 25 Day of May, 1887. H. 1; Courses, W4N; Winds, S E; this 24 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. © 537 hours first part light air @calms at 4am set all sails. H.8; Winds, SW. Noon modrate Breezes & cleare weather H. 1 (P.M.) Courses, W by N. at 4 P.M. Reeft Fore and Maine Sails. Midnight Strong Breezes and Cloudy. H.12; Noon. Course, N 68 W. Distance 113. Diff. of Lat. 44. Departure 104. Lat. by D. R. 53.04. Lat. by Ob. 53.30. Diff. of Lon. 2°.49. Lon. in 1459.10. Lon. by Ob. 145°.07, 26 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Courses, W by N; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & Cloudy at 6am modrate set ali sails. H.8; Winds,S E. H.10; Winds, Kast. Noon, Strong Breezes & Cleare Weather. Midnight Blowing Strong. H.12; Noon. Course N 57 W. Distance 153. Diff. of Lat. 83. Departure 1°28. Lat. by D. R. 549.54. Lat. by Ob. 55°.00. Diff. of Lon. 39.38. Lon. in 148.45. - Lon. by Obs. 147.57. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 27 Day of May, 1887. this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fine weathr. at6am Blowing Gale took in mainsail and Two Reett Fore Sail at 8 am made land Island of Kadiack Noon light Drifted twords Trintty Island at 8 P.M. anchord Calms. 28 Day of May, 1887. this 24 hours first part Calm at 4 a m Got under way Noon Calms Midnight Dito 29 Day of May, 1887. this 24 hours first part Calms & light Baffling winds Noon Dito at 8am anchord & Kiyayack Bay & fild water 30 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first part calm & fine weathr at 9 am got under way & proceeded to sea H. 10; Winds, S E. at 3 P.M. cleare of Land Midnight Calms & fine weathr. From San Francisce towards North Hunting & Fishing. 31 Day of May, 1887. H.1; Winds, East. this 24 hours first part modrate Breeze & fine weathr at 7 am Boats out hunting 9 am fresh Breezes & fog Boats comeon board Noon Dito Midnight Blow- ing hard & Rainy 1 Day of June, 1887. H. 1; Winds, East; this 24 hours first part Blowing hard & Rains Noon Dito H.12; 4 P.M. Course N. 67 EK. Distance 35. Diff. of Lat. 10. Departure 32. Lat. by D. RB. 579.18. Wilt. of Lon.59. \ Lon. in 152°.07. 2 Day of June, 1887. H. 1; Winds, N E; this 24 hours. first part Strong Breezes & Cloudy & heavey sea Noon Dit Midnight Dit Course South. Distance 36. Diff. of Lat. 36. Lat. by D. RB. 56.37. Lon. in 1529.17. 3 Day of May (June), 1887. H. 1; Winds, N E; this 24 hours first part strong Breezes & cloudy & high sea Noon Dito Midnight Mod- rate H.12; Noon. Course, N45 W. Distance 22. Diff. of Lat. 15. Departure 15. Lat. by D. R. 56°.52. Lat. by Ob. 569.43. Diff. of Lon. 28. Lon. in 152.45. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 4 Day of June, 1887. H. 1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours first part Rainey & fresh Breezes Noon Dit. Midnight Dito Lat. by D. R. D6°.16. Lon. in 1539.00. 5 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, S EH; this 24 hours first part 68 538 ' LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. fine weather and smooth sea Boats out Hunting Post Boat one seal H.9(P.M.) Noon. Lat by Ob. 569.05. Lon. by Ob. 153.00 6 Day of June, 1887. H. 1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first part modrate Breeze & fine weather Boats out Hunting Captains Boat Two Seals Midnight Modrate. Lat. by Ob. 56.18. Lon. by Ob. 1519.55. 7 Day of June, 1887. H. 1; Winds, SW; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fine weather Boats out 9 a m Strong Breezes & sharp sea took in Boats Lat. by Ob. 56.56. Lon. by Ob. 152.57, From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 8 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first part fine weather & smooth sea. Noon Dito Boats out Hunting No Seals Midnight foggey Lat. by Ob. 569.09. Lon. by Ob. 153° 31, 9 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first Sane fogey Noon Dito after noon cleard Boats out fog set in Boats came in Midnight fog Lat. by D. BR. 55.30. Lon. in 153°.40. 10 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds S W; this 24 hours first part Cloudy & fogey Noon Dit H. 3 (P.M.) Winds South. Midnight cleare & fine weather passed Semed Islands at 11 P. M. Lat. by Ob. 55.50. Lon, 1549.30. 11 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part light airs & fine weathr Boath out hunting H. Ti: Winds, East. Mid- night.Strong Breezes & Raineing H.12; Noon. Lat. by Ob. 55°.30, Lon. by Ob. 156°.55. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 12 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, N E; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & Raineing at 6 am Made Sheumagin [Islands at 7 am anchored in Bend of agia thick & Raineing & Blowing Gale Midnight weather Dito. 13 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, East; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fogey Noon Cleard got under way & proceeded for onger wind light Midnight Dito 14 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, N W; this 24 hours first part light airs & calms H.8 ; Winds, North. at 1 P. M. Captain went on shore at onger 3 P M Started for Coal harbor on N W Side of Island Midnight Calms 15 Day of June, | 18387. H.1; Winds, North; this 24 hours Calms & light N W winds at 3 P.M. anchord in Coals harbr took in coals. “16 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, North, this 24 hours first part Calms & fine weather at 2 a m Got under way & proceeded to go to Sanack Midnight modrate Breezes 17 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, Calms & Northerly winds; this 24 hours first part calms & fine weather at Noon calms poot Boats out hunting From San Francisco towards North Hunting. 18 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, N W; this 24 hours first part light airs Calms Boats out hunting Bird Island Baring S W 19 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, N W; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fine weather Boats out hunting Bird Island LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 539 Bareing N W 10 miles Dis at 4 P.M. Boats in Run for Halesboat Island 20 Day of June, 1887. H. 1; Winds, N W; Courses, S W by W; this 24 hours first part fresh Breezes & fine weathr. at 8am made Haleboat Island 10am hove Two at 4PM Set Sail & Ran for Ouni- mack Island to fill water H.12; Noon. Lat by Ob. 54°.05. Lon. by Ob. 162°.20. 21 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, West; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fine weathr Noon Dito Tack ship to Northard Midnight modrate H. 12; Noon. Lat. by Ob. 539.14. Lon. by Ob. 163°.57. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 22 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, S H; this 24 hours first part fresh Breezes & fine weathr at 12M anchord at Cape Lutke fore water fild water Midnight Calms 23 Day of June, 1887. This 24 hours first part light airs & calms at 3 am got under way & proceeded twords pass Noon half way through the pass Midnight Calms 24 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, East; this 24 hours first part fresh Breezes & fine weather Noon Dito Midnight Dito Lat. by Ob. 5429.33. Lon. by Ob. 166°.40. 25 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, North; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & Cloudy Noon Dito Midnight Modrate & fogey H.3 (P.M.) Winds, NNW. Lat. by D. RB. 54.16. Lon. in 167.09. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 26 Day of June, 1887. H.1; Winds, N N W;; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fogey Noon Dito hove two Midnight Calms Lat. by D. R. 54.06. Lon. in 167.26. Lon. by Ob. 167°.26. 27 Day of June, 1887. H. 1; Winds, Northerly & Calms; this 24 hours first part Calms & fogey Noon Dito Midnight Dito Lat. by D. R. 59.08. Lon. in 167.30. 28 Day of June, 1887. this 24 hours first part light airs & calms Noon Dito Boglsoy Bares W Dis 8 Miles at 4 PM cano & 2 Indians Came on board lost schooner Anna Beck Midnight fogey 29 Day of June, 1887. this 24 hours first part Fogey & Calm Noon Dito 2P.M. Run for Oumank Island Boglesloy Bareing W N W Dis 3 miles 12 midnight hove two From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 30 Day of June, 1887. this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & cloudy Noon Dito Indians on board yet Midnight Calms Lat. by D. BR. 53.15. Lon. in 169.00. 1 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, N W; this 24 hours first part light airs & cloudy Indians onbord Noon Dito Midnight Dito Lat. by D. R. 53°.25. Lon. in 169.20. 2 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, West; this 24 hours first part Calm & cloudy Indians left and went onbord W. P. Saywood of Vie- toria Midnight fresh breezes & cloudy. 3 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first part 5AO LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Strong Breezes Cloudy Noon Dito Midnight Dito Lat. by D. R. 53°.50. Lon. in 165.10. 4 Day of July, 1887. H. 1; Winds, N W; this 24 hours Strong Breeze & cloudy & light Rains Noon Dito Midnight Dito Lat. by D. R. 54.15. Lon. in 169.00. 5 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, West; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & Raineing heavy sea making Noon Dito Midnight modrating Lat. by Ob. 549.05. Lon. in 1689.45. From San Francisco towards North Hunting & Fishing. 6 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first part heavey sea & fresh Breezes & fogey Noon Dito Midnight Dito Lat. by D. R. 559.56. Lon. in 168.00. 7 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S E & Calms; this 24 hours first part light airs & calms & thick fog Noon Do Midnight Do Lat. by Ob. 549.01. Lon. in 1679.45, 8 Day of July, 1887. H.1: Winds, S E; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & Raineing Noon Do Midnight Do. Lat by D. R. 53.50. Lon. in 167°.40. 9 Day July, 1887. H. 1; Winds, 8 S EH; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & heavey sea & Raineing & fogey Noon Do Midnight Do. H. 2 (P. M.) Winds, South. Lat. by Ob. 54.06. Lon. in 1679.20, 10 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fogs Noon Do Midnight Do Lat. by Ob. 54.00. Lon. in 168.00. 11 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, 88 W; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fogs Noon Do Midnight Do Lat. by D. Rh. 54°.290. Lon. in 167.40. From San Francisco towards North Hunting. 12 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, West; this 24 hours first part light airs &fogey NoonDo Midnight Do Lat. by D. R.54.01. Lon. in 168.06. 13 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; this 24 hours first part Strong Breeze & fog Noon Do Midnight Do Lat. by D. R. 54.20. Lon. in 168°.15. 14 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, SS W; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & high Sea Noon Dito Midnight Dito Lat. by D. Rk. 54.24. Lon. in 168.10. 15 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part Strong Gales & heavey Sea Noon Dito Midnight Do Lat. by D. R. 54°.08. Lon. 168°.30. From Sau Francisco towards North Hunting. 16 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part heavey Gales & Raineing & fog at 6am Run in too Morovoskoy Bay to fill water anchord at 230 pm Midnight Gale Blowing Still. 17 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, N W; this 24 hours first part Cleard & Calms at 5 a m Got under way & proceeded out to sea Noon fogey & light winds. Midnight Calms & fog. Lat. by D. R. 53.38. Lon. in 166.23, 18 Day of July, 1887. this 24 hours first part Calms & fog Noon Do. 19 day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours first part LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 541 Strong Gales & heavey Sea. Noon Dito Midnight Do Lat. by D. R. 54.07. Lon. in 166.50. 20 day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S. E; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & heavey Sea & fogey Noon Dito H. 10; Winds, South. Midnight, Do. Lat. by D. BR. 54.08. Lon. in 1669.30. 21 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S W; Modrate Breeze & fogey with heavey Sea Noon Calm Midnight Do. Lat. by Ob. 549.04. Diff. of Lon. 166.20. From San Francisco towards North Hunting. 22 Day of July, 1287. this 24 hours first part Calms & Fog Noon Dito Midnight Do. Lat. by D. R. 549.19. Lon. in 166.40. 23 Day of July, 1887. this 24 hours first part calms & fog Noon Do, Midnight Do. Lat. by D. R. 54°.22. Lon. in 166.00. 24 Day of July, 1887. this 24 hours first part Calms & fogey Noon Do Midnight Do. Lat. by D. R. 549.06. Lon. in 166,30. 25 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours first part light air & fog Noon Do. Midnight Do. Lat. by D. BR. 54.00. Diff. of Lon. 166.40. 26 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours fresh Breeze & fogey & Rains. Noon Do Set sail & Shifted Grounds to N W Midnight Strong winds & fog at 10 hours P M hove Tow Lat. by D. R. 53.56. Lon. in 167°.00. 27 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part Strong winds & fogs Noon Do Midnight Do. Lat. by D. R. 55.350. Lon. in 1689.15. From San Francisco towards North Hunting. 28 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, SW; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fogs & Rain Noon Nosealsinsite Change Grounds to Southard Midnight fog & Rain Lat. by D. BR. 54°.30. Lon. in 167.50. 29 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, SW; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fog & Raine at 6 am hove tow seals in site Noon Do. Midnight Do. Lat. by D. R.54°.10. Lon. in 167°.20. 30 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, SW; this 24 hours first part Modrate Breezes & fog & heaveySea Noon Do Midnight Do Wore ship Every Tow houres Lat. by D. R. 549.15. Lon. in 167°.10. 31 Day of July, 1887. H.1; Winds, SW; this 24 hours first part modrate Breezes & fogs Noon Do Boats out Hunting. From San Francisco towards North Hunting. 1 Day of August, 1887. H. 1; Winds, S E; this 24 hours fresh Breezes & fog & Rains Noon Do Midnight Do. Lat. by D. R. 54.27. Lon. in 166.20. .2 Day of August, 1887. H.1; Winds, South; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & fog & Rains H.4; Winds, S W. H. 7; Winds, West. Noon Do. Midnight Do. Lat by D. R. 549.28. Lon. in 166.25. 3 Day of August, 1887. H.1; Winds, West; this 24 hours Strong Breezes & Cloudy Noon Do afternoon Schooner Mountain Chief Spoke us. 345 skins onbord Midnight Calm & Rains Lat. by D. R. 549.30. Lon. in 1669.30. 542 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 4 Day of August, 1857. this 24 hours light airs & calms & Raine Noon Do after Noon Strong Breeze & Rains Midnight Cleare & Strong Breeze Lat. by D. R. 549.40 Lon. in 166°.20., From San Francisco towards North Hunting. 5 Day of August, 1887. H.1; Winds, ES E; this 24 hours first part Strong Breezes & Raine Noon Cleard of H. 2 (P. M.) Winds, S. W. Lat. by D. R. 549.47. Lon. in 1669.50. No. 2.—Washington, D. C. July 28, 1892. L. G. SHEPARD, Captain Revenue Marine. Captain’s Boat, June 6th, 1887, 3 Seals. Post Boat, G, Riges, March 31st, 1887, 3 “ : April 1, oe jk «06 April 21, f¢ slate May 11, ec legs ES 12, ae ac’ 13, Q « June 5, és 1 lena i 1 “é May 9th, 1887, 2 Seals. 1G (73 1 oe Basin Sea, Indians, June 28, 1G.) oie July 1, rap Store List, Schooner Anna. March 30th, opend one Barrel Beef & Pork April 3rd, 2 Sack Flour, 8 iL (a4 (74 13, if 66 7 a1 if! ce (79 26, iL 6 6 May 2, 1 Barrel Beef, 2, 1 Sack Flour, Vf 1 ce oe 1 1 (79 ee 15, if 6b “ 20, 1 ‘ “cc 23, 1 (79 ce 1 Barrel Beef (iP orls 27, + ‘ Butter, OS 1 Sack Flour, 2 June, ir aot b F Courses Winds Leewy Remarks SW by W3W PM fine wind vering sthly wake seals traveling SW Pree A 4 PM 16 fine wind veering SW by S toS E Glass standing to 29-30 Generally 8 AM PL 35 10 PM Dble reefd mnsl Mont 50 miles PL 2 AM Saw the Lumagin Isds about 8 miles off 4-30 AM Passed down Attkins Id Which is Bold very High & rather Steep on all sides rather conspicuous when making from N to E Simeonoff appears like two sugarloaf Isds apart with a Deep Hollow between on nearer approach It shows a long low piece of Land Extending ina S E direction for some 6 miles beyond the southernmost Hill Runing down through 12 fthm strait the Entrance to Simeonoff Harbour is Hidden by a long low strech of Land gradually Extending from the S W Mountain to level with the water the S Western Point Projecting about 2 miles to the N W of the Entrance which runs ina EN E direction for about 2 mile opposite an House Occupied by Otter Hunters in 11 feet at Low Water Filled Water and Washed clothes and got ready to sail ally 8AM Blew very Hard with rain wind S E of water 3 fthm at Low spring tides When re N B Chart decribes the depth their is but 11 feet OCONMHWOUF wwe be ee WHO OP oboe fF we > WODOMNMDOFPWNH ERE COONS BERS LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Monday 4th. K F Courses Winds Leewy Remarks PM all hands washing clothes 4 PM got under way 6 Calm Came to again in outer part of Harbour in 5 fthms mdnt light N W airs 3 AM Got under way and proceeded to sea 7 AM Harbour Bearing E N E 3 miies put out the Log This Reef Extends 2 miles to Southward Noon Calm off Cherbroar Isd about 4 miles N by W Note Glass 29—30 Wind S W to West K F Courses SiE Nw }4W Lat 54 - 42 Tuesday 5th Winds’~ = Leey Remarks PM Calm with a nasty swell on 8 PM West end W by N and middle of Sineon Isd bearing N by W PL10M Mdnt 25 4 AM 35 8 AM fine Canoes made a move to the wastward Noon fine lt airs west Canoes returning Long 159°- 56’ W Var 14 Pts Eastly ewre CHONIMOWIPWNR RK RH OMAIMDS LE =) on OONMHMS cob ol eel ood Noro SIS epee a=) A WWWWWWWE FE FOLOODOUWNWNNW NNR Re Dowdy HeeE A Rb bt www re F PPeeee | i LOG BOOKS OF Courses WNW SW by W SW by S South Courses S by W N W by W SW by SiS SEALING VESSELS. Wednesday 6th Winds Vble Light 6é 66 &é Leey Remarks PM Calm with lit Wstly airs Canoes returned with 4 seals 8 PM light rain wind freshening 10 PM fresh West wind Mdnt PL 35 4 AM PL 51 5 AM Breaking off Tacked to NW 8 AM fine wind light from 11-20 AM tacked to south PL 74 Noon fine PL 75 Lat 54-29 Long ®, 161-34 Chr Var 1% Pts Eastly Thursday 7th July /87 Winds Lwy Remarks PM light winds and Vble Rep Musl 4-40 PM Tacked PL 7 M Canoe took a turn to look for seals PM Tacked 8 PM Calm light rain Sannaka Id mdle N W Mountain on Unimak Id W4S PL 16M Mdnt Calm 4AM PL29 7AM 36 Calm with a nasty Ground Swell noking Sails to Rags Noon Calm as usual Note Glass Rising from 29—30 557 558 Friday 8th /87 : LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. | { | | | | H K F Courses: Winds Leey Remarks 1 PM Calm with a heavy 2 1 SSW West Ground swell ship rolling 3 3 and thrashing sails heavily 4 4 25M a light Breeze from west 5 5 NW by N 5 PM Tacked to NW fresh wind 6 5 NNW 6-80 Isld NNW 4+ W 7 5 Snowy Mountain WNW 8 5 8 PM Mountains NW by W & NW 9 4 NW by W Pl 64 M Pt on Port Shore about 10 4 W by N 11 4 11-30 tacked to southward moderate 12 4 Mdnt Pl 80 Saunaka Isd 1 4 4 Sby E NNE 20 M 2 4 4 3 4 4 WNW 4 4 4 4 AM Moderate Fine 5 4 4 6 4 4 SSE 6AM P1108 The Outlines 7 3 of the Land and indentations 8 4 W by N + are very deficiently described s) 4 on the Chart 10 5 SE by S 7-30 Tacked to WNW P1116 1 5 9-30 Tacked off SW End of Onimak 12 5 W by N + 11-40 Tacked to Westward Note A gratually Rising Glass Sun Obscured —~ all the time with dense clouds Wind from S West to West Saturday 9th July/87. H K F Courses Winds Leey Remarks iL 4 WN W PM thick air and a 2 4 fresh wind 3 4 SEW 3-30 PM Ngama Id SW by W 4 4 SSE dark cloudy 5 2 4PM PLI16M 6 2 8 PM PL 28M 7 2 WNW 8 4 South g 1 10 1 ibl il Mdat Calm 12 1 2 3 3-30 AM St Mnsl 4 light air 5 6 1 SE byS il i 8 i 8AM Calm Dead Sky overcast 9 it 4 Glass °30 10 1 4 N W Noon PL 40 Lowered Canoes to 11 1 4 t look for seals 12 1 4 obs Lat 54-7 Long 163-57 By Bangs 4% 54-21 * 163-49 of Isd Var 14 East Vote Glass at 30 Calm sky cloudy wind southernly & S W_ fog & drizzly rain sky densely . overcast most of the time with a southerly swell t Canoes lowered CHAD UFWLH fan] _ -_ SHCVAEN MS COIN ee nro RE POONA TR WDE ER OO OR OIE by Ho A re SUOTOT OURS bo bo bs CUOUOT OTE i OU & OO bo bo bo bo 1) i Bh ES) | pep 4 4 EF LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Sunday 10th/87 Leey Remarks PM light airs from SW a Southerly swell 3 PM PL 10 8 PM Id NW by N3M Calm light airs PL 30 M Midnt wind light from SE 4 AM fine wind light and Vble 6 AM Strong wind rising Dble reefd Mnsl furld Jib 8AM PL 65, nasty sea with 10 less wind Nasty sea Noon PL 87 strong wind and Rain Lat 54°-28’N Long 166°-17’ W Var 1 2 Pt East Monday 11th July /87 Courses Winds West SW W by N WS WwW Sth West SE West WbySs Courses Winds WbyS West W by N Leey Remarks PM thick rain nasty sea 3 PM shot seal lowered canoe But lost it. Made sail 4PM 8 PM Wind light Vble Nasty swell Mdnt rain with a light wind PL17 4AM PM 27M not so much swell 8 PM thick and Clear PL 40 Noon PL 60 Lat 54°-45/ Long 168°-12' W Varl1zZ Pts East 560 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Tuesday 12th eo A Courses Winds NSW RR ee Pee NW COMOADUPWNWR RR rE OMAN OF WLe Ot a) NNW North coal anil eae Loe ee) ee bo bo Lat 55°-8' PM lower Canoes in Behring Sea Lwy Remarks PM Lowered Canoes Clear at intervals and thick Occasionally 4 PM Canoes returned with seals 8 PM furld Mnsl and Jib cruising on the Sealing vround thick rain Midnt moderate fine PL 4 AM Canoes started for seals 8 AM thick and clear occasionally PL 31M Noon PL 35 Canoes came Home with = Long 168°-16’ W Var 13 E X 91 seals first sealing day Wednesday 13th A F Courses Winds 4 North 4 West Be ee Noro SE NW DONATE WNW HH HHOONOMewNe SW eaqeae oe ) ay -++ Canoes out all day coming and going Leewy Remarks 2 PM Tacked to west Canoes Went out again 5 PM canoes returned with seals 8 PM Calm light airs all canoes on Board Mdnt Calm 4 AM sheets calm canoes out for Seals 5 Sky Generally Overcast and - Mist or thick rain 8 AM thick and clear occasionally Canoes returned 8 to N Lat 55°-12'/N Long 168°— 16 W 168 - 36 Var 1% Kastly —- LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 561 Thursday 14th. a A F Courses Winds Lwy Remarks WSW South PM fine weather Canoes out sealing Weather clear ao 5 PM returned; wore to the EbyS S E wind lt clear 9-30 PM put out P log ; wind increasing Eby N Dble reefd Mnsl and Jib AD OU CO bo ) Mdnt wore to S W SW by W 4AM thick rain with a fresh Wind 8AM PL only5 ole oe Berke) Owe il ll coll oll seal 9,2) SWhbys en a ere ee Noon Much rain and an incr Wind With a falling Glass 29-20 Wind SE Lat 55°—4’ Long 1689-58’ W Var 1 2 East Canoes out and returned with seals 63 5 PM of Civil day Friday 15th July /87 ee = Courses Winds Lwy Remarks S by W4iW SE 1} PM Torrents of rain and a strong wind PPR by 8 PM a very heavy cross sea running ship laboring SW byS 3 Heavy pumps attended to Re ee Mdnt thick rain and a nasty sea 4 AM Wore around to south 8 AM put ont p log 8m a nasty sea running Par ar at a aS SE by S WONDOUFEWNW RRR RK ODIO OF CNS No) Noon Strong wind with a nasty sea running — ws) = rar i) Sr Ow or Ot Lat Noon 54° 40’ N Long 168° 18 W Var 18 E 71 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Saturday 16th /87 H K F Courses Winds 1 up SW West 2 off South 3 up =, South 4 oft ESE 5 1 4 South 6 1 4 Tf 1 4 8 a 4 9 i! 10 i 11 H10;Ko 1: F.5d; Hoi Kea Midnight thick haze N. W. End of BirdId. SE 4 miles. Tae tude (Ace) 549,50’ N. Longitude (Acc) 159.28 W. Barometer: 30,55; 30.55; 30.57. 580 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Thursday, 14th July, 1887. H.2; K.1; Courses, SW b 8S; Winds, SE; A.M. Light wind and foggy weather. H.4; K.2. H.6; K.4; Martin Johnson laid up improving. H.8; K.5; Freshening wind with oceasional thick fog. H.10; K.5; Courses, SW. H.12; K.5; Winds, ESE; Noon same weather. H. 2; K.6; P.M. Fine breeze and hazy. H.4; K.6; At3:30 passed schooner ‘‘Alexander” at anchor. H. 6; K. 6; Foggy weather.. H.8; K.7., H.10; Ke9; dvain:,, Eis Keage Winds, East. Latitude (Acc) 549.40’ N. Longitude (Acc) 1609.45’ W. Barometer: 30.55; 30.35; 30.20. Friday 15th July, 1887, H. 2; K. 7; Courses, West; Winds, East; A.M. Fine breeze and rainy weather. H. 4; K. 7; Winds, SE; Thick fog. H.6; K.6; Martin Johnson on the sick list. H.8; K.6; 8:35, In Ounimak pass. Thick fog. H.10; K.3; Winds, Calm; 10 Calm. H. 12; Winds, SW; Noon fresh SW breezeand foggy. H.2; K.5; Courses, WNW;P.M. Fresh breeze and rainy weather. H. 4; K.5. H.6; K.5; At 6 Handed Mainsail & Jib. H.8; K.3. H.10; K.3; Courses, West; Midnight thick and rainy weather. H.12; K.3. Latitude (Acc) 54°.40/ N. Longitude (Ace)165°.32’ W. Barometer: 29.80; 29.80; 29.85. Saturday 16th July, 1887. H. 2; K. 3; Courses, W b S; Winds, Southerly; A. M. Decreasing wind & thick. H.4; K. 3. H.6; K. 2; Martin Johnson laidup. H.8; K.2; A heavy westerly swell. H.10; K.1. Light wind & hazy. H.2; Winds, ESE; P.M. At 1h Lowered all boats & canoes. . In the evening canoes returned with 32 Seals. H.6; Winds, NE; Thick hazy weather and a heavy swell from the SW. Latitude (Ace) 55°.18’ N. Longitude (Acc) 1679.3’ W. Barome- ter: 29.80; 29.80; 29.90. Sunday 17th July, 1887. H. 2; K.3; Courses, SW b W; a NE; A. M. Light wind and thick hazy weather. H. 4; K. 2; Courses, North; Winds, ENE;. H. 6; K. 2; Courses, North Winds, North; Thick fog at times. H. 8; K. 2; Courses, NW b Ws Winds, North; At 8 h Lowered. H. 10; K. 1; Clear & jossy at intervals. H. 12; K.1; Martin Johnson laid up. EL 2; K. 2; Courses, WNW; Winds, North; Pee. \dtrom A hsto 2h Very, ee fog; 7 Hi; re K. 3: At2h Canoes went off again & returned with 63 seals, EE 6: K. 2: BS; K. 25: Winds, NU W. 105K. 2; @ourses;; NW; Winds, SE; Light air and thick fog. H. 12; K. 1. Latitude (Obs) 550,34 N. Longitude (Obs) 167°. 35! W. Baromionen: 30.10; 30.20; 30.30, Monday 18th July, 1887. H. 2; K. 1; Courses, NW; Winds, SE; A.M. Light airs and thick fog. iE 4; K. 2; Martin Johnson laid up. H. 6; Thick fog. At 8 Lowered. H. 10; K.1; Winds, South; Fog signal every half hour. H. 12; K. 2. H. 2; K. 1; Courses SSW; Winds, SE; P.M. Freshening wind and thick constant fog. Canoes returned at 4h with 16 seals. H. 4; K.1. H.6; K.5; Winds, SSE; Set Mainsail H. 8; K. 2; Courses, Hast; At 6 fell in with the (Mary Ellen”... E20. 2: EL 2: K. 35 Midnight brist gale, lying to under the foresail. Latitude (Acc) 55. SL N. Longitude (Ace) 168°. tks Barometer: 30.35; 30.45; 30.45. Monday 19th of July, 1887. H.2; K.2; Courses, East; Winds, SE; A.M. Strong gale and thick rainy weatherthroughout. H.4; K.2. H. 6; K.2; No boats out. H.8; K.2. H.10; K. 2; Cons Sb W.) e 12; K.3;; P.M. Strong breeze and. rainy weather. H.2 Eee 2, H.4; KS; H.63- Ko 2: HS; Ko. Clearing cup: @ aor K. : 2; ‘Winds, South; Wore ship. H. 12; ie 23 Courses, SE b E. Latitude (Ace) 55.55 N. Longitude (Acc) 167.356. Barometer: 30.38; 30.25; 30.15. Wednesday, 20 July, 1887. H.2; K. 2; Courses, ESE; Winds, South; A.M. Strong breeze and cloudy weather. H.4; K.2. H. 6; lad LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 581 K.2; Foggy at times. H. 8; K.2;. H.10; K.2; No boats out. H.12; K. 2; Courses, SW b W. H. 2; K.1; P.M. Strong breeze and foggy. H.4; K.1; W. Parker lowered without success. H.6; K.1; Courses, SEbS; Winds, SW. H.8; K.1; A heavy swell from the westward. H.10; K.1. H.12; K.1; Thick weather and light wind. Latitude (Acc) 55.51 N. Longitude (Acc) 1679.58’ W. Barometer: 30.10; 30.10; 30.12. Thursday, 21 July, 1887. H.2; K.1; Courses, ESE; Winds, South; A.M. Light and foggy weather and a high cross sea. H6 +) Kd Courses, WNW: At 6" W. Parker lowered. BMS Kaks At 10308 the Indians lowered their canoes. H. LOs* Kees Martin Johnson sick mbed. H.12; K.1; Foggy at intervals. H. 250K. 1: Winds, WN Wir P.M. Light airs and hazy. H.4; K.1. H.6; K. 1; A schooner in sight to the northward. . H.8; K.1; Canoes returned with 67 seals. By 10; Kok sWinds, North.) 2H. 12; K. 1; Light air. Latitude (Ace) 55.43 N, Longitude oe 167°. ce W. Barometer 30. 38; 30.45; 30.55, Friday 22nd July, 1887. H. 2 eS Calm; A..M. Begins with ealm and foggy. H. 4; K. 1; Winds, Kast; light airs. Lowered all: boats. H.6; K. 1. H. 83 Ki. 1; Martin Johnson still laid wp.) Hier K. 1; At noon had apt seal on board. H. 12; K. 1; Winds, South; Clear weather. H.2; K.1; Courses, SE; Winds, South; P.M. Light air and clear weather. 1H. 45K. 4, i. 6; K. 1; Total catch 203. bio; KK. 7 pe: 107K. 1; Moderate. breeze,and thick. -H..12; K.1; Courses, NW. Latitude (Obs) 55.32 N. Longitude (Acc ) 167.45 Ww. Barometer 30.70; 30.75; 30.70. Saturday 22 July, 188i: * Hi 25oK.e iy Fo4s Courses, SE by i; Winds, South; A.M. Moderate aoe and fogey, ele Ga orl il A: Courses, SW bw. H. 6; a BS 49H 8; Kee 4s Same weather all forenoon. Pi @) Ke. 1; ; Courses, SEbE. H. 12 ods Bae No boats out. H. 2. K. 1; ai - Courses, SW bW; RP. M. Moderate breeze and drizzling rain. aE As Kea ‘4: Ee Gs Kudo 4s) EES Se KK. t; BF. 4; Courses, ESE; Heavy rain. H. 10; K. 1; F.4. H.12; K.1; F.4. Latitude (Obs) 559.27. Longitude (Acc) 1679.45’ W. Ba- rometer 30.72; 30.62; 30.55. Sunday 23 July, 1887. H. 2; K. - > 2; A. M. Light airs ~ rain. At 2" Calm. H.4; F.4; 4, Light wind and misty. H. 65 Ko =s-Rs4s Courses NNW; Winds, N’W'ly. EL Os HG ples ies Courses, West. Hy. 10; — Nea ok 4: Fresh breeze and eloomy weather. H. 120 Kate WAG H. 2 -aiG 7 P.M. Brisk wind and thick hazy weather. EL A. Kats Fr. - Courses, SSW; W. Parker lowered for an hour, without suc- cess. H. Os Kd: Courses, NNE; At 6" All boats out and returned at 7:305 with 8 seal. H. 8; K. 2; F. 4; Courses, SW. H.10; K.1; Courses, NEbN. H.12; K.1; Light wind and thick weather. Lati- tude (Acc) 55°.40’ N. Longitude (Acc) 167.46’ W. Barometer 30.55; 30.65; 30.78. Monday 25th July, 1887. H. 2; K.1; Courses, NNE; Winds, NW; A.M. Begins with light wind and foggy. H.4; K.1. H.6; K.-; Courses, Calm; At 5° Lowered all boats. 8" Calm and thick weather. P.M. Light air and hazy. H.2; K.1; Courses, SW; Winds, North’ly. 4s Kid. YER 6K. 2: Thiek for. Ex: 8: Keats Total cateh this d: i129 Seals.. H. 10; K.1; Winds, Var. .H. 12; K. 2: Courses, East. Lati- tude, (Obs.) 55°.39. Longitude (Obs) 1689.45’ W. Barometer 30.82; 30.85; 30.80. Tuesday 26th July, 1887. H.2; K.1; Courses, ee Winds, South’ly ; j A.M. Begins with light air and foggy. ay, Ke 2 3 EL. 6s K. 3; Ato Lowered. H.8; K.3; - At 10 Canoes returned with four seal. Seal plen- 582 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. tiful but shy, hunters could not approach them. H.10; K.3; H. 12; Noon made sail. Weather hazy. H.2; K.7; Courses, NW; Winds, SE; P.M. Pleasant breeze-and cloudy. H.4; K.5; At 3:30" Short- ened sail to foresail and stay sail. H.6; K.2; EbN. H.8; K.2; At 95 A steam ship bound NW. H.10; K.2; H.12; K.2; Brisk gale and hazy. Latitude (Acc) 55°.25’ N. Longitude (Acc) 1689.34’ W. Barometer 30.70; 30.65; 30.50. Wednesday 27th July, 1887. H. 2; K.1; F. 4; Courses, S b W; Winds, SE; A.M. Fresh breeze and hazy. H.4; K.1; F.4. H.6; K.1; F. 4; Did not lower in the forenoon. H. 8; K.1; F. 4; Winds, South’'ly. H.10;K.1; F.4. H.12; K.1; F.4; Moderate and hazy. H.2; K.2; Courses, South; Winds, SW bW. P.M. Brisk wind and thick weather. H.4; K.2. H.6; K.2; At 3" Lowered but without success. H.8; K.2; Winds, West. H.10; K.5; Courses, SE b H; At 6" Canoes returned with three seals. H.12; K.5. Latitude (Acc) 59°.53’ N. Longitude (Ace) 1699.6‘ W. Barometer 30.20 30.12; 30.10. Thursday 28th-July, 1887. H.2; K.1; F.4; Courses, NW; Winds, West; A. M. Brisk wind and thick weather throughout. H.4; K. 1; F.4. H.6; K.1; F.4. H. 8; K.1; F. 4; A few seals about, weather unfavorable for lowering the boats. H.10; K.4; Courses, ENE. H. 12; K. 4; H. 2; K.1; F.4; Courses, NW; P. M. Moderate breeze and gloomy weather. H.4; K.1; F.4. H.6;K.1;F.4; A schooner steering to the Southward.” H..8; K. is I. 4. oH. 10; Ki 25 ieee: Courses SEbE. H.12; K.2; F.4. Latitude (Acc) 559.32’ N. Lon- gitude (Acc) 168.138 W. Barometer 30.25; 30.30; 30.37. Friday 29th July, 1887. H.2; K.1; F.4; Courses, NW b W; Winds, SW; A.M. Moderate breeze and gloomy thick weather throughout. H.4; K.1; F. 4; Courses, South. H.6; K.1; F. 4; West, Courses. H.8; K.1; Winds, South; Very few seal visible from the vessel and weather unfavorable for hunting. H.10; K.3; Courses, Kast. H.12; K.1; F. 4; Same weather at noon. H.2; K.1; F.4; Courses, South; Winds, WSW; P. M. Brisk and dark cloudy weather. H.4; K. 1; Bead. H.6; K.1; B. 45° H.8sK. 1; E24; Courses, N Wo Wee K.1; F.4; Fresh breeze and highsea. H.12;K.1; F.4. Latitude(Acc) 55°.352/N. Longitude (Acc) 1679.46’ W. Barometer 50.35; 30.30; 30.21, Saturday 30th July, 1887. H.2; K.1; F.4; Courses, South; Winds, WSW; A.M. Brisk gale and dark cloudy weather throughout. H. 4; K.1; ¥.4. H.6; K.1; F.4, H.8; K.1; F.4; Only afew seal visible from the vessel. H.10; K.1; F.4; Seatoo rough for lowering. H.12; K. 1; F. 4; Noon Wore ship. H.2; K.1; F.4; P. M.. Strong breeze and cloudy. H.4; K.1; F.4; H.6; K.1; F.4; Decreasing wind. H. 8; K.1s F.4. H.10; Ki1; B.4. “12s Kod; 4. latitudes) 55°14’N. Longitude (Ace) 167°.26’W. Barometer 30.27; 30.37 ;30.43. Sunday 31st July, 1887. H.2; K.1; F. 4; Courses, South; Winds, Sw; A. M. Moderate breeze and cloudy weather. H.4; K.1; F. 4. H. 6; K.1; F.4; Courses, WNW. H.8; K.1; F.4; Lowered without success, only 3.seals. H.10; K. 4; F.4; Courses, NW b N. H. 12; K. 4; Cloudy with passing showers of drizziing rain. H.2; K. 2; F.-; Courses, N. Wb N. P. M. Fresh breeze and rainy weather. H. 4; K.5; Courses, WbN; Winds,SW. H.6; K.5; Courses, West. H.8; K.5. H.10 K.4. H.12; K.3. Latitude (Obs) 55°.55’N. Longitude (Obs) 1679.10’ W. Barometer 30.45; 30.40; 30.30. Monday Ist August, 1887. H.2; K. 3; Courses, SE; Winds, SW; AM Brisk wind and rainy weather. H.4; K.3. H.6; K.3; Foggy at times. H.8; K.3, H.10; K. 4; Courses, WNW. H.12; K. 45) De- creasing wind and cloudy. H.2; K.1; P.M. Light wind and cloudy. H. 4; K.1; Lowered. H.6; Courses, Calm; Catch this day 28 seals. LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. 583 H.8; Winds, North. H.10; K.1; F.4. H.12; K.2; Midnight, light wind & fine weather. Latitude (Acc) 569.8’ N. Longitude (Acc) 1689.15’ W. Barometer 30.20; 30.15; 30.15. Tuesday 2nd August, 1887. es. 2; K.2 ; Courses, NE; Winds, North; AM Light air and fine weather. Hi. 43 B. 4. Ee O78 4.) Seas Courses, SE; At 8" lowered without success. H. 10; K.4; At 10°" too much wind | _ hunting. Made sail shaped a Course to Southward. Pet 2K: 8: Courses; SS.H;° Winds; NW. H. 2; K28; P.M... Strong breeze il hazy weather. H. 4; i Sy JEG; K. 8; Saw a few seals mom 6. 3to 32.6) Hy 8s K.8; Winds, WNW; gn Handed mainsail and Jibs. H. 10; a 5; Winds, West; At 115 lying to under foresail. H. 12; K. 4-1; F. 4; Courses, SW. ‘Latitude (Ace) 55° .46’; (Obs) 55° 00’. Longitude (Acc) 167° .55’ W; (Obs) 167° .49’ W. Barometer 30.07; 30 10; 30.15. Wednesday, 3rd August, 1887. H.2; K.1; F. 4; Courses, South; Winds, SW; A. M. Moderate breeze and hazy. H. 4; K. 1; F. 4; Courses, W > Ne 6; K.1; F.4; At 5" Lowered, Seals in sight. fl 8s K. 0 es ee Courses, South. H. ROS KE Heya ee WER: 12) uke Fp. 4: Courses, WNW; ; Noon thick fog Canoes returned with 45 skins. ET; 2 K. 3; Courses, NW b N; P.M. Moderate breeze and foggy at times. H.4; K. 3; At 2" Lowered again. H.6; K.1; F. 4; Courses, WNW; Catch this day 51 seals. H.8; K.2. H.10; K. 2; Passing showers of drizzling rain. H.12; K.2; Courses, West. Latitude (Acc) 54° .23’ N. Longitude (Acc) 167° .35’ W. Barometer 30.37; 30.45; 30.48. Thursday 4th August, 1887. H.2; K.1; Courses, SE; Winds, South; A. M. Light winds and cloudy. HL. 4: Ko Courses, West; H. 6: K. 2; Courses, South; Winds, ESE; At 6° Lowered. Wind light and small rain. H. 8; K. 3; Courses, SSE; Het0; 1K 22: Courses, SSE; Winds, Hast; At 108 Canoes returned. Wind having inereased with short Jump of a sea, and heavy rain. H. 12; K.2; Courses, NNE; Noon brisk wind and clomd ye Fin” Kas Courses, South; P.M. Strong breeze and rain. H.4; K.3; At 4° W. Parker lowered & re- turned at 6" with 1 seal. H.6; K.1; F.4; Courses, NE; Catch this day 41 seals. H.8; K.1; F.4. H. 10; K.1; F.4; Midnight a steamer in sight steering SH. H.12; K.1; I. 4. Latitude (Acc) 549.20’, Longi- tude (Acc) 167.40 W. Barometer 30.50; 30.47; 30.25. Friday 5th August, 1887. H. 2; K. 1; Courses, NE; Winds, East; A.M. Light wind & fine weather. H. 4; K. 1; At 4.30 Lowered. Seal in sight. H.6; K.1; Courses, NW; Spoke Schooner “Allie I. Algar.” H.8; K.1. H.10; K.1; At 10" one canoe returnd with 13 seals. H. 12; K. 1; Winds, Rvs Pia Ke ei hash wind: ane weathers, “Hird: KK. 1. A. 6; K. 13-6" Rain, 283; Ko1; Catch this day 131 Seals. et LOG KG ult 9) Eiedl2s Kole atiiude GA.ce) 54° .25? N; (Obs) 54.15. Longitude (Cbs) 167° .45’ W. Barometer 30.12 30.15; 30.17. Saturday 6th August, 1887. H. 2; K. 1; Courses, SE; Winds, Southerly; A.M. Light wind and rainy weather throughout. H. 4; Kok: Courses, SIWis. a0 6; K.1; Courses, SE; Very few seal in sight. Three Canoes & W. Parker lowered. (Hi. S20Kie ds (Hs 1030 Kiet: Courses; SW; At 10" all canoes lowered. H. iD rae: aL; Noon rainy weather. H. 2; K.1; P.M. Light variable wind & cloudy. H. 4; K.1; Winds, NE; 4 Wind shifted to NE with heavy rain. H. 6; K. 1; Catch this day 42 seals. Eis Ko ts Wands, North. 2.10; de. 1; Courses, WSW. H.12; K.1; Winds, Nw; Rainy weather. Latitude (Acc) 549.18’ W. Longitude (Acc) "1679.50/ W. Barometer 30.19 ; 30.15; 30.98. 584 LOG BOOKS OF SEALING VESSELS. Sunday 7th August, 1887. H.2; K.1; Courses, SW; Winds, West; A.M. Strong breeze ana rainy weather. H.4; K.1; 4h nn up. H.6; K.1: H. 8; K. 2; Courses, SH; Clear. H.10; K. 2; Courses, East. H. 12; K. 2; Courses, East; Noon clear weather and fresh breeze. H. 2;.K. 2; Courses, NNW; P.M. Moderate breeze and cloudy. H.4; K.3; At 4h lowered and caught 8 seals. H.6; K.1. H.8; K.1; Courses, West. H.10; K.1; Fine'weather. H: 12; Kai: Latitude (Acc) 54°.00 N. Longitude (Acc) 167°.8’ W. Barometer 30.00; 30.20; 30.37. Monday 8th August, 1887. H.2; K.1; Courses, West; Winds, SW; A.M. Moderate breeze and cloudy. H.4; K.1; At 5" lowered H.6; K.1; Decreasing wind. H.8; K.1. H.10;.K.1; A schooner in sight to the westward, supposed to be the “ Allie lig Algar mA Ne@ow Calm. P.M. Calm. Cruising. Catch this day 161 seals, which com- pleted the first thousand. H.8; Winds, Northerly. Midnight light wind. Latitude (Acc) 54°20 N. Longitude (Acc) 167° 15’ W. Barom- eter 30.50; 30.50; 30.52. Tuesday 9th August, 1887. A.M. Light wind and cloudy. Cruising. H.4; Winds, Westerly. At 6" Lowered. Freshening wind and pass- ing fogs. H.12; A schooner in sight. P.M. Moderate breeze and fine weather. H.6; Winds, WSW. Catch this day 64 seals. Lati- tude (Acc) 54°10’ N. Longitude (Acc) 167° 30’ W. Barometer 30.52; 30.52; 30.55. Wednesday 10 August, 1887. H.2; Winds, SW; A.M. Light wind and cloudy. At 5° lowered. At daylight two schooners in “sight i in the west and one to the east which proved to be the “Vanderbilt”. H.10; Winds, SE. Noon light wind & fine weather. P.M. Moder- ate breeze and fine weather. Catch this day 76 seals. Calm. Lati- tude (Acc) 549.20’ N Longitude (Acc) 167°.0’ W. Barometer 30.60; 30.60; 30.60. Thursday 11th August, 1887. H.2; Winds, Calm; A.M. Calm throughout with fine weather. At 5" Lowered. H.10; Two schooners in sight to the northward. P.M. Calm and clear weather. H.10; Winds, South. Light wind and foggy. ental (Acc) 54.25. Longi- tude (Ace) 166.40 W. Barometer 80: 60; 30.52; 30.40. Friday, 12th August, 1887. H. 2; Winds, Southerly ; A.M. Light wind and rain at the beginning. 4 “4 Thie kk fog. Sailing to the Hast- ward. H.6; Winds, SW. At 10" Lowered. Noon light wind and hazy. P. M. Light wind dwindling down to calm and hazy weather. H. 6; winds. SSH. 4"°Calm. Catch this day 90 skins. Midnight thick fog. Latitude (Ace): 54° 25’ N. Longitude (Acc) 1669.0 W. Barome- ter 30. 50; 30.50; 30.52. Saturd: iy, 13th August, 1887. A.M. Calm, weather clearing up at 2h, At 4" 30™ lowered. At 10" Strong breeze, Canoes returned with 26 seals. Made sail. H. 10; Winds, SE. Noon, brisk wind & clear, heavy tide rips. P.M. Fresh breeze and hazy weather. Working to Windward towards the Volcano near Ounimak pass. H. 10; Rainy weather. In flying Jiband mainsail. Latitude (Ace) 54°. 40’ N. Long- itude (Ace) 165° 30’ W. Barometer ou: 46; 30.58; 30.30. Sunday 14th August, 1887. H.2; Winds, SE; A. M. Strong gale and foggy weather. At 4" Set mainsail & Jib, endeavoring to work in to the watering place, but were unable to owing to the strength of the wind. At noon wind moderating. P.M. At {h Came to an anchorage under the Voleano. Indians and. crew watering ship. At 8" weighed and made sail wind light and weather foggy. H.8; Winds, WS W. H. 12; Winds, Calm. Latitude (At anchor near Ounimak pass). Barometer 30.22; 30.28; 30.52. LOG BOOKS OF .SEALING VESSELS. 585 Monday 15th August, 1887. A.M. Very light wind and gloomy weather throughout. H. 4; Winds, NE. At 6° all boats away. 8® Foggy. At 10" Two canoes came alongside with 25 seals. Noon hazy. P. M. Begins with calm weather. H. 4; Winds WSW;; Catch this day 169 seals. 8 Rainy weather. H.12; Strong breeze and rainy. Volcano SE 12 miles. Barometer 30.30; 30.25; 30.18. Tuesday 16th August, 1887. H.2; Winds, WS W; A. M. Begins with brisk wind and dark gloomy weather. 7" Calm. 8". Winds, Calin; All boats away. Noon calm and heavy swell from the west. P.M. Calm and clear weather. H.6; Winds, S W; Increasing wind and thick weather. Catch this day 79 seals. H. 12; Midnight fresh breeze. Off the N end Ounimak. Barometer 30.15; 30.12; 30.12. Wednesday, 17th August, 1887. H.2; Winds, S W; A. M. Decreas- ing wind and thick weather. H.6; Clear. All boatsaway. 12> Light wind and clear. P.M. Increasing wind and clear. At 4" Boats re- turned with 84 seals. H.8; A schooner in sight to the Northward. In sight of Ounimak to the Southward. Barometer 30.15; 30.18; 30.25, Thursday 18th August, 1887. H. 2; Winds, WSW; A. M. Fresh breeze and clear weather. Did not lower this day on account of the wind and sea. H.10; A schooner in company beating to windward. Noon strong wind and hazy. P.M. Strong wind and clear weather. No boats out this day. Latitude: off Ounimak 20 miles. Barometer 30.30; 30.37; 30.41, Friday 19th August, 1887. H.2; Winds, WSW; A. M. Brisk wind and cloudy. At H. 6, 30m, All boats away. Noon Calm and clear weather. P. M. Calm at the beginning. Catch this day 123 seals. H.10; Squally and rain. Latitude (Acc) 549.50’ N. Longitude (Acc) 165.10 W. Barometer 30.45; 30.45; 30.45. Saturday 20th August, 1887. H. 2; Winds, NW; A. M. Strong wind accompanied with squalls and showers throughout. H. 8; Did not lower this day. H.12; Schooner ‘“ Allie I. Algar” in company. P.M. Strong breeze and squally. H.8; Winds NNE. H.12; Hazy. Lati- tude (Ace) 55°.5’N. Longitude (Acc) 1659.30 W. Barometer 30.40; 30.42; 30.50. Sunday 21st August, 1887. H.2; Winds, NNW; A.M. Fresh gale dark gloomy weather and high sea. No boats out this day. P.M. Wind and weather as above. Latitude (Acc) 55°.12’ N Longitude (Ace) 165.355’ W. Barometer 30.50; 30.50; 30.45 Monday 22nd August, 1887. H. 2; Winds, North; A. M. Brisk gale and cloudy with high sea. No boats out. H.12; Foggy. P. M. Strong gale and hazy. Latitude (Acc) 559.9’ N. Longitude (Acc) 165°.30' W. Barometer 30.35; 30.25; 30.10. Tuesday 23 August, 1887. H.2; Winds, North; A. M. Begins with strong wind and gloomy weather. H.6; A heavy searunning. H. 8; Decreasing wind and cloudy. Lowered at 9". H. 10; Winds, N E. Noon light wind and cloudy. P.M. Light wind and cloudy. Catch this day 35 seals. H.12; Thick foggy weather. Latitude (Acc) 549.48’. Longitude (Acc) 166°.48’ W. Barometer 30.05; 30.05; 30.00. Wednesday 24 August, 1887. H.2; Winds, North; A.M. Moder- ate breeze and thick weather. H.6; Thick fog at intervals. At 8" lowered. Noon fresh breeze and foggy. Catch this day 22 seals. Lat- itude (Acc) 54°.19’ N. Longitude (Acc) 166°.20. Barometer 29.95; 29.90. [No. 4.—Washington, D.C. July 28, 1892. 4 L. G. SHEPARD, [Captain Revenue Marine.] THE FUR SEAL OF GUADALUPE ISLAND, OFF LOWER CALI- FORNIA. Tor many years it has been known that fur-seals breed at Guada- lupe Island, where formerly large numbers were killed annually for their skins. Two thousand were secured as late as 1883, since which time small numbers have been taken nearly every vear. Inasmuch as the Northern fur-seal (Callorhinus ursinus) is not known to breed south of the Pribilof Islands, but occurs in winter off the coast of northern California and passes north in the spring, it seemed important to de- termine the species of fur-seal inhabiting Guadalupe Island. For this purpose an expedition was sent to said island by the direction of Dr. C. Hart Merriam in May, 1892, in charge of Mr. C. H. Townsend, an assistant of the United States Fish Commission. Seven fur seals were seen near the island and one was shot by Mr. Townsend, but it sank before it could be recovered. The visit was made too early in the sea. son to find the seals on the shore. A beach on Guadalupe Island wa_ visited where it was known that a large number of fur seals had bee* killed a few years previously and four skulls were there obtained. W® have carefully examined these skulls and find them to belong to a spe cies of Arctocephalus, a very different kind of fur seal from that found in Bering Sea, the well known Callorhinus ursinus. J. A. ALLEN. THEO. GILL. C. HArtT MERRIAM. 586 LETTER FROM C. M. LAMPSON & CO. LONDON, 64 Queen Street, EH. C., June 13, 1892. F. W. Frigovut, Esq., Deputy Consul-General of the United States: DEAR SiR: Referring to the conversation we had with you to day, we beg to inform you the averages of last year’s catch of fur-seal skins are as follows: Per skin. PAU SIkcrieeee ad alle rk CR Ld ee es ee Se SA 1258. 4d. WODPED scamssoseclccte ness Cena Best Shee. Se Se 68s. 6d. Northwest Coast. abt 4soc 5. 222. Xe Sse cyseeeeecteisiet= ed 538s. 3d. Yours, truly ; C. M. Lampson & Co. KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN, City of London, England, ss: I, Francis W. Frigout, vice and deputy and acting Consul-General of the United States of America at London, England, do hereby certify that the signature “‘C. M. Lainpson & Co.” subscribed to the foregoing letter is the true and proper handwriting of Emil Tiechmann, a partner in said firm of C. M. Lampson & Co., a firm well and favorably known to me as the leading firm in the seal-skin industry of this city, and that to all acts so signed as the foregoing full faith and credit are and ought to be given in judicature and thereout. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 14th day of June, 1892, [SEAL. | FRANCIS W. FRIGOUT, Vice and Deputy and Acting Consul-General. 587 THE BERING SEA DISPUTE: A SETTLEMENT. By Sir GEORGE BADEN-POWELL, K. C. M. G., M. P.* It is generally forgotten, however, that this question of seizure is, however § great from an international point of view, a mere minor ques. tion to that of the industry itself. It is merely as to the lesser or greater extension of one State’s authority over certain seas, but it does not affect and can not affect the whole of those seas. If the American case were conceded to-morrow in its entirety it would merely mean that “pelagic” sealers would not be permitted to fish north of the Aleutian Islands. This means that they would miss one-third of their present catch. But they would remain absolutely free to prosecute by every means in their power the capture of seals at sea over all the ocean to the south of these islands, where already they obtain two-thirds of their eateh. The owners of the islands complain that the “ pelagic” sealers neces- sarily lose nine out of every ten seals they kill, and that 90 per cent of those they kill are females, mostly in pup. My careful local inquiries show both these complaints to be enormous exaggerations. But what IT would here point out is that, in so far as they are true, in so far the owners of the rookeries, by pressing the one claim of juri isdiction within Bering Sea, and making all to hinge thereon, will absolutely free and mere these “ pelagic” sealers to adopt even more vigorous methods ot saling than those in use at present. A cordon of sealing vessels in ecneleay at the right moment, across the Unimack and other channels in the Aleutian Islands, could capture or scare most of the seals journey- ing tothe Pribilof Islands, and this without so much as entering Ber- ing Sea. As I have said, this question of jurisdiction in Bering Sea is alto- gether a minor question, and even if won by or conceded to the owners of the rookeries would mean that free hand elsewhere to the “pelagic” sealers which might and would do far more injury to the whole indus- try than even they worst possibilities of the present indeterminate régime. What I have insisted on is that, in the interests of all concer ned, the question to be decided is industrial rather than political; the material issue is not what rights have each of the parties in international or conventional law, but rather what means are necessary to insure the continued prosperity of the industry. The pelagic sealers have undis- puted and indisputable right over thousands of miles of ocean. The shore sealers have undispute dand indisputable right over the land and the waters adjacent thereto. The mere definition of aline of demar cation between the two, however interesting, does not settle the ques * Extract from ‘‘The New Review,” Vol. 1v., No. 21, Fenmaee 1891, pp. 147- 149. 588 THE BERING SEA DISPUTE—A SETTLEMENT. 589 tion of the preservation of the industry. What is needed is that all interested in this fishery, whether they take their seals on land or at sea, Should come together to determine what dangers or risks are now being run, and how ‘they may be avoided in the future. Some such settlement is becoming more than ever necessary now, seeing that the question is daily assuming international dimensions. Itis no longer a mere family bickering between Yankee and Britisher; no longer a mere means of twisting the British lion’s tail for electioneer- ing purposes. Russia, withher important breeding islands, frequented by probably one-half of the seals that travel up the British Columbia coast; Japan, with lesser breeding grounds but an increasing number of sealing vessels; Germany, with her enterprising citizens fitting out sealers ; these and other nations are entering upon the field. A sound general view must be taken. The area affected is wide. Effectively to protect the industry one would have to include all the Pacific Ocean and coasts thereof to the north of, say, latitude 50°. The territorial powers are China, Japan, Russia, the United States, and the British Empire. Germany and other powers are interested in the wsus and fructus of these seas. The one complete remedy is international agreement resulting in international administration, with a view to the proper preservation of the fur seal. We have an admirable and successful precedent in our own North Sea, where, outside of territorial waters, various matters of police, even to the retailing of spirituous liquors, are administered by an international executive, and under laws set up by the mutual codperation of all the States whose flags are to be found on the vessels engaged in those fisheries. Such a settlement appeals to the common sense of all concerned. Sufficient material points and facts in the “natural history” of the case have now been gathered together and placed on record; sufficient is known on which to base an international agreement. A conter ence of the five or six powers interested could in four weeks, and well before the next fishing season opens in Bering Sea next July, determine on the outlines of such international administration as should best pre- serve the rights and interests of all at present engaged in the industry. Indeed, the “outlines of such a settlement have already been drafted, and are such as would completely safeguard the permanent interests both of the “pelagic” and the ‘‘shore” “sealer s. Itis a common-sense settlement for the good of all concerned. It will, therefore, commend itself to the people of the United States, of Canada, and of the United Kingdom; and the Governments of these countries, as well as of Russia, Japan, and Germany, will, without doubt, best realize the wishes and interests of their peoples by securing such. a common-sense settlement of this troublesome Bering Sea dispute. Ba ee hls Reis ili ol aa a We att el iskodutal oa ee is ty “aie i mi aes. ud bas qin ee bata ba yard - Pear | Fraenlu oNes ath y: eit Saat isa seit , Sein bak hte hae } an pita frts':) 17h | 1 Buber Uke WGLC Yeeeah) MoM Ud whet! CWA 6 oe Metis Pazk Wear br, a aot © Bol wry iE TU Greet BA is A oat PS os fgg wtih Petote Nir? | A teley “SHIR He vies de a iit, ene aS est fg seh Poteet sat BATES ele aa anes b. oh! fabdatet Piegiatt ao ; ae HVAT SEU eB seth We Tb sty | le SMMVOLCTE ILL Wait 2 she fil tind Biagio elated fanai't (13s we ie Saar Wares se) adit es Tia oe maior se *, Tas ete ee eee | i Pico kis ao Ty Lit Sante siina?: Ana I af Rete: a BAL st whic?) CDV ALS (1S hehe Vane aT hohe nat tidy Peale iat ae cs oe ae rye tars aa AT atetl tiie hla fates ited Br hay Mt he Pine ul aft (fetes i Tine Freire Mircnis, pil Fae ef brie a ae: ates ib att re tak ee water titi fc, tn at Mae ne VANS 2 een j ule Ee are et eli Tees Be THis Sy fecairtp = tach: igi) lion? Alive PTE, Meare tei (rit ey i ett ike fo ates ees Hatt Pigeon tas Rous ey" 8 fice area Pap ans AP OT y iets te) ¥. br : patie Serie ay Bien AL Chaar Pvc macy a. sy, betty tt Oe os Prat eae fiat nos Tire ae Per AED TD aS i le a Pi and tes fet ait: - ea a nvehy pwr ts) oo thi ean tiie eae ate rons ee Bee BI Mie COTW UK Lahe Parte! wen ET ECT \irw; sitig as | Tike a. e ane istenell Hyer Latta He these BET Nine A aha qari. ae Rl” 5 . ih é eMiaeD gad es Bue ae Gr i 4 tha i> a + ; ai a An 4 Paks Fae =A pp ra ve ne wegeh ah; * rhe ase Prat ‘ het anh (si Meet =. tga 9 a Sree Cane ae OBEY Si tmarerraa O1 Wert) Se ie , rao. ; At : 7, eh eres 7 sp: ae Sra. int 0 9g ie ee. Wea Fir pee Hel@enc® ee ene et: th} 7 ; fy fe a gta ; ate pat 9 eta he = . ~ = moe a ms Aly ‘he Wi Aieee pio ea ee a coat ast) Toei ie CUR ee i op a eras cits Ip tie PF ay he a hae’ | aa ee ms i E j : < fy Sa ait: A aR S oy alley aes vy ok Ak Se as ~ aM Meee S -& Deen ener 5, 6 a a= ents Peee >= ree reeks nes ee He eee inh se ae tee Tee paca ws) o> ¥2- | San P86 ©5 ats ra “Z “sy eownae® seer. ~ Ser rent whey Meote* te rnolt WEATHER BUREAU TABLES. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Washington, D. C., July 13, 1892. Pursuant to section 882 of the Revised Statutes, I herein certify that the annexed tables of climatic data have been compiled from the original records of observation made by an observer of the Signal Service, United States Army, stationed on the Island of St. Paul, Bering Sea, during the period of time covered by the tables, and that said tables of cli. matic data are true compilations from the original records of observa- tion now in the possession of the Weather Bureau. Mark W. HARRINGTON, Chief of Weather Bureau. Be it known that Mark W. Harrington, who signed the foregoing certificate, is the chief of the Weather Bureau, and that to his attesta- tion as such full faith and credit are and ought to be given. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the Department of Agriculture to be affixed, on this 15th day July, 1892, [SEAL. ] J. M. Rusk, Secretary of Agriculture. Mean temperature (degrees F.) at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, Alaska. [Latitude 57° 10’ N., longitude 170° 01’ W.; elevation, 30 to 50 feet.] Year. Jan. | Feb. | Mar. | Apr. | May | June July | Aug.|Sept.| Oct. | Nov. | Dec. Annual. WGI acoceccoossed| BaeSEcOOGG el SES ECCT Sees Bae eee Cocina ee eves ieee (eee ieee) ctet see (erates ler en er = a Ay SE ease ecSees 157) 1856 }/ 12.6) | 23.9) | 30) 5 |) 37-5 | 43:0) | 46.5 | 43.0) || 37.8 | 32.4 | 29.9 31.0 ab Si( WA ae ei 29.9 | 33.5 | 33.0 | 34.5 | 39.0 | 44.4 | 49.1 | 50.8 | 47.3 | 40.2 | 37.8 | 33.3 39.4 Whaat. ~ cscs = 34.9 | 35.3 | 29.0 | 28.9 | 34.2 | 42.0 | 47.0 | 47.9 | 46.0 | 41.7 | 34.9 | 26.2 37.3 LSiG sees. nasa: Sea e PlGrom E2500 26:20 cat |Poone | fonae |) toed: leases aseree 2851+) (2054 jee tee AV i eee cae os 13.2 8.0 | 25.4 | 25.4 | 32.5 | 39.4 | 42.9] 45.8 | 41.0 | 36.6 | 28.6 | 23.1 29.7 TSU See ees oe sets ia 8/2 16,4 | 2.9 | 30:6 |) 39.9) | 45.1 | 47.5 | 45.9 | 34:7 | 29.7 | 29.16 30.8 LSOl 2 oe wee ncee BIRO) |] PR Zo Oa ake PLS ha}: ie Woe eS see leeeess| Ebeecallssocolectsca|ceaco|sanc6oc5 SS Oe eran ere real een eres a ell eee se cinalloeaaee |G cce alma ott ell cleemreclfisistetotel| ne etcaeete Ef A eeGe seen acllGeeboc) lO osbce BGemCr Emeese Baebes *39..9) | 44.3 | 48.5 | 46.7 | 42.4 | 36:3) || 27.1 |2.2 SSS S82 se Aetorsaw ann 32.1 | 23.7 | 28.3 { 32.0 | 35.2 | 41.8 | 46.9 | 47.4 | 44.5 | 40.3 | 33.7 | 22.4 aay i IRB) scacoospeenen 30.2 | 26.0 | 19.9 BY see eh Se eee ee ee eee emt mee cB el epmocollacacencs SHUN cadbeouesel nobecalae bce beskee ESSE Cs See ete MESES 6 ese Pema eee oes eres rerio Rommel ras Ante IMieanSieeeeee ace 26.1 | 20.9 |. 23.6 | 27.3 | 33.7 | 40.4 | 45.2 | 47.2 | 44.9 | 39.1 | 32.7 | 26.5 34.0 * Twenty-six days. REMARKS.—The mean temperature was obtained from the observations made at 7a.m.,2and9p.m., after the formula 3 (7+-2++9-F9). 591 | — District or Corum, City of Washington, ss: George L. Scarborough, being duly Sworn, depos¢s and says: Iam 36 years of age and by occupation clerk in the Department of State; the annexed table, compiled by me, represents the list of vessels engaged in pelagic sealing and the nationality of the same for each year since the epssion of Alaska to the year 1892, of which reports or information has been received by the said De; artment; the dat om Which the same has been compiled are reports of officials of the State, Treasury, and Navy epartments of Jnited States, affidavits of various witnesses, tables compiled by officials of the Alaska Commercial Compan; » information received from competent and reliable persons, and the official reports of the Department of Fisheries of the Dominion of Canada from 1886 to 1891 inclusive, Gro. L. Scarsoroven, Sworn and subscribed to before me this 3a day of August, 1892, [SEAL,] ale SEVELLON A. Brown, Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia, U. 8. A: 592 WEATHER BUREAU TABLES. Maximum temperature (F.) at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, Alaska. Latitude 57° 10’ N., longitude 170° 01’ W.; elevation, 30 to 50 fect. .—) * Twenty-six days. REMARKS.—A ‘‘clear”’ day has no clouds or less than 0.3 clouds. Year Jan. | Feb. | Mar.| Apr.| May.'June. |July. |Aug. |Sept. |Oct. [Nov. |Dec. |Anrual Th) 2a 6hcdpcudbed scesedlsseacd Season sadoc5|saoscal|Socene|Sonoccllbssase 52 45 41 36 |. -2. cae 4 IVA} saosecacodane 34 34 35 35 41 47 52 55 49 46 41 40\2.5<3-aee NS faeetamiatalcteieiseiaie 37 40 42 45 52 57 58 52 56 48 45 40) |. 5... ee (STDP ee eee ees 42 44 40 41 47 51 57 55 52 50 45 39°)2. ae ASTGi tac oon siewe csc 39 36 41 43 42 53 54 Du eee ic scste 38 35: | o2220aee IES Seeecesee 36 33 36 37 43 51 54 58 51 47 39 3D) | kaon ee WSS se aces 35 34 39 40 4D le seiee| lies steal sete ictere 54 45 40 39! Pen eee 1QTOsoce Cote pil 36 38 39 AT licccenidliccse cele = 202s Leese ete hope ae eee Sere Ubo8) Seopa coeceses|psoecollemocedlloscoocloudace|lboooodlscopcd| Aso sacloosccollesoscolleeceodliodeacasllansesslecas:: - PBB Saar toe cae oil atave ace ol esis tee | Sree jernlisetere ol ereretetets *51 57 56 53 50 43 42) |S. 3c ee 7p See Gees 38 3 38 42 50 52 59 5d 54 49 42 36 |222 ee WS83.ccccse os ssces 36 39 38 37 AGM 22558 sal eciccis close re call Soa [eee nee | eee Jest esse SUN bossoocoosce)| eseneollassues pore oslloobods | jssoadullSsesac pcoancs)| nececollcsscedisccnas |------|------|----2-=- IMCaNS Sasecie ens |la- be oe S50007 60+ osallaoasoallecwacellocone|Heccad||osocée|souecellosoccs GSH SeSSS|sacoGc 20 * Twenty-six days. Minimum temperature (F.) at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, Alaska. | Latitude, 57° 10’ N.; longitude, 170° .01/ W.; elevation, 30 to 50 feet.] Year Jan.| Feb.| Mar.| Apr.| May. |June.|July.| Aug.| Sept.| Oct. | Nov.| Dee. | au IY RA Sse SER peise losses acaba Gseses|Posaeolluocsool lbsoadallecsona||lsaacea 33 22 23 , ee 3 STS -ceeeweccstse —11 | —12| —7 3 19 28 36 39 35 31 23 12")..0 5. eee US Avec ateletalois 8 19 19 21 25 34 42 d4 39 32 26 22) \ sisi Se cere Reese seees 19 21 12 aly 25 84 39 43 41 33 28 abel sce -:-5 WSWOis sone ac eee = 23 8 3 5 22 30 35 Eile aneacalpooges 15") — "Fee WS ilisee ne tice c= to —17 | —22 5 8 23 30 37 40 33 25 17 Db oe oc eee US eo eSeGgousced —10 | —21} —13 3 20 31 39 40 33 29 18 11... eee Ri Dressceet een 18; —1 10 7f AQ os .6llSSeis asilsccweraieocecte| (= sae alee sce oases See ee 1st Win ee oer oon | poeuas boreed acess occas Scrone ions oecleceedal ooo oc ldoceec| basmaa ltosoncittosacllsscca- | i ee Seaaosecser lsenae> bepoaslpsoseniioscons|lcceoa. *35 35 45 38 32 32 13). 25 1BSoescesac secs 19 3 13 10 19 31 39 41 34 31 22 i eee SSS oot .cistere casi 13 8| —9 —1 71 fi pam rons Heeron aacece lates boeces|taaSealoocas.cc - St oece aaonesee| soooes) bconcd| boeoce lsosaccllocdeoniaecsscilascocal|seesnc|l6cccdd||Sasoscllosbeozlleasosslesecsc-- MWearistaet ice ssealeemsea ce seerleeeeae | feeee | = cosnte| Ses ete lsceeeeleeeerc Pees os Mee tae eeeeee laces ee ane * Twenty-six days. REMARKS.—Minus sign (—) indicates temperature below zero. Actual number of clear days at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, Alaska. (Latitude, 57° 10’ N.; longitude, 170° 01' W.; elevation, 30 to 50 feet.] Year Jan. | Feb. | Mar.| Apr.) May. |June.| July.) Aug.|Sept.| Oct. | Nov.| Dec oa IGT Bissnacact cone bapoceslsocsec\eos dns Séqad| basses 0 0 0 1 0 ul i SSBGOH 5 A OGA em eisleia\ sea 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 il 2 0 10 CM Stodeacoas aac 3 4 il 3 4 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 20 NOU GIeeoe eee se sorte il 9 4 4 0 tt) 0 0) Wasco | Beet 3 DS |e ence ae YW ascosdeeeoas 4 10 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 il 2 4 26 Merhescaseacceons 8 10 6 0 1 2 ib 0 0 al 0 3 32 IBV eeeecpencced il 6 3 0 a Sa Snecsa ects sae Sc HOakGG | aasa6 lcoaseoolitcocos .- VSBD) gicievis0.ca;e crews wie ie wel weenie | oiaicio =)<1]|s eielue al sic mlaia lll wie myehallletstota: alau tascps ete Ne Bre hove Rell rere te tate ete tsher'erl iat eat tee SB ian creiiclescteisa' areletoie | attictemttall einteleeies| oc etait atest *0) 2 0 0 1 1 L.\| Sects cee Gt Viasonsoonse la al 1 tf 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 IREEBY Sesceoncs SoEC 0 1 0 0 [Oe ek AAS See steel eee ol Gee al SSA acsoncllSoogrmclls=ccts 22 SUMS i e2-sceccce 19 42 24 15 6 3 5 0 4 4 11 AR) eespete 25 MMGaNs i eceseesscs 24 5.2 3.0 1.9 0.8 0.4 0.6 0 0.6 0.6 1.4 1.5 18.4 WEATHER BUREAU TABLES. 593 Actual number of fair days at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, Alaska. (Latitude, 57° 10’ N.; longitude, 170° 01’ W.; elevation, 30 to 50 feet.] Year. Jin. | Feb. | Mar.| Apr.| May. |June.! July.) Aug. | Sept.) Oct. | Nov.) Dec. ae LEYS. we ceno ben SSeolespses| accace| Gocess Ssored lsooeas 7 2 3 8 9 8 ie aes TE nck 10 10 9 9 14 gi al 7 3 15 14 2 126 S75 eer se ores eiscs 16 8 iil 10 8 1 9 4 15 9 7 19 117 USFGP peak. sece sci 20 12 13 6 6 7 | 1 Ey Stare al ears 17 6)|e se saee LS Pie er= (test cisv=) ~:~ 14 10 4 8 6 4 0 5 15 8 1155 7 96 SiR t ee oss 12 10 13 14 11 5 | 4 8 9 AG 16 12 129 STORE cis 2 «5.2. 21 12 14 11 ME Satara rarotex~ | ate Secll ic eke a |S Sree I aes cee | er iste) .- .-secpessAdllesa as! aes scellsgeSnallseaads | lestoed Beosce epcorel boosie see ees Sees oaecsloee se sso acs soc GEM . co coseeeSeed Babess | okeeac| meee |e (ane *4 | 3 0 7 5 LO yi 14 ee eae NSB2beeeen-)--- sce 8 10 15 12 2 5 | 2 0 1 2 6 i 70 nee ee a eeeoeee 2 18 16 20 0 ee oes lpeeces|pos5os||ss5qer| conga seac<|losoece~ - Sumesc.-c------ 103 megoll os | oo 65 | 37|. 22] 29| 6s! 63| 93 | 96 |. .ccuuen Means Sey -ccc=5.- 1219) ) 12) |) 11.9) |p 2 8.1 4.6 2.8 3.6 9.7 |- 9.0 | 11.6 | 12.0 108. 6 * Twenty-six days. Remarks.—A ‘ fair” day has from 0.3 to 0.7 clouds, Actuul number of cloudy days at St. Paul Island, Bering Sea, Alaska, [Latitude, 52° 20’ N.; longitude, 170° 01’ W.; elevation, 30 to 50 feet.] : | Year. Jan. | Feb. | Mar. | Apr. | May. June.) July.| Aug. | Sept.| Oct. Nov. | Dec. oe GS -.ceebencauocl Reaeedl Saree Baneee eee Reeeee 8 | SB) | GE BoB} I ar) a6) 8 Teese eaecsee 20 17 21 20 16 26 30 24 15 15 14 11 iby (i) See eapeeee = 12 16 19 17 19 29 20 27 14 22 21 12 iG cose ee 10 8 14 20 25 93 30 DOM Leet Races: 2 i) |) Oe Te fi Sere ets 13 8 25 20 25 25 21 26 15 22 14 20 TS: aoe beeneee lil 8 12 16 19 2 26 23 21 15 | 6 1S TOR tee Sis = 9 10 14 19 Ce Seca he ssbo] ESOcn a] spe ee Heel eee! See eas TED sina cic oe = cieisetc aleis cts ees eon 115 Unibeds Siatesioss Giibormsemeec see etes a2 sa ie\seci 22 soca s ace sre eee 113 UTA TEC! SHENES OS ROMNOONEC SURED, ons aan coos Sade se Geoe posse oe Sena Beooe 121 HGanviehen ace dae © OMOTESS Seems sae = See cee ces ae ae cise ba geneies 92 Act to prevent the extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska... 92-99 Act to provide for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska... - 99 Re wISe Cs Sta DULL CS as separ ia. Mater Bae a ores sh faie eave eo hw awn boon 95 Additional facts relating to the Russian American Company : WoO USIMESS eras sis one Seiten tae se alin Satie. saees ae ayseesian see hoe 11 IDS OMNES) SOU OCH INNES a 55 SaqSeroneeTeod bas csGe sac anes eee Eee ee 10 DAC Oi, CN Olt Dp EVUSSTLANS sae oar alec. a eee eee era ere stc win Seo ere 10 ixpansion of russians beyond Kadiak —-- 2. 2. - 22. 55-2- 2+ s-s2-ecen- sce: 9, 10 GERD USINGSS 7 sees se sr eee ey sae soto aoe esa emae hos Soman neccs bee 11 Keadiakeavi sts bOrnGs Cruises mommy = rset eject epe os feo 5 se cin cio eee oe ce 9 MeasesrOpeudsonmsmbay © Oompa sscas eases ees eae aie = 5 = bets Ses tae 113 JE ies: oa neko ee a Sees seep mec boch OC ee See ee eee 9 RG SSECOLOTH YA aD AMG ON CMa setae sees sete = yas = Sase jars einen, Sajs uiels ae ores eee oe il ISLOGINLRGIE io Bee BOS IS COO SEH So EERO nae See ine Seer Bea aN Re ete 9, 10 idechaxten,expinablOn) Ofese a4. a (22 anos Soc oss cu see S-e ehac ee ee 11 iradegwabheroreroners discoumbuenamcede. =~ -42-5- --2.52-.5- sa ses s=ejosee 10 WmitedvAmericaniCompanyorvanized s-- =. 2... 2 Sekt ace etl s sence hue 10 Alaska. (See Action of the United States Government relative to.) Magica Commercial. Companys lease of, 1870 to. -=--.--)2-4--5222-- 22-25 o0cee- 104 JRE RS RECHT CIR R SMO Se Dee SCE Se tae ea a aI 128 PA EC eA CMa slOM. OfgS CN OOM ETA Ha ema talalo sla= 2 sew alelels <\sis wie wic/aeie a acis Serine 548 cn etter Ae nal LCL ORs coe store Sane a mic a= SS Se So oe one's sca ene c es be becus 365 Amsterdam Islands .-.---- SCOR SORE SEED SEO OE Oe SaaS Hae eee Cee are pes one 402 EEE PROM SOMOUGRELA IS .53t in on jus ace ae st ono aS eho aR ieeacrteehl ys nenbses 531 Spumpedcasiniandyest ers ee EE i os De Lk doesent ne 401 Arbitration, arbitrators. (See Treaty of Arbitration of 1892.) Article by Dr. Allen: Part I: LSPROINO WO ERE ee ae — aera e eee Oe mers ae 365 Sy MOPsissote inp ed Ses ences eee a. ss ais toa tape teesee De eee ee 367 AnclsdandssonanOlgns uo hes cette fs oe sow o/Skie See cra sisene ements Sees 371 PALO @NUSCM ere ioe oro. ecolos Sonne 8 4.26 als sateen Sone ose alee once ews coe eeone 441 Canadian industry in pelagic sealing. (See Official reports.) Caplan, (S@GSIAIIUDE, Oke )a 66 eke Seoeee pees asec er Ser oSSeap Eon poEGeoce 461 Charters: (Clair OF IG) 335558 Sasa e eae CA Oeb AE SOSA S SOs ae ace eae ane Pee ee 14 Chamcerrotel Sderot rate = enieme ete ctoyaram oars ce owe e/e nse Sebo sep sas 16 Clrattienotel G44 ered ees a eh Cote masa Jae eset encee bes stele abet 28 Wloserscdsonstorhait-Seals-5 9. case sees esate Sec6 Sawa see ten be eece tos | GOOo CollenipmenroressonshODeite- aoe eere cease cls as Siac esis se cece -a5 eles seco esaiee 421 Colonnorane (See otatutes, Torelom) soe) 2. 2. ose cell eos Se esc e eee se 484 Cham indere sland Ses ears ae se ea ciatis eaves - as sees <5 sees a ciotsitiee ie 406 Commission. (See Joint Commission. ) Congress. (See Action of the United States Government relative to Alaska since the cession.) COMbraGhBlorsne laolerse allan Ores ee er aie sce a al so niet ais misie se miele elses sani 523 Correspondence, Diplomatic. (See Diplomatic correspondence. ) Courts, United States. (See Action of the United States Government relative to Alaska since the cession. ) Chemeth IMPINGE) oSa50 co daSeene dec es eed sabe coodoo ob eopEde ECS SesabeepiEEas doce 400 Damages. (See Modus Vivendi of 1892.) Decisions of United States Courts. (See Action of the United States Govern- ment relative to Alaska since the cession. ) Decision. (See Treaty of Arbitration of 1892.) Decrees. (See Statutes, Foreign.) Diplomatic correspondence. Chronological arrangement: Correspondence of the years 1822-1825 relative to ukase of 1821 and toevhe: treawesion 18 247andl 1825s eee ee season -)s 225 > oa ala 132-152 Correspondence between the United States and Great Britain relative to the seizure of British sealing vessels in Bering Sea in 1886 and CO SSeS cebGbon Use 6 oe SS aee OS NSS SU Sadn Ber ae ane eee Bes Seoee 153-168 Correspondence relative to proposed international measures for the protection of fur-seals (1887-1888) ...-....---.-------------------- 168-194 Correspondence relative to and growing out of the seizure of British sealing vessels in Bering Sea in 1889 (August 24, 1889, to January 22, SOD) GoGadoosdes Gh aep ane JOR one ene ee Ss Sse ae ee eee eit 195-203 Correspondence relative to proposed international measures for the protection of fur-seals—continued—(February 10, 1890, to June 27, HIS DU) eee ee ena ae tS eras Bare ela aha Rut acjaeles ole ne) = ciehs) eee 204-223 Correspondence relative to the jurisdictional rights in Bering Sea for- merly possessed by Russia and transferred to the United States by the treaty of 1867 (Mr. Blaine’s note of June 30, 1890). ---.-.------- 224-235 Correspondence relative to Great Britain’s willingness to enter into a convention for the protection of fur-seals (June 30, 1890, to July 19, EGO) wckisrc ds bade becuse Shao eas aeo = Ree an eae pone uaaemner secuienon 236-241 Correspondence relative to the jurisdictional rights in Bering Sea for- merly possessed by Russia and transferred to the United States by the treaty of 1867—continued—(August 2,1890, to April 14, 1891) -. 242-297 Correspondence relative to the modus vivendi of 1891 and to the negotia- tions for arbitration (April 20, 1-91, to February 8, 1892)..--..-.-- 298-350 Correspendence relative to the modus vivendi of 1892 (February 9, 1892, iD einen Deseo) heb Se eset osusrbe oe bedomceas cube bocoeaaan ces 351-364 List of notes: Adams (Mr.) to Poletica (M. de), February 25, 1822 -.......--.....---- 132 Adams (Mr.) to Poletica (M. de), March 30, 1822 ..-..-.-.------.----- 134 Adams (Mr.) to Rush (Mr.), July 22, 1822 ......-------.--.-..-------- 145 598 SUBJECT-INDEX. Diplomatic correspondence—Continued. List of notes—Continued. Adee (Mr. we Pauncetote (Sir Sana “lay 5 20, 1391 is Sa eR eee Adee (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir Jujian), May 26, 189i ss. Sa ae eee Adee (Mr. ) to Pauncefote (Sir Julian), July 8, 1891---..--222-.------ Bayard (Mr.) to Sackville West (Sir 16s Sb) Nov ember 12, 1886-.......- Bayard (Mr.) to Sackville West (Sir L. S.), January 12, 1887 ...--..- Bayard (Mr.) to Sackville West (Sir L.S,), February 3, 1887 --.-.----- Bayard () (Mr.) to Sackville West (Sir L.S.), April 12 1887 ct eee me etme Bayard (Mr.( to Sackville West (Sir L. 8.), July it WSSTce: fe das Ee Bayard (Mr.) to Vignaud (Mr.), August 19, 1887 ....-.-.---1--.-+---- Bayard (Mr.) to Hubbard (Mr.), September 30ISST e322 ele eee Bayard (Mr.) to Garland (Mr.), October 7, TSS Tis sc ss cada ee e Bayard (Mr.) to Sackville West (Sir L. 8.5, October 22, 188i s2ss2 oe Bayard (Mr.) to McLean (Mr.), November 18, 1887 ..........---.----- Bayard (Mr.) to Hubbard (Mr.), November 21, 1887 ........-..--.---- Bayard (Mrs) tore helps) (vir:) November25) USS sees ae eee Bayards(Mtrs)) towMclaner(vire) Pebruanyi S88 ssaseee see eee Bayard (Mr) to ehelps (Mr), Bebruary, i) 1888 222-22 sel ee Bayardy(Min:)) totehelips) (Mr); March 2) 1888 esa. eee seen Bayard (Mr.) to Sackville West (Sir L.S.), March 30, 1888... -.....--- Bayard (ir) toy Wihiter(via::)\ Ajomil Seils8S S25 ees eee ee ee ee eee Bayard (iz) bo Wihite) (Mir); Aprils, 1S3sm see ae ease ee eee Bayard ((Mr>)) tonwWhite) (tr: May dl 18835 aeseees ene e eee Bayardy(Mn:) toveubbard (vir) dimly ls a SeS seme ese ee Bay ard) (Mrs) tosbub bard) (Mir) vAuo ust dy LS88in= == = eereee eee Blaine (Mr.) to Edwardes (n, )- Aucust ore 1889) SSate eae neeee eee ae Blaine (Mr.) to Edwardes (Mr.), September 14 1889). 2h oa eee Blaine (Mr.) to Edwardes (Mr.), September 14, 1839........---...---- Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), January 22, 1890 .-......---..--- Blaine: (Mr) to! Pauncefote (Sin J.); March US90M 22s = eee eee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), May 26; 1890 === 22 32222 32 eee Blaine! (Mz) to Launcetote (Sint). May: 29 eS90e es. ace eee eee Blaine (Mars) tov Rauncefote (Simd.); June 2, 1890 hs. sees eee eee Blaine (Mz:)\to Rauncefote (Sir J-), Junet4. 189025222" see a see ee ee Blame (Ma) toy Pauncetote (Sins), une 890 SS ae Blaine) (Mr:) to: Pauncefote (Sir J), June 30) 18902222. ss eee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sit J); duly, 2 s(890 55 oe ae eee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J. i dally: 195 1890 ea tee eee ee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Six Jp) seDecemibers(, 1890 = ans eee eee Blaine (Mr:.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), April 14) 1891-32 =. 2.2522 ase Blaine (ir) ito Pauncefote (Sind), Mays4- sl SOls = oe eee eee eee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), November 27,1891 ........-...--- Blaine (Mr:) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), December 2, 1891... ...-.2---.---- Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), December 10, 1891........-.------ Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), December 14, 1891.....--....-.--- Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), February 4, 1892--.....-...-.---- Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), February 9, 1 SOOR sr. ee ve eee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), February 12, 1892 Loc eee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), February oA) 1S 92 o. < eeetoeeaeee Blaine (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), February 26, 1892 _-....--.---.- z Blaine (ue ) to Pauncetote (Sir-J. )s February 27, tes Soft Specimaeeee Cining (Mr. ) to Bagot ‘(Sir CD); February 5 5; 1823 soe Seapets Canning (Mr.) to Bagot (Sin.@>),, Jianuany20 sl S24 eee eee Canning (Mr.) to Bagot (Sinc@:), July 245 W824 eee eee. meet Canning (Mr. G.) to Canning Ging): December 8; 1824s aoe citsta siete Canning (Mr. 8.) to Canning (Vin: Gs) se Hebruamyelii) pleco 2 eae eet Coleman (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), September 1, 1887--.--.-.-...-.-.-..... Coleman (Mr.) to Berchem (Count), September 1, 1887........----.-- Conyngham (Lord) to Lyall (Mr.), November 26, 1823 ..-...:------.- Edwardes (Mr.) to Blaine (Mr.), August 24, 1889 ...--......-...-..-- Edwardes (Mr.) to Blaine (Mr.), Aust ust 25, TSS9): 2 Soars Saete= acter Edwardes (Mr.) to Blaine (Mr.), Septembe P12. 1889 es jase eee Edwardes (Mr.) to Blaine (Mr, ), October 14, 1889s. Cie, ce eee Flourens (Mr.) to McLane (Mr.), October a1, i toy Pe Et Seen Sar Giers (M. de) to Lothrop (Mr.), November 25, 1887 ...-.-.---.-------- Hubbard (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), September < 28, 188i xe Societe cemeeeee De nai a SUBJECT-INDEX. Diplomatic correspondence —Continued. List of notes—Continued. Hubbard (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), September 29, 1887 .............-... Hubbard (Mr.) to Ito Hirobumi (Count), October 6, 1887 Hubbard (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), October 10, 1887 Hubbard (Mr.) to Okuma (Count), June 20, 1888 Einbbards (Mu; to Bayard, (Mar:), June'23, 1888) 2-5. . e222 a2 eee Hubbard (Mr.) to Okuma (Count), July 12, 1888 ....................- iiubbardi@Mn:) ito Bayard: (Mr:), Joly 13, 18882. 2-52. 52-. 22-225 eee nib bardEeine qos ayard (Mrs) pully: 13l&S8i oo eee eee Iddesleigh (Earl of ) to Sackville West (Sir L.S.), October 30, 1886 - Ito Hirobumi (Count) to Hubbard (Mr.), October 8, Peel Londonderry (Lord) to Lieven (Count), January 18, LODO Ase ace eae Lieven (Count) to Canning (Mr.), January 19, (31) (505k ee Lothrop (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), December 8, 1887.............---.--- Lothrop (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), February 22, 1888 Lothrop (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), March 12, 1888 .........:.....-..--.- Lyall (Mr.) to Canning (Mr.), November 19, 1823 Magee (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), March 20, 1888 saps h is tne Satemereamice see McLane (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), October 2 DVN OS dnge mises So Hees eee Middleton (Mr.) to Adams (Mr.), August 8, 1822 ..._................- Middleton (Mr.) to Adams (Mr.), December 1 (CUS) el GO Sie eyes eee Nesselrode (Count) to Wellington (Duke of), November, 11, (23), 1822. Okuma (Count) to Hubbard (Mr.), July 7, 1888....-..............--- Okuma (Count)sto Etubhands (irs), Sully: 9) 1888.42. -2 oes nee Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), February 10, 1890 ............... Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), April —, 1890 ..................- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), May 23, TROUE. ck oe is ee Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), June 3, 1890.-....--.....--.----- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), June 6. ISQO Ea AS Soa oet eee Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), June 9, S90 Sake cece ate eee Pauncefote (Sir J.) tu Blaine (Mr.), June 11, 1890.-..-.2...-.---.---- Pauncetote (Sir J) to. Blaine (Mr.), Jumeii4, 1890. --...--.-...-.-2-.- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), June 27, 1890..-......-..---.---- Pauncetote (Sir J.) to Blame (Mr:), June 30; 1890.......--.--..-2---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), June 30, 1890....-.......-....---- Pauncefote (Sir J) to Blaine (Mr.), April 20,1891..-.........-....--.- Pauncefote) (Sir J.) to Blame (Mmr:), May 5, 1891. ..--........----s2-- ipauncefote) (Sir J!) to) Adee) (Mir:).) May 20 1891 <2. 522-2252 se2n-- 2 = Pauncerote\(Sir).)) to-Adee Vas) May 27, 1890 see sec c ee Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), June 6, 1891 -...........-..---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), June 8, 1891 ............-.-.---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), June 10,1891 ..........---.---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), Jume 11,1891 ........--..-.--.-- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), June 13, 1891 .......------.----- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), June 21, 1891 ..--....-.-.--..--- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), June 27, 1891 ......---.---.---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), July 6, PULA CGS Cie ee re eee Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), July 6, 1891.........-.-.------ Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), July 7, 1891--.--.--....-.-..-- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), July 13,1891. ......--...----.- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), August 8, 1891 ............---. Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), August 24, 1891........--..-.-. Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), August 26, 1891 .......-.--..-- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), August 26, 1891.....-.....---.- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), August 26, 1891 -......-....-.----- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), October 13, 1891 ....--.-.-.---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), October 17, 1891. ........-..... Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), October 23, 1891 ....-.---..---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), November 23, 1891.......---.---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), December 1, 1891 ........--..-..- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), December 8, 1891. ..-.-.--..----- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), December 11, 1891 ...........---- Paunceftote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), December 15, 1891. ..........---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), December 17, 1891. .-...--...---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), December 30, 1891 oe ata Same eietehs Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), January a1, 1892 Eos ais came station Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), January 30, 1 boo Area ete eter ohana Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), February 6, 1892 ..-.....-....-.- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), February 8, 1892 ......-.....---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), February 11, 1892-....... SSieie esas 600 SUBJECT-INDEX. Diplomatic correspondence—Continued. List of notes—Continued. Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), February 13, 1892 ..---.....--.-- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), February 19, 1892 .........--.... Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Blaine (Mr.), February 29, 1892 ..........----- Pauncetote (Sir J.) to Blaine’) Ma.) Manch 7) i892 25 222 .sseeee ee Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), March 19, 1892.....---.------- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), March 26, 1892 .......-.--.---- Pauncefote (Sir J.) to Wharton (Mr.), March 26, 1892.......-...----- Phelps (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), November 12, 1887........-.---..----.. Phelps (Mr:) to Bayard (Mir) hebruary lO; el 88ess==se. oe) aoe aes Phelps (Mr:) to Bayard (Mm:), February 25,1888. -22-225--2 2-22. ----- Phelps (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), September 12, 1888.......-......-..-.. Poletica (M. de) to Adams (Mr.), January 30, 1822............--.----- Poletica (M. de) to Adams (Mr.), February 28, 1822 oF SOs See a ees Poletica (M. de) to Adams (Mr.), April 2, 1822..................------ Rush (Mr.) to Adams (Mr.), December 19, NS 25 Sees ee cee ee eee Sackville West (Sir L.8.) to Bayard (Mr.), December 7, 1886....----- Sackville West (Sir L. 8.) to Bayard (Mr.), October 21, 1886.......--- Sackville West (Sir L.8.) to Bayard (Mr.), dene Mf akstsls) ooasas.c Sackville West (Sir L. 8S.) to Bay ard (Mx), January 988i 222-2 == Sackville West (Sir L.8.) to Bayard (Mr.), February io Rosey (eae et ae Se Sackville West (Sir L.S.) to Bayard (Mr.), February 4 1SSiee pee oe Sackville West (Sir L. 8.) to Bayard (Mr.), April 4, CT Ge eG a Sackville West (Sir L.S.) to Bayard (Mr.), July 8, 1887 .........----- Sackville West (Sir L. S.) to Bayard (Mr.), August LDA SST eee See See Sackville West (Sir L.S.) to Bayard (Mr.), October 4, 1887....------- Sackville West (Sir L. S.) to Bayard (Mr.), October 12, 1887..---.--.-- Sackville West (Sir L. 8.) to Bayard (Mr.), October 19, USSit= 2 see er Sackville West (Sir L. 8.) to Bayard (Mr.), October 26, 1887s Sees Sackville West (Sir L. 8S.) to Bayard (Mr.), March 26, 1888 BASS eee Sackville West (Sir L. 8.) to Bayard (Mr.), April 2, gee. 0. aie Salisbury (Lord) to Sackville West (Sir L. = 5 September 10, 1887 - Salisbury (Lord) to Sackville West (Sir L. 8.), April 16, 1888 WES ae Saepaty (Lord) to Sackville West (Sir L. S. )eaprdll WOR ISSSee eee eee Salisbury (Lord) to Edwardes (Mr.), October 2, 1889......-...-.----- Salisbury (Lord) to Edwardes (Mr.), October 2, 1889 tL a eee Salisbury (Lord) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), Miaivez22-)1890 Sees eee Salisbury (Lord) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), June 20, 1890..........-.---- Salisbury (Lord) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), August 2, 1890. othe soeeee Salisbury (Lord) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), February 21, 1891. -.........- Shepard (Captain) to Hankanson (Mr.), July 11, 1889 ...-.....-..--- Tuy (Baron) storAdams (Mir) Avril 12124182322 ese eeeeeee Wellington (Duke to Canning (Mr.), ney ember cae 1822 RP ES W ellington (Duke of) to Canning (Mr. ¥, ENGR bee 29, 1829. noua Wharton (Mz: tosPauncefoter(Sir ys Jnmie 45 113 Ole eae eee Wharton (Mz::)to Pauncetorei(Sirid).); Jue iG 1801s 22 eee ee aeeee Wharton! (Mr:)\ to Pauncetote (Sin J.) June 95 1sOl esse ee eee Wharton (Mr-.) to’ Pauncetote (Sir J),jJume 1) 18922223 eae ee Wiharton (Ma) to Rauncefote (Sir Je), diume 3 VSO ae oes Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), Jume 25, 1891_...-.....-------- Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), June-20, 1891_-.-----2-.---228- Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), June 26, 1891 ---.---.--_----.-- Wiarton (Mir) to;Rauncefote (Sir). July jay LeOle ses eee ee eee Wharton (Mr:) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), Jully 9) dS9ll- == 2. 522 eee eee Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), July 23, BOD: oe eee Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J), August 17, BQ oo Ss 5% arat amare Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), August 29, TSO ase aja serene Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), September 2, TSO. Sees cemeae Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J), September 7, 1891. .-..--------- Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), October 10, 1861< 0 eee Wharton (Mr.) fo Pauncefote (sir Je) ,OCtobere Sis Ol sees eee ae Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote (Sir J.), October 22, 1891..........-.... Wharton (Mr.) to Pauncefote Siz J.), March 8, BOD, AT a Ww hi eb ae Mr. ) to Paune e fote ( Sir J. ? Mareh 92 18927 eS hee eee White (Mr. ) to B: Sard (Mr. yi April 7 7: 1888 ES ee cya ree White (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), April 20, W888i EE NS ee ees eee Wihiter (Mr) ‘to Bayard) (ir) Jnmme 20m S88 ose see eee eee Wurts (Mr.) to Bayard (Mr.), September 3, 1887 ........-----..------ SUBJECT-INDEX. 601 Page. EMEIRHGE SOR INDE eee ioe misc eisicis nin Said SiG ke HSS Dogs Se ae beet See ence com eaas 371 BRIBE ORG AIS s see aaa s.c ie esibcc eta 3o see See sae eee HeEeS oma 370 PEE LO SCOTS CHOON Clie: etree sinas See te ee aie ele care nee ye ies Od we ene eee oe 525 Executive. (See Action of the United States Government relative to Alaska since the cession. ) SEM De isa eared olen) IS pe keeeterere, yotciay crates craic aha cts adhalsinia stele) Scie Slaw Scene Gasca ne eee 394. (See also Statutes, foreign.) PTA OAS MOSCAISMEN DISS, 100) Cin 0) A Bee ee ee ee ieee a Cee ae on 469 Fur-bearing animals, act to prevent the extermination of, in Alaska .......... 92,99 Fur industry of Bering Sea. (See Notes on the fur industry, etc.) Furs. (See also Notes on the fur industry, ete.) Fur-seals: Alaskan. (See Article by Dr. Allen, Part III.) CHUSRONIE) os Scns coc eka pee oA ee Ee eee a See ase mE ceca 373 Hderminacioncotsoughernty =o) a. <..c= scosso ches ss. coe enone eee ee 390 Hunting in Southern Hemisphere of. (See Article by Dr. Allen, Part II.) POAM Sarita | SSoSeSOs ions ae gee Sane Need pe 374 IKRGRETCIGIN 4 Se poe RO SEBO ACA O IOI ee Soa EO one ae aa me ao 375 INGWy ZGMIOIDG LSS GREED OER EE SEIS ON Rae a i Deal ES 375 WG IPUNE TR, SES Cie oS Rae RICHES RE Ree ar ee eS 572 Of Guadalupe Island, certificate as to species ---.........-...-...-------- 586 Prohibition against killing. (See Revised Statutes. ) ea OUSHOTAPLOLeChLOMOti a. saesis = soe Saas feet en 2 eee colec nee nee 4 hevenue derivedsirom, by iWnitedtstaves.«--2. .s-s5422-s4sses5+2 50 ee ee 130 OU wAts CAM Mester Sat 2 AAAS cat Sandie on + hae Agcee ss ase eee eee 375 BOUUMerneappemey teats y= Sa)ycis osetia sac Aare s ekoe oc cae Ae emia ees eae 374 SOMiNeLM ERC COMM Olea ese ees eine nae seein Se cee Seen 379 SCONE AY ERI» EXE ONS) OSTE ce eo en Pf 375 Seen mCn HIE AIONOfe a= 5254028 55a eo jan dea aed bos oso aeie win Sg Dae ee BO (See also, Action of the United States relative to Alaska; Notes on the fur industry. ) CHAE GOS IMAG. So. Geto dase oe Gene Ace See eee See eRe i 396 Cameawsvor Great bricam and: Canadas... 2.6 -2.22-2--s2-26 sot. sence cees 450 (Gries, LDTES TB IGTOR A 18 1A Se es Pe ee eee ee 423 COWMGIN JIIENRGE SoS os eels 6 a cee SOHO ea SEEN age ee ear ee eee eereee 8 400 Great Britain and-Canada, game laws of.........----.-1----------------- 22+ 450 Great Britain: Diplomatic correspondence with the United States. (See Diplomatic corres- pondence. ) (See also Hovering acts; Statutes, Foreign; Treaties.) (Ged alipeslsl andi seme eae is ee Naas See eee ss - ea dhe. ches knees 406 Guadaloupe dstand:tur-seall 4220 325.5222 sees Noo ee ne eek ashes bones SRY 586 eri sro tesoubhernyhurssealsize= 26 se" cee asa s eects oo eek fess - 2 casos ses ceceene 375 Hair-seals: (Beard eden asst ea a55 etc aeiscceiseceisss foes B (5 pes sais icra spon eaters 384 CASIOIIT 6 aan Saas Sots Bees Sea SA Se ae ane eet ae 384 Pe ernhn a ere ne See ne a eee heer ett! vs Sot bat c's aSGo 5 nocd sana gawesene 386 DisonilbublOMmoteere Heese ts soo ees sey a ye see estes ct ost oe euiosee seca eee 381 ARI! canst cob ba coe MeO eee ee ree ee te i ote rt 371 CONE Er eee Mien eae eaneimins Foe seeshn teen eeeh ss ele SL ees se ce es 385 ED Ole eee ame aac eee aes ee Bes bees cleo tye eions Maem oe ace emia 381 ee De ee a ap ae ee BN SEO a pals Lode nea eeee Sean eee 382 Akos aikalemer cen enss navel. n eae as fe eee es ee Get lS Nel se eae eae 384 ILGODANRE os Bois Soe ae POTS Seg re ae er 386 MON 3356 6566 Sc DOSES BEES Sa Oe ee ee cr CE BE 385 JR SOOM cosets oace Sins COR ae eRe Ne ae rec 384 ISIMNGD, SSSRe SSeS Sco Se OG ee SEE ae SOR tae ee eRe yee ES a 381 ROR ode eu ob GONE SEES eee ee ee ae ea ea gen eT 386 \WGIUGUIS SOses 6S Soto ero C DD ORES Gee eee er eee SSS eete aaS 386 WY GSU) IGVOWON ono Gods EEO Cee IR eo et a Ee eS Ss on 385 JeiGiimisy, IDR [Bye ols Secchi o OAS Ae San at ee Sc Res ee 431 Hovering acts: (ne ale ls Gil clinnerney sess ae en ye eS rt os At Oe coaches oon esine meee 493 SGMBEIeLOIime men Sete te aha. Mert weiss et 3 3s Le a ee ees 495 Lita des Gates) te ees sae Nesom 51 She Ten Ra Coad ee uote eens 494 Mute we retyL de statement, DY. +25. <<.2-c.22 sfc «ii 5.228 Be eca dese se 411 Imperial Russian edicts relating to the Russian American Company: WHATS IE OlehiO owners hos hen on SSS as SS ee Se ey ae tied a Seen bee eee 14 Car LOL MO taal Slee MN SPS I Sop Sa wee ja Soo Jae eee we oa. cee anes 24. CHartere@ tygl S44 ee mts ance Fae eel est ewe Bee eee ae ek eae 28 WIKRSS Git WR en ee ee re Ue re ee a een een eases eee ers gd 16 602 SUBJECT-INDEX. Italy. (See Statutes, foreign) <.c. 2-2. 22 sce cen = eo lee eae ncaa eee Jan May ensealeryn «22 ccna see ee nets 2.5 2 oat eiraeaees Sn ere eee none eee eee Japan. (See Sti tutes, fORETOM'!) seo a = Sassen ae BS nae eee eae re eee ee Joint commission. (See Treaty of Arbitration of 1892.) Juan Wermandes 2.) ssc aei cic -ctecicje os os soca de son Geys.oe oocaemisce Se eeEeeee Kerouelendiamd 2ic8 2.2 stacey ences 5 series Sess soe = oho oe ee eee eee Killing of seals. (See Modus vivendi of 1892.) Laws enacted by Congress. (See Action of the United States Government rel- ative to Alaska since the cession. ) Laws. (See Statutes. ) Leases— Of 1870 to the Alaska Commercial Company ...-..-.--..-:.-----+2------- Of 1890 to the North American Commercial Company .--.....-.-.-- essa eee Letters: C.M. Lampson & Co. to Deputy Consul-General Frigout .-..--....-...-.- Foster, Secretary Charles, to North American Commercial Company -..---.-- North American Commercial Company to Secretary Charles Foster ..-.---- North American Commercial Company to Secretary Charles Foster......- eottersvotmaturalists.. oto. 25.00. So5 ce coe oo oe ene oe coe eee eee Bore Wr CAanlOS raat ctor sieneteinie eae late we ata eaten Se tare get Blanchard, DroRaphael’ 2s. 5.csscec cence seen case oe eee eee ees eee Collette; ProfsRobert os sees eweecmot hee see eee oe eerie eee eee Hartlawb; Dr: 'Gustay sac oilsccrseicc soe eid Saccisernia te cise patentee wise Dotan Holub, Dr, mt) oan sesh on Scceee sme nieve saeco eee ase see eee eee eee Giololiy Dr: Henty TH. .csS2 ocean oe ee oe ee ee Eee ane oe ee inlljebors, Prot. Dr Wallhhelmcc.: S222... -4- seep Soca eee oe a eee Milne-Kdwards,Dr. Alphonse.s.0-- -2--25 2426 a-moaate = See nee eee sosee Nehrino, On Alirede. 22. 22 2-3. sc cf ie cee tae sce eens oie erate a cicleyersraee Nordenskjold Prof BaronvAd olde Bile sare oss see] eee eee eee Salvador) Prot..Count, Lomass0-a-a5 5455654 secs cose aes See Peer VionsMiddendori Dra o 4. ce hoe ie a aio eelces One Oat eie eee oe ene Vion Schrenck, Dr. Weopoldt. j2.56-2.4- Anse nat oe ewe ee ee ee eee inlljebors, Prof, Dr. Wilhelm 0.22. 2. tssen- oes sd eeenie beso Bene eee ee eee Hobos Islam, -/c2 5 ~ aes Seis wisto ol oceacecee ere Slate revere ror spert eter etowis hers aoe ae oe eee Log: Ofeschooner Ad@aoaNo 2 seeks Se Ss othe e See eee Bee Ie HE oes Cee ree Ofischooner:A lined Adams .o- aca oeone ote te tee ee ee ree ee ee eee oe Ofischooner Annie a sa.03.. cea eosin cise seats aehen meres aan oe oe Otis choomer: Hence 22.2 sae aso eae are 2 ete Cie ene eee eee orsbooks of sealano vessels: cna ac e ata< ech oa ee eee en ee ee ee eee Mas- ~il- TEED bee eetwee eee Coat beinne eee a elee sca mere e Sere eee ee eee Mexico, (Seg statutes, HOnele mn) sesso. see se aes eae Suedrbemadesieme se nace MilnesEid wards Dr Alphonse. = 252.2 eee.co sec san sae ene oe eee eRe Modus Vivendi of 1892: British agents may visit Seal Islands 222.2254 soi3505 Sctiee4 Se aseeeiseeee Damage clause SR ae ee eee ee a aan ae eel AC eater eng een Sqoste Denunciation -ohes.20: obs cos see ee, I a ee Great) Britain to) prohibit seal) kallimio Saseesee se eseeee ese eee eer Rrohilbibionvot sealing eeesee ee eee eee eee eee ee eee eee Ra tiliGations,: cae asec + Seine ee eee een eee e Pee oe oe Eeee Seizure: OF Vessels: 2 soo hs oe eee eae Serie Geer eee eee eee UnitedsStatesstomprohilbitisealicillim cee see ee eee eine eee eee Naturalists. (See Letters of naturalists. ) Nehring; Dro Altre... 2272 ons. dietetic sie Some Gale Se eee A Rae ee ees North American Commercial Company— Claim‘ of; -@See also Tetters)\s.22cse ace seteeoe Leen ene ee eee ere Ee Reoee ease Of 189060). 2 Sosc2 Soe chee se ores mio eee Eee En Eee Eee eeene Norway. (See Statutes, foreign.) Notes on the fur industry of Bering Sea and the adjoining regions..........- Bere’s foures 24 Se ccs enc s onthe ca ee aes oe one ee RE eee Fur-seal skins exported trom S62;tonlS6teeeeeeeeseeee eee eee eee eee Fur-seal skins taken from Pribilof Islands from 1868 to 1891........------ Hurs exported) estimates oven too lowe--ceeee sees seen eee eee cee ee eeee Hurstexportedtromiuva3s) GO L823) = ae ae ae et cay rn eee =e urs exported fronwi1Sl7, to L83iaeceae sane oe eee eee ane ae ursiexportedstromils2 tbo S62) =< oa eee eee er ee Tikhmeniet’s figures Veniaminof’s figures i sor) N91 0-10) H-1-) SUBJECT-INDEX. 603 Page Newwoundiland#seuleties’=. 22 sae serie ete nce one bee adaned ses cues Geet en ee: 382 INexweo urd landams @SeenSuallbess LOn€1@N)) =... 2c 22m |a2 sac oe eee ee Seeeeneee 442 Wewevealand.= (See suabuces, fOrETON)) 22525565 osq5 242s 1es naan eos eee 43! Notice issued by the United States Government in 1845 ............-......--- 91 Ordinances. (See Statutes, foreign). FeLi IEE A, GS SSS ee ee Pe ROR Pa Rey at 396 Helusicreatch, (Contract LOL <= ss s2s25 2235556 -s5 2255s 5sones te ee teas see saees 523 Pelagic sealing. (See Article by Dr. Allen, Part 111.) FAM CASYS VMONSISIOke se a)an as cece oticte cs we 6 5G 2 a,ch sconces 2 pee ea cee 367 HeeED Owls lame seers cee ae ss eso Se ease A wed eae ee ee 405 (See Action of the United States Government relative to Alaska since the cession. ) (See also Notes on the fur industry, etc. ) Rrincormdnvardwlislang ss 8= 5s ascitslc ons io sic eccasesss ode essa ScSs.cee be ees 400 BrocamavlonsOmuneretesiMentceeess os. s-.- snes eee chasse acces 3 eee eee 112 Prohibition of trade on Russian American coast in 1845 .........-..:....----- 91 OhierrannipiMme sale bere teene ios aes ence ie ssicee ces sclca case sank olehkcce~ 5 aoe eee 496 Rad sew breasuyalistyOn ase ssec es ctiee cise: soe s Secs esecbae oon eau neue eee 515 Reports, official: CaniainelOopenac! coer ss ciscees oe se eine eee ckete eee. s etek acae aoe ee eee 498 MEecreaseisin cel S(OUS seen Aon ae Seek as ae See ee ee Pee Lee 498 imcamgse wMenss- see sce ee ow mines fe eeeine cee ac oee sce cet eic Sue ere 503 Imiianysealiniovs. ssn. cs Sem < Seen SBE heck eee as ce See 502 NMilorablOngrenn sao 22 eos one ee one soe ee oe Oe Seo eee 503 ebetCRCainee tat Sct eee Sec Sn k se ke sees ons tee op eae See 499 HelapicisenlimonimebacuieiOceaniases2-24 == sos52 sect ones ee ae eee 504 HRelagicsedlImMeam ais Crimi aber as a-|ae see ee er eee ee ee 501 Relacicrealinox mode Ot 2-5 fees h 254. shen ce ad eee Ses ote eee eer 500, 501 Relamic sealimovon; thernerease 2-55 sc<2.¢-2s5 -- c aoe Se ceonmec eee 499 ETOLecMonpMela cite) OCeamMNecessulys ssaaaese sone = ea = ona ee 499 Sealsudomotlandktonicoasteerren seecen «ss stecc cls act accom eters ese 49 DPeshinowvessels' =e. sss sel Se oes sta cled se ol SLs. e Ue oe see ee 500 War estofasedlers see motte a see ce ceciasce 2 ee eck See eee 500 NWictsitero telilomeee meee reise ee oie oe 2 wa ah Pee eee 499, 502 Canzdianypelaciesseallancam us tr yess a= = ee e e e e aeeeee 507 OWNerstoresealinGviessOls tere soe aaace se eas Seis ce soe pols oes 515 iRelaoircicatches, 185-1890 Meas ee eee ea eee). 2 oe as eee 518 aplerotapelacic catch wi SO enon =e ene ee See es oot os es ee eee 510 Table of sealing vessels, tonnage, and crews, 1891 -.......-.--------- 509 Malerotsvalwerobayesselsisesescemae oe ones see eee evel t Soc cee ceetae 511 IVieSSelSMOWMECESS sss Shoes eee ae ete meee ese soo ale ese 513 Lieutenant Quinan: Pelaoicisealimowdn dane son weccse ee nosso: selec oot ets Feast Se scene 504 Relapicisealino method ofe-= 2 se... scsssoc see cces es 52s 5 eos ee eee 505 Spears hic tin Ome ee eee ae ey vee ea ea Sake a ee de te aioe see 506 Revenue cutters dispatched to BeringSea ..-.....---.--..----------- 110 Revenue derived from the Alaskan seal herd ......----.---------------------- 130 Russia. , (See also Treaties. ) (See Diplomatic correspondence. ) (Sccialsors tabwtes storeiom))) 2225 222 -2osesssc-esss sects cen ose ese meee 445 Russian American Company. (See Additional facts relating to; Russian correspondence relating to the affairs of; Diplomatic correspondence; Correspondence relative to the jurisdictional rights in Bering Sea, etc., pp. 224-235 and 242-298. ) (See Imperial Russian edicts relating to; Notes on the fur industry of Bering Seaand the adjoining islands; Notice issued by the United States Government in 1845.) Russian correspondence relating to the affairs of the Russian American Com- DAV geen ay ae ere re Soe ay Sse eee tod ects Shae meds se eee ees 49--90 (For list of documents see Contents. ) Russia’s early title to parts of the American coast. Pxiracu trom: wondon: Quarterly, Review o-c..--6- +--+... -+-5-+- --+ ssa cleee 12 E=trachinom:Marchand’s) Voyaces S22...2 22226 Sa55- 5 ose c eo sacs oss aece 11 Extract from Middleton’s Confidential Memorial......-..-------.-------- 13 EEXULACHALO MASINI PSONIS WOOL Kies S255 222 eat cee och ace cs asec cheese clemcere 13 No other nation ever claimed eastern shore of Bering Sea ...------------- 12 Sif, AUT OLD: ISIE NNG | 3 55 ta Sear COO EOD E REO TORIES Ca Eee Ree a aeaee 396 St. Helena. (See Hovering Acts.) 604 SUBJECT-INDEX. Page. St. Welix Teland :. 232 so cacaccs- sass sees se sae eee esse nee Oe eRe ee eee 396 St-eMarysdsland:. i. jossieeSen 2 ees cance: See eset ee eee ae ee eee eee 396 StsPaul [slands 22:22 t tet Secassat beck ac sas Chee ae eee Bee eee 402 St. hauletsland, tablestofweatherat csc. sses- cos eee eee ee eee eee 591 Salisbury, Lord. (See Diplomatic correspondence.) Salmon fisheries, act to provide for protection of-............-..-.-.--.----.-- 99 Salvadori, Prot. Count Momasso:o-24-5---4 2 cleoe ee oon ec os ae ee 429 Sandwich ands: s2osoce saa we hee eee ce ee See eos eee 399 Schooner=Adasloc ote s.52 hea 65 88 Seis es Sees nl ee es se Ce ee ee 574 Scluter Orsehilipsuupley,atidavabibyereeeseoesee pee ee eee ee eee 413 Sea-elephants: Californians: 222s -caseiaeass oss aeeesecne cs Ste ctegu eee ee ee eee eee 387 EVA IGS Oy pe Stave oo vaya tet ie etapa eye ee Syste eee ST ere re (AS ee ee ee 388 Higoded=seall a. 2 oi s0tjeraro ay ose Sere i= ore, HS Pere hota nn 387 UTI OL: sian. =o awe ata n eloates Se sis S win Se e ee cee eer se es Se 389 SCarcity OL oe. cee ete Sake bene eee ac cial oe 47 390 Southerner: S255 Sa sce ete s a grne Sek meets cee tl aeee ees ae 388 Sealine vessels, Jog books of. 2-2. Aa20u. 5 eo ode che ds shee eae sea eee eee 525 DOASMONG tos Meee acca Dak scion smack Sinaia cet Oe ca ee ee 371 MUICklan dfs sass sisats a. Dee e aison soe e 8 sane eC ae Ce ee ae ae eee 371 Californias oo a. seis store, cts sie ole Sem, s qelnine bee eee ae oe ae ee ee 372 Gray g se oe eect eRe eide Sere Se a Mare Hata ac oe etn is mero ie ee a eee 372 Southerny 02.52, fohecsco fos 2 eee eoets eos se eee wet eee eee eee Byee Stellens'ss2)so Soieece eee cissies Se acs coe in ccee Settee nie aa ee tee ee ee 312 Seals eared. 2... = Jos. eas cscs awe wle wes 22 ssn eee eee sees eee a 370 Seale nhair Sao o2 ees ee ek eth arene cine eeeaee SeISae EE eee eee 371 Seals. (See Fur-seals and hair-seals.) Seal sysyNOpPsis Ob «2 24. ssscctoce se Sa osioesee oe oo neon eee eee eee 367 Seizures imeBerine: Seas..2o.55 2s 2S sks sass oe ners eerie eee eee eee 108, 109 Seizures of vessels. (See, also, Modus Vivendi of 1892.) SoubheAtiea; west coastOf. 5. so. - acne a= sa se cee otic eee See RE eee 403 SouthiGeorgiadislands =o. ste se cisctisectiee eee cee eee eer eee eee 399 SouthsShetland Islands 2: 4 bacc.sae- facets see tass oc Saco eee eee eee 398 Spain. (See, also. Treaties.) Statutes, Foreign— Australia, an act regulating pearl shell and Béche-de-mer fisheries ....-. 467 Canada, an act respecting fisheries and fishing ..---...-..--.-------.-.-- 441 Canada, came laws Of 3... 25. 2m ens ae teae Sade Sao eee eee eee eee 457 Ceylonsresulationsjandiondimances\Ohes=——2= sees eee eee eee eee 461 Colombia, decree of 1890 on diving with machines within the department. 485 Wecreeiof May 1018626 s55552 8 22 Seo < aoe Sees nn eee ee ee 469 Halklandelslamds: Ordinance vote eee yee eee 435 Great Britain, brief summary of laws of, relating to protection of game .. 450 Wb liy 22.52.22 5 ee ee cach corsa. sce ino gene cole JER OS See Oa eee ee eee 470 Japan, extract from regulations numbered sixteen of the seventeenth year Of, MY ile 2 os Soa sees coe sie th Meee Baca io aac ae eee eee 449 Mexico, relating to Mexican pearl fisheries ...............- detente eae 489 Newfoundland, act respecting prosecution of seal fishery --......--..---- 442 New Zealand, an act to alter*boundaries of. ----.--2---:.22+-+--52-4.-5-6 436 Norway. -.-- Fadl alsjeraiaielahaes ol nisi sem Stee ee ec so UNS S MIN Sisieeie Sere aS Spree eee 482 Quarantine ache. 252. eee sks snelen se see ee aie cs ee ee os ee eee 496 Relatinetojoystertsheries of Ireland sseas==e- eee seen eee eee 457 Russia, code of laws governing rural industry..-.-..-......-.---.--..------ 445 StHelenaiact. i552 Fe Nee dh ae at Sees eset ee es soso ee eee eee 495 Uruguay, letter by the custodian of the archives at Montevideo -...-.-.-- 448 Statutes of United States. (See Action of United States Government relative to Alaska since the cession.) Tables of furs. (See Notes on the fur industry, etc.) Mablesiot weatherat St.Paul lsland@esscseeeeeas sec eee ee eee eee 591 Mableiofavesselsiserzedam) Berino (Seana seen eens ee eeee eee ae een eee eee eee 108-9 Tax. (See Leases.) Mierra, del: Pues ..'. 2 aia = emcees Seas geese eee ene pene eee 396 Tradeion Russian American coast prohibited 222 e-. =s-4 ree eee eee 91 Treasury Department. (See Action of the United States Government relative to Alaska since the cession. ) Treasury list of raids. 2 2.223 dec sine ne eae eiesioe coe male ee Ce en aneieioe nee 515 Treaties: Great-Britain and Russiasle25.2 S552. seo sete eee eee. eee eee 39 Great -BritainiandSpainy 1790)s2- 222 ee eee ee eee ee ee eee eee eee ee 32 SUBJECT-INDEX. 605 Treaties—Continued. Page. Wmited States'and Great Britain, 1818.2... -...-..5.. 222s ccces eee eee cee 34 WOimibede Stanestan duussia O24 ses o 7. Se samaec cence noe soe ee eee acne 35 Winiteds Stabesrand UR ussiagiSGiansoa. cos occ sac etee vic ote shoei ee ee 43 WiMiiedeStatessamd Spada 1S1Ol = clon a2 ose ea ee ee ee 34 Treaty of Arbitration of 1892: Bee ALOE Nee es ened elon) > So eriaia co Rarctoel- Mass SEN a cares one = ee il, 2 3 2 PecistIon wwuhemto WOTeEN Cored i/o .5\.2ocs.cse 2 sewn!S ees 62 boone eee 5 Wecision somperconsidered imal: = 5... 25225002225, 225 scones dec ae eee ee 5 IDO CUI CNUs Restrain ays a melas =) siciae 2 Sac a cis'e wa Se Sa fe ciieiicis Sans ayes Sree 2 Documents production Ofaa.- = 2s. 2. ." 1 eee A + en foe eee SFiis gah os Tht Kies: i Mee ae age } Rens Me sy ne -. Hci leat (ce oe: @ Reet. a eet ess Pe ew pot a = OGLE a Ie “La Ci. ros >t) iv. Ses or i$ ta has SS ees) ; 7 ; - hss fe: Re he : Sg tune 0 pan ME ge ers ngs | & a: i laa b= ; 2 Ss eee ee Te ee a ; a pie tad Ul tee tot ih - ., eA . ' = : ys, seihe ae ‘ 4 ‘at = : 7 ee 7 : +a a .. ; : » { a # al bw | © P ’ ‘ . eay ! ‘ & * . ' q Am f sy Ak CO 2 . ’ é et cas “44 — — (<2 we ¢ 4 > ed . tls ; i aay (cad 5 vr el ee | a : ; ae Ea Dy te Mee eae ; eaten, Dae yl Wea Bo'g eee F216. ah oh eee ‘ ot ; ; : eee aa } ; no S _ ae a t ages we) : , re edie . f 7 ‘ . ’ 7 we ~ oe : ; i =a « - ys sm tee ise 2 ' : ; : Wee Pe, ane : aes Ty Fe 4 Sts Car weber OSE y ; : ah big ee he EE ay Seo or >.) ; ; : f. 7 c s = er CS ty (i? he r+ Se La lith {seo iat ea i a) . Fi FDO + OY oe Pie re Pp- 1 oe ES PT fale ie fans ©) pecan! | Seayee ‘ - i. ne ~ we i . ] wy sua ir jek Stag ‘ ? : 5 i : ry oo is vo: ih 4 ae doe ‘ > i? Past, rhe AS Rae A apis he Bair, a TL 9088 00814 9643