Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 1, 1890
Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine.
Sir: In your note of the 29th of May last, which I duly transmitted to the Marquis of Salisbury, there are several references to communciations 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 Department with respect to those communications.
I have, etc.,
The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauncefote.
Sir: I have to acknowledge your dispatch No. 83 of the 30th ultimo, inclosing copy of a note from Mr. Blaine dated the 29th ultimo.
It contains several references to communications which passed between 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 on the 23d April of that year I informed the American chargé d’affaires, Mr. White, that it was proposed to give effect to a seal convention by order in council, 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 agreements of this kind are brought into force in England. But two or three days after the 23d 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 Dear White: 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 Dear 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 with a line.
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 arrangement 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 received a 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 [Page 450] 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 if this be now 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 White: Lord Salisbury is afraid that he did not make himself understood 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 contention 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 crafted 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 Government 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 always have been, and are still, anxious for the arrangement of a convention which shall provide whatever close time in whatever localities is necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species. But I have always represented 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.
Sir: Since forwarding to you my dispatch No. 33 of the 22d ultimo, I have been in communication with the Russian ambassador at this court, and have invited his excellency 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 will inform 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 so doing 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 1886–37 and 1887–’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 engaged in the seal-fishing industry.
I am, etc.,
Salisbury.
In pursuance of this dispatch, the suggestion made by Mr. Bayard, to which I referred, was discussed, and negotiations were initiated for an agreement between the three powers. The following dispatch contains [Page 451] the record of what I believe was the first meeting between the three powers upon the subject:
The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.
Foreign Office, April 16, 1888.
Sir: The Russian ambassador and the United States chargé 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 covered by the proposed convention should be the sea between America and Russia north of the 47th degree of latitude; that the close time should extend from the 15th April to the 1st November; that during that time the slaughter of all 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; that the traffic in arms, alcohol, and powder should be prohibited in all the islands of those seas; and that, as soon as the 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.
I am, etc.,
Salisbury.
It was impossible to state more distinctly 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 considerable distances the information which they required before their opinion on the subject could be thoroughly formed, and after that it was delayed, 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 if the view of them which is taken by Mr. Blaine is accurate, they would bear out the argument which he founds upon them.
I shall be glad if you will take the opportunity of informing Mr. Blaine of these corrections.
I am, etc.,