[Inclosure in No. 470.—From the London
Times, Friday, June 5, 1891.]
Seal fishery (Behring
Sea) bill.
The consideration of this bill in committee was resumed on clause 1
(power to prohibit by order in council the hunting of seals in Behring
Sea). The first subsection enables Her Majesty by order in council to
prohibit the catching of seals by British ships in Behring Sea during
the period limited by such order.
Mr. A. S. Hill moved to add after “order” “if the legislature of the
Dominion shall consent to such prohibition.” He said that the persons
most concerned were the Canadians, and they were by no means consenting
parties to this measure. The
[Page 535]
Americans required that they should be allowed to kill 7,500 seals on
their own account. Whatever number of seals they claimed to kill, they
ought to kill in the open seas and not in the rookeries. These 7,500
seals were not to be killed for food for the islanders. But the United
States said that they kept 300 Aleutian islanders in the seal fisheries,
and if the prohibition was to affect them they would have themselves to
keep these servants of theirs, and for their wages would have to pay
some £20,000. A more monstrous claim could not be put forward. If there
was to be any claim at all, it should be made by the Victorian
fishermen.
Mr. W. H. Smith regretted that his honorable and learned friend was not
satisfied with the assurance which the Government had given. He said
distinctly on the second reading that the Government could not assent to
the introduction of these words. The Dominion had a right to legislate
so far as her own people were concerned, but she had no right to
legislate for the British flag. The Behring Sea was some thousand miles
away from Canada, and the Canadian Government had received every
assurance that compensation should be given to any British subject who,
it could be shown, would suffer loss. Her Majesty’s Government hoped
that the British losses would be a great deal less than his honorable
and learned friend supposed. The destruction of 7,500 seals was
considerable, but they were willing to consent to that proposal in order
to put an end to a serious danger.
Mr. A. S. Hill said that, after the assurance of the right honorable
gentleman, he would not, of course, proceed further with his amendment.
He had, however, received a cablegram from Canada on the subject.
Mr. Bryce asked for some information as to what had passed between the
Government and the Canadian Government and the nature of the terms that
had been arranged.
Mr. W. H. Smith said the Government had satisfied themselves that the
Canadian Government had accepted the view he had previously indicated.
He would endeavor to give the House further information on the subject
as soon as possible.
Sir G. Campbell wanted a more explicit assurance on the subject of
compensation and expressed the hope that the British taxpayer was not to
become liable.
The amendment was withdrawn and the clause was added to the bill, as was
also clause 2.
On clause 3 (application and construction of act and short title).
Mr. G. O. Morgan referred to the phrase “marine animal,” and asked
whether it was likely to include whales.
Mr. W. H. Smith said the phraseology of the clause had been carefully
considered, but, of course, Her Majesty’s Government did not intend to
prohibit the catching of whales.
The clause was agreed to, and the bill reported without amendments to the
House.
The House resumed.
Mr. W. H. Smith appealed to the House to allow the bill to be read a
third time now. It was of great importance, and it was also desirable
that no delay should take place.
Sir W. Harcourt joined in the appeal and hoped that no objection would be
taken to the course suggested by the right honorable gentleman. He asked
the first lord of the treasury to lay on the table of the House the
communications which had passed with the Canadian Government.
Mr. W. H. Smith said there was no reason why the House should not be
placed in possession of the information.
Mr. Sexton hoped that the first lord of the treasury would appreciate the
forbearance of the Irish members in allowing the bill to be read a third
time. [Laughter.]
The bill was read a third time.
