Mr. Gresham to Mr. Bayard.
Washington, March 17, 1894.
Sir: The British ambassador called at the State Department about noon on the 7th instant and informed me that he had received from his Government a draft of a bill to be introduced into Parliament for putting into force the Bering Sea award, and other papers which he desired to submit for my inspection before a formal interview. I informed him I was ready for the interview whenever it would suit his convenience; that I knew of nothing so important as the Bering Sea award, and the sooner we reached &n agreement for making it effective the better it would be for both Governments. Sir Julian stated that at 3 o’clock the next day he would be ready for an interview, at which hour he again arrived at the Department and for the first time handed me the draft. I informed him that I would examine it as speedily as possible, and after conferring with the President I would be ready for another interview, which we agreed should be on the 10th at 11 p.m. Sir Julian appeared at the appointed time, and I called his attention to the following defects in the draft submitted:
Paragraph 1 of section 1 declares that the reported regulations shall have effect as if they were set out in the act, and paragraph 2 declares that any person violating the act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor within the meaning of the merchants’ shipping act of 1854, and the ship employed in such contravention, and her equipment and everything on board thereof, shall be liable to be forfeited as if the offense had been committed under another act, “Provided, That the court, without prejudice to any other power, may release the ship, equipment, or thing, on payment of a fine not exceeding five hundred pounds.” The penalty prescribed in the shipping act for a misdemeanor is a fine not exceeding 100 pounds.
The court is thus given discretion to punish offenders with nominal fines and release ships employed in contravention of the act on payment of like fines.
Paragraph 3 declares that certain sections of British acts shall apply as if they were expressly recited and in terms made applicable to the act, “and any commissioned officer on full pay in the naval service of Her Majesty the Queen may seize the ship’s certificate of registry.” Neither in this nor other sections of the draft is it made the duty of British officers to arrest offending persons and ships.
Paragraph 2 of Section VII reads:
Where, on any proceeding against a person or ship in respect of any offense under this act, it is proved that the ship sailed from its port of departure before the scheduled provisions were published there, and that such person or the master of the ship did not subsequently and before such alleged offense receive notice of those provisions, such person shall be acquitted and the ship shall be released and not forfeited.
This paragraph is plainly intended to protect Canadian sealers which have already left Victoria to hunt seals in violation of the regulations. Should the bill become a law and a Canadian ship be caught any time taking seals in the waters described in the first regulation, or the waters described in the second regulation, during the months of May, June, and July, it could not be forfeited if it sailed from its port of departure before the scheduled provisions were published at that port and the master did not receive notice of the regulations before the offense was committed. The owners and masters of Canadian sealing [Page 155] schooners or ships were all familiar with the treaty and award of the Paris Tribunal before the ships left their home ports for this season. They knew it was the duty of both Governments to enforce the regulations and protect the inhibited waters; they were bound to contemplate that both Governments would do what the treaty and the award obliged them to do, and they are not, therefore, entitled to the protection contemplated by the seventh section of the draft.
Having urged these objections to the bill, I again informed Sir Julian that a convention such as I had proposed was in the strict line of what the award called for, and that I would like to know what objection his Government had to proceeding in that way. He replied that his Government did not think a convention was necessary that it was opposed to a convention; that legislation would accomplish all that was needed, and that if a convention should be agreed upon, it would not be operative in his country without Parliamentary action. I replied that a convention would have the force of law in this country, and that I presumed Parliament could speedily give it such force in England. Sir Julian said he had suggested to Lord Rosebery that, owing to the lapse of time and the near approach of the inhibited season the would not say whether Canada or London was to blame), it would be well for the two Governments to renew the modus vivendi for another year.
I replied that this would not protect the waters of the North Pacific embraced in the second regulation, that the modus was applicable only to the waters of Bering Sea, and asked Sir Julian if he was in favor of extending the existing modus for twelve months so as to embrace all the waters included in the second regulation. He replied that he did not think his Government was willing to go so far 5 that his idea was simply to close the Bering Sea for another year, leaving the waters of the North Pacific, south of the Aleutian Islands, free, as heretofore, thus giving more time to reach an agreement for the enforcement of the award. I informed the ambassador that this Government was not responsible for the failure thus far to put into force the award, including the regulations; that I would agree to nothing looking to a departure from the award; that I would entertain a proposition for a modus vivendi on the basis of the first and second regulations, to be operative for twelve months, during which time a treaty might be entered into between the United States, Great Britain, Russia, and Japan, settling the entire sealing question. Sir Julian seemed to think there was force in this suggestion, and said he would at once telegraph to London for authority to enter into such an agreement, which he has done, but has as yet received no reply.
Should an arrangement of this kind not be entered into, I fear we will soon be confronted with serious questions.
I am, etc.,