Mr. Olney to Prince Cantacuzène.

No. 17.]

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of two notes from the Imperial legation of Russia dated August 7, 1895, answers to which have been inadvertently delayed.

On the 27th of May last, a reply to the proposals made by Secretary Gresham in his note of the preceding 23d of January was received through the British ambassador at this capital in the form of a printed copy of an instruction from the British foreign office, dated May 17, [Page 1116] 1895.1 Her Britannic Majesty’s Government, for reasons therein stated at much length, declined to entertain the proposition for the appointment of an international commission, and for an efficient modus vivendi pending the more comprehensive agreement in which all the parties interested in the fur-seal fisheries might join. The instruction of the British foreign office, however, contained the suggestion that resident agents be appointed by the United States and Great Britain to be stationed on the Pribilof and Commander Islands, there to make joint investigation during the next four years, and to report from time to time as to the condition of the fur-seal fisheries.

While unable to regard this suggestion of the British Government as satisfactorily meeting the exigencies of the case, this Government made it the basis of a new suggestion to the British Government substantially as follows: That three agents be appointed by the Governments of Great Britain, Russia, Japan, and the United States—twelve in all—to be stationed on the Kurile, Commander, and Pribilof islands, respectively; that these agents be instructed to examine carefully into the existing conditions of fur-seal fishing, and to recommend from time to time any needful changes in the regulations of the Paris award and any desirable limitations of the land catches on each of the said islands; that within four years they present a final report to their respective Governments, and that pending such report a modus vivendi be entered into extending the Bering Sea award regulations along the line of the thirty-fifth degree north latitude from the American to the Asiatic shores.

To this last suggestion of the United States a reply was received by note from Lord Gough, dated the 19th of August last.2 Therein, after argument to the effect that the facts do not justify any extension of the regulations made pursuant to the Bering Sea award, it is stated “that Her Majesty’s Government can not recognize that Russia and Japan have any interests in the seal fisheries on the American side of the North Pacific, and that they can not, therefore, take part in any inquiry on the Pribilof Islands in which those powers are associated, but Her Majesty’s Government are ready to appoint at once an agent to inquire conjointly with an agent of the United States alone, as already proposed; and they would also be ready to consider any request from the two powers concerned to join in an inquiry on similar terms with Russia and Japan, respectively, in the Commander and Kurile islands.”

It will be observed that no allusion is made to the important proposition that pending the proposed investigation by agents, a satisfactory modus vivendi for the preservation of the fur-seal fisheries should be put in force.

Recurring to the two notes from the Russian legation already referred to, it does not seem to be quite clear, and I therefore desire to ask whether the Russian Government desires the prohibition of all sealing north of the thirty-fifth degree of north latitude, pending the investigation of the conditions of the seal fisheries, or simply that the regulations of the Paris award and the closed season thereof be extended to the Bering Sea on the western as well as the eastern side.

Further, the second note, as translated in this Department, apparently suggests that the closed season should last until the 1st of April. Is there not an error in the note or the translation, and should not the word “after” be substituted for the word “until,” since under the Paris regulations the open seasons last from August through April?

[Page 1117]

It is hoped that the delay in answering the two notes of August 7 last has in no way inconvenienced the Russian Government or its legation at this capital.

Accept, Mr. Minister, etc.,

Richard Olney.
  1. See p. 618, ante.
  2. See p. 665, ante.