711.417/723
The Japanese Ambassador (Matsudaira) to the Secretary of State17
Under the date of January 5, 1926, the Japanese Ambassador addressed the Honorable the Secretary of State a note setting forth the desire of the Japanese Government to hold a conference as contemplated in Article 16 of the Convention for the Protection of Fur Seals for the purpose of considering and, if possible, agreeing upon further extension of the Convention with such modifications and additions as may be desirable.
In view of the fact that the United States Government has not accorded its recognition to Soviet Russia, the United States Government, while prepared to consider the Japanese proposal with good will, failed to see its way to participating in a conference at which Soviet Russia will be represented. In appreciation of the difficulty thus felt by the United States Government, the Japanese Government proposed, in the course of March last, that, without touching the question of recognition and previous to the formal conference of official delegates of the signatory countries, a preliminary conference be held by experts of these countries on the understanding that so far as the United States is concerned it may treat the Soviet expert as an observer, while so far as Soviet Russia is concerned it may treat the American expert as an observer. This proposal was made [Page 470] with a view to similar treaties being concluded in the end among the United States, England, and Japan, on the one hand, and among England, Soviet Russia, and Japan, on the other. To this proposal also the United States Government failed to agree, but it wished to know the terms of modification desired by the Japanese Government so that it might be enabled to find some other means of adjusting the requirement.
Views thus exchanged on this subject have duly been reported to the Japanese Government, and the Japanese Ambassador is now instructed to approach the United States Government again with the request that the latter may see its way to acquiescing in the above proposal to conclude a similar treaty on this subject separately among the United States, England, and Japan, on the one hand, and among England, Soviet Russia, and Japan, on the other.
In again presenting this proposal to the United States Government, the Japanese Ambassador is charged to point out that the seals, the number of which was estimated at about 140,000 on the occasion of the conclusion of the existing Convention, have increased to about 840,000, and that the object for which this Convention was signed has been fully realized. With such a large increase in number, the seals frequenting waters adjacent to the coast of Japan are now said to have increased to 400,000 in recent years, with the consequence of serious damage being inflicted on the Japanese fishing industry. In order to save this situation, it is deemed not at all improper to permit pelagic sealing under certain restrictions.
In the second place, in the event of a remedy being sought for this situation in augmenting the number of land killings, instead of permitting pelagic sealing, it may be impossible to attain the purpose already mentioned, even though the land killing on Robben Island be increased, unless the United States Government will augment considerably the number of land killings on the Pribilof Islands, as it is estimated that 370,000 seals out of 400,000 resorting to the Japanese coast belong to the herds on the Pribilof Islands.
In the new convention to be reached, therefore, it may be necessary to strike out altogether Article 11 of the present Convention and to modify at the same time the terms of Article 10 conformably to the changed circumstances, with a view to securing the agreement of the United States Government to increase land killing on the Pribilof Islands.
In the third place, provisions in regard to the joint inquiry into the increase of seal herds, the rate of distribution of seal skins, the maintenance of a guard or patrol on the part of Great Britain, and the killing of seals by natives, either do not exist in the present [Page 471] Convention or are found short of meeting the actual requirement if they do exist. These shortcomings should be remedied by a new Convention.
In the fourth place, the United States Government appears to be under the apprehension that, even though a new convention were concluded in a manner as suggested by the Japanese Government, the United States Government in view of the existing relations with Soviet Russia, would be debarred from exercising its right in regard to seizure of persons or vessels of the latter, offending against the prohibition as provided for in the present Convention. Such a contingency nevertheless exists under the present Convention, and it is hoped that a suitable measure of remedy may be found on the occasion of discussing the new convention.
In consideration of the foregoing observations, the Japanese Government earnestly request the United States Government to be so good as to reconsider this question so as to agree to the Japanese proposal.
- This undated aide-mémoire was left with the Under Secretary of State by the Japanese Ambassador on July 20, 1926.↩