صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

had, as we have seen, been agreed that if the determination should be against the United States on questions of exclusive jurisdiction the tribunal should "then determine what concurrent regulations outside the jurisdictional limits of the respective governments are necessary, and over what waters such regulations should extend." In regard to the regulations adopted by the tribunal, the agent of the United States said:1

"The regulations as finally framed and promulgated are the result of an honest and conscientious effort on the part of the neutral arbitrators to do all they conceived possible and necessary for the protection and preservation of the seal herd consistent with their decision on the fifth point. These regulations go further than the provisions which our government has proposed in the past, but it is to be observed that later investigations have revealed perils to which the seals are exposed not then known. It is to be hoped that the regulations when put in operation will realize the best expectations of the tribunal. Much depends on the manner in which they are enforced. It is not to be doubted that both governments, in deference to the expressed directions of the tribunal and to their own obligations, will adopt all necessary legislation and rules to give them full force and effect. If the recommendation made by the tribunal for a complete cessation of taking seals both on land and at sea for a few years be adopted, I shall look for satisfactory results from the operation of the regulations."

[ocr errors]

By an act of February 21, 1893, it was provided that whenever the Government of the United States should conclude an effective international arrangement for the protection of the fur seals in the north Pacific Ocean, by agreement with any other power or as the result of the pending arbitration, the laws of the United States for the protection of the fur seals and other furbearing animals within the limits of Alaska and in the waters thereof should by a proclamation of the President be extended over all that portion of the Pacific Ocean included in such international arrangement. The result of the arbitration having

Final Report of the Agent of the United States, Fur Seal Arbitration, I. 11.

2 Supra, 801.

3The expenses of the United States in the arbitration amounted to $224,514.39. (H. Ex. Doc. 306, 53 Cong. 3 sess.) By an act of March 2, 1895, the Comptroller was directed to allow the disbursements made by the disbursing officers of the United States. (28 Stats. at L. 843.)

For a review of the arbitration by Mr. Foster, the agent of the United States, see the North American Review for December, 1895 (CLXI.) 693. 427 Stats. at L. 472.

rendered this act inappropriate, an act was approved April 6, 1894, for executing the regulations of the Paris tribunal, and a similar act was passed in Great Britain. No agreement for the temporary suspension of sealing was effected.

Damages.

The damages claimed by Great Britain as growing out of the controversy amounted to $542,169.26, without interest, which was demanded at the rate of 7 per cent. On August 21, 1894, Mr. Gresham, Secretary of State, offered, as the result of a somewhat extended negotiation, the sum of $425,000 in full and final settlement of all claims, "subject to the action of Con. gress on the question of appropriating the money." "The President," said Mr. Gresham, "can only undertake to submit the matter to Congress at the beginning of its session in December next, with a recommendation that the money be appropriated and made immediately available for the purpose above expressed, and if at any time before the appropriation is made your [the British] government shall desire, it is understood that the negotiations on which we have for some time been engaged for the establishment of a mixed commission will be renewed." The offer was accepted by Sir Julian Pauncefote on these terms. At the ensuing session Congress did not appropriate the money, and the negotiations for a mixed commission were renewed.

On February 8, 1896, a convention was concluded at Washington by Mr. Olney, Secretary of State, and Sir Julian Pauncefote for the appointment of two commissioners, one by the United States and the other by Great Britain, to meet and sit at Victoria, and also, if either commissioner should formally so request, to sit at San Francisco for the purpose of determining the claims for damages. The convention includes by designation the cases of the Wanderer (1887-1889), Winifred (1891), Henrietta (1892), and Oscar and Hattie (1892), in addition to the cases mentioned in the findings of fact of the Paris tribunal.

Any cases in which the commissioners may be unable to agree are to be referred to an umpire to be appointed by the two governments, or, if they disagree, by the President of Switzerland.

128 Stats. at L. 52; S. Ex. Doc. 67, 53 Cong. 3 sess.; For. Rel. 1894, App. 1, pp. 107–233.

2H. Ex. Doc. 132, 53 Cong. 3 sess.

The commissioners under this convention have been duly appointed, the commissioner on the part of the United States being the Hon. William L. Putnam, a judge of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, and on the part of Great Britain the Hon. George Edwin King, a judge of the Supreme Court of the Dominion of Canada. Various sessions have been held. Counsel before the commission are: On the part of the United States, the Hon. Don M. Dickinson, senior counsel; Messrs. Robert Lansing, junior counsel, and Charles B. Warren, associate counsel; on the part of Great Britain, Messrs. Frederic Peters, Q. C., senior counsel; Frederic L. Beique, Q. C., associate counsel; Ernest V. Bodwell, junior counsel and agent, and Sir Charles Tupper, Q. C., associate counsel. The secretary of the commission is Mr. Chandler P. Anderson, of New York City. The clerks to the commission are Messrs. Reuel Small, Thomas R. E. McInnes, J. C. Clay, and Thomas P. Owens.1

It is proper to state that the form "Behring" instead of "Bering," in referring to the sea of that name, has been employed in this chapter merely for the sake of uniformity, the form "Behring" having been used in many official and historical documents which the present writer deemed it to be his duty to quote without any alteration whatever.

5627-61

CHAPTER XVIII.

QUESTION OF A PERMANENT TREATY OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN.

The present volume, in which a history is given of the arbitrations between the United States and Great Britain, may fitly be closed by a review of the recent negotiations between the two countries for a general and permanent treaty of arbitration.

The Senate of the United States on February 14, 1890, and the House of Representatives on April 3, 1890, adopted the following concurrent resolution:

"Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That the President be and is hereby requested to invite from time to time, as fit occasions may arise, negotiations with any government with which the United States has or may have diplomatic relations, to the end that any differences or disputes arising between the two governments which cannot be adjusted by diplomatic agency may be referred to arbitration, and be peaceably adjusted by such means."

The British House of Commons on July 16, 1893, adopted the following resolution:

"Resolved, That this House has learnt with satisfaction that both Houses of the United States Congress have, by resolution, requested the President to invite from time to time, as fit occasions may arise, negotiations with any government with which the United States have or may have diplomatic relations, to the end that any differences or disputes arising between the two governments which cannot be adjusted by diplomatic agency may be referred to arbitration and peaceably adjusted by such means; and that this House, cordially sympathizing with the purpose in view, expresses the hope that Her Maj esty's Government will lend their ready cooperation to the Gov

ernment of the United States upon the basis of the foregoing resolution.".

1

As the result of these expressions of opinion, communications were exchanged between the two governments in regard to the conclusion of a permanent treaty of arbitration, the negotiations being at first conducted by Mr. Gresham, Secretary of State of the United States, and Sir Julian Pauncefote, British ambassador at Washington. From the spring of 1895 till March 1896, however, the consideration of the subject was suspended; but on the 5th of that month Lord Salisbury, referring to the prior negotiations, addressed to Sir Julian Pauncefote an instruction in which the discussion was renewed. The correspondence which then ensued resulted in the conclusion on January 11, 1897, of a treaty. The following documents, beginning with Lord Salisbury's instruction of March 5, 1896, exhibit the history of the subject:

No. 65.]

Lord Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauncefote.

FOREIGN OFFICE, March 5, 1896. SIR: In the spring of last year communications were exchanged between Your Excellency and the late Mr. Gresham upon the establishment of a system of international arbitration for the adjustment of disputes between the two Governments. Circumstances, to which it is unnecessary to refer, prevented the further consideration of the question at that time.

But it has again been brought into prominence by the controversy which has arisen upon the Venezuelan boundary. Without touching upon the matters raised by that dispute, it appears to me that the occasion is favorable for renewing the general discussion upon a subject in which both nations feel a strong interest, without having been able up to this time to arrive at a common ground of agreement. The obstacle which has separated them has been the difficulty of deciding how far the undertaking to refer all matters in dispute is to be carried. On both sides it is admitted that some exceptions must be made. Neither Government is willing to accept arbitration upon issues in which the national honor or integrity is

Blue Book, "United States, No. 12 (1893)." President Cleveland referred to this resolution of the House of Commons in his annual message to Congress of December 4, 1893, saying: "It affords me signal pleasure to lay this parliamentary resolution before the Congress, and to express my sincere gratification that the sentiment of two great and kindred nations is thus authoritatively manifested in favor of the rational and peaceable settlement of international quarrels by honorable resort to arbitration.”

« السابقةمتابعة »