in the provisions of Section 1956 of the United States' Revised Statutes, and directed to seize all vessels and arrest and deliver to the proper authorities any or all persons whom you may detect violating the law referred to, after due notice shall have been given. "You will also seize any liquors or fire-arms attempted to be introduced into the country without proper permit, under the provisions of Section 1955 of the Revised Statutes, and the Proclamation of the President dated 4th February, 1870. “Respectfully yours, "Captain M. A. HEALY, "Signed: C. S. FAIRCHILD. “Commanding revenue-steamer Bear, San-Francisco, California.' "ANNEX B. "IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA. "AUGUST SPECIAL TERM, 1886. "To the Honourable Lafayette Dawson, Judge of said District Court: "The libel of information of M. D. Ball, Attorney for the United States for the District of Alaska, who prosecutes on behalf of said United States, and being present here in Court in his proper person, in the name and on behalf of the said United States, against the schooner Thornton, her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, and against all persons intervening for their interest therein, in a cause of forfeiture, alleges and informs as follows: "That Charles A. Abbey, an officer in the Revenue Marine Service of the United States, and on special duty in the waters of the district of Alaska, heretofore, to wit, on the 1st day of August, 1886, w.thin the limits of Alaska Territory, and in the waters thereof, and within the civil and judicial district of Alaska, to wit, within the waters of that portion of Behring sea belonging to the said district, on waters navigable from the sea by vessels of 10 or more tons burden, seized the ship or vessel commonly called a schooner, the Thornton, her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, being the property of some person or persons to the said Attorney unknown, as forfeited to the United States, for the following causes: "That the said vessel or schooner was found engaged in killing furseal within the limits of Alaska Territory, and in the waters thereof, in violation of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States. "And the said Attorney saith that all and singular the premises are and were true, and within the Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of this Court, and that by reason thereof, and by force of the Statutes of the United States in such cases made and provided, the afore mentioned and described schooner or vessel, being a vessel of over 20 tons burden, her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, became and are forfeited to the use of the said United States, and that said schooner is now within the district aforesaid. "Wherefore the said Attorney prays the usual process and monition of this honourable Court issue in this behalf, and that all persons interested in the before-mentioned and described schooner or vessel may be cited in general and special to answer the premises, and all due proceedings being had, that the said schooner or vessel, her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture may, for the cause aforesaid, and others appearing, be condemned by the definite sentence and decree of this honourable Court, as forfeited to the use of the said United States, according to the form of the Statute of the said United States in such cases made and provided. "Signed: M. D. BALL. "United States District Attorney for the District of Alaska. "ANNEX C. "The following table shows the names of the British sealing-vessels seized or warned by United States revenue cruizers 1886-1890, and the approximate distance from land when seized. The distances assigned in the cases of the Carolena, Thornton and Onward are on the authority of U.S. Naval Commander Abbey (see 50th Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Executive Documents No 106, pp. 20, 30, 40). The distances assigned in the cases of the Anna Beck, W. P. Sayward, Dolphin and Grace are on the anthority of Captain Shepard U. S. R. M. (Blue Book, United States N° 2, 1890.— pp. 80-82. See Appendix, vol. III).' (1) Neah Bay is in the State of Washington, and the Pathfinder was seized there on charges made against her in the Behring Sea in the previous year. She was released two days later. "And whereas the Government of Her Britannic Majesty did ask the said Arbitrators to find the said facts as set forth in the said statement, and whereas the Agent and Counsel for the United States Government thereupon in our presence informed us that the said statement of facts was sustained by the evidence, and that they had agreed with the Agent and Coun sel for Her Britannic Majesty that We, the Arbitrators, if we should think fit so to do might find the said statement of facts to be true. "Now, We, the said Arbitrators, do unanimously find the facts as set forth in the said statement to be true. "And whereas each and every question which has been considered by the Tribunal has been determined by a majority of all the Arbitrators; "Now We, Baron de Courcel, Lord Hannen, Mr. Justice Harlan, Sir John Thompson, Senator Morgan, the Marquis Visconti Venosta and Mr. Gregers Gram, the respective minorities not withdrawing their votes, do declare this to be the final Decision and Award in writing of this Tribunal in accordance with the Treaty. "Made in duplicate at Paris and signed by us the fifteenth day of August in the year 1893. "And We do certify this English Version thereof to be true and accurate. "ALPH. DE COURCEL. "JOHN M. HARLAN. "JOHN T. MORGAN. "HANNEN. "JNO S D THOMPSON. "VISCONTI VENOSTA. "G. GRAM.". "Déclarations faites par le Tribunal d'Arbitrage et Présentées aux Gouvernements des États-Unis et de la Grande-Bretagne pour Etre Prises en Considération par ces Gouvernements. “I. "Les Arbitres déclarent que les Règlements communs tels qu'ils sont établis par le Tribunal d'Arbitrage, en vertu de l'article VII du Traité du 29 février 1892, n'étant applicables que sur la haute mer, devront, dans leur pensée, être complétés par d'autres Règlements applicables dans les limites de la souveraineté de chacune des deux Puissances intéressées et qui devront être fixés par elles d'un commun accord. "II. "Vu l'état critique auquel il paraît constant que la race des phoques à fourrure se trouve actuellement réduite par suite de circonstances incomplètement éclaircies, les Arbitres croient devoir recommander aux deux Gouvernements de se concerter en vue d'interdire toute destruction de phoques à fourrure, tant sur terre que sur mer, pendant une période de deux ou trois ans, ou d'une année au moins, sauf telles exceptions que les deux Gouvernements pourraient trouver à propos d'admettre. "Si cette mesure donnait de bons résultats, elle pourrait être appliquée de nouveau, à certains intervalles, suivant les circonstances. “ III. "Les Arbitres déclarent en outre que, dans leur pensée, l'exécution des règlements établis par le Tribunal d'Arbitrage devra être assurée par un ensemble de stipulations et de mesures qu'il appartiendra aux deux Puissances d'arrêter, et que le Tribunal doit s'en remettre en conséquence à ces deux Puissances pour rendre effectifs les règlements établis par lui. "Fait et signé à Paris, le 15 août 1893. "ALPH. DE COURCEL. "JOHN M. HARLAN. "JOHN T. MORGAN. "J'approure les déclarations I. et III. "HANNEN. "J'approuve les déclarations I. et III. "JNO S D THOMPSON. "VISCONTI VENOSTA. "G. GRAM." "[English version.] "Declarations made by the Tribunal of Arbitration and Referred to the Governments of the United States and Great Britain for their consideration. "I. "The Arbitrators declare that the concurrent Regulations, as determined upon by the Tribunal of Arbitration, by virtue of article VII of the Treaty of the 29th of February 1892, being applicable to the high sea only, should, in their opinion, be supplemented by other Regulations applicable within the limits of the sovereignty of each of the two Powers interested and to be settled by their common agreement. "II. "In view of the critical condition to which it appears certain that the race of fur-seals is now reduced in consequence of circumstances not fully known, the Arbitrators think fit to recommend both Governments to come to an understanding in order to prohibit any killing of fur-seals, either on land or at sea, for a period of two or three years, or at least one year, subject to such exceptions as the two Governments might think proper to admit of. "Such a measure might be recurred to at occasional intervals if found beneficial. "III. "The Arbitrators declare moreover that, in their opinion, the carrying out of the Regulations determined upon by the Tribunal of Arbitration, should be assured by a system of stipu latious and measures to be enacted by the two Powers; and that the Tribunal must, in consequence, leave it to the two Powers to decide upon the means for giving effect to the Regulations determined upon by it. "We do certify this English version to be true and accurate and have signed the same at Paris this 15th day of August 1893. "I approve declarations I. and III. "I approve declarations I. and III. The Result of the "ALPH DE COURCEL. "JOHN M. HARLAN. "HANNEN. "JNO S D THOMPSON. On the various questions of right submitted to the tribunal its decision was against the United States; but to anyone who has read the foregoing pages it must be evident that this result was not due to any lack of ability or of effort on the part of the American agent and counsel. It must be equally evident that it was due to certain historical and legal antecedents, among which we may mention the following: 1. That when the first seizures were reported in 1886 the Department of State not only possessed no information concerning them, but was unable to give any explanation of them; and that when the circumstances of the seizures were ascertained, even though the full judicial record had not then been received, the vessels were ordered to be released.1 2. That the court in Alaska, in condemning the vessels and punishing their masters and crews, proceeded on a doctrine of mare clausum, which the United States had never asserted and which the government afterwards disavowed.2 3. That the treaty ceding Alaska to the United States did not purport to convey the waters of Behring Sea, but in terms conveyed only "the territory and dominion" of Russia "on the continent of America and in the adjacent islands," and drew a water boundary so as to effect a transfer of the islands, many of them nameless, which lay in the intervening seas.3 4. That the ukase of 1821, which contained the only distinctive claim of mare clausum ever put forward by Russia, did not assume to treat the whole of Behring Sea as a close sea, but only to exclude foreign vessels from coming within one Supra, 772, 773. 2 Supra, 797. 3 Supra, 763. |