Rensselaer Republican, Volume 25, Number 31, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 30 March 1893 — BERING SEA ARBITRATION [ARTICLE]

BERING SEA ARBITRATION

Statement of the Dispute With , Great Britian. The Arbitrator's Board Will Hold SeaMon* With Open Doom at Paris. TheN. Y. Herald's Paris cable of Sun* 7 dgysaYsr~“A:t the aftgting qn Tharsd ay of the Behring sea arbitrators It was .decided that the sitting of the tribunal should not bo held abehind closed doors. This permits making public the exact ; points ojyjie contention between the United States and Great Britian. Briefly stated, the case of the United States is that the Alaskan fur sea! is begotten, born and reared only upon tho Pribylov or Sea. Islands in the Bering sea, to which islands they return every spring to spend several months, consortl ng together in accorJauee with their gregarious nature; that while at these islands the seals are easily controlled; that can he aiuL has been exercised; that while from the islands during migration, which reaches as far south as the coast of California, they land on no other shore and mingle with no other herd of fur seals; that because of these habits the Alaskan herd and each individual of it is tho sole property of the United States. It is claimed that a>large p<‘iventago%f *be seals killed by open sea hunters are females. the majority of which are about to become or are mothers* The destruction of the pregnant female causes the dea th of the unborn young. The death of the mother seal, Killed while in search of food in the waters of the Bering Sea, destroys tho offspring on the Pribylov rookeries. It is further claimed that many of the seals shot in the open sea by hunters, escape mortally wounded or sink before the hunter reaches them. On the Islands only a limited number of the male seals are killed. As the seal is polygamous, a largo number of mate seals can be killed without affecting the birth rate of the herd. On these facts the American Government claims that from tho nature of the industry established on tho Pribylov islands the -United States has the right to protect and preserve these seals wherever tluty may be found, as the animals can only be killed on United States territory without danger of extermination. The case of Groat Britain, on the other hand, is that the Alaskan seals have not the characteristics of animals that can be made subject to property; that it is not certain they land only on the Pribylov islands, or that they do not in term Engle with tho Russian seals, or that they are pelagic in nature and, therefore, should bo treated as fish rather than as animals; that many of the propositions essential to the position taken by tho United States are unproven or contrary to the facts. As to the pelagic sealing it is claimed that the destructiveness and wastefulness have been greatly exaggerated, that itisa legitmate and proper method of taking seals, and that it can bo prosecuted without danger of exterminating the herd. Both nations concede that the seals have decreased, tho. United States charging such decrease to the destruction of the producing sex by open sea sealing, Great Britain claiming that tho present condition has been caused by the excessive number of males killed on the islands and the injurious effect of the methods there employed, '