Harriet. diction over the high seas, or as to the rights of Case of the protection or property in seals when found on the high seas. Seals were never taken at the Falkland Islands otherwise than on land, and the Harriet was not charged with the offense of taking them on the high seas. Second. The real question in the dispute was whether the Republic of Buenos Ayres owned the coasts upon which sealing had been indulged in by the captured schooner, and upon this point issue was actually joined by the two Governments. The position assumed by the American Chargé was that the Falkland Islands were unoccupied and under the sovereignty of no nation, and that, therefore, sealing on them was open to all. Third. It is true, the American Chargé asserts that "the ocean fishery is a natural right," and that "every interference with it by a foreign power is a natural wrong;" and these assertions appear to be relied on at page 137 of the British Case to defeat the claims of protection and property now put forward by the United States. The context1 shows, however, that, so far as sealing is concerned, the Chargé was merely laying a foundation for the proposition that, granting the title of Buenos Ayres to the coast in question to be 1 Post, p. 190. Harriet. Case of the perfect, yet it was bare and uninhabited, and, therefore, justice required that "the shores, as well as the body of the ocean, ought to be left common to all;" which proposition, if established, would have justified the act of the Harriet. The accuracy of this proposition the United States are not now called upon to discuss, since it has no bearing upon the present issues. In dismissing the case of the Harriet the United States again insist that it is wholly irrelevant to the present controversy, for the reason that no occasion had arisen for the assertion of any right to protect seals when away from land, and no such right was, in fact, either asserted or denied by either party. PART SECOND. REPLY OF THE UNITED STATES TO THAT PORTION OF THE CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN CONTAINED IN THE REPORT OF THE BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 41 PART SECOND. REPLY OF THE UNITED STATES TO THAT THE BRITISH COMMISSIONERS AND THEIR REPORT. The Report, bearing date June 21, 1892, of the Commissioners of Great Britain, which is herein treated as the second part of the British Case, was delivered to the Agent of the United States and to the Arbitrators in pursuance of an agreement reached by a diplomatic correspondence between the two Governments, already cited (ante, p. 2), but not until the 25th of October, 1892, and after the lapse of seven weeks from the delivery of the original British Case. Commission. The character of the Report will be discussedThe Bering Sea somewhat in detail in the following pages, and it is considered to be proper that some observations should be made at the outset as to the composition of the Commission. In 1891, when the subject of a Modus Vivendi, as preliminary to the contemplated Treaty, was under discussion, |