ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 7 



He states the couversation ; and (in reply to what Mr. Blaiue said), 

 remarks: 



I observed that this appeared like an assertion of the inare claiisitm which I could 

 hardly believe would be revived at the present day by his Covernnient or any other; 

 to which he replied that his Government had not officially asserted such a claim and 

 therefore it was unnecessary to discuss it. As a matter of fact there had been no 

 interference with any Canadian \cs8ols in Bohring's Sea except such as were found 

 engaged in the capture and destruction of fur-seals. But his Government claim the 

 exclusive right of Seal fishery, which the United States and Russia before them, had 

 practically enjoyed for generations without any attempt at interference from any 

 other country. The fur-se.al was a species most valuable to mankind. And the 

 Behring's Sea was its last stronghold. The United States had bought the Islands in 

 that sea, to which these creatures periodically resort to lay their young aud now 

 Canadian iishermen step in and slaughter the seals on their passage to the islands, 

 without taking heed of the warnings given by Canadian Officials themselves, that 

 the result must inevitably be the extermination of tlie species. This was an abuse, 

 not only reprehensible in itself aud opposed to the interests of mankind, but an 

 infraction of the rights of the United States. It inflicted, moreover a serious injury 

 on a neighbouring and friendly State, by depriving it of the fruits of an industry on 

 which vast sums of money had been expended and which had long been pursued 

 exclusively, and for the general benefit. The case was so strong as to necessitate 

 measures of self-defence for the vindication of the rights of the United States and the 

 protection of this valuable fishery from destruction. 



Now, Sir, if you care to consider the utterly immaterial question 

 whether the position of the United States as asserted by its counsel on 

 this trial differs from tliat which was earlier taken by Mr. Blaine, I ask 

 you to discriminate if you can, between the position of Mr. Blaine at 

 the outset of these negociations, and the proposition T have endeavoured 

 to state to you to-day as being- the only one this case presents. Sir 

 Julian gives the remainder of the interview, which I need not read — it 

 is before you — and, as corroborating what I said a little while ago about 

 the unimportance of these seizures, I will only read from the concluding 

 paragraph of the letter : 



As regards compensation, if an agreement should be arrived at, he (Mr. Blaine), 

 felt sni'e that his Government would not wish that private individuals who had acted 

 hona fide in the belief that they were exercising their lawful rights should be the 

 victims of a grave dispute between two great countries, which had happily been 

 adjusted. He was not without hope therefore, that the wishes 1 had expressed might 

 be met, and that all might be arranged in a manner which should involve no humil- 

 iation on either side. 



His tone was most friendly throughout and he manifested a strong desire to let all 

 questions of legal right and international law disa})})ear in an agreement for a close 

 season, which he believes to be urgently called for in the common interest. 



This is the report of the language of the dead statesman, coming to 

 us through the eminent representative of Great Britain in the United 

 States, Sir Julian Pauncefote, and published in their evidein^e. Surely, 

 no one who has Mr. Blnine's reputation at heart need blnsh for the 

 record thus made. And if the United States have been unfortunate 

 in this matter at all, it is that they did not adhere as Eussia did, firmly 

 and resolutely, to ground that was unanswerable, and never give way 

 for a moment to any suggestion of negotiation, or settlement, or arbi- 

 trament, short of the plain necessity and justice of the case. 



I shall refer to anotlier letter. Sir, with your permission, which will 

 be found on page 305 of the same volume. This is again from Sir Julian 

 Pauncefote to tlie Marquis of Salisbury, is dated on the 12th of Decern' 

 ber, 1889, and to make it intelligible 1 first refer to a ])reeeding letter 

 of December 7th, 188!>, from Lord Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauncefote 

 on the same page: 



I have been informed that a telegram has been received by the Secretary of State 

 for the Colonies from the Governor-Geneial of Canada, reporting that his council 

 have expressed the following views in regard to reopening ncsgotiations with the 

 United States Government on the subject of th« Behring's Sea seal fishery. 



