24 ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 



shore, and this on tho gronnd that the negotiations for the establishment of a close 

 time are going on." But, Mr. PheljJS added, there is every reason tiiat this step should 

 not become public, as it might give encouragement to the destruction of seals that 

 is taking place. 



And then something more in regard to communicating that to Lord 

 Lansdowne. 



He also said he presumed that any Convention for exercising police in Behring's 

 Sea must, in the case of America and Great Britain, be supported by legislation; 

 and he would be A^ery glad if Her Majesty's Government would try to obtain the 

 recjuisite powers during the present session. 



1 replied that the matter should have our immediate attention. 



You perceive, therefore, that when pressed for an excuse for not car- 

 rying this Convention into effect, Lord Salisbnry falls back upon a 

 remark that I have no doubt he supposed was api)lied to this subject, 

 as an excuse for delay, when the very letter in which he conununicates 

 that remark to his own Minister shows that if it was made or as it was 

 made, it was used by the Minister as a reason for greater despatch. So 

 that the reason for delay which he set Mr. Blaine to defend liimself 

 against, as coming rather from ^he American side than the British, was 

 a reason that was given on the American side for greater despatch. It 

 shows that a mind charged with many matters is liable sometimes to 

 forget exa(;tly what took place in i)articular conversations. It is 

 unquestionable that Lord Salisbury, as I have said, felt the embarrass- 

 ment of the position in M'hich he was placed. 



You will see that this agreement was made, continued, and repeated 

 and attempted to be carried out, as far as Great Britain could get, with- 

 out the concurrence of Canada; — that nothing but the objection of 

 Canada prevented its being carried into effect; and that the objection of 

 Canada was founded upon a statement of fact which now is not pretended 

 to be true; it was founded alone upon the sup])osition that the increase 

 of seals was so great that all the results of pelagic sealing would not even 

 arrest it, and that, therefore, the attempt of the United States to inter- 

 fere was simply saying, while the abundan.ce of these animals is greater 

 than we can take, and greater than we want, we will still prohibit you 

 from taking a small fraction out of the sea of the seals we should not 

 and could not use. 



Mr. Blaine is inaccurate in saying that the British Government 

 abruptly terminated these negotiations. It never did terminate them; 

 they died of inanition, and on the 12th of November is the letter of the 

 United States Minister that has been so often referred to that I shall 

 not read from it again, which is the last time, I believe, till the subject 

 was referred to in 1890 by Mr. Blaine, in which this Convention figures, 

 and which expresses the belief of the Minister, though Lord Salisbury 

 had not said so, that Great Britain would not carry that arrangement 

 out withoitt the consent of Canada, that the consent of Canada could 

 not be had, and that the United States Government might as well 

 understand that the whole agreement was at an end. That is the pur- 

 port of it. 



Now, when you come (and I shall soon be through with these pre- 

 liminaries, I hope) to the renewal of the negotiations with Mr. Blaine, 

 the first communication in regard to which I read this morning, — 

 between Sir Julian Pauncefote, the then Minister, and Lord Salis- 

 bury, — what then was the attitude of Great Britain? It was, from 

 first to last, all the way through, exactly this: — " We deny the li^lit of 

 the United States Government to protect itself against this dcstiiictitm 

 of the seals, because it would be an infringement of our rights uj^on 

 the high seas. We deny that you have acquired that right from Russia; 



