94 ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 



if the practical operation of them during many years has been only to 

 control British subjects and British ships, and if it be true that tlie 

 seal fisheries of J^ew Zealand have been oi)en to the world during this 

 time or any part of it, or if such an assertion has ever been nnule, evi- 

 dence of it would have been forthcoming, because my learned friends, 

 of course, and those who instruct them are quite in possession of all 

 the records, and all the information and knowledge that is to be fur- 

 nished by the (jrovernment of New Zealand, on this .subject. 



Look at it for a single moment. Is there a single spot in the world 

 where the fur seal is known ever to have been that it has not been made 

 the subject of i)ursuit from the very i)rofitable results of such pursuit ? 

 Is there a place? We have seen in the ])rogress of this case that on 

 almost every S])ot in the world except these Islands in BehringSea, the 

 seal has not been only i^ursued, but exterminated. In two or three 

 localities, under the influence of such protection as has been adopted 

 at a comparatively late day, when attention was called to the value of 

 it — in two or three localities like the Lobos Islands, and such places, 

 there is a remnant of the seal. Now if the New Zealand seals had«been 

 open during all this time to general pursuit as my learned friends con- 

 tend the Behring Sea seals should be and are, how happens it that that 

 place alone has been free from the attacks of the vessels that have 

 gone to the utmost parts of the earth, as the evidence shows, for the 

 purpose of depopulating and exterminating the seal Islands. This then 

 appears, that under these Statutes which on the face of them apply to 

 everybody — under the effect of those Statutes in the districts .shown by 

 the map, the seal has been protected, and the world — that is, such ]>or- 

 tion of the world as could have any interest m trespassing upon it — 

 has acquiesced in that. 



The Falkland Islands is another place, where at a later period — as 

 late as 1881 — measures were adopted for this purpose. It was an Ordi- 

 nance to provide for the establishment of a close time in the seal fl.shery 

 of the Falkland Islands and their dependencies, and the seas adjacent 

 thereto ; and the preamble is : 



Whereas the seal fishery of these ishinds which was at one time a source of profit 

 and aclvanta.i;e to the colonists has been exhausted by indiscriminate and wasteful 

 fishiusi, and it is desirable to revive and protect this industry by the establishment 

 of a close time, during which it shall be unlawful to kill or capture seals within the 

 limits of this colony and its dependencies, 



Be it therefore enacted, and so forth. That is the reason and the 

 first reason why no person .shall kill or attempt to capture, and without 

 stopping to read the various jnovLsions, they will be seen to apply in 

 their terms to any person, any ship, any master or sailor, and to every 

 description of seal including some varieties that are not strictly of the 

 family of the fur seal. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Within the limits of the Colony. 



Mr. Phelps. — Within the limits of the colony and its dependencies, 

 yes. It does not appear there, — I think the contrary does appear — that 

 the sealing is not pelagic. I do not know whether it does or not appear 

 that this sealing is principally, I believe, on the Island. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — At any rate, that state went as far as flie 

 country thought it could go for the protection of the seal. 



Mr. Phelps. — It went as far as it was necessary to go and only limits 

 it by the limits of the Colony. 



I may say in ])a.ssing what I might better have said at the beginning 

 of this afternoon, that this protection of the seal, shown to be univer- 

 sal now as far as there are any seals left, will be a very important con 

 sideration when we come to discuss the extent of the freedom of the 



