ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS 103 



had separately legislated on the subject. But in another view of the 

 case it might have been regarded as proper.-^ 



Senator Morgan. — In asking the question I did, and which was 

 for information, I did not have in my mind the running out of these 

 principles into the serious results which have been discussed, and 

 which are not within our purview or even within the purview of our 

 contemphition. 



I was looking at the question as to the value of these arrangements 

 between these Great European Powers as a precedent on the subject of 

 regulations that might be adopted by this Tribunal, affecting the riglits 

 of Great Britain and tlie United States on the Pa(;itic Ocean. 



Mr. Phelps. — It undoubtedly has an important bearing on that 

 branch of the case. But aside from the question of regulations, there 

 is no doubt at all that it has an important bearing, on the other ques- 

 tion, of the character of the conduct which is sought to be justified 

 here, whether it comes witliiu the legitimate freedom of the sea or not, 

 as shewing what the sense of mankind is upon that subject. It is 

 principally in those two connections that we have cited it, not because 

 it is in other respects at all analogous to the case that we have in hand. 



The Uruguay protection provisions will be found on page 441) of the 

 Book I have been reading from, the 1st United States Appendix, and 

 inchides the Lobos Islands, where there are still, as we learn from the 

 testimony of the furriers, seals enough to afford a small annual profit, 

 not large commercially, but still appreciable. This comes from the 

 custodian of the Archives at Montevideo: 



I have to iuform you iu compliance with the foregoing decree, that the taking of 

 seals on the islands called Lobos, Polonio, Castillos Graudes, and Corouilla, on the 

 coasts of the Rio de la Plata, and in that part of the Ocean adjacent to tlie depart- 

 ment of Maldonado and Rocha is done by contractors who obtain their contract for 

 periods of ten years each paying annually into the public treasury seven thousand 

 dollars in gold, and also the departmental duty of twenty cents on each seal-skin 

 and four cents on each arroba of oil. 



A very similar arrangement to that which the Government of the 

 United States asks. 



This duty was established (and provision made for the object to which it was to 

 be apidied) by the Act of July 23rd 1857, and that of June 28th 1858, (Caraira, vol- 

 ume I, pages 440 and 448, Digest of Laws). The State guarantees to the contractors 

 that they shall carry on their industry without molestation. It does not permit ves- 

 sels of any kind to anchor otf any of the said islands, and does not allow any works 

 to be constructed that might frighten the seals away. The catch begins .June 1st 

 and ends October 15th (Decree of May 17th 1876, page 1480 of Laws now in Force, 

 t*y Goyena). This is all that the undersigned has to communicate. God guard you 

 many years. 



It is under that provision that the few seals left on the Lobos Islands, 

 (and some of the witnesses tell you what has become of the race that 

 was there in great numbers formerly,) are preserved. Anyone who 

 supposes that an individual can fit out a ship, to go down there and 

 destroy those seals out of the three mile line to the extent of extermin- 

 ation, would probably find out his mistake. Nobody has attempted it. 

 Lobos Island used to be free plunder for seals till the seal was almost 

 exterminated, and since then the extermination has almost stopped? 

 Why is that? The sealers belong to other nations, not to Urugua> 

 The sealers come from America largely. What has put a stoj) to it? 

 Why, the knowledge that it is forbidden and would not be tolerated; 

 and it would not be safe for anybody to take them. 



The President. — Tliere is notliing here against Pelagic Sealing. 



