ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 105 



of the Eiissiaii Goveniment in seizing several vessels", — Canadian ves- 

 sels I believe — perliai)s one of tliem was an American — wliicli were 

 engaged iu sealing, my friend Sir Cliarles Ivnssell refers to a correspond- 

 ence with Secretary Frelinglinysen in 1882, and Secretary Bayard 

 in 1887. That wonld not at first sight be particnlarly apposite to the 

 seizures that took place iu 1802, especially as those seizures were ]>rin- 

 cii)ally of British vessels, and this correspondence appears to have been 

 M'ith a former Secretary of State of the United States. No man is so 

 fertile in that s])ecial recourse of advocacy which transfers the dis- 

 cussion of a question to a different subject, as my learued friend Sir 

 Charles Kussell. He answers what is said about 1892 by a reference to 

 a controversy on an entirely different subject several years before; and 

 it is not difticult to make such an answer quite successful, because you 

 get rid of the exact couditions under which the question arises in the 

 case in hand; and therefore if the case presents any difticulty it can 

 sometimes be successfully met by discussing another case that stands 

 ui)ou a dift'erent footing. 



Now what was this correspondence in 1883 and 1887? It had noth- 

 ing to do with the taking of seals. It was in reference to the whale 

 and cod fishing and the trade iu arms and liqnors with the natives on 

 the Eussian Coast. Now I respectfully ask : What has that to do with 

 the seizure of Sealing vessels in 1892? The San Francisco firm which 

 made the complaint upon which Secretary Frelinghuysen's representa- 

 tion to the Eussian Government was presented, state explicitly that 

 they have nothing to do with the taking or purchase of furs, in their 

 complaint of the action of the Eussian Government — they take care to 

 clear themselves from the embarrassment of having it supposed that 

 they are interfering with the sealing. Then all that was said on that 

 subject had reference to an entirely different controversy. Lynde and 

 Hough's note to Mr. Folger who was the Secretary of the Treasury, is 

 the foundation of that controversy, which I shall pursue just far 

 enough to show that it has nothing whatever to do with any question 

 in this case. I read now from page 18 of Part 3 of Volume II of the 

 Appendix to the British Case. This letter is dated San Francisco, 

 February 15th 1882: 



Sir: You will please pardon us for this seeming intrusion, but tlie matter in which 

 we now seek your aid and kind assistance is of great imjiortance to us. 



We now are and have been extensively engaged in the Pacific Coast Cod fisheries, 

 and, in fact, are among the very few who fifteen years ago started in a small way, 

 believing with energy and fair dealing we could work up an enterprise that would 

 be a benefit to the coast. Our ideas were correct. We have been yearly sending 

 vessels to the coast of Kamtchatka (Sea of Okhotsk) for fish. 



We never have been molested in Russian waters from catching cod-fish or procur- 

 ing bait, which are small salmon in the rivers, or filling fresh water for the use of 

 ship, but it appears now there is a law which has never been enforced against for- 

 eigners, the same wo have recently noted, and wlilch we have been apprised of, and 

 the substance is that foreign vessels must receive an order Irom the Governor of 

 Siberia, besides must pay a duty of 10 dollars per ton on all fish caught in Russian 

 waters. This decree, if sustained, is ruinous to one of the best and rising industries 

 of the coast, and as we fit our vessels to sail about the 1st May, leaves us but 

 little chance to arrange matters this season save with your kind assistance in the 

 matter. Our business is fishing entirely. We do no trade with natives, having 

 nothing to do with the taking or purchasing of furs. At this time we are nlaced in 

 a very bad jn-edicament. Trusting that yon can relieve us from this embarrassment, 

 and receive an early reply on the subject, we are, etc. 



(Signed.) Lynde and Hough. 



P. S. — Our vessels fish from 10 to 55 miles from shore. 



L. AND H. 



