182 ORAL ARGT^MENT OF HON. EDWARD J. rRELPS. 



fered with, so afterwards they never were interfered with — not a Biitish 

 ship nor an American ship ever entered that sea to iiiterfeie with the 

 trade, with the settlement, with the fur-seal industry, or the far bearing 

 industry, which then extended beyond the fur-seal. 



In the Treaty of Great Britain with Spain in 1790 (which will be 

 found at i^age 33 of the first American Appendix) there is a similar 

 provision by Great Britain, 



Lord Hannen. — That is the origin (as pointed out in your case) of 

 this Treaty. 



Mr. Phelps. — Article 4 of the Treaty between Great Britain and 

 Spain says this. 



His Britannic Majesty engages to take tbe most effectnal measures to prevent the 

 navigation and tiBlusry of liis subjects in the Pacitic Ocean or in tbe 8outh sens, 

 from being made a pretext for illicit trade with tbe Spanish settlements;- and, with 

 this view, it is nn)reover expressly ;jtipulated that British subjects shall not navi- 

 gate, or carry on their fishery in tbe said seas, within tbe space of ten sea leagues 

 from any part of the coasts already occupied by Spain. 



That is an illustration of what I am trying to say in regard to the 

 effect of this Ukase of 1821. 



Lord Hannen. — I'hat Avas a Treaty. 



Mr. Phelps. — That was a Treaty — yes; and we say that this Ukase, 

 as left by the Treaty, had a similar effect — not that it was specifically 

 provided that they should not approach within a certain nnmber of 

 miles, but they obtnined the right of free navigation without obtaining 

 the right to disturb the industries, settlements, and trade, of Russia. 

 That was at the time when restrictions of trade were common. 



The President. — Mr. Phelps, in the letter of Mr. Canning which 

 you have just read, upon page 73, it is difficult to put those together so 

 as to make what you have just read concordant with the words of Mr. 

 Canning. He says: 



But tbe pretensions of tbe Russian Ukase of 1821 to exclusive dominion over the 

 Pacific could not continue longer unrepealed without compelling us to take some 

 mensure of public and efiectual remonstrance against it. 



You will therefore take care in tbe first instance to repress any attempt to give 

 this change to the character of tbe negotiation, and will declare without reserve 

 that tbe points to which alone the solicitude of the British Government, and the 

 jealousy of the British nation attach any great importance is the doing away (in a 

 manner as little disagreeable to Russia as possible) of the effect of the Ukase of 

 1821. 



Mr. Phelps. — Yes, Sir, it has an effect upon navigation, but you will 

 find that there is not asserted, from beginning to end, any pretence on 

 the part of either of these countries to interfere with these rights. 



The President. — You mean to say that England understood that 

 sealing was excluded, and did not care for it; she only cared to main- 

 tain the right of navigation? 



Mr. Phelps. — Yes — the sealing and all their industries — not sealing 

 specifically more than anything else — the fur industry, their settle- 

 ments, their trade — whatever there was: that the result of this Ukase, 

 as modified by the Treaty, was to leave the right of navigation free, 

 but not to open to the world these valuable industries. 



The President, — Are there any documents, besides the Ukase of 

 1821, from which you might infer that this question of sealing was 

 specifically raised? 



Mr. Phelps. — Ko Sir, not specifically raised. 



The President. — 1 do not see that the English documents make any 

 allusion to the right of sealing, either to except or include it. 



