272 ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 



Then lower down : 



The poaclier at sea lias lent his aid since 1885 to this destruction. — 



Sir Charles Russell. — I think you ouglit to read the next; he 

 does refer to driving. 



Mr. PnELPS. — Yes, I am willing;; it was only to save time, and I 

 hope the Arbitrators will treat themselves to the very little entertain- 

 ment there is in this case of the anuising kind, by i)erusing some of 

 these field-notes. What my learned friend wants me to read is: 



The club and effects of drivhig has destroyed it, slowly at first, but surely through- 

 out the last eight years! 



He had not been there ! 



Sir Charles Kussell. — "And ra)>idly during the last three of this 

 period." 



Mr. Phelps. — Yes. 



And rapidly during the last three of this period — especially rapid last year and at 

 the present hour. 



He had not been there, and not a living man had told him so. 



Every man who was there swears to the eontrary. 



I could spend half a day reading this if it v\'ere material to show the 

 character of the man. He started on his theory, and like some orators, 

 gains in strength as he goes on; as he warms up to the subject he 

 becomes not only more eloquent but more tremendous in the reach and 

 force of his statement. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — I beg my learned friend's pardon, but he 

 made what I consider a very grave insinuation about Mr. Elliott, 

 namely, that he was attacking the new company because.of his inter- 

 ests in the old Com})any. 



The reason why I want that last passage read is this, the lease to 

 the new Company was in 181)0 and in a i^assage I have read he does 

 not confine his complaint of mismanagment to the period of the new 

 Company at all because he says : 



The club and effects of driving has destroyed it slowly at first, but surely through- 

 out the last 8 years. 



Therefore going back to 7 years of the old Company. 



And gradually during the last three of this period — especially rapid last year aud 

 at the present hour. 



I am rather surprised at that insiunation because my learned friend 

 Sir Kichard Webster distinctly stated in page 1G23 of the report that 

 Mr. Phelps had undertaken that no comment was to be made on Mr. 

 Elliott's conduct attributing to him motives, or any comment except 

 what the report furnished. 



Mr. Phelps. — 1 am not now saying anything but what Judge Swan 

 said who was the other witness, and I leave it to my learned friends to 

 settle between Judge Swan and Mr. Elliott, if it is of any importance 

 at all. It is altogether probable on the face of this report that Mr. 

 Elliott was willing at least that the Government should cut down the 

 profits of this Company by abridging the number of seals they might 

 take. But I do not care about it. We have not the least necessity to 

 discredit Mr. Elliott, because in every dis])uted point in the case but 

 this, he sustains the United States contention as completely as all our 

 other witnesses do, so that in nine-tenths of this case Mr. Elliott 

 becomes our witness. We do not need him and do not call him, but 

 we accept his statements when put in by the other side. And, there- 



