ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 285 



Mr. Wharton said, when dealing' with the modus vivendi which conhl 

 not extend beyond Behriiig- Sea, because there Avas no statute of tlie 

 United States then, enforcing regulatiousontlieir citizens in the North 

 Pacitic. Limit Them to Uehriiig Sea. But if you close Behring Sea 

 fiom January to December, what woukl be the result on the preserva- 

 tion of the seal? My learned friends admit it would be ineffectual. 

 Sir Richard Webster said you nuist, in order to save the seal, prevent 

 the killing of the gravid females on their way to grounds where they 

 are delivered; and yet they would limit it so as not to interfere with 

 such killing at all, which is all done in the North Pacific. 



What time is proposed by these British regulations? To shut ui> 

 Behring Sea from the loth September round to the first July; and I 

 shall show you from the evidence in this case that no British sealer 

 ever went into the Behring Sea earlier than the 1st July, except in 

 some rare exceptions in the last days of June, and they are all out 

 before the loth September. The proposed closed time, therefore, for 

 the protection of the seal would leave all the sealing that has ever 

 taken place in Behring Sea open, aiul would make a close time as to 

 those parts of the year when they would not be there even if there was 

 no close time- 

 Is that all ? They say they want these Eegulations temporary. That 

 is, for some term of years. What is the result of that? You will 

 remember that you have decided, before you arrive at these Regula- 

 tions, that we have no rights. We have submitted that (piestion, and 

 have agreed to abide by the result, and we must abide by it, and we 

 shall abide by it, of course, whatever it may be. You have decided 

 before you reach this part of the case, therefore, that we have no rights. 

 Then yon say " We will give you Regulations for 5 or 10 years". At 

 the end of that time, where are we? We cannot defend ourselves at 

 all; Ave have agreed that we are to be bound by the award of the Tribu- 

 nal, we cannot make further Regulations without the agreement of 

 Great Britain, and we cannot get any Regulations except what they 

 agree to. No Regulations would be agreed upon, and where should we 

 be? We should be absolutely defenceless, and the seals would have 

 to perish. It is a hundred times better to establish no Regulations at 

 all than that. 



Then what else? They want them made non-enforcible; that is to 

 say Regulations on paper, so that if there is transgression by the 

 sealers, we alone having to suffer, we skould have to enter into a diplo- 

 matic correspondance with Great Britain on the subject. We have 

 tried that remedy before, and the result is that we are here. Where 

 should we be if we cannot enforce the Regulations? We can open a 

 diplomatic corres])ondauce with a country across the sea which stands 

 between us and this Province, with regard to v/hom we are at arms 

 length. 



Sir ("iiARLES Ruf^SELL. — Tliis language of my learned friend betrays 

 so very grave a misapprehension of our position that I am bound to 

 interi)Ose, Sir. We never said that the Regulations were not to be 

 enforcible; on the contrary, we pointed out that legislation in each 

 country would be necessary to give ettect to tlie Regulations to bind 

 the nationals of each country; and speaking for the Government of 

 Great Britain, I said that that country would be bound to pass the 

 necessary enactment to enforce it; and that, of course, it would. 



The President. — I think we understood the language of Mr. Phelps 

 to have the meaning that you have expressed. 



