ORAL ARGUMENT OP HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 315 



the liurd without exterminatinf? the race. That would be an extreme 

 statement. You cannot take enough to make this business worth fol- 

 lowing upon the evidence in this case which I have shown before to be 

 so conclusive and so overwhelming, without destroying the race. I 

 respectfully submit this question to the Tribunal, to the consideration, 

 in view of the evidence, of every Member of it — how far can you stop 

 short of that, and preserve the seals? Take the month of January and 

 consider that, or take the month of February, because January is too 

 small to be noticed, if there is anything at all. Take the month of 

 February and then go on to March. Go on in this increasing ratio to 

 April, May and June, and then go into Behring Sea till the 15th Sep- 

 tember wiieu they are all goiie. Draw the line if you can, where it 

 is enough short of a prohibition, to accomplish the object for which you 

 are assembled here, in the event that it turns out that the United States 

 have not that property interest or right to protection which enables it 

 to defend itself. If we have gone too far — if in this Eegulation of 

 absolute prohibition you find we have gone further than is necessary, to 

 that extent you will curtail it of course — It would be your duty to cur- 

 tail the Eegulations we propose, bearing in mind that you cannot limit 

 the number taken. It is imi)OSsibleto limit sex or even age. Draw the 

 line for yourselves, I respectfully submit, and see how far short of a sub- 

 stantial prohibition you can stoj) and conscientiously say that you have 

 preserved the race of seals from extermination. With the answer to 

 that question which the Tribunal shall reach, we are bound to be satis- 

 tied and we shall be satisfied. 



Then as to the extent of area we have named in our regulations. East 

 of 180, and i^orth of 35. 



The President. — Does that comprise the whole of your limit with 

 Eussia? 



Mr. Phelps. — It comprises the migration current, and to go further 

 than that, and take in the migration current through the Commander 

 Islands would be for the benefit of Eussia; which is what Lord Salis- 

 bury agreed to do at the instance of Eussia. That is not for our benefit, 

 and it is not for us to ask it here, nor is it within the power of the Tri- 

 bunal, as it is the preservation of the Pribilof Islands seals you are 

 charged with, because Eussia is not a i)arty here. 



The President. — You are satisfied with 180. 



Mr. Phelps. — Yes, that takes in the migration course. Outside of 

 that there are only a very few seals, which we do not take into account. 



The President. — 35 degrees goes below San Francisco. 



Mr. Phelps. — It goes below San Francisco, and tliat is 12 degrees 

 lower down than tlie line agreed upon with Lord Salisbury, which was 

 47. Here again that limit of latitude, you will bear in mind, at that 

 time was criticised, but there never was any objection stated to it, and 

 if you are to repress sealing in the Pacitic Ocean at all, 10 degrees 

 more or less do not amount to much; but we invite attention to that. 

 If it is too far, why, of course, you will limit it, bearing in mind that 

 we do not mean to claim anytliing more than is necessary. 



These are the two propositions on the one side and on the other. 

 There is the Treaty that defines the dispute between these parties, the 

 object and pnr])ose of this Arbitration. If this part of the case is 

 reached, there is the duty to discharge which the Tribunal has been 

 kind enough to accept at the reciuest, and upon the instance of the 

 (lovernments. Tliere is the evidence that j)oints out the limits to which 

 the discharge of that duty nmst inevitably carry it; and when I say inevi- 

 tably, I do not mean to say that the line we have adopted of 35° is the 



