ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 57 



from them. I would wish in that connection to add only this word, 

 that if such a power as 1 have suggested of denouncing the regulations 

 after a definite period of 5, 7 or 10 years, or whatever is thought reason- 

 able by the Tribunal, then each party would be remitted to its original 

 position, its original rights, whatever they were, unaffected and unim- 

 paired, and tliat they each of them would be in a position to approach 

 the consideration of proper Eegulations in view of the wider experience 

 which the actual working of such Eegulations as you are pleased to 

 propound will have apported; and that there is no reason to apprehend 

 that in view of that further light thrown by experience upon the condi- 

 tions of seal life so far as they may be affected by any Eegulations that 

 you formulate — there is no reason to suppose that these Powers could 

 not come easily and satisfactorily to an arrangement of the matter. 



Now having dealt with these considerations, but two things remain 

 for me to do. The first is to consider the suggestion made on the part 

 of the United States. Tlie second is to assist the Tribunal by suggest- 

 ing the character of the regulations which upon the part of Great Brit- 

 ain are suggested as being just and fit and equitable, in all the circum- 

 stances of the case. 



First, as to the regulations put forward on the part of the United 

 States. I do not know whether I am to regard that suggestion as put 

 forward seriously. 



Mr. Phelps. — I think you may, Sir Charles. 



Sir Charles Eussell.^WcH, I really cannot so regard it. I cannot 

 think that any member of the Tribunal will so regard it. 



Why, Mr. President, it takes us back to the year 1799, to the year 

 1821, and we begin to wonder, in the face of this suggestion of the 

 United States, at the moderation of the Emperor Paul, because all that 

 he claimed was JOG miles from the shore, but in that memorandum of 

 Baron de Tuyll was content with six miles over the area which corre- 

 sponds with the area which is here in dispute. 



Now what is this suggestion. I may describe it correctly thus : a 

 deprivation for all time of the rights of British nationals over an area 

 of the sea approaching 3,000,000 square miles; a deprivation forever of 

 the rights of British nationals to fish for seals in that enormous area; 

 a monopoly to the United States in that area; a monopoly to the United 

 States which is to be secured in part by the co-operation and at the 

 expense of Great Britain, because I take it that whatever scheme of 

 Eegulations is laid down by this Tribunal, each Power will be morally 

 bound, internationally bound, to lend its part in the enforcement of 

 those Eegulations; and all this perpetual exclusion, this monopoly to 

 the United States, this expense to Great Britain, without one fraction 

 of security that the object of this Treaty, which is the preservation of 

 the fur-seals, shall have been secured. 



I have spoken of the extent over which this perpetual i)rohibition is 

 proposed to extend. I have had coloured on this map of the northern 

 hemisphere what it means. The north pole, of course, is in the centre 

 of the map. 



It is a worse state of things — a wider and a more reckless and 

 unfounded assertion of the jurisdiction or claim of jurisdiction than in 

 the time of the Ukase of 1799 or of 1821, because in those days this 

 region was not a field of much commerce or of much enterprise. But 

 what is the state of things to day"? This prohibition extends over that 

 area [Pointing to it.] Here is Vancouver, and here is Victoria, and this 

 line traced upon the map is the new and established mail route to 

 Yokohama and China, and I need not say that that means the following 

 of commerce and of considerable commerce in its train, and yet over 



