82 ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR RICHARD WEBSTER, Q. C. M. P. 



tioiis, ami it is because this paper deals with both tbat I have taken it 

 first. As you will see in a very few minutes, it has a very important 

 bearinti" on the question of Kegulations, but 1 mention the two subjects 

 together so tliat I need not n)eution them again. My learned friend, 

 Mr, Phelps mentioned today that in the debate in the House of Lords 

 last week when part of the arrangement respecting Eegulations was 

 referred to, Lord Kosebery, the Foreign Minister for Great Britain had 

 not stated that there was any definite arrangement with regard to the 

 seizures of last year, but as had been in-eviously stated in the House of 

 Commons by the Under Secretary, the matter was still in negotiation; 

 and, Mr. President, it was not till to day that the Attorney General or 

 myself could have told the Tribunal that which the Attorney General 

 has told you. We knew perfectly well what was happening, but were 

 not in a position to state it for the reasons I have already mentioned. 

 The matter had been referred by the Kussian Government as appears 

 by the papers to a Committee on wliich a very distinguished jurist is 

 sitting — ]\Ir. Martens one of the gentlemen whose authority we have 

 cited in the course of the case, and till that Committee reported, the 

 question of the seizures during the last year could not be dealt with. 



Now with regard to the seizures, I Avill dispose of them in a moment. 

 Russia never did claim at any time to seize these vessels outside the 

 territorial waters except where there was evidence that they had been 

 inside. That will appear from the correspondence which I will read in 

 a moment. I merely mention that in the final arrangement, made as 

 read to you this morning by the Attorney General the only case in 

 which they seek or ask to justify the capture i^ where the boats of the 

 ship herself had been actually engaged in sealing in territorial waters. 

 In the other case they admit a responsibility and liability to indemnify. 



This jjaper from which I am about to read which is now before my 

 learned friends and before you, would have told you the same story, 

 but not quite so shortly as the telegram or information from the Foreign 

 Oftice that the Attorney General read to you this morning. I will 

 read no more than is necessary and if I might trouble you to take the 

 paper and to look at p. 3. 



In the despatch from Lord Rosebery to Sir Robert Morier on the 18th 

 January, 1893, occurs this passage. 



But the seizures of British vessels by the Rnssiau authorities iii Behring Sea dur- 

 ing tlie course of last year, at considerable distances from land, render it expedient 

 to arrive at some definite understanding of the attitude of the Russian Government 

 in this respect. 



I have, therefore, to request that your Excellency will inform the Russian Govern- 

 ment of the application that has been made by the Canadian sealers. 



You will state that in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, which they doubt 

 not will be shared by that of Russia, the memorialists ought in justice to receive 

 early information as to the limits within which tliey may lawfully and safely pursue 

 their industry. 



And then, Sir, on page 4, on the 11th of January, Sir Robert Morier, 

 writing to Mr, Chichkine the representative of Russia, puts the matter 

 in these words: 



As at present advised Her Majesty's Government proiiose to inform them 



That is the sealers : 



that the modus vivendi agreed upon between Great Britain and the United States 

 having been prolonged during the pendency of the arbitration on the questions in 

 dispute between these two Powers, sealing will be entirely prohibited to their respec- 

 tive subjects and citizens during the next season in the waters affected by that agree- 

 ment; but that outside those waters sealing vessels will be at liberty to pursue their 



