ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR RICHARD WEBSTER, Q. C. M. P. 89 



posals liad been submitted to him by the United States Department, to 

 none of which, however, had he been able to give his assent. There 

 are other letters, though they are not stronger than that. 



Mr. Carter. — Are there any others that have any value? 



Sir Richard Webster. — Yes, there are, and 1 will give my learned 

 friends references to the others, should they desire to know those which 

 I rely upon, but I am quite satisfied with that I stated from the cor- 

 respondence to which attention was called this morning and from this 

 correspondence, it is perfectly i^lain and quite proper that Russia while 

 declining to endorse the view taken by the United States was naturally 

 willing and anxious to reserve to herself the benefit of this discussion, 

 should it turn out the United States were right. 



Then, if you will kindly look at the bottom of page 27: 



With these reservations, wo accept the British proposal iu the following terms. 



There is no alteration in the terms which I read; and the final assent 

 is given on the 29th of May, 1893, by Lord Rosebery to Mr. Howard : 



With regard to the reservations made in Mr. Chichkiue's note yon will state that 

 Her Majesty's Government have taken note of them, but do not at present propose 

 to discuss them; that, on the other hand, they must adhere to the reservation pre- 

 viously made by them, and contained in your note of the 12th of this month, and that 

 it is understood that the riglits and position of either Power are in no way affected 

 by tbe conclusion of this provisional arrangement. 



Now, Mr. President, on page 29, appears the assurance or answer 

 from Sir Robert Morier, in consequence of which, as Mr. Phelps 

 informed the Tribunal, Lord Rosebery last week introduced the Bill to 

 give efiect to this modus vlvendi; for, without the consent of Parliament, 

 the rights of British subjects cannot be interfered with on the high seas. 

 And it was on that occasion, as Mr. Phelps rightly stated, that Lord 

 Rosebery, not being then in a position to announce the satisfactory con- 

 clusions with reference to the claims made by Great Britain, stated 

 that the matter was under discussion ; but it is the fact, as tlie Attorney- 

 Geueral has told you this morning, since then, having fully investi- 

 gated the matter, Russia has adopted that line which was in accordance 

 with all her previous actions, for she stated, as appears by this corre- 

 spondence, that no vessels had been illegally seized because they were 

 within the 3 miles or had just gone out of itj and, in accordance with 

 that, she has acted throughout. 



Senator Morgan. — Is it intimated in this correspondence, or is there 

 any action of the Government, as to how far the Russian Government 

 would have been authorised to follow those vessels after crossing the 

 line? 



Sir Richard Webster. — I do not know; but I really speak without 

 having looked up the subject lately,— I do not think that there is any 

 limit of distance as to hoi pursuit. I know that the question has been 

 raised whether you can follow them into other territories, — I know it 

 has been raised with reference to the high seas; and I should think 

 you can go for 40 or 50 miles in hot pursuit. I am now sijeaking of 

 matters that have come before me when I was Attorney-General, with 

 reference to France and Germany, where the right was recognised to 

 follow vessels that had broken the Fishery Conventions on the high 

 seas. 



Senator Morgan. — Would not that rather be. Sir Richard, ex pro- 

 pria vifjoref 



Sir Richard Webster. — Well, I should hardly say that, Sir; but 

 by the assent of Nations to the arm of the law being stretched. I do 

 jiot tliink it would be quite right to say it was done ex projyrio v'ujore^ 



