ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR RICHARD WEBSTER, Q. C. M. P. 145 



seals or seal-hunting. He further said that he did not intend to subjef^t the Indians 

 to an Exiiiuination by the British side as they might stultify thcniHelves. He said 

 the Indians were easily niisuiulerstood, and quite as easily induced to say things 

 that were not true. Finding it useless to prolong the interview, I left him, and 

 went up to the Indian village. 



And then he refers to a conversation which is not important with the 

 Indian who indorsed that which has been stated, that he could not give 

 evidence or answer any questions without the permission of the Agent. 

 That is confirmed by Andrew Laing, the interpreter iu paragrai^hs 3 

 and 4 of his affidavit. 



That I went back to the "Quadra" and told Mr. Belyea what Peterson said. 



Peterson was one of the Indians. 



Mr. Belyea at once went on shore and saw tbe Indian Agent, one John P. M. Glynn. 

 I went with him and was ]iresent and heard all that passed between him and the 

 Agent, except for a few minutes at the close of their conversation. I have read 

 wljat Mr. Belyea says took })lace then, and it is true. I remember the Agent telling 

 Mr. Belyea tliat he would not allow the Indians under any circumstances to give 

 evidence to the English. This was in reply to an otter of Mr. Belyea to take the 

 evidence in Agent's presence. 



That and the declaration of General Jackson on the next page bears 

 upon the same matter, but I only mention it in order to respectfully 

 caution the Tribunal, though I do not supjiose any caution is necessary, 

 against accepting on any questions of i^er centage or statements of 

 this kind, affidavits taken not only with no opportunity of cross-exam- 

 ination, but when cross examination by a respectable gentleman, a 

 member of the Bar sent out for the purpose has been refused. I am 

 only suggesting the Tribunal will do that which every Court would do 

 for itself, having the matter brought to its notice — accept any such tes- 

 timony with extreme caution and except iu so far as it was obviously 

 corroborated, would not consider it entitled to special weight. 



The President. — Do you lay any responsibility on the United States 

 for the behaviour of these Agents. 



Sir EiCHARD Webster. — Well, I do not suppose that the United 

 States representatives would wish that a thing of that sort should for 

 a moment take place. I was only referring to the evidence, and I hope 

 you will understand that I make no charge of any sort or kind against 

 the United States. I do not suppose for a moment they knew anything 

 about it, but what I do say, is, and what I think I am justified in say- 

 ing, is, that evidence taken under such circumstances is or should be 

 of very slight weight before any Tribunal. 



We are dealing, you must remember, with very uneducated men. 

 They are speaking in a language not their own, which must have been 

 interpreted in a great number of cases. They are not able to read or 

 write; a large number make their mark, and it is taken in the presence 

 of Mr. McGlyun, who objects to them being questioned. I say no more 

 than that. 



The President. — Would it not have been wise of the English Gov- 

 ernment to apprise the American Government that they were sending 

 a man out for the purpose of cross-examination"? 



Sir Eichard Webster.— Well, Sir, that was not our contention; I 

 am obliged to you for that suggestion. We had not seen these affi- 

 davits. They were only disclosed to us in September, 1892. . 

 ■ The President. — And this is in December, 1892. 



Sir Richard Webster. — Well, this gentleman, not knowing about 

 the particular people, simjdy goes there for the purpose of getting evi- 

 dence, that is to say of seeing Indians. He does not know the partic- 



B S, PT XIV 10 



