ORAL ARGUxMENT OF CHRISTOPHER ROBINSON, Q. C. 325 



wliole proceedings in the conduct of the business on the islands is a 

 tampering with the laws of nature. You can do it with domestic 

 animals, wlien you have the means of observing its effect constantly 

 and regulating its operation, but not with aninuils ferce natnrw. As a 

 matter of fact, I question whether there are such things as surplus 

 males either in the seal race, deer, or any other i^olygamous wild 

 animals. 



I do not know how far it may be a test, but I think it may be a rea- 

 sonable test as affording something in the way of illustration. Sup- 

 posing the United States or England, I do not care which, owned the 

 country in which these islands were, as well as having the ordinary 

 rights of the sea; suppose a British subject or a United States citizeu 

 owned these islands, and suppose the country of which the owners were 

 subjects were called upon to make such regulations as they thought 

 reasonable with regard to the two rights, pelagic sealing and killing on 

 the islands. I submit it would not be thought reasonable to prohibit 

 l)elagic sealing, to take away the rights of one class in order to transfer 

 those rights to another class; but that they would endeavor to make 

 such regulations as would ensure the due and reasonable exercise of 

 both rights. 



Then some question was spoken of with reference to numbers yester- 

 day. I do not believe you can regulate this upon the question of num- 

 bers, because you can name no number that is to be destroyed in each 

 year where the natural conditions may vary in each year. It may be 

 right to kill 10,000 this year, and wrong- to kill 5,000 next. 



I have thought that the regulations proposed by our Commissioners 

 were most reasonable in principle. In other words they say, under nor- 

 mal conditions a zone of so many miles is enough; but there may come 

 an epidemic, or a great loss of seals by a storm, as has hapi>ened before, 

 and you may find it unreasonable to kill half the number that year that 

 you killed the year before. If so we will give you a double zone. In 

 principle that is correct. 



Here we are with equal rights; one a right to exercise our right of 

 pelagic sealing; and you must first see what Regulations are necessary 

 to prevent pelagic sealing from killing an unreasonable number of 

 nursing-females, and when you have succeeded in doing that, the con- 

 sequence of our exercising that right in a reasonable manner must take 

 care of itself. You cannot provide for it otherwise. I am prepared to 

 face the consequences either way. If the consequences of our exercis- 

 ing that right in a reasonable manner are only to enable us to kill a 

 few, then we must kill a f w; but if the consequences are to enable us 

 to kill a good many, then we shall be able to kill a good many; and 

 that will vary from year to year depending upon circumstances. You 

 can only carry on pelagic sealing in calm weather, because the canoes 

 can only float in calm weather; and if you have a nmgh season, you 

 will have very little pelagic sealing, and we should kill very few. If 

 we have a calm season, we should be able to kill more. But those are 

 tilings that no human power can regulate. You can only attach to 

 the exercise of our rights reasonable conditions: and, when you have 

 done that, the effect upon other industries must take care of itself, 

 whether it is little or much. What I mean is, that I do not under- 

 stand how the consequences can affect the legality of other rights in 

 any way; but the conditions must be reasonable. 



When you attach such conditions that our rights may be reasonably 

 exercised under those conditions, the consequence upon other indus- 



