ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 61 



Sir Charles Eussell. — The Tribunal will see that this is a very 

 grave allegation. The attention of the Government of the United 

 States is called to it as early as the 9th of October, and one would have 

 expected that in a grave matter of this kind the Executive would have 

 been in possession of complete information as to what the facts were. 



Here are two Powers fortunately at peace and iu most friendly rela- 

 tions with one another. A number of the vessels of one of those 

 Powers are seized upon the sea, without any suggestion of previous 

 diplomatic representation or expostulation of any kind ; and yet as late 

 as the 12th November, if you will turn to page 27, you will 

 793 find Mr. Bayard (an able and courteous Statesman of the United 

 States, whom I have the pleasure of knowing) writes on that day 

 and says: 



The delay in my reply to your letters of the 27th September and 2l8t October, 

 aslsing for information, conceruinj; the seizure by the United States Revenue cutter 

 *'Cor\vin" in the Behring Sea, of British vessels for an alleged violation of the laws 

 of the United States iu relation to the Alaska seal fisheries, has been caused by my 

 waiting to receive from the 'I'reasury Department the information you desired 



My application to my colleague the Attorney General to procure an authentic 

 Report of these proceedings was promptly made, and the delay in furnishing the 

 Report doubtless has arisen from the remoteness of the place of trial. 



As soon as 1 am enabled, I will convey to you the facta as ascertained in the trial, 

 and the rulings of law as applied by the Court. 



Let me ask the Tribunal to realise the position of things. He has 

 been told that the seizure has taken place in Behring Sea, when these 

 vessels were in pursuit of fur-seals. He has been told that they were 

 seized at distances from land which showed that they were outside the 

 ordinary territorial limits; and yet the Secretary of State cannot give 

 any answer to the challenge of Lord Iddesleigh, who affirms that these 

 facts point to a grave breach of international law, but must wait till he 

 gets the exact information from the place of trial. 



Senator Morgan. — How can that be if the British Government dis- 

 claims all responsibility lor the conduct of its nationals? 



Sir Charles Russell.t— I am sure it is my fault. Sir; but the appo- 

 siteness, or connection with my argument, of that remark I fail quite 

 to aijpreciate. 



Senator Morgan. — I understand that the British Government has 

 disclaimed in the diplomatic correspondence, and excluded from the 

 Treaty, all considerations of responsibility for the conduct of its 

 nationals in taking fur-seals. If that be so, I do not understand why 

 it is that Mr. Bayard was required to make any representation to the 

 British Government about a matter that he wished to redress or prevent. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Sir, I still fail, Avith all sincere respect, to 

 see the connection with the argument I am pursuing. 



Senator Morgan. — I regret that you fail to see it. 



Sir Charles Russell. — I am calling attention to the fact that Lord 

 Iddesleigh has stated facts, which are not contradicted, of the seizure 

 of British vessels on the high sea outside territorial limits; seized not 

 by the act of individuals, but seized by the act of the State through its 

 Executive Authority. 



Lord Hannen. — What is your ground of complaint, Sir Charles'? 

 It was necessary to ascertain the fiicts, and the scene of action was a 

 long way off. 



Sir Charles Russell.— "With great deference, my Lord, No. If 



the case really were, that they could justify themselves as having a 



legislative power over Behring Sea, or, which is the case now made, as 



protecting their property in the fur-seals, there was a prompt and 



793 immediate answer. "We have committed no offence against 



