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



Tliat demurrer was overruled. I do not tliiuk I ueed trouble j'^ou 

 with it. 

 Senator Morgan. — "Was there an intervention of the owner in that 

 case? 



830 Sir CnARLES Eussell. — Yes, of the owner or the person inter- 

 ested; I think the owner. I wish to go over all these, so that I 



need not liave to recur again to tlie pleadings in the other cases. 1 am 

 merely giving the "Thornton" as a sample case in 1886, The others 

 were similar. 



I will now turn to page 112 of that large volume, which relates to the 

 later seizures. 



The President. — Your point is that the prosecution was always had 

 under section 1056? 



Sir Charles Russell. — Yes, sir. I find I ought to refer the Tri- 

 bunal for one moment to the beginning of the x)roceedings in the " Say- 

 ward" case, as they were similar to the later prosecutions. It is on 

 page S3, at the bottom of the page, vol. III. 



In the Distkict Court of the United States for the District of Alaska. 

 United States v. Geo. B. Ferry and A. Lain(j. — Information. 



District or Alaska, ss. 



George R. Ferry and A. Lainjj are accused by M. D. Ball, United States District 

 Attorney for Alaska, by this information, of the crime of killino; fur seals within the 

 waters of Alaska Territory, committed as follows: 



The said George R. Ferry and A. Laing on the 8th day of July, A. D. 1887, in the 

 District of Alaska and within the jurisdiction of this Court, to wit, in Behring"s Sea, 

 within tlie waters of Alaska Territory, did kill ten fur seals, contrary to the Statutes 

 of the United States in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dig- 

 nity of the United States of America. 



Dated at Sitka the 23rd day of July, 1887. 



I need not trouble you with the pleadings, which were based upon 

 the same line; but I now proceed to show the grounds upon which the 

 judgment of condemnation of the court was invoked, and that will be 

 found at page 112, these being the grounds filed in the Court, and pre- 

 sented as the case of the United States, upon which the demand for 

 iiulgment was based. It appears that we have got these proceedings 

 from The New- York Eerahl of October 18, 1887. You will see at the 

 bottom of page 112 a not unimportant statement. The Neiv-YorJc Her- 

 ald is an important paper x)ubli.shed, as you know, in New- York, and 

 indeed I may say in Paris also : 



The Government here are in receipt of advices from Sitka, w^hich contain the brief 

 which is uuderstoud to have been prepared at Washington and recently hied in the 

 Court at Sitka by Mr. A. K. Delauey, as counsel for the United States Government. 



Therefore it was under high auspices. 



Mr. Foster. — That is a despatch from Ottawa, published in the 

 Herald. 



Sir Charles Russell.— There is no doubt about the fact, but if 

 my friend intimates to me that he has any doubt about the fact I will 

 pursue the evidence that shows it. 



Mr. Foster. — I am simply calling attention to the fixct that the 

 despatch originates from Ottawa, Canada. 



831 Sir Charles Russell. — It does not matter very much where 

 it originates. 



The President. — You mean, as a matter of fact, that the pleading 

 was prepared at Washington? 



