ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 141 



888 What is the ground for restricting that to a portion only of 

 this north-west coast ? 



Article 111 hasdealt with the formation of establishments, and has 

 said that one Power shall not form a fresh establishment north of a 

 particular point in Kussian territory, and that the other Power shall 

 not form a iresh establishment south of a particular point on the 

 United States territory. And then Article IV, passing away from the 

 subject of establishments, deals with the qnestion of fishing and trad- 

 ing with the natives of the country, and provides that there shall be a 

 reciprocal right: to the citizens of the United. States along the whole 

 coast which belongs to Kussia, and reciprocally there shall be the right 

 of the Eussian i)eople along the whole coast which belongs to the 

 United States. 



The President. — Is there evidence that the United States took 

 advantage of this article to trade with the natives of the coast! 



Sir Charles Kussell. — Yes. 



The President. — Inside Behring Sea? 



Sir Charles Kussell. — No, ai)parently at that time there was no 

 inducement to go inside Behring Sea. 



Senator Morgan. — I suppose the fur-seals were in there then, were 

 they not? 



Sir Charles Russell. — Yes, fur-seals were in Behring Sea, I pre- 

 sume, from time immemorial. 1 do not know, but they probably were, 

 so far as we know. Uj) to this time the fur seals had not assumed any 

 position of importance, either as regards Russian enterprise or the enter- 

 prise of any other people. 



General Foster. — They had taken over 3,000,000 of skins. 



Sir Charles Russell. — I will deal with that in a moment. The 

 observation is a little irregular, and I must ask you to restrain your 

 imi)atience. Mr. Foster has made an interjection. Sir, which it is per- 

 haps irregular to notice, in which he says that there were a large num- 

 ber of skins got. I do not know the evidence he refers to, but 1 have 

 no difficulty in saying that, as regards the fur-seals on the Pribilof 

 Islands, they had not assumed any importance as regards the supply 

 of skins. The islands were discovered in 1786, I think, and in Japan 

 and on the Commander Islands we know there was trading, but I do 

 not recollect that there was any such extent of dealing with fur-seals 

 on the Pribilof Islands. I will not refer to the interruption further, 

 but if my learned friend will give me the reference, I will deal with it 

 at a later stage. As a matter of fact, it stands thus. There were no 

 settlements at the time of this Treaty north of the Aleutians, except 

 the one I have mentioned at Nushagak. Obviously, therefore there 

 would be very little interest — motive of interest is perhaps the best way 

 of putting it — to go trading in the Behring Sea; but the point is not, 

 with very great deference, whether the United States used the power — 

 they did at a later period use it for whaling and to a considerable 

 extent in Behring Sea after this; the question of the President was 

 addressed only to dealings with natives. 



889 The President. — Yes, under Article IV. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Yes: there was, in fact, as I have 

 said, only one settlement, and there would be comparatively little interest 

 or motive to attemi)t such trading at that time; but as regards the free 

 navigation of Behring Sea for thepurj)oses of whaling, which was then 

 considered a profltalile industry, the United States did undoubtedly 

 pursue that industry in the Behring Sea. 



