ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 361 



Sir Charles Eussell. — 1 beg your pardon ; tbat is so. I had omitted 

 to notice it. 



Lender the law of Uruj>;uay the killing of seals on the Lobos and other islands "in 

 that jjart of the ocean adjacent to the dejiartments of Maldonado and Rocha" is 

 secured to contractors, who pay to the Government a license fee and duty. 



If tliat is all tliat my learned friend has to say about it, I am content 

 to take it, it is not a thing that demands an answer. 



Then Chile is mentioned in the Case; I will read what we say about 

 it at page 90 of our Counter Case. We set out what is said in the 

 United States Case thus: 



The United States Case says : 



The Governments of Chile and the Argentine Republic have also recently given 

 protection to the far-seals resorting to their coasts in the hope of restoring their 

 almost exterminated rookeries. 



The mischief, however, ajipears to have been entirely done by sealers landing on 

 the rookeries. Mr. Comer states that. 



If there had been strict regulations enforced, allowing us to kill only young "wigs", 

 and not to disturb the breeding seals, I am convinced, and have no doubt, that all 

 these rookeries would be full of seals to-day. 



The Chilean law referred to appears to be the Ordinance of the 17th August, 

 1S92, from which the following extracts are made in order to show that the 

 1153 Chilean Government asserts no jurisdiction beyond the ordinary 3-mile limit, 

 but is careful to define strictly the limits of the operation of the Ordinance. 



Then the Ordinance is set out. 



" Ordinance regulating the Pursuit at Sea or on Land of Seals or Sea-wolves, Otters and 

 ' Chungungos' in the Coasts, Islands, and Territorial Waters of Chile. 



" Article 1. Only Chileans and foreigners domiciled in Chile are allowed to engage 

 in the pursuit on land or at sea of seals or sea-wolves, otters, and ' chungungos' /m 

 the coasts,isIands, and territorial waters of the Republic, as laid down in Article 611 of 

 the Civil Code. 



" No ships can engage in the pursuit to which this Ordinance refers except those 

 Chilean vessels which are in possession of the qiialilications required by the Naviga- 

 tion Laws to be considered as such, foreign vessels being absolutety prohibited from 

 engaging in this industry. • 



"Art. 2. For the purposes of this Ordinance, ifte coasts, islands, and tei-ritorial waters 

 of Chile shall be considered as divided into as many zones as there are Maritime 

 Governments in the Republic. 



" The extent of each zone shall be that of the respective Maritime Government." 



Then it proceeds : 



Acting under powers conferred by the above Ordinance, the. President of the 

 Republic on the 20th August, 1892, decreed that the fishery of seals 

 " be suspended for the period of one year in the regions included in the Maritime 

 Governments of Chiloe and Magellanes, and on the coasts of the Islands of Juan Fer- 

 nandez. " 



The general law of Chile as to fisheries is contained in the Civil Code, where it is 

 enacted : 



Article 585. 



And I would beg to compliment Chile upon its very accurate state- 

 ment of what I conceive to be the law recognized by nations in this 

 matter. 



Things which in their nature are common property, as the product of the high seas, 

 are not subject to any dominion, and no nation, corimration, or individual has any 

 rigbt to monopolize them. The use or enjoyment of them is determined among the 

 citizens of any one nation by the laws of that nation, but between different nations 

 by international law. 



"Article .593. The adjacent sea, to a distance of 1 marine league, measured from 

 low-water mark, is the territorial sea, and under the national dominion ; but police 

 administration for the purposes of the security of the State or the carrying out of 

 fiscal Regulations, extends to a distance of 4 marine leagues, measured in the same 

 manner." 



