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



That is the Treaty of the other Powers. Now, is it not enough to 

 say— 



Mr. Phelps. — What are you reading from, Sir Charles? 



Sir Charles Eussell. — The Articles of the Treaty. 



Mr. Phelps.— What Treaty? 



Sir Charles Eussell, — The Treaty between the Powers, by whom 

 the charge of the Great Emperor was committed to the British Govern- 

 ment. 



Mr. Phelps. — Is that in the Case anywhere? 



Sir Charles Eussell. — No; it is not in the Case; but it is not mate- 

 rial that it should be in the Case. I am reading a historic document. 

 But surely, it is enough to say about this matter, without more, that it 

 is no reference, no guide to this Tribunal, and throws no light whatever 

 upon the question that we are discussing. It was not an assertion of 

 any general right upon the part of Great Britain. It was a case in which 

 a number of the Powers — the allied Powers, as they were called — at the 

 close of a long and disastrous war, took these measures, and, so far as 

 the United States is concerned, took these measures with the implied 

 assent of the United States. 



The President. — Was that assented to by the United States? 



Sir Charles Eussell. — Yes. I have read, Sir, the grounds upon 

 which I base that argument. The matter stood thus : The United States 

 and Great Britain had entered into a Treaty of commerce. Before the 

 ratification of that Treaty, when it would become binding upon both 

 the Powers, this arrangement as to the custody of the Great Emperor 

 was entered into by the Allied Powers. Upon that, communication is 

 made by the British Government to the United States Government, and 

 they are told, "We can only ratify the Treaty subject to your recogniz- 

 ing that you have no longer the right to touch at St. Helena, or to go 

 within a stipulated distance of it." 



The President. — And that communication was accepted? 



Sir Charles Eussell. — That communication was accepted, and the 

 Treaty ratified after that communication was made. Therefore it does 

 not lie in their mouth to ssuy that that was something they were obliged 

 to do, or which was put upon them by compulsion. 



Senator Morgan. — I think the United States might be justly cred- 

 ited with having accepted and admitted, in that arrangement, the 

 1169 proposition that the great nations of the earth, in providing for 

 their security and the security of their political rights, could 

 impose upon other Powers a recognition of this exception that they had 

 made in the open sea for the security of the Emperor Kapoleon; and so 

 they could make an exception of like character for the security of any 

 great industry or any great enterprise, or any other thing that would 

 concern the affairs of the whole commercial world. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — If I may respectfully say so. Sir, there is a 

 great chasm between the premise and the conclusion. 



Senator Morgan. — I do not happen to see it. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — To answer it in detail, Mr. Senator, would 

 Indeed cause a very wide deviation from my path. 



Lord Hannen. — I was going to ask what was the effect of the 

 restraint. I think it was only this. All vessels were forbidden to 

 touch at the islands. 



Senator Morgan. — A little more. 



Lord Hannen. — I was going to add, and the rest is analogous to the 

 Hovering Acts. There was nothing to prevent vessels sailing through 

 the waters adjoining St. Helena; but they were not allowed to hover 

 in those waters. 



