414 ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR RICHARD WEBSTER, Q. C. M. P. 



any way going back upon that j^art of the case whicli to me, at any 

 rate to day, lias no more than historic interest, namely as to what the 

 particular contention was that was put forward from time to time by 

 the United States, on looking at the question broadly as to what rights 

 the United States had at the time of the signing of the Treaty — if the 

 United States could have made out that either by the acquiescence of 

 Great Britain, or from the general position of the sua and the Islands 

 or upon any other ground known to international law, they were enti- 

 tled to the exclusive use of a strip of the sea outside the three-mile 

 limit, then the questions of exckisive right of protection and property 

 would have arisen just in the same way as they have from time to time 

 arisen with regard to bays, with regard to enclosed waters and with 

 regard to the strip next to the coast, be it three miles or more, as from 

 time to time ISTations have varied in the width to which they would 

 claim exclusive jurisdiction. I therefore, point out for the purpose of 

 my argument that when I deal with the rights of the United States 

 as distinguished from the rights asserted and exercised by Russia, I 

 shall pro]iose to give the largest meaning to the five questions, in order 

 that if the United States have any exclusive right either of protection 

 or property in those fur-seals, they may have the benefit of raising 

 that question before this Tribunal and of having an adjudication upon it. 



Now I will take you for a very few moments back to the early history 

 of this matter, and it is essential, at any rate in order to make my point 

 clear, that I should ask you to go with me a little back in order of time. 

 My learned friend Mr. Carter, in his most interesting argument before 

 you, told you more than once that for the purj^ose of the negotiations 

 which were going on from 1821 to 1825, or rather, in order to be more 

 accurate, from 1821 to 1824 between Russia and the United States, and 

 from 1821 to 1825 between Great Britain and the United States, the 

 North-West Coast was to be regarded as the strip of land shown on the 

 map in pink colour and accurately represented in language by my 

 learned friend the Attorney General as the lisiere. Mr. Carter, I think, 

 without proving the statements, told you that whatever may have been 

 the claims of Russia originally under the Ukase, whatever may have 

 been the assertions in 1789, or 1821, that for the purpose of the bargain 

 between the parties the north-west coast meant that and nothing more 

 than that. 



Mr. Carter. — Not quite that. I did not confine it to the lisiere. 



Sir Richard Webster. — If my learned friend will pardon me, I 

 think if he looks at latitude 60°, which was the point he took, this is 

 how I understood it, but I am sure I take the correction — he said the 

 North-West Coast went from 60° to 54O-40. 



Mr. Carter. — No, further down. 



Sir Richard Webster. — I see my learned friend's point now. 



Mr. Carter. — The southern boundary is infinite. 



Sir Richard Webster. — That points my observation, and, if possi- 

 ble, makes my point stronger when I come to develop it, that the North- 

 west Coast extended northward of 60°, and the southern boundary 

 may have been at 55° or elsewhere. I am obliged to my learned friend 

 for the interruption. I did not mean to misrepresent him ; but my mind 

 was concentrated on what was the northern termination of the North- 

 west Coast. I shall point out presently, and I hope this will not be 

 lost sight of in my argument by the Tribunal, that as between the 

 United States and Russia there never was any dispute about the north- 

 ern boundary of Russia at all; further, that as between Great Britain 

 and Russia there never was any dispute at all about the northern 



