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



the islands to wliicli I am not going to refer furtlier. I leave tliat very 

 interesting subject of discussion for the next occasion when Mr. Phelps 

 or Mr. Carter in the United States or in England, as I hope, meefc on 

 some platform where political economy and the abstract question as to 

 the rights of property are being discussed : and I shall relegate to that 

 occasion the question whether property is robbery, and wliether the 

 rights of the United States and of Great Britain to dispossess natives 

 of their territory and to possess themselves of it, is the exercise of a 

 legal right, or is a development of that principle which, years ago 

 woukl have been called the force of arms. My learned friend Mr. Car- 

 ter has kindly taken under his wing and protection all the various acts, 

 not altogether justifiable, which have been done by Great Britain and 

 by the United States in the past and reduced them all to a philosophic 

 basis. It seems to me, if I were to endeavour to follow him, I should 

 soon get out of my depth, and I am certain that I should not assist this 

 Tribunal. Therefore, 1 will confine myself to Ihe legal asjject of these 

 questions. 



Sir, my learned friend Mr. Carter, turned from the four questions, 

 after a considerable discussion upon them, with a sense of relief, and 

 he said, on page 364 of the report of his speech, — 



I approach with satisfaction a stage of this debate where I have an opportnnity 

 for the first time of putting the claims of the United States upon a basis which I 

 feel to be impregnable. I mean the basis of a property interest. Now the United 

 States asserted a property interest connected with these seals in two forms which, 

 although they approach each other quite closely, and to a very considerable extent 

 depend on the same evidence and the same consideration, are yet so far distinct and 

 separate as to deserve a separate treatment. 



And then he discussed the question of property in the seals and prop- 

 erty in a seal " herd". 



Mr. President, the traditions of my profession prevent me from being- 

 able to say that any answer which I can give to this proposition places 

 Great Britain in an impregnable position, but I hope, as I said yester- 

 day, that my arguments will not receive less attention or less consider- 

 ation from this Tribunal if I abstain from endorsing them by personal 

 opinions; I may in the heat of the moment be misled into using expres- 

 sions which would look as though I was referring to my personal opin- 

 ion, one cannot avoid doing so particularly in answer to questions jmt 

 by the Tribunal, but I hope they will understand that I submit my 

 argument to their judgment without craving any additional weight from 

 the fact that I may be of opinion that my position is impregnable or 

 the reverse. I mention that because otherwise those who may be good 

 enough to read my argument may think that because I do not express 

 personal opinions or personal belief in the merits of my case, therefore 

 the case is entitled to less consideration, or my argument to less respect. 



Now the proposition has been stated by my learned friend Mr. Carter 

 many times over and pretty much in the same language; and it is only 

 necessary for me to give one citation for the purpose of reminding you 

 of that to which I am about to address myself. He said (the particular 

 reference is at page 464 of the report before you) : 



Wherever an animal although commonly designated as wild, voluntarily subjects 

 itself to human power to such au extent as to enable a particular man or a partic- 

 ular nation to deal with that animal so as to take its annual increase and, at the 

 same time, to preserve the stock, it is the subject of property. 



You will remember, Mr. President, that in an argument extending 

 over a very considerable time, my learned friend the Attorney General 

 dealt with that argument — and I could not with advantage supplement 

 what he said by any detailed examination of the main principles on 



