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



tliat tliey have no claim either to the seals or to the lierd apart from 

 the industry. May I state, first my submission of the law in regard to 

 tins matter, and then deal in detail to whatever exteut 1 think nectes- 

 sary, without trespassing unduly upon the time of the Tribunal, with 

 the arguments of my learned friend, Mr. Phelps, Avhich apjjear in the 

 written book. Apart, Sir, from a malicious act with the intent of injur- 

 ing tbe person who is carrying on an industry, and done by a i)erson 

 who is not doing the act complained of Limself for the purpose of his 

 own trade, there is, so far as I know, by the law of no civilized country, 

 no right of interference by the person whose trade is injured. 1 am 

 putting it as I am sure my learned friends will admit, in the broadest way. 

 I am not endeavouring to obtain any advantage from the fact that what 

 the United States do is entirely done on the Islands and is in territorial 

 waters. I say that whatever industry is carried on, if it be conceded, 

 as for the purpose of this argument it must be conceded, that the ani- 

 mal itself is not the property of the United States; excei)t in the case 

 of what may be called wanton and malicious acts with the intent of 

 injuring the person carrying on the trade, pursuit, or industry, no civil- 

 ized country recognizes that any wrong is being done by the person 

 who, in the course of carrying on his own business, interferes with or 

 competes with, or, reduces, the profit earned by the person who makes 

 the complaint. 



Sir, it can be tested in a moment, and tested, I submit, almost 

 exhaustively by one test. Can the right of the pelagic sealer depend 

 upon the question of whether or not the industry is being carried on 

 on the Islands? Is it not absolutely fatal to the United States conten- 

 tion as to their right of interferring with the particular act done by the 

 pelagic sealer, if they are driven to admit that the pelagic sealer could 

 kill the animal if the United States were not carrying on what they 

 call the industry upon the Islands? Sir, legal rights cannot dejiend on 

 any such contingencies, and to put only for the purpose of enforcing 

 my argument one of the main positions taken by my learned friend, the 

 Attorney General — suppose the trade did not pay ; suppose the price 

 of seal-skins in the market is such that the lessees do not care to renew 

 their lease, and suppose that the United States as a Government do not 

 go in for the catching and dressing of seal-skins, my learned friends 

 cannot claim that the pelagic sealers would then be within their right: 

 and therefore their position is this, that the determination of a particular 

 individual to catch animals on land is in itself sufficient to turn an act 

 at sea otherwise lawful into an unlawful act. Sir, I speak with great 

 deference to any authority that my learned friend, Mr. Phelps, may cite 

 when he comes to reply. If there are any new authorities, we shall, of 

 course, have the privilege of dealing with them, but in his very learned 

 and elaborate argument, and in the most interesting argument of my 

 learned friend, Mr. Carter, there is not a trace of authority for such a 

 proposition as that to which I am now directing attention. It does 

 require authority and does require some principle which one can appre- 

 ciate in order that it may find ftuvour with such a Tribunal as this. 



Now, what is the real ground, so to speak, of my learned friend, Mr. 

 Phelps, contention? You will remember, Mr. President, that the United 

 States in their Case give a long list of legislation by colonies and other 

 countries, by which legislation certain restrictive measures have been 

 taken with a view to the preservation of animals, or with a view to the 

 prevention of the interference with individuals in their rights of taking 

 animals. And you will remember that every one of those instances was 

 examined by my learned friend, the Attorney General. They had been 



