ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 11 



Britain) the attention of tlie Arbitrators must be called 

 before tlieir labours are com])lete: the question whether 

 any, and, if so, what Sealing Regulations it may be neces- 

 sary to formulate. 



The position which Her Majesty's Government have con- 

 sistently maintained on the subject of these Regulations is 

 clearly set forth in the Introduction to the Second Part of 

 the Counter-Case presented on its behalf. It sutifices 



9 now, in the briefest manner possible, to insist on that 

 position. 



So long as the claim of the United States to impose 

 Regulations on pelagic scaling is based on the assertion of 

 a legal right, that claim is strenuously opposed, and the 

 right as strenuously denied. 



But when the question is put on the lower and i^ractical 

 plane of connnon benefit to all the nations interested, on 

 the recognition of the right of the pelagic sealer as well as of 

 that of the island sealer, then the British Government will 

 cordially co-operate in giving effect to snch measures as 

 may be found necessary for the preservation of the fur- 

 seals. 



On this basis the question assumes the negation of the 

 right which the United States now claim, and admits the 

 necessity for the concurrence of Great Britain. Her Maj- 

 esty is, and always has been, ready to concur in Regula- 

 tions just and equitable in the interests of all concerned; 

 but she has been unable to join in the consideration of 

 Regulations based on the principle that the United States 

 have a legal right to the jjrotection which those Regula- 

 tions are intended to give. 



Should any regulations be the outcome of this Arbitra- 

 tion, it is contideutly expected by Her Majesty's Govern- 

 ment that they will be such as not to protect oidy the United 

 States in the manner which their present contention urges, 

 but to protect an industry in which all the nations of the . 

 world have an interest. 



It were useless to make Regulations which should bind 

 only citizens and subjects of the United States and Great 

 Britain. As in the case of the Jan Mayen fisheries, so in 

 the case of the Pacific fisheries, the subjects of all the 

 nations who now participate in them, or who may be rea- 

 sonably expected to do so, ought, to be equally bound. 



Her Majesty's Government cannot leave this subject with- 

 out expressing regret and disappointment at the position 

 apparently assumed by the United States on the question 

 of Regulations. It is discussed by the United States as if 

 the exclusion of all the other nations of the world from a 

 share in the fur-seal industry in the western seas were to 

 be the aim and purpose of such Regulations. Her 



10 Majesty's Government absolutely dissent from this 

 view, and feel confident this Tribunal will not 



approve it. If the existing rights of nations are to be 

 abridged, they can justly be abridged only in the interests 

 of all, and the United States of America must be prepared 

 to do their part by the adoption of Regulations and im- 

 proved methods on the islands to preserve the fur-seals. 



