134 



ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



Index to British argument — Continued. 



Damages — 



British claim for 



Cases quoted in reference to 



Question of i)rospeclive earnings 



United States claim for 



Dawson, Judge. Decision of, in cases of "Thornton" and " Dolpliiu" 



Distinction alleged between skins of seals on two sides of Pacilic 



Domestic. Pur- seals cannot be classified as 



" Dolphin." Case of 



Exceptions to law of nation s 



Exclusive rights of United States are lost when seals are on high sea 



Falkland Islands. Seal fishery legislation 



FercB iiaturce — 



E ur-seals are 



Laws of Great Britain and United States as to, identical 



Fishery Conventions. Arguments to be deduced from 



Fish- 

 Common right of all men to take on high sea 



Food of fur-seal 



Food of fur-seal derived from the sea 



Forei<;n seal fishery legislation. Conclusions from 



Freedom of the sea defined 



French fishery laws 



Fur-seal — 



Cannot be classified as domestic 



Duration of stay on shore 



Food of, derivecl from high seas 



Is pelagic in habit 



Not provided with food by man , 



Undoubtedly /ercc naturm 



Great Britain. Contentions of. 



Greenhow includes Behring Sea in Pacilic 



Greenland — 



Fisheries. Protection of. 



Seal fisheries. Legislation for... 



Handford, Judge. Decision of, in case of "J. G. Swan" 



"Herd." Term only applicable to seals when on islands 



High sea. Claim to protect seals in 



Home of fur-seal as applied to Pribyloflf Islands inadmissible 



Hovering Acts — 



United States Argument based on 



Do not extend limit of territorial waters 



Intermingling of seals — 



Between St. Paul and St. George Islands 



In North Pacific 



International law — 



Cannot create new principles 



Derived from practice of nations 



Sources of 



Irish oyster fisheries legislation 



Italian coral fisheries 



"James G. Swan." Case of the 



Japan seal fisheries legislation 



Jurisdictional questions^ 



Cannot be lightly dismissed 



Fully discussed in British Case and Counter-Case 



Stated by United States to be of secondary importance 



Kent. On sonrcesof international law 



Laws of other nations. Ob.jects of United States Argument derived from, di.scusscd 



Legal principles. Examination of 



"Le Louis." Case of 



"Lisi^re" as distinguished from north-west coast 



161 Lobos Islands. Seal fishery 



Low -water mark. Limit of territory 



Malice not alleged against pelagic sealers 



Management doe.s not constitute possession 



Mexican pearl fisheries 



Modus Vivendi for 1892. Agreement for 



Nations can only legislate for their own nationals on high seas 



Naturalists admit no distinction between seals on two sides of North Pacific 



Newfoundland seal fishery legislation 



