ARGUMENTS ON PRELIMINARY MOTIONS. 25 



The President. — We will not recofjnize the Agents as arg^ninjy the 

 matter. We recognize them as iei)resenting tlie Goveinmeut. Coun- 

 sel will argue the matter and we will dispose of it. 



Sir Charles Russell. — We have no objection to that. 



Mr. Foster. — I proceed: 



The Agent of the United States desires to bring to the attention of the Tribunal 

 of Arbitration tlie fact tliat he has been informed by the Agent of Her Britannic 

 Majesty, in a note dated March 25th ultimo, that he has sent to each of the members 

 of the Tribunal copies in duplicate of the Supplementary Report of the British Com- 

 missiouers appointed to inquire into seal life in Behring Sea. 



The Agent of the United States, in view of this information, moves this Honor- 

 able Triliunal that the document referred to be dismissed from consideration, and be 

 returned to Her Majesty's Agent on the ground that it is submitted at a time and in 

 a manner not allowed by the Treaty. 



I follow that with a second motion for the information of the Tribunal : 



The Agent of the United States moves this Honorable Tribunal to dismiss from the 

 Arbitration so much of the demaiid of the Government of Great Britain as relates to 

 the sum stated upon page 315 of the Counter Case of said Government to have been 

 incurred on account of expenses in connection with proceedings before the Supreme 

 Court of the United States; 



And, also, to dismiss from the Arbitration the claim and request of the same Gov- 

 ernment, mentioned on said page 315, that the Arbitrators find what catch or catches 

 might have been taken by pelagic sealers in Behring Sea without undue diminution 

 of the seal herd during the penilency of this Arbitration; 



And, further, to dismiss from the Arbitration the claim of the same Government, 

 mentioned on the said page 315, to show payments by it to the Canadian owners of 

 sealing vessels; 



And that all ])roof8 or evidence relating to the foregoing claims or matters, or either 

 of them, be stricken from the British CounterCase, and in particular those found on 

 pages 215 to 229 inclusive, of Volume II of the Api)endix to said Counter Case. 



'I'he ground of the foregoing motion or motions is that the claims and matters afore- 

 said are, and each of them is, jiresented for the tirst time in the Counter Case of the 

 Government of Great Britain, and that they are not, nor is either of them, pertinent 

 or relevant b}^ way of reply to the Case of the United States, or to anything con- 

 tained therein, except so far as the same may tend to support claims for danuiges dis- 

 tinctly made in the original Case of the Government of Great Britain, and that so far 

 as they come under that head the matters are irregular as being cumulative only. 



I have copies of these motions sufficient to supply the Arbitrators and 

 Counsel of the British Government. I will place them in the hands of 

 the Secretary. 



The President. — The Tribunal will be ready to hear the first motion 

 of the United States immediately argued; but the Tribunal must reserve 

 for a later stage of the proceedings the argument upon the second 

 motion, which we do not consider as relevant in the present stage of 

 our proceedings. If the Counsel of the United States wish to s])eak 

 upon the first motion, we will ask you to restrict your argument to this 

 first motion. I mean the motion which relates to the Supplementary 

 Report presented by the British Government. 



Mr. Phelps.— The reading. Sir, of the motion to which the President 

 has just alluded, and to which, of course, with great deference to the 

 intimation of the Tribunal, I shall at this time confine myself, has dis- 

 closed to the Tribunal that it is in itself a motion of very considerable 

 importance, and that it is of still greater importance in the effect of the 

 questions to which it gives rise upon other evidence and other parts of 

 the Case that will be found to be extremely material. 



Since the last meeting of the Tribunal, when the written arguments 

 were submitted, and when the case, so far as the hearing of it is con- 

 cerned, would have been at an end, if the counsel on either side had not 

 desired an oral argument, or if the Tribunal had not directed it, because, 

 as the Tribunal has perceived, the oial argument is not required by the 

 Treaty J it is a privilege accorded to the counsel on either side; it is a 



