106 AEGUMENTS ON PRELIMINARY MOTIONS. 



States appear to have overlooked the ])rovision of Article VII, by 

 which, with reference to tlie question of the concurrent regulations, 

 express permission is given to each Government to submit other evi- 

 dence". That is to say, there is provided, according to this interpreta- 

 tion a subsequent time, after decision by the Arbitrators, in which each 

 Government may submit further evidence, and that subsequent time 

 (the inference is, or the language is, I think in some parts of this 

 paper) — that subsequent time is a matter of procedure to be regulated 

 by the Tribunal of Arbitration itself; and when it comes to decide the 

 first five questions in such a manner as to make the consideration of 

 regulations necessary, it will then determine the time, manner and 

 method in which the subsequent evidence is to be given, and, in such 

 determination will, of course, afford full protection to each party as 

 against the other. 



" These are the views," he goes on to say, " of the Government of 

 Her Britannic Majesty, and they must maintain their correctness. But 

 the Government of the United States have expressed a difterent view. 

 They have taken the i)osition that any facts relative to the considera- 

 tion of concurrent regulations sliould have been included in the Case 

 on behalf of Her Britannic Majesty presented under Article III; and 

 that the absence of any statement of siich facts places the United 

 States at a disadvantage. The Government of Her Britannic Majesty, 

 while dissenting from this view, are desirous in every way to facilitate 

 the j)rogress of the Arbitration, and are, therefore, willing to furnish at 

 once to the Government of the United States and to the Arbitrators 

 the separate Eeport of the British Commissioners with its appendices. 

 The Government of the United States are at liberty, so far as they 

 think fit, to treat these documents as part of the Case of the Govern- 

 ment of her Britannic Majesty ". 



Well, upon receiving that, it was thought on the part of the United 

 States that it possibly, probably, furnislied a way out of the ditficulty, — 

 a way not free from objection — no such way could have been found to get 

 out of this difficulty — but still a way which, under the circumstances, 

 ought to be accepted. If this Report of the British Commissioners 

 with its Appendi(;es thus promised, really contained the substance of 

 all that Great Britain designed to rely upon in respect to matters of 

 seal life, why the United States would have an opportunity of meeting 

 it and of overcoming it if they could, in the Counter Case, and they 

 therefore were disposed to accept the offer thus made of this Report 

 with its Appendices as a reparation, so far as possible, of what they 

 conceived to be the injustice which had been done to themselves. 



Senator Morgan. — But if you will allow me to enquire, Mr. Carter; 

 did tliat Agreement between the Agents of the G overnment, or between 

 the two Governments, operate to enlarge the jurisdiction and powers of 

 this Tribunal after the Case of Great Britain had been submitted into 

 the hands of the Arbitrators? 



Mr. Carter. — Well, that is a question, which, I do not say has not 

 occurred to us, but which we have never thought it worthwhile to fully 

 discuss, or come to any opinion about. I should hope for myself that 

 no question would be made about it by the Arbitrators. Under the 

 circumstances the United States Government in its capacity as a Gov- 

 ernment and through the ordinary measures of diplomatic intercourse 

 has consented to adopt this mode of repairing what it conceives to have 

 been an original error in the preparation of the Case. I believe it is 

 within the power of the Government of the United States to enter into 

 that agreement, and that it is binding ui)on this Tribunal of Arbitration. 

 That is my belief. 



