79 



given to these iiiquiiicy and questions by tlie treaty that I will examine 

 the subject. 



Tiie very general manner in wLicli tlie questions submitted to arbi- 

 tration are stated in tlie treaty, and the iiidetlnite statement of the 

 claims of the respective governments, the absence of direct issues of 

 fact or law in the submission, and the unlimited range of inquiry as 

 to all facts, wLietlier historical or judit-ial in character, the general 

 form in which all questions are stated in the treaty, seem to demand 

 a broad and just award by the tribunal that will cover a great con- 

 troversy that is entirely new. In the treaty of ISOli, differing from all 

 former treaties on like nnitters, the facts Mhich constitute the foundation 

 of the claims of the respective parties are not stated hypothetically, or 

 in any form, nor are the questions that arise on those facts stated in 

 any issuable form, nor are the rules of law or justice stated under 

 which the tribunal shall ascertain and admeasure the rights of the 

 parties. 



In this treaty everything is left to the ascertainment and the deter- 

 mination of the tribunal within very broad limits of inquiry upon cer- 

 tain topics. The only separate and specific duty iniposed on the tri- 

 buiml is that they will ascertain and declare the facts, and apply the 

 law that, in their opinion, gives a true answer to certain sweeping- 

 inquiries stated in Article VI of the treaty. This is an exceedingly 

 broad and comprehensive grant of power and discretion to this tribunal 

 of arbitration, in reference to a subject in which all civilized countries 

 are interested, and is, to many uncivilized people, a source of supply 

 of food and raiment. 



These great nations found occasion to project, if not to foimulate and 

 to establish by imi)artial arbitration, new rules of right and convenience, 

 and also of jurisdiction, that are not distinctly stated in the international 

 law, for the protection and preservation of the fur seal, to be enforced 

 outside the jurisdictional limits of the two governments and of all other 

 governments. In doing this they agreed to bind themselves to accept 

 and abide by the rules that this tribunal shall adoi)t, and to coo])erate 

 in securing the adhesion of other powers to them. A course somewhat 

 similar was followed by them in the Treaty of Washington, of 1.S71. 



When the nature of this splendid fur is considered, and the fact that 

 it is the only source of supply of large i)elts that is available for the 

 uses of mankind; and that the fur seal is the only fur-bearing animal 

 that can bei)reserved by law, on the i>riuciple of domestication; and that 



