178 ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



supposed without casting an unwarrantable aspersion upon Her Maj- 

 esty's Government, thai Great Britain would have undertaken to main- 

 tain by naval force the Canadian vessels in the conduct in question, 

 how far is it to be believed that she would been sustained by the gen- 

 eral opinion of the world"' More especially in view of the claim she 

 has always successfully and justly asserted, of the right to protect all 

 interests of her own against injury by individuals on the high sea for 

 the sake of gain. 



And finally, if by the concurrent action of the United State's, Great 

 Britaiu, and Russia, a prohibition of pelagic sealing during the breeding 

 time had been effected, as proposed, would those three powers combined 

 have had a better right to exclude any casual poacher under t he flag of 

 some other government from the depredation's prohibited, than the Uni- 

 ted States now has, standing alone.' Or would they have been con- 

 strained, by the requirements of what is called international law, to oc- 

 cupy the humiliating position of standing idly by, while the interests 

 they had found ii necessary to unite in protecting, should be deliber- 

 ately destroyed for the benefit of a few adventurers, whose methods 

 defied law and disgraced humanity. 



Wha1 the United States Government would have been justified in 

 doing in self defense, by the exertion of such reasonable force as might 

 be necessary, is precisely what she has a right to ask in the judgment 

 of this Tribunal. There can not be one system of international law for 

 the world and another for the closet, because the closet does not pre- 

 scribe the law of nations; it derives it from those principles of right 

 and justice which are adopted as a rule of action by the general assent 

 and approval of mankind. 



Instead of taking its defence into its own hands, the Government of 

 the United States has refrained from the exercise of that right, has 

 submitted itself to the judgment of this Tribunal, and has agreed to 

 abide the result. Its controversy is only nominally with < ! reat Britain, 

 whose sentiment and whose interest concur in this matter with those 

 of the United States. It is really with a. province of Great Britain, 

 not amenable to her control, with which the United States Govern- 

 ment has no diplomatic relations, and can not deal independently. 

 Although the erroneous assumption that the United States claimed 

 the right to make Bering Sea a mare clausum, has undoubtedly drawn 

 Her Majesty's Government into a position in this dispute that it 

 might not otherwise have taken. 



