14 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 



At the time of tlieir seizure the Carolina had 6HG seal-skins on board, the Thornton 

 404 and the Onward 900, and these were detained, and would appear to be still kept 

 at Ounalaska, along with the schooners, by the United States authorities. 



According to information given in the "Alaskan" anewspaper published at Sitka, 

 in the territory of Alaska, and dated the 4th of September 1886, it is reported: 



1) That the master and mate of the schooner Thornton were brought for trial before 

 Judge Uawson in the United States District Court at Sitka, on the 30th of August 

 last. 



2) That the evidence given by the officers of the United States revenue cutter 

 f'orwin went to show that the Thornton was seized while in Bering Sea, about 60 or 

 70 miles Southeast of St. George Island, for the offence of hunting aud killing seals 

 within that i>art of Bering Sea, which (it was alleged by the Alaska newsi>aper), was 

 ceded to the United States by Russia in 1867. 



3) That the Judge in his charge to the jury, after quoting the first article of the 

 treaty of the 30th of March, 1867, between Russia and the United States, in which 

 the Western boundary of Alaska is defined, went on to say: 



Tlien lie gives au extract from the Judge's charge. 



4) That the jury brought in a verdict of guilty against the prisoners, in accord- 

 ance with which the Master of the Thornton, Hans Guttonson, was sentenced to 

 imprisonment for thirty days and to pay a tine of .$500 ; and the mate of the Thornton, 

 Norman, was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days and to pay a line of $300; 

 which terms of imprisonment are presumably being now carried into effect. 



There is also reason to believe that the masters and mates of the Onward and Caro- 

 lina have since been tried and sentenced to undergo penalties similar to those now 

 being inflicted on the master and mate of the Thornton. 



Sir Charles Russell. I would be glad, if it is not iucouvenieut to 

 my liioud, if he would read the grounds of the Judge's charge. 

 Mr. Carter. Certainly. 



Sir Charles Kussell. Beginning with the words "All the waters". 

 Mr. Carter. This is the part quoted from the Judge's charge: 



All the waters within the boundary set forth in this treaty to the Western end of 

 the Aleutian Archipelago and chain of islands are to be considered as comprised 

 within the waters of Alaska, and all the penalties prescribed by law against the 

 killing of fur-bearing animals must, therefore, attach against any violation of law 

 within the limits heretofore described. If, therefore, the jury believe from the evi- 

 dence, that the defendants by themselves or in conjunction Avith others, did, on or 

 about the time charged in the information, kill any otter, mink, marten, sable or 

 fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal or animals, on the shores of Alaska or in the 

 Behring Sea east of 193 degrees of west longitude, the jury should find the defend- 

 ants guilty. 



Tliat is the boundary in the Treaty — the western boundary named in 

 the Treaty of cession to the United States from Russia. 



The jury should find the defendants guilty, and assess their punishment separately 

 at a fine of not less than $200 nor more than $1,000, or imprisonment not more than six 

 months, or by both such fine (within the limits herein set forth) and imprisonment. 



Lord Iddesleigh continues: 



You will observe from the facts given above, that the authorities of the United 

 States appear to lay claim to the sole sovereignty of that part of Behring Sea lying 

 east of the westerly boun<lary of Alaska, as defined in the first article of the treaty 

 concluded between the United States and Russia in 1867, by which Alaska was ceded 

 to the United States, and which includes a stretch of sea extending in its widest part 

 some 600 or 700 miles easterly (westerly?) from the mainland of Alaska. 



In support of this claim, those authorities are alleged to have interfered with the 

 peaceful and lawful occupation of Canadian citizens on the high seas, to have taken 

 possession of their ships, to have subjected their property to forfeiture, and to have 

 visited upon their persons the indignity of imprisonment. 



Such proceedings, if correctly reported, would appear to have been in violation 

 of the admitted principles of international law. 



I request that you will, on the receipt of this dispatch, seek an interview with 

 Mr. Bayard, and make him acquainted with the nature of the information with 

 which Her Majesty's Government has been furnished respecting this matter, and 

 state to him that they do not doubt that, if on incjuiry it should prove to be correct, 

 the Government of the United States will, with their well known sense of justice, 

 at ouce admit the illegality of the proceedings resorted to against the British vessels 



