44 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 



■VNliich v.'cve commenced in London in 1888, but was suspended owing to various 

 causes, sliould he resumed in Wasliiun'ton. 



1 now have the ]n)nor to inform you that Her Majesty's Government are willing to 

 adojit this suggistiou, and if agreeable to yonr Government will take steps concur- 

 rently with them to invite the participation of Eussia in the renewed negotiations. 

 I have, etc., 



Julian Pauncefote. 



Here we find a suggestion from tlie Government of Great Britain that 

 tlie orijj;inal negotiations, wliicli luid been interrnpted from various 

 causes, should be renewed in the eity of Washington and that sjigges- 

 tion was accepted by Mr. Bhiine. After that it a])pears that some ])er- 

 sonal communications Imd talcen ])lace in Wasliington between Mr. 

 Blaine and Sir Julian respecting the resumption of the negotiations, 

 and the ])robability, or possibility, that they might be brought to a 

 successful issue. Mr. Bhiiiie had suggested in the course of those com- 

 munications that he thought it quite improbable that the assent of 

 Canada would ever be obtained to any regulations, or to any settle- 

 ment, which would have the efiect of protecting the seals from extermi- 

 nation. I presume — it seems fairly presumable — that Sir Julian had 

 answered those suggestions by intimating that he was of a contrary 

 opinion, and that it was not impossible for some arrangement to be 

 readied which would be satisfactory to Canada upon the subject. This 

 rather called upon Sir Julian to submit some i)roposition that would, 

 presumably, be agrecal)le to Canada, and which he might suppose 

 would not be unacceptalde to the American Government; and con- 

 sequently in April 1890 — the date is not given — it appears to have been 

 received on the 30th of April — Sir Julia.]! addresses Mr. Blaine, thus: 



Sir Chaeles Eusskll. The date is the 29th, I think. 



Mr. Carter. The 29th. 



Sir Julian I'anncvfote to Mr. Blaine. 



Wasiiingtox, Jjjril — , 1S90. (Received April 30.) 

 Dear Mr. Blaixe: At the last sitting of the Conference on the Behring Sea Fish- 

 eries ([uestion, you expressed doubts, after reading the memorandum of the Canadian 

 Minister of Marino and Fisheries, Avhich l>y your courtesy has since been printed, 

 whether any arrangement could be arrived at that would be satisfactory to Canada, 

 'ion observed tliat the proposals of the United States had now been two years 

 before Her Majesty's Government, that there was nolhing further to urge in support 

 of it; and you invited me to make a counter proposal on their behalf. To that task 

 I have most earnestly applied myself, and while fully sensible of its great difficulty, 

 owing to the conflict of opinion and of testimony wliicli has manifested itself in the 

 course of our discussions, 1 do not despair of arriving at a solution which will be 

 satisfactory to all the Governments concerned. It has been admitted, from the com- 

 mencement, that the sole object of the negotiation is the preservation of the fur-seal 

 species for the benefit of mankind, and that no considerations of advantage to any 

 particular nation, or of benefit to any private interest, should euter into the question. 



I call the attention of the Arbitrators particularly to the last sentences. 

 They are golden words and rightly express what should have been, and 

 what should be at all times, the main purpose and the main object in 

 any discussion of these questions, or in any effort to bring about an 

 accommodation. 



Such being the basis of negotiation, it would be strange indeed if we should fail 

 to devise the means of solving the difficulties which have unfortunately arisen. I 

 will proceed to explain by what method this result can, in my judgment, be attained. 

 The great divergence of views which exists as to whether any restrictions on pelagic 

 sealing are necessary for the jireservation of the fur seal species, and if so, as to the 

 character and extent of such restrictions, renders it imiiossible in my opinion to 

 arrive at any solution which would satisfy public opinion either in Canada or Great 

 Britain, or in any country which may be invited to accede to the proposed arrange- 

 ment, without a full inciuiry by a mixed commission of experts, the result of whose 

 labors and investigations, in the region of the seal fishery, would probably dispose 

 .of all the points in dispute. 



