ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 59 



seals goiiiG^ forth to secure food for the hnnrlreds of thonsantls of their young of which 

 they lia\e recently been delivered. The destrnetion of the fenmhis which, according- 

 to exixnt testimony would be i)5 per cent of all which the sealing vessels might 

 readily capture, would indict deadly loss upon the rookeries. The destruction of 

 the females would be followeil by the destruction of their young on the islands, and 

 the herds would be diminished the next year by this wholesale slaughter of the pro- 

 ducing females and their ottspring. 



Tlie ten-mile limit Avould give the marauders the vantage ground for killing the 

 seals that are in the wafer by tens of thousands searching for food. The oppor- 

 tunity, under cover of fog and night, for stealing silently upon the islands and 

 slaughtering the seals within a mile or even less of the keeper's residence would 

 largely increase the aggregate destruction. Under such conditions the British vessels 

 could evenly divide with the United States, withiir the three-mile limit of its own 

 shores and upon the islands themselves, the whole advantage of the seal fisheries. 

 The respect which the sealing vessels would pay to the ten-mile limit would be the 

 same that wolves pay to a Hock of sheep so i)laced that no shepherd can guard them. 

 This arrangement according to your proposal, was to continue for three mouths of 

 each year, the best months in the season for depredations upon the seal herd. No 

 course was left to the United States or to Russia but to reject the proposition. 



The propositions made by Lord Salisbury in 1888 and the i)ro])ositious made by 

 fler Majesty's Minister in Washington in 1890, are in significant ctmtrast. The cir- 

 cumstances are the same, the con<iitions are the same, the rights of the United States 

 are the same, in both years. The position of England has changed, because the 

 wishes of Canada have demanded the change. The result then witli which the 

 United States is expected to be content is that her rights within the Behriug Sea 

 and on the islands thereof are not absolute, but are to be determined by one of Her 

 Majesty's provinces. 



This proposition was received by Mr. Blaine witL some considerable 

 degree of impatience, as will be observed. He seemed to feel that he 

 was confronted at all times with the objection of Canada, and that the 

 objection of Canada was in all instances perfectly effective to prevent 

 the approach to any accommodation. For my own part I see no objec- 

 tion whatever why Great Britain, before she should come to an arrange- 

 ment of this sort, slionld consult Canada; because Canada was tlie 

 province which was more immediately interested. I see no reason for 

 comi)laint upon that score. It is a little different, however, when we 

 come to consider the circumstance that originally, when the pro])osition 

 made by Mr. Phelps was provisionally accepted by Lord Salisbury, it 

 was not stated that it would be dependent upon the wishes of Canada, 

 or dependent upon the result of investigations made after Canada had 

 been consulted. Had that been stated at that time it would have pre- 

 vented the raising of expectations only to be disaj)pointed. 



These observations, of course, do not relate to the merits. They are 

 designed to explain the progress of the negotiations and the sentiments 

 of the negotiators from time to time; and, at this point of time it is 

 very observable that there was on the part of Mr. Blaine a feeling of 

 great impatience, as if he had been in some manner wronged. 



Senator Morgan. Mr. Carter, what is the date of that letter, if you 

 please, that you are reading from Mr. Blaine? 



Mr. Carter. I\ray 21), 1890. 



Senator Morcian. If it would not disturb you I would lilce to call 

 your attention to page 461 of voL 3 of the Appendix to the British 

 Case, to a note from the Marquis of Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauncefote. 

 Its number is 332. 



Mr. Carter. I have it. 



Senator JMoegan. It is very short, and for the jnirpose of calling 

 your attention to the particular language of it I will read it: 



Sir: I have received your dispatch of the 29tli ultimo covering copy of a note in 

 which you submit to Mr. Blaine the draft convention which has been approved by 

 the Government of Canada for the settlement of the Behring's Sea fisheries question, 

 as well as a copy of the draft convention itself. 



The terms of your note are approved by Her Majesty's Government. 



