ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ 183 



Eiuly iu the progress of the Conference it became evident that there were wide 

 ditterences of opinion, not only as to conclnsions, but also as to facts. It seems 

 proper here to refer briefly to the attitude of the Commissioners on the part of the 

 United States or to the standpoint from which they endeavored to consider the 

 questions involved. 



Tlie instructions under which we acted are contained in Article IX of the Arbi- 

 tration Convention, and, as far as relates to the nature of the inquiry, are as follows : 



"Each Government shall appoint two Commissioners to investigate conjointly 

 with the Comuiissioners of the other Government all the facts having relation to 

 seal life in Bering Sea, and the measures necessary for its proper protection and 

 preservation." 



This sentence appears to be simple in its character and entirely clear as to its 

 meaning. The measures to be recommended were such as in our judgment were 

 necessary and sufficient to secure the proper protection and preservation of seal life. 

 "With questions 6f international rights, treaty provisions, connnercial interests, or 

 political relations we had nothing to do. It was our opinion that the consideration 

 of the Joint Commission ought to have been restricted to this phase of the question, 

 80 clearly put forth in the agreement under which the Commission was organized, 

 and so evidently the original intent of both Governments when the investigation 

 was in contemplation. 



Had the preservation and perpetuation of seal life alone been considered, as was 

 urged by us, there is little doubt that the joint report would have been of a much 

 more satisfactory nature, nnd that it would have included much more than a mere 

 reiteration of the now universally admitted fact that the number of seals on and 

 frequenting the Pribilof Islands is now less than in former years, and that the hand 

 of man is responsible for this diminution. 



That our own view of the nature of the task before us was not shared by our col- 

 leagues representing the other side was soon manifest, and it became clear that no 

 sort of an agreement sufficiently comprehensive to be worthy of consideration and 

 at the same time definite enough to allow its consequences to be thought out. could 

 be reached by the Joint Commission unless we were willing to surrender absolutely 

 our opinions as to the effect of pelagic sealing on the life of the seal herd, which 

 opinions were founded upon a careful and impartial study of the whole question, 

 involving the results of our own observations and those of many others. 



Under such circumstances the only course open to us was to decliTie to accede to 

 any proposition which failed to offer a reasonable chance for the preservation and 

 protection of seal life, or which, although apparently looking in the right direction, 

 was, by reason of the vagueness and ambiguity of its terms, incapable of definite 

 interpretation and generally uncertain as to meaning. In obedience to the require- 

 ments of the Arbitration Convention that "the four Commissioners shall, so far as 

 they may be able to agree, make a joint report to each of the two Governments," 

 the final output of the Joint Commission assumed the form of the joint report sub- 

 mitted on March 4, it being impossible iu the end for the Commissioners to aL:;ree 

 upon more than a single general proposition relating to the decadence of seal life on 

 the Pribilof Islands. It therefore becomes necessary, in accordance with the further 

 provision of said Convention, for us to submit in this, our separate report, a tolera- 

 bly full discussion of the whole question, as we view it from the standpoint referred 

 to above as being the only method of treatment which insures entire independence 

 of thought or permits a logical interpretation of the facts. 



But the British Coiinuissioners toot an entirely different view of their 

 functions. Their view was that this herd of seals having its home on 

 the Pribilof Islands, certain superior advantages and facilities were 

 enjoyed by the Government of the Fnited States for taking- them on 

 the Islands; that, on the other hand, the seals were during a large 

 part of the year in the high seas, where they could be ])ursued by the 

 citizens of other nations; that under these circumstances the citizens 

 of other nations had the same right to pursue them on the sea that the 

 United States had to take them on the land, and that their function 

 and office was to contrive such regulations consistent with that sup- 

 position of respective national rights as would best tend to preserve 

 the seals. That view is manifest all over their report; but I will read 

 a section or two which serves to bring it out very clearly; beginning 

 with Section 123 found on page 20 : 



123. Besides the general right of all to hunt and take the fur-seal on the high seas, 

 there are, however, some special interests in such hunting, of a prescriptive kind, 

 arising from use and immemorial custom, such as those of the "natives" of the 



