200 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 



2. It is defenceless against man on the land, and is easily found ana 

 captured at sea. 



3. The present draft made upon the herd by pelagic sealers is not by 

 a few barbarians to supply their immediate wants, but by civilized man 

 to supply the eager demand of the whole world. 



4. The race may be substantially exterminated by man by either 

 form of attawk, that on the land, or that upon the sea. 



Now as to the land, the possibility of extermination is admitted. 

 The race can be exterminated by the United States. The seals are 

 there, absolutely within the power of man, for live or six mouths of the 

 year, and they could all be killed. And if any remained after an indis- 

 criminate slaughter in one year they could be killed in the next. It 

 would take but two or three years to exterminate the whole of them. 

 So far as they constitute an ingredient of the commerce of the world 

 and a bounty of nature useful to man, they could be absolutely exter- 

 minated by the United States if the United States chose to do such a 

 thing. They can also be exterminated by pursuit at sea. That will 

 not be admitted by the other side, but the members of the Tribunal 

 will see that that point is beyond dispute. The learned counsel for 

 Great Britain take the ground that this herd will not stand the annual 

 draft of 100,000 young males which is made upon the islands — that that is 

 destructive. Now we contend that it will stand a draft of that amount. 

 There is of course a certain number of young males that may be taken, 

 and we think it ranges as high as 100,000. If you go beyond that point 

 you begin to destroy the herd, because you do not leave a sufficient 

 number of males for reproduction. Our position is that the Innit to 

 which a draft may go is as high as 100,000. The position of Gre-iit 

 P)ritain is that that is too great a draft, and they offer what they con- 

 ceive to be evidence tending to show that this is so. They point to the 

 limited draft which Kussia made as being the safer number and they 

 say that the herd began to diminish under the larger draft made by the 

 United States before i)elagic sealing began; well, according to them, 

 the held will not stand a draft of 100,000 young males annually. Then, 

 if it will not, what draft of females will it stand? Why, uiuler the 

 system of pelagic sealing, tliat has already reached between sixty and 

 seventy thousand a year; and when we take into consideration the 

 number killed but not recovered — 



The President. Is the number killed by American vessels in- 

 cluded? 



Mr. Carter. On page 207 of the Eeport of the British Commission- 

 ers will be found such evidence as we have in the Case showin.g tlie 

 catch of the United States vessels. I thought that was included in 

 the pelagic catch contained in the tables of the American commission- 

 ers. But I am corrected in that particular, so that the table from 

 which I read must be increased by the amount of the American catch, 

 whatever it may be, in order to get the true figures. But the American 

 catch cannot be easily determined. 



Sir Charles Russell. I thought the figures at page 207 embraced 

 all. 



Mr. Carter. There is a difference, however, between the American 

 and British Reports as to the amount of the catch of the Canadian 

 pelagic sealers. The table contained in the American Case says the 

 catch was 62,500 in 1891, whilst the British Report says 08,000. But 

 so far as these details are important, they will be dealt with by my 

 brother Coudert when he comes to treat upon the evidence. The point 

 to which I wish to draw the attention of the Arbitrators here, is that 



