ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 231 



United States in dealing with that problem did it by treaty; but what 

 are treaties between a powerful nation and these tribes of Indians ! They 

 are not capable of giving consent. They do not deserve the name of 

 treaties. They are called so; but what is the effect of them? You 

 take away from the Indian his hunting ground. You have to support 

 him by giving him rations; and I suppose the same thing is done in 

 Canada. That is what it comes to. They occupy territory which is 

 fitted to produce prodigious quantities of wheat. That earth must 

 be cultivated. The Indians will not do it. If you take it from them, 

 what do you do? You give them rations. That is what they do in 

 Canada. That is what they do in the United States. That is what 

 they do wherever this problem of dealing with barbaric tribes is 

 treated with generosity and with justice; but the interests of civiliza- 

 tion and the demands of civilization cannot be made to wait upon the 

 destinies or demands of these few barbarians. That cannot be done; 

 and when the question comes whether they are to be permitted to 

 exterminate a race of animals like the seal, not for the purpose of sup- 

 plying themselves, but because they are the employes of men who are 

 prohibited from doing it, of course you must prohibit them as well. 



The President. That is their livelihood also! 



Mr. Carter. The livelihood of the Indians. They have a right to 

 pursue their livelihood as long as it is confined to getting the seal for 

 the purijose of clothing for their bodies or for meat; but when they 

 want to engage in commerce and clothe themselves in broad cloth and 

 fill themselves with rum in addition to their original wants, and for 

 that purpose to exterminate a race of useful animals, a different prob- 

 lem is presented. 



But practically it would be of no account. The only way in which 

 they pursue, or ever have pursued the seals is in open boats, going out 

 short distances from the shore. They can take a few seals that approach 

 the shore rather more closely. The pelagic sealing that threatens the 

 existence of the herd is carried on by means of large vessels provided 

 with perhaps a dozen or fifteen or more boats and a very large crew, 

 which follow the seals off at sea, it may be hundreds of miles, capable 

 of standing any weather and continuing on the sea for months. These 

 vessels follow them up, put out their boats wherever they see a number 

 sufficient to engage attention, and slaughter them in that way. That 

 is what threatens the existence of the herd. If sealing in open boats 

 from the shore were permitted, probably it would never occasion any 

 serious danger. No boat can go out, of course, and stay over night. 

 They cannot go more than a few miles, because they must come back 

 again before dark. It is but a few seals they can take; and that does 

 not threaten the existence of the herd. 



The attack which civilization makes upon it, and which it has no right 

 to make in a destructive way, is this sealing by vessels with crews and 

 boats which go on long voyages. It is that which is destructive. The 

 answer to this suggestion of the right of the Indians to make their 

 attack upon the seals is this ; that it does not create any serious prac- 

 tical difiiculty in relation to the problem. Of course it is not to be sup- 

 posed that the United States are going to take away from that people 

 their means of subsistence, at least without supplying them in turn. 

 Their history abundantly repels any suggestion of that sort. They have 

 never inflicted any such barbarity. Their right might be declared to be 

 subject to that of the Indians. 



The President. Is the sealing on the coast carried on by Indians 

 from the United States or only by Indians from Canada? 



