ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 243 



ing to the nations whicli lie in nearest proximity to them. In the next 

 place, they are exJiaustible. There is not enough for all; and therefore 

 there arises an occasion when you may assert the same principles which 

 govern the laws of property. In the next place, these industries, if left 

 open to the unregulated invasion of the citizens of all nations, would 

 be used up and destroyed. The only condition upon which they can 

 be preserved and made beneficial to mankind is that they be allowed 

 to be «^orked and operated by the particular power which has the best 

 facilities for that purpose. In the next place, they can be preserved 

 only by putting them uuder a system of regulation, which shall be 

 operative upon the citizens of all nations. It is necessary that the 

 citizens of the particular power, who go out there and improve these 

 advantages, should also be made subject to these regulations. In other 

 words, the general condition is presented that mankind may have the 

 benefit of these advantages if they are disposed of in this way, and not 

 otherwise; and, consequently, they ought to be disposed of in this way. 

 The bottom of the sea in these places is not made the property of the 

 particular powers who assert the right to the industries. It is not their 

 property at all. It is not within their sovereign jurisdiction at all, any 

 more than any other part of the high seas, but it is a theatre where 

 their defensive regulations may be put in operation, and where the 

 industries of their citizens may be defended. 



Let rae support these views by a reference to the opinions of the best 

 writers. I read from Puflendorf on the Law of Nature and Nations. 

 The extract is found on page 134 of my printed argument: 



As for fishing, though it hath much more abundant subject in the sea than in lakes 

 or rivers, yet "tis manifest that it may in part be exhausted, and that if all nations 

 should desire such right and liberty near the coast of any particular country, that 

 country must be very much prejudiced in this respect; especially since" tis very 

 usual that some particular kiud of fish, or perhaps some more precious commodity, 

 as pearls, coral, aml)er, or the like, are to be found only in one part of the sea, and 

 that of no considerable extent. In this case there is no reason why the borderers 

 should not rather challenge to themselves this hai^piness of a wealthy shore or sea 

 than those who are seated at a distance from it. 



And then Yattel, upon the same subject, says: 



The various uses of the sea near the coasts render it very susceptible of property. 

 It furnishes fish, shells, pearls, amber, etc. ; now in all these respects its use is not 

 inexhaustible. Wherefore, the nation to whom the coasts belong may apijropriate 

 to themselves and convert to their own profit, an advantage which nature has so 

 placed within their reach as to enable them conveniently to take possession of it, in 

 the same manner as they possess themselves of the dominion of the land they inhabit. 

 Who can doubt that the [.earl fisheries of Bahrem and Ceylon may lawfully become 

 property? And though where the catching of fish is the only object, the fishery 

 appears less liable to be exhausted, yet if a nation have on their coasts a particular 

 fishery of a profitable nature, and of which they may become masters, shall they not 

 bo permitted to appropriate to themselves that bounteous gift of nature as an 

 appendage to the country they possess, and to reserve to themselves the great 

 advantages which their commerce may thence derive, in case there be a sufficient 

 abundance of fish to furnish the neighboring nations? 



(Sec. 2) A nation may appropriate to herself those things of which the free and 

 common use would be prejudicial or dangerous to her. This is a second reason for 

 which governments extend their dominion over the sea along their coasts, as far as 

 they are able to protect their right. 



Now, upon that very firm basis of reason and authority we place the 

 right of the United States to protect themselves in the enjoyment of 

 the industry which they have established upon these islands. They 

 have peculiar advantages, supreme advantages, for appropriating the 

 annual increase of the seal, without diminishing the stock. They have 

 established an industry and made rules and regulations which are 

 devised to preserve it, and to make this blessing i)erpetual to mankind. 



