ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 259 



Sir Charles Eussell. If I may with propriety inter]iose, there is 

 no reason wliy I shoiihl not explicitly state what we niean. What wo 

 mean is this: That my learned friends and myself propose to submit a 

 comidete argument, dealing- with one subject, and one subject only, 

 distinct aud separate in its character and to which legal considerations 

 alone apjily ; that having presented that argument, unmixed and uncon- 

 fused with any other on a difterent subject, we shall then, at what ever 

 moment is convenient to the Tribunal, proceed, may be immediately, to 

 discuss the question of regulations; but that we shall present two 

 arguments separately. 



Lord Hannen. You will not call upon us to give a decision upon the 

 five points before your argument upon the question of regulations'? 



Sir Charles Russell. No, my Lord, I have not suggested that 

 at all. 



Lord Hannen. That is the only question upon which it is supposed 

 there is a difference between us, and that will, of course, disapi)ear in 

 view of your explanation. 



Sir Charles Kussell. I ought to state, perhaps, that I mentioned 

 this to my learned friend, Mr. Phelps, as a course whii^h might obviate 

 the necessity of the Tribunal being called upon to make any decision 

 upon a legal point as to which there might, or might not, be difterences 

 of opinion amongst the Tribunal; and 1 think my learned friend will 

 say that he recognised my suggestion as a reasonable one. 



Mr. Phelps. Yes; the course suggested by Sir Charles Kussell will 

 be quite acceptable to us. The only point of diflerence at the outset 

 was that suggested whether the Tribuiuil was called upon to express a 

 decision, or an opinion, upon the previous points before hearing the 

 argument in respect to the regulations; but as counsel on both sides 

 understand it now, that claim will not be made; and we do not object 

 at all to the course of the argument proposed by my learned friend on 

 the other side. 



Justice Harlan. Of course what I state shows that 1 made no criti- 

 cism of that arrangement at all. I only understood the observation of 

 the President to go beyond that. That is why I made any remark. 



The President. I merely say that counselfor Great Britain will be 

 free to argue their case as they like, and divide their work between 

 themselves as they like. The Tribunal have agreed in leaving all liberty 

 to counsel for either party to argue their case as they like, and the Tri- 

 bunal not to make any decision until the whole argument of the case 

 has been gone through by both parties. 



I think we have now come to an agreement and we are ready to have 

 Mr. Carter proceed. 



Mr. Carter. The subject, Mr. President, which is now to engage ray 

 attention is that which, in a certain contingency contemplated by the 

 treaty, has reference to the framing of regulations, to be concurred in 

 by Great Britain, for the preservation of the seals. I think 1 have sev- 

 eral times observed in the course of my argument that, however the 

 two nations may have differed u]>on what may be called questions of 

 right, and however wide their difterences may have been upon those 

 questions, there is one point upon which they were agreed at the out- 

 set, and upon which they have been at all times since apparently agreed, 

 and upon which I hope they will continue to be agreed until the argu- 

 ment of this controversy is disposed of; and that is, the necessity upon 

 all grounds and in the interest of all nations that this useful race of 

 animals should not be exterminated, but should be preserved, and its 

 benetits and blessings be made available perpetually for the use of man- 



