ORAL ARGUMENT OF FREDERICK R. COUDERT, ESQ. 289 



States, is to be examined in order to ascertain what the international 

 law may be. Is not this common to both countries'? Do not botli 

 countries prohibit such practise as we complain of? Do not botli coun- 

 tries assert that it is criminal to kill the nursing mother because the 

 effect is to annihilate the tlock? As my friend Mr. Carter has said, it 

 is spending- the capital and impoverishing the individual. The man 

 who spends his capital recklessly brings destruction only on himself; 

 and yet in some countries — as here, I believe — the law beneticently 

 steps in to guard the prodigal against the results of his own imprudence 

 and will not allow him to squander his own substance. . It pnts a guard 

 upon and about him; he can make no valid contracts; betakes no tinau- 

 cial steps which entail responsibility, because of his disposition to dis- 

 sipate the capital that he owns. Where the capital is suffered to perish 

 the whole source of happiness and prosi^erity that flows from its proper 

 use is gone. 



It is claimed that these are animals fercv naturw. I do not think the 

 proposition is helped by giving it a Latin name, even if it is consecrated 

 by long usage and time. These are wild animals, it is said, and wild 

 animals have no protection under the law. That is one of the grounds 

 taken by the other side. Tlie other ground is that the sea is free; that 

 commercial nations cannot accept the idea or tolerate the claim that 

 depredations of this kind may be interfered with. Let us look at these 

 claims for one moment. 



In the first place, are the seals properly designated as animals feroi 

 naturwf Perhaps the Arbitrators may have thought before coming into 

 this court, that they knew something about the nature of the seal; but 

 any such idea, however flattering it may be to themselves and to their 

 preconceived beliefs may be prom])tly dissipated in view of the conflict 

 that arises the moment that we try to agree upon what a seal really is. 

 If the view of our friends, as expressed by the British Commis.sioners, 

 is correct, the seal is one of the marvels of nature. These gentlemen 

 have undertaken to define the animal. It would be unjust to them to 

 give merely a synopsis of their detinitions; and I propose to read from 

 their own work and therefrom to show what an extraordinary animal 

 the seal is. I am sure that you would ail wish to be informed of the 

 nature and qualities of the animal that we are dealing with. It is well 

 when you are dealing with an animal to know what designation to give it, 

 especially if you are a Frenchman. '■'■J-appeJle un chat un chat,^^ he is 

 fond of saying. As to the aninml under consideration, it is claimed on 

 the other side that it is an essentialUj marine animal; tliat it goes upon 

 the land merely because its instinct tells it to go; merely because it is 

 necessary for such purposes as breeding, nursing, and raising the 

 young; indeed, they add, if nature did not tell them to do this, and if 

 it was not indispensible to their life, they could do without it. These 

 latter propositions Ave are disposed to agree to; but after all this is only 

 another way of saying that Nature has inculcated into those animals cer- 

 tain h'.ws necessary to their preservation, and which they must fulfil 

 under the penalty of death. Nature is severe in her punishments. She 

 is inexorable. Her commands cannot be disobeyed with impunity or 

 avoided by ingenuity. You may violate the commands of God and 

 hope for mercy; you nuiy transgress the laws of the State and escape 

 or find indulgence and clemency; not so with nature. Every infrac- 

 tion of her laws will be followed by retribution. Animals sho\y more 

 wisdom than men by giving at once implicit obedience to the inevitable; 

 and all that may be said, therefore, about them in this particular is that 

 B S, PT XII 19 



