Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1893-04-20
WAS MIS-QU0TED.
Mr.. Carter Did Not Disparage
Judge Dawson.
More French Bank Officials Jailed for
Connection With Panama Frauds.
liberal Member Of Pariment Deserts His
Party on Home Rule.

| PARis. April I9.--lIan !. c. Carter of
| the counsel for the United States in the
proceedings before the Behrine sea tribunal
of arbitration makes the request that pub
li,ity be given the following statement:
| Yesterday MIR, Carter complained 10
Baron de Courcclle, president of the tri-
hunal OF arbitration, of the misrepresenta-
ton of his remarks in the report Of last
Fridays proceedings, as published in the
London Times.
| In this report Mr. Carter was represented
as referring 10 the American, Judge Dnw-
son as two-penny judge. Mr.. Carter OK
| planned that he sail nothing in the least
dispsraging of that distinguished and very
worthy juisr. What he really ssil was
| that the Unuea States could not hc held
| responsible for reasons which Judges
| assigned decisions.
lttwerc SO, the United States govern
meat might he held answerablc for
decisions of any ,wo-pcnny Justice of the
peace, lie Carter never said that the
Judgment given by Judge Dawson, con
demung British schooncrs seized in
BeGring sea, were incorrect lie believed
that the Judgment was SQUAD.
The Judgment spoken of by Mr.. Carter
was that delivered by judge Dawson, in the
the eases of the srhooners DOLPHIN. Anna
Beck Grace and Ada, which opinion wide
" reviewed the claims in relation to Behr-
ing sea, AMI the evidence in support of those
ciain,S and directed that judrmen, he issued
against the vessels,
In rcsuming hiS argument before the tri-
bunal ot arh,rItion to-day, Mr.. Carter
claimed that the seals were not ierde Hdtu-
rdc, hut private property, when nourishcd
ami tended hy man. Mr.. Carter quoted
eases IN support of this contention,
notably the ease of Morgan VS..
EArl ai Ahergnvenny which resulted in
the decision that deer are private property.
similar TO bees AMI swans, being wild until
cultivated seats ,reqnrnting the Prihy-
ioif Stands, were, MIR. Carter commended,
guarded and cherished by the uitcd States
and therefore a species of hushandry was
formed giving property rights IN III" seals.
The line of arguments presented by Mr..
Garter in support of the claim of American
ownership in seal. was 80 intricate and
technical that the president of the tribunal
was obliged 10 frequently intcrpose with
questions in regard to the ,tatements made.
Continuing, Mr.. Carter sail that Great
Britain claims the right To prey upon the
| animal whose very existence today was due
| to the efforts of the United States. The
determination of seal life in Bchrng sea
was prevented by the United States, and
| this action of the United States was worthy
OF the recoguiticn by Humanity, who is still
| benefited from the seal industry.
Mr. Carter divergcd from the main line
of the argument to discuss the abstract
question of property. lie cited eases in
vhih the rights of humanity were enforced
i ,,,I al
| For instance, he said. In 1870. Great
Britain, with the approval of the world,
made war against China to compel the open
| ing of Chinese ports If countries growing
| Peruvian bark should declare their intention
to destroy the plant the other countries of
the world would be justified in interfering,
in the name Of humanity's right. to prevent
such destruction.
| The right of property might include in
most cases the right to destroy, but thou
sands of laws existed 10 preserve to human
| ity the use of the product of certain kinds
of property.
| Why did Great Britain occupy Egypt to-
| tayY Because Egypt lay along the pathway
to Great Britsin's mighty commerce with
the East. II the Egyptian government was
unable to assure to Great Britain In the
safety of this pathway, Great Britain was
justified in her interference.
| Baron dc Courccl--You seem 10 take n
very high view of tho subject. You antici-
pate the verdict of history.
| Senator Morgan TO Mr.. Carter IF
this tribunal decides that the United States
do not own seals, ought the United States
to repeal all the laws concerning seal life
in the Behring senS
| Mr., Carter--I think not, but the question
is unimportant, AS in the event Of such a
decision there would soon be no seals The
permission of pelagic sealing means the ex-
termination of seal life. Adjourned.