New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-05-04
COUDERT BEGINS HIS PLEA.
TIE REHRING SEA COURT LISTENS WITH
DELIGHT TO THE AMERICAN LAWYER.

ro,rrr OWNERSHIP OF SEALS AND THE
,,rc,,se,rv OF PROHIBITING PELAGIC
SEALING DwELT ON THE INTER
yENTrON OF CANADA
Paris. May Sat the meeting Of tho lehrinG
S.o Tribunal Of Arbitration to-day F. Il Coudcrt,
=, counsel for the United States. gave an outline
=, tho arguments which he proposed TO offer in
,,nnort ~ Mfr. Carter. The defence of the seal
;nr ,rdustrv in Behrng Sea by the United States
yos Mfr. Coudert declared, Imperative, and an
attack on the sealing industry was an attack on
,hs United States The United States raised the
GOALS az the Pribylon Islands in the same sense
that Australia raised sheep. and it was impossible
that the nurture and culture of the seals at the
pribylof Islands could exist in common with
nclogic sealing. The seals at the Prbylon Islands.
continued Mr. Coudcrt. were absolute property,
inst as cattle and sheep were absolute property.
Sir Charles RUSSELL Of counsel for Great Britain.
bore interposed with the remark: Certainly
not
Mr. Coudert admitted that proof as to owner
shin was impossible Some propositions were self
evident although they could not he demonstrated
nv proof. However, when the seals were at the
islands, they could be branded and their ears
Clipped The British Commissioners recognized
that the seals were American property when they
said that the guard was inefficient to protect the
seals from raids In that statement the right OF
the United States to protect the seals within a
certain limit was recognized, and 1t was ABSURD
10 say that the United States was unable to
protect the seals outside of the limit Seals, Mr..
Coudert argued, were not ferae naturae Mt
Coudert went on to describe seal life. The seal,
he said was not marine animal. IL goes 10
SEA only TO seek food. 1t possessed the animum
revertendi. and the title to the seal as absolute
,ronerty was undenable. The United States did
No, Interfere with the freedom Of the seals, which
cxisted for peaceful purposes, and II was not
wrong-dong on the part Of the United States 10
promote, instead of impeding, the culture OF these
animals.
Mr. Coudert devoted his argument in the after
noon to proving the necessity OF prohioMlng
pelagic sealing in order to preserve the race OF
seals lie stated nothing new i'll the way OF iacts'
hut he presented the case in novel ana rcllheoI
humorous manner which delighted the trlounai
and the great thrOng OF VISITORS Mt Nouuer'
mrbasized the assertion that the failure of Great
britain and the United States 10 come to an agree
ment as to Behring Sea due to the interven-
tiop Of Canada. He compared pelagic sealing to
the attach, of Don Quixote on a flock OF sheep
and dIated at length upon the methods of pelagic
scaling. and especially the destruction done win
tbe shotgun However, continued Mr. oouue i
The seal often revenged himself upon me scar, scar.
by dropping in the water and shSn Sy ,ans ad
xarIaoo of the specific gravity of the seal.
Touching the Sealers' Union which insisted upon
having certain number of seal hunters VINO VT
iiIind mr. wounded MANY seals which were lost
The Ti,e' unions motto: Liberty Equality, FRA,
ternity" was the true one 1t gave hneTW 10
wnsI, filed men TO enter the business, equailty III
nractisine. and fraternity in destroying useiui
animals. A.. ,.,;.od States
l.; t Su the Tribunal that an authentic report
~ the speech delivered by James carter; Cd
Counsel for the United States. would DE preS'i''"
This week