New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-05-11
THE BRITISH CASE EGUN.
SIR CHARLES RUSSELL'S ARGUMENT BEFORE
THE BEHRING SEA COURT.

THE AMERICAN CONTENTION OF PROPERTY
RIGHTS IN SEALS DIsPUTED-A Defence
OF PELAGIC SEALING.
Paris Nav lO-AttOrncy- General Sir Charles
Russell of counsel for Great Britain before the
Bchring Sea Tribunal of Arbitration began his
address to-day in behalf Of the British case. The
courtroom was tlroneed with English and Amcri-
can residents of Paris and visitors from abroad.
Sir Charles began by bestowins general praise on
the ARGUMENTS of Mcssrs. Carter and Coudcrt, Of
counsel for the United States. full of intellectual
allurements Nevertheless, he thought that Mr.
Carriers line OF argument had taken him into the
misty clouds of metaphysical and ethical discus
son which had no bearing upon the case. lie
had also built ,trongholds which were legally in
defensible sir Charles remarked on the change
of front i'll Various parts OF the American argu-
uen:. The courage. not to say audacity, with
which the American counsel had stated as PROPOSE
tons Of law arguments which had legal founda-
ton, had greatly interested him. For instance
the theory that foreign vessels could be seized
in time of peace, that pclasc sealing was Grim
inal, and that seals although wild, were neverthe
less American property. because they possessed the
animum rcvcrtendi, displayed remarkable con-
fusion of ideas
Seals Sir Charles declared. were like game
which the landowner had the right TO kill al
though only when his land The animum
Ieyertcn1 conferred property in wild animals
only when the wild animals were induced by arti-
fetal means, such as feeding Them TO return TO
q particular place Neither international nor mu-
nicipal law would confer property in seals.
the dispute between persons instead of nations
On some points. Sir Charles stated. he agreed
with the American counsel. because they drew
right conclusions based wrong premises lie
admitted that the legal questions for decision
by the Tribunal contained i'll article t should be
submitted TO the Arhitrators juIiStS. This,
however, implied that the Tribunal of Arbi-
tration must declare what the law is, and not
attempt to make the law.
Sir Charles Russell commented what he
called MI. Carriers remarkable contention that
moral and natural law were interchangeable
terms for International law. Sir Charess con
ccption Of international law that il did not
depend on moral considerations. but on the con
sent of nations. He quoted the past history OF
privateerng and the slave trade TO prove that
actions In themselves wrong are not necessarily
offences against international law. lie agreed
with the Americans that it was preferable that
the seals should be cXterminated rather thah
that the Tribunal should swerve from the stralgh'
line of the law. The whole question had oeeh
exaeccroted The American counsel spoke OF
HeaiSklnS as though 'lIe ulSdPp'"i""'N
animal. furnishing them would cause rude shocN
10 tie progress of civilization. Sir Charles woui"
not a.ser: that seashins were not necessary 10
banniness in this world in the next, out lie
noin,ed out that it was only about the NeT
1850 that a method OF preparing the SKINS was
discovered which brought them INT" tie HAHN.
az articles Of luxury. The counsel lor 'he 'S'i'
States had dwelt upon the cost OF AiasKa, anu
the value of the Territory to the Unite" states
q, account of the seals; hut at the time OF VI.
purchase of Alaska the United States uiu ho'
take the seals into consideration. , ; 40 20
Ibis statement led 10 "a long dlscussioh DO do
the correctness of the assertion DdIg g,n
Courccl, president Of the Tribunal M'si, nd r I
and Morgan. the American Arbitrator, anu T., a.
Phelps Of counsel for the lnltei >'a'oo. sV
TART in the discussion. and Dr0ugn, 0uV '"'
ppoin,s relating to the purchase of Alaska. .ho
Sr Charles Russell, continuing, uiG.u ui.'V
method Of sealing on the FrioyIoh lsian n.,,gic
more destructive ana more cruel 'hai prI; ?,5
sanlino lie ridiculed the profession OF the uniteu
States that they acting IN TINS mater ~ -"
snir;, of humanity Pclagic sealing. M" salu' wa
dine 10 the enormous tax imposed pN Ihe MI ~
States mon the lcssecs of the seal lslands ne
mean no Offence 10 his friends on the o'her S'"
81 tho case hut he asked that all the memoer' OF
the Tribunal rid their minds OF en-, anu in'' wv
question without lofty talk of phllahthioPN' NJ
Referring 70 Canada's intervention In tll' !.i,.
ring Sea negotiations, Sir Charles remarked ,Ia'
os the American colOnists We're not silent I"eI"-
10, immortal measures affecting themselves whei
Iord North was the Salisbury OF the T"riod, put
Enormously asserted the colonies right 10 speak 30
th..I. should not reproach Canada when She acted
IN; lie Indignantly repudiatcd the charges
impugning the impartialitv of the BRUSH Oo"'-