which each relied, was to be delivered to the arbitrators and opposing agent within six months after the exchange of ratification of the treaty. Four months after the delivery of the case the counter-case on each side was to be likewise delivered, but the arbitrators were given the power to extend the time for good cause shown. If either party specified any document in its own exclusive possession without annexing a copy, the other party could require a copy to be furnished: and either party had the right to call for the original or certified copies of all papers ad duced as evidence. And, finally, both par ties were to deliver, within two months after delivery of the counter case, a written or printed argument; and the arbitrators, if they desired elucidation of any point, could require a printed statement or argument, or oral argument by counsel, to which the other party had the right of a reply. The award of the Tribunal was to be rendered within three months from the close of the argu ment, if possible. As is well known, the award of the tribunal was in favor of the United States, but the value of its triumph was not in the money compensation, but in the inestimable benefit conferred not only upon the two nations concerned, but the people of the world, in pointing out a better method of settling in ternational controversies than by war. There was for a time a feeling in England of dis appointment and dissatisfaction with the re sult, but on both sides of the water general relief was experienced that a definite and peaceful settlement had been reached of a matter which had occasioned deep resent ment and threatened a long estrangement of the two kindred nations. Next in importance for the United States to the Geneva arbitration was that relating to the protection of the fur seals in Behring Sea, held in Paris in 1893. The questions then submitted arose out of the effort on the part of the Government of the United
States to protect the seals on the high sea, while absent from the islands which they made their home, in quest of food or on their annual migration. The contention of the United States was that the practice of the Canadian vessels in killing the seals in the water on the high sea was necessarily indis criminate and wasteful, and tended to the extermination of this herd of animals, useful to mankind and a source of profit to the government of the United States. The latter, in its efforts to protect the seals seized a number of Canadian vessels and confiscated them and their cargoes. Vigor ous protests from the British government fol lowed and large claims for damages were presented. After a long diplomatic corres pondence, the two governments agreed to submit the questions involved to arbitration. The treaty provisions for the constitution of the tribunal and its procedure were verysimilar to those of the Geneva Tribunal. The chief points of variance were as follows: Each of the contracting parties were to be repre sented by two members of the Court, which with the three neutral arbitrators constituted a court of seven members. The arbitrators were to be jurists of distinguished reputa tion in their respective countries; and the selecting powers were requested to choose, if possible, jurists who are acquainted with the English language." In the Geneva arbi tration it was provided that the tribunal could call for oral argument if desired by it; but in the fur seal arbitration, in addition to the printed argument, each party had the right to "support the same before the arbi trators by oral argument;" and under this provision the tribunal was in session for three months, mainly engaged in hearing oral arguments. The decision of the tribunal was against the contention of the United States, and as a result it had to pay about half a million of dollars for damages to the Canadian seal ers, and to sustain a heavy loss in its annual
