Conference at Algeciras in 1905, where he played a conspicuous part. The member from Sweden and Norway was Mr. Gregers Gram, a lawyer and judge of distinction in his own country. After the arbitration he was Prime Minister of his Government, but since the separation of Norway he has not taken an active part in public affairs.

The counsel of the United States were men of the highest standing in their profession, and in an eminent degree possessed the confidence of the country. Edward J. Phelps, the senior counsel, was chosen immediately after the arbitration was determined upon and before the treaty was drafted. He had been our Minister at London during President Cleveland's Administration, had conducted the fur-seal negotiations there, and had consequently given considerable attention to the question. He was a lawyer of such attainments that Mr. Cleveland had considered him a fit person for the high post of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, vacant at the time, but it is understood that, owing to the objection of naturalized Irish citizens because of his treatment of the Fenian question when Minister in London, the President desisted from his nomination.

At the request of Mr. Phelps, James C. Carter of New York City was selected by the President as associate counsel. Mr. Carter had been recognized for some years as the leader of the American Bar. He brought into the case some very necessary qualities for its conduct which fitly supplemented the legal attainments of Mr. Phelps. While the latter was a good speaker and possessed a large grasp of political questions, Mr. Carter was a more deeply read lawyer, a closer reasoner, and could more clearly elucidate an abstract legal principle. Besides, he proved during the progress of the case a safer counselor, as Mr. Phelps was of an impetuous temperament and inclined to reach his conclusions hastily.

The third counsel selected was Judge Henry M. Blodgett, of the United States District Court. He had been long on the

bench and had established a high reputation for judicial fairness and legal acumen. He had reached the age when he could retire under the law, and it was suggested that it would be a worthy compliment and recognition of his long service to give him an appointment as counsel in the arbitration. I was delegated by the President to go to Chicago and obtain his consent to accept the new honor. He frankly told me he did not feel fitted for the unusual duties, and asked me to excuse him to the President; but later, through the persuasion of friends, he was induced to accept. His health became impaired and he was not able to render much service in the

case.

An incident attending the employment of counsel developed Mr. Blaine's political animosity. A lawyer of New York, able but somewhat eccentric, had at Mr. Phelps's request been sent by me to Europe early in the preparation of the case to secure certain evidence. He had returned after the successful accomplishment of his mission, and Mr. Phelps strongly urged his permanent appointment as counsel. I referred the matter to Mr. Blaine, and he objected. Mr. Phelps, however, persisted, wrote a long letter to Mr. Blaine on the subject, and had a conference with the President. The latter advised Mr. Blaine to withdraw his objection, but he sent the President a telegram of such a positive character as led him to acquiesce in Mr. Blaine's refusal, and the attorney was not appointed. It turned out that as a Republican mugwump" he had opposed Mr. Blaine's election in his presidential campaign and used some sharp language in his opposition.

After the case and counter-case of the two Governments had been exchanged and on the eve of the meeting of the Tribunal, Mr. Phelps expressed to me a desire to have Frederic R. Coudert, a prominent member of the New York City Bar, appointed a counsel in the case. Mr. Coudert was of French parentage, spoke the language fluently, had close relations

with Parisian lawyers, and it was felt by Mr. Phelps that he would be able materially to aid our case by his presence in Paris. Messrs. Phelps and Carter both being Democrats and Mr. Coudert an active member of that party, I expressed to Mr. Phelps a doubt of President Harrison's willingness to appoint him. It was then within a month of the inauguration of Mr. Cleveland for his second term, and Mr. Phelps decided not to ask for any action by the outgoing President, but Mr. Coudert assisted in the preparation of the printed argument, and likewise took part in the oral argument before the Tribunal.

In the appointment of the American members of the Tribunal and the selection of counsel, President Harrison showed the same freedom from partisan bias as in his other judicial acts. Senator Morgan, one of the members of the Tribunal and a leading Democrat, commenting on the subject some time after the final adjournment of the Tribunal, wrote: “Our party was and is responsible for using the means that were employed both for the raising and settlement of these questions, and it was a just measure of responsibility that Mr. Harrison devolved upon us, when, out of a body of arbitrators and counsel and Mr. Secretary Foster, the agent, selected by him seven in all he selected four Democrats and three Republicans." As to the manner in which these gentlemen discharged their trust, we have the following testimony of Mr. Justice Harlan, in a public address: "I may say that no Government was ever represented upon any occasion where its interests were involved with more fidelity, with more industry, and with greater ability than was the United States by its agent and counsel."

As soon as the treaty was signed and before its approval by the Senate, I entered upon my duty as agent of the United States and began as industriously as possible the preparation of our "case," the term applied to the statement which the Government submits to the Tribunal, setting forth its view