Agreed; provided the bison-skins may be reefed, from time to time, according to the state of the weather.
ART.9.The provisions of this protocol shall be rigidly respected.
ART.10.

Agreed; provided no advantage be taken by lawyers.
Lord Chatterino and myself pounced upon the respective documents like two hawks, eagerly looking for flaws, or the means of maintaining the opinions we had before advanced, and which we had both shown so much cleverness in supporting.
"Why, my lord, there is no provision for the appearance of any monikins at all at this interview!" "The generality of the terms leaves it to be inferred that all may come and go who may be so disposed." "Your pardon, my lord; article 8 contains a direct allusion to BISON-SKINS in the PLURAL, and under circumstances from which it follows, by a just deduction, that it was contemplated that more than ONE wearer of the said skins should be present at the said interview." "Perfectly just, Sir John; but you will suffer me to observe that by article 1, it is conditioned that there shall be an interview; and by article 3, it is furthermore agreed that the said interview shall be conducted 'on philosophical and liberal principles'; now, it need scarcely be urged, good Sir John, that it would be the extreme of illiberality to deny to one party any privilege that was possessed by the other." "Perfectly just my lord, were this an affair of mere courtesy; but legal constructions must be made on legal principles, or else, as jurists and diplomatists, we are all afloat on the illimitable ocean of conjecture." "And yet article 10 expressly stipulates that 'no advantage shall be taken by lawyers.' By considering articles 3 and 10 profoundly and in conjunction, we learn that it was the intention of the negotiators to spread the mantle of liberality, apart from all the subtleties and devices of mere legal practitioners, over the whole proceedings.

Permit me, in corroboration of what is now urged, to appeal to the voices of those who framed the very conditions about which we are now arguing.

Did YOU, sir," continued my Lord Chatterino, turning to Captain Poke, with emphasis and dignity; "did you, sir, when you drew up this celebrated article 10--did you deem that you were publishing authority of which the lawyers could take advantage ?" A deep and very sonorous "No," was the energetic reply of Mr.Poke.
My Lord Chatterino, then turning, with equal grace, to the Doctor, first diplomatically waving his tail three times, continued: "And you, sir, in drawing up article 3, did you conceive that you were supporting and promulgating illiberal principles ?" The question was met by a prompt negative, when the young noble paused, and looked at me like one who had completely triumphed.
"Perfectly eloquent, completely convincing, irrefutably argumentative, and unanswerably just, my lord," I put in; "but I must be permitted to hint that the validity of all laws is derived from the enactment; now the enactment, or, in the case of a treaty, the virtue of the stipulation, is not derived from the intention of the party who may happen to draw up a law or a clause, but from the assent of the legal deputies.

In the present instance, there are two negotiators, and I now ask permission to address a few questions to them, reversing the order of your own interrogatories; and the result may possibly furnish a clue to the quo animo, in a new light." Addressing the philosopher, I continued--"Did YOU, sir, in assenting to article 10, imagine that you were defeating justice, countenancing oppression, and succoring might to the injury of right ?" The answer was a solemn, and, I do not doubt, a very conscientious, "No." "And YOU, sir," turning to Captain Poke, "did you, in assenting to article 3, in the least conceive that, by any possibility, the foes of humanity could torture your approbation into the means of determining that the bison-skin wearers were not to be upon a perfect footing with the best monikins of the land ?" "Blast me, if I did!" But, Sir John Goldencalf, the Socratic method of reasoning--" "Was first resorted to by yourself, my lord--" "Nay, good Sir--" "Permit me, my dear lord--" "Sir John--" "My lord--" Hereupon the gentle Chatterissa again advanced, and by another timely interposition of her graceful tact, she succeeded in preventing the reply.