ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. PHELPS. 67 



the result of actual cruises and observations recorded in the logs by 

 the naval Officers of Great Britain and America, undertaken with jireat 

 enthusiasm by the British Ofticers, you Avill remember, and undertaken 

 at all events, whether with enthusiasm or not, by the American Officers. 



Now, would it be credited till a reierence is had to the map that we 

 were fortunately able to furnish on this subject, that no one of those 

 cruisers ever was in a position to arrive at any such result, or to fur- 

 nish any information whatever on the subject ? That these maps with 

 their apparently conclusive results as to the locality of these seals, 

 stated to be founded upon observation of the very best official charac- 

 ter by gentlemen whose qualitications are unquestionable and whose 

 character is above dispute, had no foundation whatever? That there 

 were no such cruises and no such observations'? I shall ask your atten- 

 tion to Maps N"* 1, 2 and 3, in the Portfolio of the American Counter 

 Case; N" 1 sliows the cruises of the American vessels, six in number, 

 from July the loth to August the 15th. You will see how far to the 

 west they went. You will see that they never entered the waters that 

 are concerned by this encjuiry. They went to no such place. They not 

 only made no such observations and no such record as would aftbrd a 

 foundation for the British Commissioners' maps, but they never went 

 where they could have made any observations or have known anything 

 upon the subject. 



If you will, now kindly look at Map N" 2 of the same Portfolio, you 

 will find the logs of the British Vessels for the same period of time. 

 These are the gentlemen who entered into the matter with great 

 enthusiasm. I have no doubt they did, as far as they went; and you will 

 see that not one of them was much west of the 174th degree of longi- 

 tude, between that and 175'^, from the Yakutat Pass up to St. Law- 

 rence Island, and, of course, they could not have made any such 

 observations as to the locality of the seals beyond that, as these maps 

 pretend. 



Then, by referring to the third Chart, you will see that the logs and 

 cruises of the two Naval Squadrons, the American and the British, 

 cover the second period and combine the two in one map. For the first 

 period, they are given in separate maps; for the second period, they 

 are given in the same ma]), and it gives the courses of six United 

 States vessels and four British vessels. You will see in that chart that 

 they run across once and back again, and on this map, are laid down 

 the seals they saw, without attempting to discriminate between the 

 fur and the hair seals which frequented that region. You will see, 

 from the log, there are almost none at all. The first Chart shows that 

 the ships never were in a place where they could have obtained evi- 

 dence in support of the other map. The second shows that they did 

 once or twice run across there, and, when they did, they did not see any 

 seals. So that their evidence was exactly the other way. 



Now this is exposed in the Counter Case of the United States; and 

 what has the British Government to say about it"? Nothing whatever. 

 In the British Counter Case, it is said in substance that the informa- 

 tion referred to seems not to support the map, or some words to that 

 efiect. But they neither claim, what of course, no man could claim, 

 that their map derives any support from these charts, nor do they otter 

 any explanation how it came to jjass that they were led to construct 

 these elaborate maps, citing no other authority for them than the 

 observation of shii)s that either never were there at all, or, when they 

 were there, their observations were directly the other way. When this 

 was pointed out in the American Counter Case, when it was shown 

 that the foundation for these maps in the British Commissioners Keport 



