328 ORAL ARGUMENT OF HON. EDWAJID J. PHELPS. 



Bryant therefore, remains, the only witness cited by the British Com- 

 missioners in support of aquatic coition. 



On the other hand two great facts disprove the possibility of coition 

 in the water, 



a) The harem system, which dominates the whole life and economy of 

 the animal. 



b) The time of birth of the young. 



Cows give birth on arrival (Report British Commrs., Sec. 30 j Eeport 

 American Commrs., U. S. Case, p. 326). 



The period of gestation is about twelve months (British Commrs., 

 Sec. 434; American Commrs., U. S. Case, p. 326). 



Cows cannot be impregnated until after delivery. 



Arrivals and delivery occur late in June and early in July with great 

 regularity. Impregnation must, therefore, take place within a week or 

 two after delivery of the pup, when the cows are on shore and guarded 

 in the harems (U. S. Counter Case, pp. 63-64), and especially so if the 

 British Commissioners are right in saying that the females do not leave 

 the rookeries for several weeks after the birtli of their young (Sec. 30). 



That arrivals are not later now than formerly, see U. S. Case, p. 386, 

 table; U. S. Counter Case, p. 397, evidence of W. H. Williams; U. S. 

 Case, App. Vol. II, p. 13, evidence of J. Stanley-Brown. 



If females not pregnant were imj)regiiated before arrival, births would 

 be earlier, which is not pretended to be the case. 



The following evidence shows that aquatic coition is impossible: 



J. Stanley-Brown (U. S. Case, App., Vol. II, p. 14) says: 



Pelagic coition I believe to be impossible. Tlie process upon land by reason of the 

 formation of the genital organs is that of a mammal, is violent in character, and 

 consumes from five to eight minutes. The relative sizes of the male and female are 

 80 disproportionate that coition in the water would inevitably submerge the female 

 and require that she should remain under the water longer than would be possible 

 to Buch an amphibian. 



Samuel Falkener {ibid., 165) says: 



I am positive from my observation that copulation in the water cannot be efifectual, 

 and would be a most unnatural occurrence. 



H. H. Mclntyre {ibid., p. 42), after seventeen years on the islands, 

 says : 



It has been said that copulation also takes place in the water between these young 

 females and the so called breeding males, but with the closest scrutiny of the ani- 

 mals when both sexes were swimming and playing together under conditions the 

 most favorable in which they are ever found for observation, I have been unable to 

 Terify the truth of this assertion. 



J. H. Morton {ibid., p. 67), says: 



A firm foundation, for the support of the animals, which the ground supplies, and 

 the water does not, is indispeusablej to oppose the pushing motion and forceful 

 action of the posterior parte of the male which he exerts during coition. 



S. R. Nettleton {ibid., p. 75), says: 



Referring to the Question as to whether pelagic coition is possible, I have to say 

 that I have never seen it attempted, but from my observations I have come to the 

 conclusion that pelagic coition is an impossibility. 



See also articles by Dr. Allen, IT. S. Case, App., Vol. 1, p. 407 and 

 deposition of N. A. Grebnitzki, TJ. S. Counter Case, p. 362. 

 The appearance of the act, not the reality, may perhaps have been seen : 

 J. Armstong (U. S. Case, App., Vol. II, p. 2), says: 



I have seen seals in a position when it seemed to be attempted, but doubt whether 

 it is eflfectually accomplished. If it were, I think we should see pups born late and 

 out of Beason, but such is not the case. 



