ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR RICHARD WEBSTER, Q. C. M. P. 147 



couver Island, was tested. It was not taken by Mr. McGlynn and 

 wlieu a representative of Great Britain did come to examine those 

 witnesses it is found, and is found in tlie Appendix in a very remark- 

 able way that they go back from tlieir previous statements. 1 only 

 bring tiiat before the Tribunal in order respectfully to impress upon 

 them the importance of receiving ex parte testimony of these men, 

 uncrossexamined too, with a great deal of caution. I go back to pages 

 335 and 336. If the Tribunal indicate that I ought to read the whole 

 of these, I will, but I think I have sufflciently indicated my criticism. 

 I should like to refer to the journalist, because Mr. McManns was a 

 gentleman quoted by Mr. Coudert as a witness whose testimony miglit 

 have been of some weight, I call attention to it because it is obviously 

 put in a sensational and a journalistic way. 



Tuesday the 25th Auiinst rain in morning. Boats and canoe otit at half past 9 

 o'clock; out all day (returning to dinner): Result: first boat, two seals reported, 

 wounded and lost live; seals said to be shy and wary, and not so numerous as for- 

 merly; attention called to cow seal being skinned (which I had taken for a young 

 bull). The snow white milk running down blood-stained deck was a sickening 

 sight. Indian canoe, one seal, total, 3 seals; 2 mediums and 1 cow. Wednesday 26th 

 August, cloudy morning, seals floating round schooner. Boats and canoe out all day. 

 Result: first boat, 1 seal; second boat, none; Indian canoe, 10 seals; total, 11 seals; 

 8 cows in milk and three medium Skiitper in first boat blamed the powder. Socou(l 

 boat said it was tuo heavy and clumsy for the work skipper reported having wounded 

 and lost 7, and the men in second boat 9 ditto, 16 in all. Ski[)per said seals not so 

 numerous as formerly, more shy; also blamed the powder. Evidently a great deal 

 of shooting and verv few seals to correspond. Thursday 27 August, seals to all 

 appearances very scarce, species being exterminated, so to judge from the skipper's 

 remarks. Weather fine and clear. Boats and canoe out; returned at noon, conse- 

 quence of rough sea. Result: first boat, 1; second boat, none; Indian canoe, 2 seals; 

 total, 3 seals. Again in favour of Indian spear. Powder blamed again. Tired of 

 such excuses. So far have not found one word of truth in anything I've heard pre- 

 viously about open sea seal-hunting. 



Friday, 28 August, rain and heavy sea in morning; cleared in afternoon; boats 

 and canoe out in afternoon; returned at 6 p. m. No skins although a great deal of 

 shooting going on first boat reported having wounded and lost three seals; blamed 

 powder. Poor powder. It takes judging from the number of shots fired, about a 

 hundred to secure one seal. 



Saturday, 29th August, ship's cook brought down from deck a large cow seal at 

 40 yards rise. Boats and canoe out all day; fine, clear, balmy weather; Aukatau 

 Island in sight. Result: first boat three seals; second boat, three seals; cook, 

 from deck, one; Indian canoe, ten; total catch, seventeen seals, greater proportion 

 cows in milk; horrid sight, could not stay the ordeal out till all were fiayed. A 

 large number reported as wounded and lost. According to appearances slaughter 

 indiscriminate. 



It is quite clear that Mr. McManus is recording this in the way in 

 which journalists record these things, putting a very considerable 

 amount of colour into it, but I want to call attention to the fact that 

 no attention is paid to what was the actnal condition of these females 

 on the 29th August from the point of view of seeing whether in the 

 glands themselves thongh there was milk in the breast, the milk was 

 drying u}). I do not snggest it was ur.true and have never done so, 

 but I point ont from the point of view you have to consider which is 

 that of necessity, the incident referred to in this kind of language in 

 order as far as this witness was concerned to produce prejudice, does 

 not guide you or enable you to form a judgment. 



Then this evidence goes on at page 93, and I say that desiring to 

 read it asfnlly against myself as it can be read I submit that it aii'ords 

 no guide at all from which any quantitative deduction can be drawn as 

 to the number of nursing females and the females with ])ups depend- 

 ent ux)oii them that are takeu in any given season or from any given 



