ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR RICHARD WEBSTER, Q. C. M. P. 245 



Lord Hannen. — There is some in 1859. 



Sir Richard Webster. — It is just 32,000. 



Lord Hannen. — And in 1865 it is 40,000 odd. 



Sir EiCHARD Webster. — But your Lordsliip will notice that those 

 years 18G3, 1801 and 1865 have a query against them. I quote this not 

 for the purpose of saying one is as true as the other, but for the i)urpose 

 of showing the conclusion drawn with regard to the figures by inde- 

 pendent persons advising the United States many years ago was in 

 accordance with the independent judgment, made by the British Com- 

 missioners, and, yet it is in the face of this, that a grave attack is made 

 by the United States on the unfairness of the British Commissioners, 

 because they thought fit to say that the average of those years did not 

 exceed 40,000 seals ^er annum on an average of years. 



Now, Mr. President, attention was called by my learned friend Mr. 

 Carter, or Mr. Coudert, to one or other of the replies from Naturalists. 

 I think, Mr. Coudert read professor Huxley if I remember and I want 

 the Tribunal exactly to understand how that matter rests. 



Will you be good enough to oblige me by taking the first Volume of 

 the United States Appendix. 



Senator Morgan. — May I enquire. Sir Richard, whether there is 

 evidence in this case to show that during the time of the rest which 

 the Russians gave to these Islands that they provided that sealing 

 might go on on one island while the other was entirely exempt. 



Sir Richard Webster. — I do not know Mr. Senator Morgan, but I 

 think it is quite possible and a very reasonable suggestion. I do not 

 know how it stands. I do not remember it. 



Senator Morgan. — I only called attention to it to have it looked into. 



Sir Richard Webster. — It strangely accords with a note that I 

 have of an observation that I intended to make to this Tribunal as to 

 what might be reasonable with regard to these Islands, but I mention 

 this that I do not really know whether the " Zapooska" was sometimes 

 at St. George's sometimes at St, Paul's or how it is. 



Now I want respectfully to caution the Tribunal on this, because it is 

 clear that these replies of the naturalists must be at any rate consid- 

 ered with some little caution though many of them are not against me 

 at all having regard to the way in which their opinion was invited. 

 W^ould you kindly look at page 415. A statement occurs there, by 

 Mr. Merriam, of supposed facts, upon which the expert gentlemen are 

 asked to express an opinion, and, it is not going too far to say, that in 

 many of these most important facts there was a serious controversy of 

 fact known to exist at that time. Therefore one must to a certain extent 

 regard the report and opinion, however distinguished the author of it 

 may be, with some little caution, having regard to the nature of the 

 memoranda which was put before them. 



I will only call attention to the most important matters, and I will 

 take them, if you will bear with me, by the numbers. In paragraph 

 8 — I indicate those which cannot be taken as facts: 



The act of nursing is performed on land, never in the water. It is necessary, 

 therefore, for tlie cows to remain at the islands until the young are weaned, which 

 is when they ai"o 4 or 5 months old. 



Now there is not a passage in the evidence which justifies that state- 

 ment, that as a matter of fact, the pups are weaned before they are 

 four or five months old. The evidence on both sides shows that in the 

 end of July and beginning of August the pups are scattered all along 

 the islands and apparently weaning, in the ordinary sense of the word, 

 has taken jdace long before that. 



