ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 223 



found iu tbe large volume of the British Appendix page 451. He states 

 that he was an agent employed by the United States and had previously 

 reported. 



I find lie states in his deposition, made for the purpose of the Case 

 of the United States, tliat his experience in the Pribilof Islands extended 

 from 1S0I> to 1877, so that he had considerable experience. 



If you want to Icnow more about his experience, I shall be able to give 

 it to you but I do not think it is important enough. I was referring to 

 page 451 of this last volume. I think it is the same experiment that 

 was referred to by Mr. Elliott, and the paragraph to which I refer is 

 about the middle of the page. He makes a citation from Mr. Elliott in 

 which he says : 



Mr. Elliott in fact biniwelf writes on the same page (referring to the presence of a 

 large sealing fleet in liebring Sea), that it could not fail in a iew short years in so 

 harassing and irritating the breeding seals as to cause their withdrawal from the 

 Alaska rookeries and probably retreat to those of Russia, a source of undoubted 

 Muscovite delight and emolument, and of corresponding loss and shame to us. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — That is not Mr. Bryant's statement. 



Sir Charles Russell. — No I think I said he began by citing Mr. 

 Elliott. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — I mean to say that that document is not pre- 

 pared by Mr. Bryant. It is prepared by D', Dawson as a memo- 

 987 raiidum on Mr. Blaine's letter to Sir Julian Pauncefote as you 

 will see at page 436. All I meant to say was that that was not 

 the statement of Mr, Bryant. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Quite so. I think you are right so far. 



I thought it was and I think it will be found that it is in another 

 form. If I have been mistaken in that I shall be very sorry. 



I will read the print, however, as it stands. 



His remark implies that the seals may resort to either the Pribilof or the Russian 

 Islands, according to circumstances; and who is to judge, in the case of a particular 

 animal, in which of these places it has been born? The old theory, that the seals, 

 returned each year to the same spot, has been amply disprov( d. Elliott himself 

 admits this, and it is conhrnied by Captain Charles Bryant, who resided eight years 

 iu the Pribilof Islands as Government Agent, and who, having marked 100 seals in 

 1870 on St. Paul Island, recognized the next year four of them indifiereut rookeries 

 on that island, and two on St. George Island. 



Those two islands being some 30 miles apart. But I should like, as 

 Mr. Justice Harlan has referred to it, to see exactly what Mr. Bryant 

 says. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — You will probably find it in Mr. Allen's book. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Perhaps that is what it is, I know I have 

 satisfied myself that it was adopted by Mr. Bryant; but I think your 

 observation is quite correct. I find that my reason for so stating it is 

 that on page 129 of our (.'ounter Case, after giving the Elliott experi- 

 ments which I am now going to refer to, the observation is then made, 

 the same or a very similar experiment is referred to by Captain Bryant, 

 and I can prove that. 



Lord Hannen, — The passage seems to be referred to. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Yes, and I find also in the Congressional 

 Report on the Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska, Dr. H. H. Mclntyre, who 

 was referred to by my friend as a great autliority, says the seals are 

 found indiscriminately on the two islands; that is, seals born on St. 

 George are found on St. Paul, and vice versa. 



lN"ow I wish to read this experiment of Mr. Elliott. His is the Census 

 Report for 1880, which has been freciuently referred to, })ublished in 

 1881. The document is printed at the Government Printing office at 



