ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 69 



that they are incorrect and not justified by the evidence 

 adduced in support of them, particularly in the matter of 

 the general distribution of seals in Behring Sea during the 

 summer months. 



It is stated by the United States that the Maps must 

 have been based chiefly ujjou the logs of the various men- 

 of-war, that the information contained in these logs is 

 insufficient to bear out the indications of the Maps, and 

 that, as other evidence relied upon by the British Commis- 

 sioners is not particularly specified or detailed, it " should 

 have no influence on the Tribunal." 



It is then assumed that the only data were those derived Paces 50, 51. 

 from the logs of cruizers, and those of the British cruizers 

 are reproduced in the form of Charts appended to the 

 United States Counter-Case, together with the tracks of 

 United States cruizers in 1892. 



In reply to these contentions, it may be stated that the 

 distribution of seals in Behring Sea in 1891, as shown on 

 the British Commissioners' Maps, in so far as it relates to 

 the part of Behring Sea surrounding the Pribyloft' 

 Islands, depended chiefly upon the logs of the several 

 80 cruizers, but an inspection of the tracks, as printed 

 by the United States, will show that the cruizers in 

 most cases confined their operations to the regions sur- 

 rounding the Pribyloflf Islands. 



For other parts of the sea, other sources of informa- 

 tion had to be employed. The British Commissioners refer 

 to those other sources (including their own voyages) in a 

 general way. The details and the names of informants were 

 not specifically given, merely in order to curtail the length 

 of their Eeport. The procedure followed in this case seo;9os<,p.]06. 

 resembled that adopted in most other cases by both the 

 British and United States Commissioners. 



Information obtained in 1892, and set forth in detail in British conn- 

 the British Counter-Case, however, not only fully confirms 540;^andAppen~ 

 the statements made by the British Commissioners as to .!]'^O'0i- "- pp- 

 the intermingling of fur-seals in Behring Sea, and as to"" '' 

 their distribution in that sea ; but are also such as to sup- 

 Ijly to the United States the precise data which they appear 

 to require. 



"2. The alleged 'promiscuous nursing of Pups by Female 



Seals." 



On this subject, the United States deny that certain evi- Page 53. 

 deuce, tending to show that female seals nurse other pups 

 than their own, is " sufficient to establish the facts alleged." 

 But the British Commissioners in their Eeport make no 

 definite allegation in this connection. The actual evidence 

 on both sides is given by the Commissioners, and is dis- 

 cussed by them. 



It is next stated, that though Messrs. Elliott and Bryant 

 are "the two most prominent authorities relied on" in the 

 British Commissioners' Report, the opinions of these observ- 

 ers are not accepted on the question here under discussion. 



Bryant and Elliott are often quoted as authorities, because 

 their observations are those which enter most fully into 



