ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 81 



P)iit tlie reference here made to Professor Evcrmnnn's 

 evidence is uusleading'. This gentleman counted the seals 

 on two parts ol LuUannon rookery. His tirst count of a 

 small area (deducting two bulls without pups near tluMu) 

 gives an average of over nineteen females to eacli bull. 

 (This is ai rived at by taking each i)up as representing a 



female.) 

 06 A second count of a larger area of the same rook- Page 75. 



ery shows au average of forty females to each bull 

 (deduced as above). He maintains that many of the pups 

 here did not belong to the bulls, but why he should liave 

 chosen part of the rookery with au excess of pups is not 

 explained. He further adds that many cows and pups were 

 not counted, because they "did uot.seem to belong to any 

 particular family." 



Thus, the statement made in the United States Counter- 

 Case, that Evernumn's count showed an average of fifteen 

 females to each bull, is incorrect, and Evermann's state- 

 ments are themselves inaccurate by reason of his omission 

 to count the whole of the females and pups actually seen 

 by him. 



On a later page, Professor Evermann says that cows were umted states 

 more abundant in proportion to bulls on Ketavie rookery ^",p"^^''jij^p'^ lee'. 

 than on Lukaunon. 



A count made by the same gentleman at Little East ibid., p. 273. 

 rookery, St. George Island, again gives an average of 

 about forty cows to each bull. 



The British Commissioners having quoted in their Report 

 certain statements made by Mr. H. W. Elliott, which throw 

 important light on the effect of the excessive killing of 

 male seals upon the Pribyloif Islands, a reference to these 

 statements is made in the following terms on this page of 

 the United States Counter-Case: 



The Commissioners also rely on a newspaper extract, which purports 

 to be a summary of a Report made by Mr. Henry W. Elliott in 1890 to 

 the Secretary of the Treasury, to establish certain alleged facts. 



The circumstances respecting Mr. Elliott's specially- 

 authorized investigations on the Pribyloff Islands in 

 1890, the fact that his Report of these investigations has 

 not been made public by the United States Government, 

 and the further fact that it has actually been refused to fur- 

 nish it to the Agent for Great Britain, have already been 

 alluded to. It would appear that when Mr. Elliott found that 

 the United States Government did not intend to publish 

 his Report, he communicated to the i)ress, over his signa- 

 ture, a summary of his conclusions, being that contained 

 in his letter submitting the Rei^ort as a whole to Sec- 

 97 retary of the Treasury Windom. The matter thus 



made public, will be found in the Appendix to the British Case, 

 British Case. Its authenticity, so far as knowni, has never n'j'|'''"'u''nited 

 heretofore been questioned either by the United States states No. 2 

 Government or by Mr. Elliott. The United States Gov- <^**^^>'" P' ^^• 

 ernment are in possession of the original Report. 



An objection is next raised in the United States Coun- Page 76. 

 ter-Case, to the effect that certain figures, quoted from Mr. 

 Elliott, relating to the state of the rookeries on the Priby- 



B S, PT X 6 



