ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 107 



Captain Hooper does not state whether the voyage 

 referred to was made outside or inside Vancouver 



131 and the Queen Charlotte Ishmds, but in either case ^^s® i"*- 

 his observations accord perfectly with those depended 



on by the British Commissioners. 



He further states, in two places, that the arrival (or co^"'/^®^.^^'*^**^ 

 appearance) of seals upon the coast is directly related to, a i;p<i"iix, pp! 

 that of the coming of the smelts, herring, and ulachan. "^^liHilih com- 

 This statement may be compared with those made in tlie™'*^'""®''^' f<e- 

 British Commissioners' Report, and in the British Counter- 22I 223!''^*^' 

 Case, with which it fully accords. teSf paX" 



As the statements made by Captain Hooper appear to 

 be relied upon by the United States in connection with 

 that part of tlie migration route of the fur-seal which lies 

 to tbe south of the Aleutian Islands, and to have been 

 employed in the construction of the revised migration-map 

 presented with their Counter-Case, it may be interesting united states 

 to note that Captain Hooper in 1892 left Unalaska on the'i°;|;;,[,^i^^''y^: 

 10th November, and arrived in San Francisco some time 2-«, ^^3. 

 before the 21st November, when his Keport was made. On 

 the passage he saw but two seals. 



Captain Ferguson is, however, also quoted to express his ^^s^ ^o'- 

 belief that there must be an "immense feeding-ground" of 

 fur-seals between latitude 40° and 42° north and longitude 

 172° and 135° west. He saw no fur-seals there himself, 

 but quotes the reports of vessels (not named) which are 

 stated to have seen seals in this region. From the evidence 

 printed in the British Counter-Case, it is very probable that , Bntisii conn- 



t6r-(_/isfi 1)1) 13T 



Captain Ferguson may be correct in his conjecture that a 138. ' '*^' ' 

 certain or even a considerable number of fur seals may 

 often be found in the region specified, but this in no way 

 aflects the general facts as to the migration of the main 

 bodies of the seals of the North Pacific. So far as it goes, 

 it assists to bear out the evidence relating to the inter- 

 mingling of the seals of both sides of that ocean during 

 the winter months, and also the statements as to the essen- 

 tially pelagic habits of the seals. 



The "data collected and mentioned above" are those 

 just referred to, and their extremely scanty character fully 

 justifies the doubts expressed as to the trustworthiness of 

 some of the indications of the new version of a migration- 

 map presented with the Counter Case of the United States. 

 It must be explained, tliat the criticism thus made 



132 is not directed to all the indications of tlie map; but 

 it is confidently maintained that no substantial evi- 

 dence has been adduced to verify that i)art of these indi- 

 cations which shows the fur-seals, after having h*ft the 

 territory of the United Stales on the Pribylolf Islands, 

 navigating in a body directly to that part of the west coast 

 of North America wliicli is coini)rised in the territory of 

 the same Power to the south of the Canadian coast. 



It may also be noted, that no atteni|>t is made on the map 

 in question to show the general distribution of the seals in 

 Behring Sea and along the Aleutian chain during the sum- 

 mer months. 



In this connection it is further important to observe, that 

 on another maj), which purports to give details respecting 



