ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 121 



Otiier examples may be found, as to the 26th April, at 

 pp. 257, 357, and 306; as to tlie SOth April at pp. 256 and 

 485; as to the 3rd May at pp. 323, 349, .308, and 445; and as 

 to the 12th May at pp. 269 and 283 of the same Appendix. 



Mr. Joseph Murray, another United States Agent, ap- ^jMr- Joseph 

 pears to have been able to attest affidavits in two places at ' ""'^^' 

 once. For instance, on the 13th April he attested the dec- 

 laration of Isaac Leonard at Kadiak, and on the same day 

 the declaration of E. W. Littlejohn at San Francisco, the 

 distance between the two places being not less than 1,680 

 miles by sea. (See pp. 217 and 457, United States Appen- 

 dix, vol. ii.) 



No less than twenty-three affidavits from various Makah ^ The Makah 

 Indians who inhabit Beah Bay and district appear in the 

 United States Appendix. None of these witnesses have 

 been seen on behalf of Great Britain, nor has their evi- 

 dence been subject to the test of local inquiry, for the 

 reasons stated in the declaration of Arthur Belyea (see 

 British Counter-Case, Appendix, vol.ii, p. 176), from which 

 it will be seen that in November 1892 he visited Neah Bay, 

 with a view to making the necessary inquiries, but although 

 the Indians were perfectly willing to talk to him and give 

 evidence to him, the United States Government Agent, one 

 John P. McGlinn (who it will be noticed has witnessed 

 nearly every single deposition taken amongst these people), 

 refused to allow him to examine any of the witnesses, 

 although he oflered to do so in the presence of the said 

 John P. McGhnn. 



Mr. Belyea, however, saw the natives, and tried to get 

 them to give evidence in spite of Mr. McGlinn, but he was 

 told by them that they dare not disobey this Agent, and 

 that he had forbidden them to talk about seals to any 

 stranger who came there without his permission. Whilst 

 he was making these inquiries he was followed by a police- 

 man under the orders of McGlinn, and, as he believed, for 

 the purpose of preventing the Indians from talking to him. 



The policeman actually followed him into the house of 

 one of the Indians, and used threatening language to the 

 Indian, which caused him to cease speaking to Mr. Belyea. 

 He, however, got hold of one Indian named Jackson, who 

 made a statement to him, which apx)ears in the British 

 Counter-Case, Appendix, vol. ii, p. 178. The witness, 

 amongst other things, told him that Mr. McGlinn would 

 issue an order that would send any one to gaol who gave 

 evidence to Mr. Belyea. 



The United States evidence comprises some eight decla- ^^i^r- cbaries 

 rations by one Charles J. Behlow as to accurate examina- 

 tions purporting to be made by him of certain cargoes of 

 seal-skins taken from pelagic sealers. 



In these depositions he professes to give the result of 

 the examinations, reporting in each case an extremely 

 small number of male skins, and also reporting that the 

 female skins showed that almost all of them were in pup 

 when taken. Inquiries lead to the discovery, however, 

 that Mr. Behlow's inspection of the cargoes in question 

 was so slight as practically to amount to no inspection at 



