183 



It was suggested in argument tliat if the claim of tlie United States 

 to own the Pribilof far seals be sustained, the result would be to 

 establish a monopoly in its favor, by excluding the citizens and subjects 

 of other nations from engaging iu the business of taking seals in the 

 open Avaters of the sea. But surely this can not constitute any reason 

 wliytheclainishouldnotbesustainedifitbe well founded in law. Such an 

 objection could be made to property in anything; for all property is mo- 

 nopoly. The world has no interest in permitting the destruction of a race 

 of animals bestowed for the well-being and subsistence of mankind. It 

 so happens that the United States, by its ownership of the Pribilof 

 Islands, is in a situation to care for and preserve these seals for the 

 benefit of the world and to furnish the means of government while 

 taking the annual increase, which ultimately goes into commerce. If 

 its claim be denied, and pelagic sealers are unrestrained in the taking 

 of these animals in the o])(iii seas in the destructive mode i^racticed by 

 them, the species will soon be exterminated. It is idle to say that the 

 existence of these fur seals can possibly be secured, if pelagic sealing 

 to any material or i)rolitable extent is permitted in Bering Sea, or 

 in any part of the North Pacific Ocean where they may be found while on 

 their way back to their home on the Pribilof Islands. If, therefore, 

 pelagic sealing is suppressed and the taking of these seals is restricted 

 to their breeding grounds, where alone it is possible to make a discrimi- 

 nation as to the sex of the animals and as to the number killed for use, 

 the result will be the preservation of the race to the world. The object 

 of the treaty under which we are proceeding was, as the learned Attor- 

 ney-General of Great Britain conceded in argument, to secure these 

 fur seals against extermination, without reference to any special inter- 

 ests possessed either by the United States or by pelagic sealers. And 

 as they may be preserved by the United States, under the regulations 

 it has established for the taking of male seals at their breeding grounds, 

 and ca)mot be preserved at all if unrestrained pelagic sealing continues, 

 that fact is of conclusive weight in determining whether the right of 

 proi)erty in them should be awarded to the United States ; for, according 

 to all the authorities, a right of pro^ierty in animals/erce naturw depends 

 upoij the capacity of the party asserting such a right, exclusively to 

 take the increase of such animals from time to time without destroying 

 or impairing the stock. If, therefore, an award of property in favor of 

 the United States will give that country, practically, a monopoly in the 

 business of taking these fur seals for use, it will be a monopoly which 

 all civilized nations are interested in fostering-. When a monopoly iu 



