PROPERTY IN THE ALASKAN SEAL HERD. 81 



(12) Many seals are killed, or fatally wounded, which are not recovered. 

 At least one-fourth as many as are recovered are thus lost. 



(3) A large proportion of the females killed are either heavy with 

 young, or have nursing pups on the shore. The evidence upon these 

 points is fully discussed iu Appendix. 



Eighth. Pelagic sealing is, therefore, by its nature, destructive of the 

 stock. It can not be carried on at all without encroaching pro tanto 

 upon the normal numbers of the herd, and, if prosecuted to any con- 

 siderable extent, will lead to such an extermination as will render the 

 seal no longer a source of utility to man. 



Eeturning to the main proposition hereinbefore established, that 

 some legal and determinate owner must be assigned to all tangible 

 things which are (1) objects of desire, and (2) limited in supply, and (3) 

 capable of ownership, the question is, do the Alaskan fur-seals exhibit 

 these three essential conditions of property? Respecting the first two, 

 no discussion is needed. That this animal is in the highest degree 

 useful to man, and an object of eager human desire, is not questioned, 

 and this earnest controversy is abundant proof of it. That the supply 

 is limited and in danger of being cut off by the depredations of man is 

 agreed to by the parties. 1 Whatever difference there may be, must 

 and does arise upon the question whether the animal is susceptible of 

 ownership. Doubt and difference are indeed possible here, and the first 

 step iu the effort to remove them should be to have a clear understand- 

 ing of the meaning of the term, susceptibility of ownership. The definition 

 which would naturally be first given is susceptibility of appropriation by 

 the owner to his own use to the exclusion of all others. But this does 

 not render the whole language entirely intelligible. We still need to 

 know how it is possible for man to make this sort of exclusive appro- 

 priation to himself. What are the acts which are sufficient to constitute 

 it? Must the thing, in order to be thus appropriated, be actually in 

 manu, or otherwise physically attached to the person of the owner, or 

 even within his immediate reach and sight, so that he can immediately 

 assert his appropriation and forbid all intrusion upon it? 



It is here that the conception of ownership, as distinct from mere 

 possession, comes into view, and, inasmuch as it has a close bearing 



1 Joint Report, Case of the United States, p. 309. 

 14749 G 



