104 ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



of a few hundred people. But, after such occupation, through the in- 

 strumentality of commerce, the whole world made its attack. This 

 demand, of course, could not be supplied consistently with the preser- 

 vation of the species without an immediate change from barbaric to 

 civilized methods: that is to say, from indiscriminate capture, which 

 threatened the stock, to a selective capture confined to the increase. 



But this condition creates no difficulty. The demand thus made is 

 comparatively insignificant, and does not threaten any danger. The 

 United States have no desire or intention to cut off from these rude 

 inhabitants any of their means of subsistance. Their history and cir- 

 cumstances have made them familiar with the survivals of barbaric life 

 in the midst of civilized conditions. They have steadily pursued the 

 policy of securing to such tribes, as long as possible, the benefit of ttie 

 sources of subsistance upon which they had been accustomed to rely. 

 They suppose it may be safely left to them to insure to these people 

 such an enjoyment of the seal herds as they originally had, or the 

 property interest which they justly claim may be recognized .subject to 

 a reasonable use by the Indians upon the coast, such as they have here- 

 tofore enjoyed. But, surely, this claim of the Indians can not be made 

 a cover for the prosecution of a destructive warfare upon a valuable 

 race of animals. The civilized man can not assert for himself the 

 license of the barbarian. If that can not be confined to the barbarian, 

 it must be given up altogether. The exacting demands of civilization 

 must be met by the methods of civilization. 



It may be asked whether the claim made by ihe United States goes 

 to the extent of asserting a legal right of property in any individual 

 seal which may at any time be found in the seas between the Pribilof 

 Islands at the north and the coast of California at the south'? And 

 whether they would insist that in the case of any seal captured any- 

 where within those limits by any person other than a native Indian, and 

 for purposes of scientific curiosity, or to satisfy hunger, a trespass had 

 been committed upon the property of the United States, and an action 

 might be maintained in their name in a municipal tribunal to recover 

 damages, or for the recovery of the skin of the animal, if it should any- 

 where be found. The United Stales do not insist upon this extreme 

 point, because it is not necessary to insist upon it. All that is needed 

 for their purposes is that their property interest in the herds should be so 

 far recognized as to justify a prohibition by them of any destructive pur- 

 suit of the animal calculated to injure the industry prosecuted by them 



