318 ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



everywhere unsatisfactory. Observations made in one place are qual- 

 ified in another, contradicted in another, and perhaps reasserted in 

 another. To follow such a line of discussion with minute criticism 

 would be an endless task, and when it was concluded it would be found 

 to be nearly useless. The best method of dealing with such a sort of 

 contention will be to briefly state the points to which it seems to be 

 directed, and to offer such observations upon these and the matters 

 relating to them as seem most pertinent. 



First. Considerable importance seems to be assigned to the point 

 whether seals are more aquatic than terrestrial in their nature, and 

 surprise is expressed that they should be viewed, in the case of the 

 United States, as being very largely land animals. 



But whether they are principally aquatic or terrestrial is of little im- 

 portance. It is certain that they are amphibious, and that they live 

 sometimes upon the land and sometimes in the sea. The only im- 

 portant question is whether they have those qualities, which, under 

 the principles upon which the law of property rests, make them prop- 

 erty, or render it expedient that an industry established by the United 

 States in respect to them should be protected by a prohibition of 

 slaughter upon the high seas. 



Second. Much stress is also laid upon the question whether coition 

 may be had in the water. Of what consequence is this? We know it 

 is a fact that it is had principally, if not exclusively, on the land, to an 

 extent which in its circumstances forms the most prominent distinctive 

 and controlling feature in the habits and movements of the fur-seal. 

 The births certainly take place upon the land, and it is there that the 

 young are nourished and brought up. 



Third. A good deal in the way of conjecture is stated and sought to 

 be supported, to the effect that the seals may have had, in times of 

 which we know nothing, other breeding places, of which we know 

 nothing; and may again be driven to other haunts. It is not perceived 

 that these conjectures are in any manner relevant. They are purely 

 conjectures, and were they deteimined one way or another, it would 

 not matter. What we are dealing with is an animal which has had uni- 

 form habits ever since anything has been known about it; and the only 

 reasonable conjecture which we can make is, if it were of importance 

 to make any, that it will continue to have, in the future, the same 

 habits, as under the same circumstances it has had in the past. 



Fourth. In the report of the British Commissioners, submitted with 



