326 ORAL ARGUMENT OF FREDERICK R. COUDERT, ESQ. 



If lie tells tlie truth, tliis subject ouglit to be practically disposed of. 

 It is not an inference; it is observation, not guess-work. It is tlie state- 

 ment of a man wlio has had eyes and used them, and whose business 

 it was to use them in connection with this very matter. 



Now we And a priest on those Islands, Father Kushen, who says on 

 page 145 : 



No cow will suckle any pup but ber own, and I liave often watched a cow driving 

 pups from liei" until she found her own. She knows her pup by smelling it. 



Then says Mr. Mclntyre: 



The pups do not appear to recognize their own dams, but the mother distinguishes 

 her own offspring witli unerring accuracy and allows no otlier to draw her milk. 



And another witness, Anton Melovedoff, who has also had very vast 

 experience and who has made very full depositions in this case, says: 



AVlien the cows return, they go to their own pups, nor will a cow suckle any pup 

 but her own. The pups would sack any cow tliat would let them, for they do not 

 seem to know one cow from another. 



That is the appearance of them. 



No cow will nurse any pup but her own, and I have often watched the pups 

 attempt to suck cows, but they were always driven off; and this fact convinces me 

 that the cow recognises her own pup and tliat the pup does not know its dam. 



I have now given the High Tribunal the testimony that we produce 

 on this point. It seems to us that it is absolutely conclusive. In fact, 

 from the very nature of it, assuming it to be reliable, tlie result cannot 

 remain in doubt. If these men, who have lived on tlie Islands these 

 many years, with their vast experience say: we saw this and we did 

 this, and we know this, you may bring scientists without end who will 

 say we never saw, heard, or did this, and yet the testimony must remain 

 unshaken. 



The British Commissioners, however, ])lace great reliance upon the 

 testimony of Mr. Macoun, a gentleman of character and intelligence, 

 who visited the Island and was there for a very brief period. He was 

 there in 1892; that is last year, and spent some time there, no doubt in 

 a conscientious investigation of seal-life; and, if his testimony should 

 differ from that of others, I should say that others, being equally 

 credible, are entitled to be believed because their experience is of the 

 highest order and of the most extensive character. But although Mr. 

 Macoun is brought forward as a witness, apiiarently, to dispute our 

 projiositions, I will submit to the Court that if there were no other 

 testimony in the case than that of Mr. JMacoun, the propositions stated 

 in supi)ort of the Case of the United States would there find full sup- 

 port, and it sliould be taken as conclusive, so far as ex[)erience limited 

 in extent and in point of time can ever be supposed to fix definitely a 

 scientific proposition. 



I desire now to read Mr. Macoun's testimony in the Appendix to Her 

 Britannic Majesty's Counter Case, volume I, on page 142: ''On St. 



George Island, 15th July," this is very interesting; it is very 



graphic. It is well told. All our witnesses have not the same facility 

 of expression as Dr. Macoun, and it is quite refreshing to find a man 

 able to express himself in such an interesting manner. 



On St. George Island, 15th July, as I sat on the low cliffs overlooking a part of 

 North Rookery, 1 saw three cows come ashore. One of them was still gravid. 



Senator Morgan. — What year is he speaking of? 

 Mr. CouDERT. — 1892. He was there for a few days in 1891; but his 

 first visit of any extent was in 1892. 



