ORAL ARGUMENT OF FREDERICK R. COUDERT, ESQ. 363 



Mr. CouDERT. — I tliiiik so. Wliy not. We take them in our arms, 

 examine tliem and liandle tliein, therefore why not brand them, but 

 what good would it do"? On tlie prairie, when a man does the thing 

 that these people are doing, he is hung on a tree without a judge or a 

 jury, because necessity compels men to do it. Tliey cannot run about 

 for a justice of the peace, three or four hundred miles oft, and say, 

 "This man has stolen my cattle, notwithstanding the brand"; self- 

 protection first steps in, but how would it help us"? They cut the ears, 

 In some instances, of the pups and the next year they found the pups 

 with the same ears. That is a proposition that my learned friends w ill 

 not dispute. " This power of domestication has made it possible to 

 discriminate carefully". 



Sir Charles Russell. — Will you read the last sentence, because it 

 was that which rather amused me. It begins "It is in fact". 



Mr. CouDERT. — Yes, I will. 



It is in fact tlie most useful of all domestic animals, since it requires no care, and 

 no expense, and consequently yields the largest net profit. 



Probably this was written before the naturalist quoted knew pelagic 

 sealers had put us to a great deal of expense. To that extent he is 

 inaccurate. 



This power of domestication, 



our case goes on to say, 



has made itpossibleto discriminate most carefully between the classes of sealskilled, 

 and to enforce rules and rejjulations for the general management of the herd. Rear 

 Admiral Sir M. Culme .Seymour, in a desi)atch to the British Admiralty says: — "The 

 Beals killed by the Alaska Commercial Company are all clubbed on land, where the 

 difference of sex can easily be seen." 



Now so long as they are on the land, and this goes on, what difference 

 is there, — what difference can be alleged, between these and domestic 

 animals? If you take the old expression — the old distinction between 

 fenv naturce and domitm naturrc, that is a nature that is controlled and 

 reduced to subjection by man, are not these animals domitce naturcef 

 They will come to man, they will be fondled and handled by man, they 

 will be driven by man, they will be enclosed by man in such district as 

 he may choose. 



Senator Morgan. — In point of domestication in what do they differ 

 from swine, which are not useful for any purposes of domestic employ- 

 ment, and are used only for food, and yet are domestic animals"? 



Mr. CouDERT. — They are practically like swine in that way, and they 

 are also like calves. The flesh is eaten and resembles veal; the pelt is 

 extremely valuable. We do not make hogs work. We raise them 

 because of the food they furnish and because their skin is valuable in 

 commerce. I confess my utter inability to see, during that period at 

 least, while the case is not complicated, if it be coinx>licated by their 

 resorting to sea to get food instead of roaming on a prairie to get grass, 

 that there is any difference whatever, and why, unless we are fettered 

 by ancient prejudices and old ignorance we should not say that the seal 

 is a domesticated animal, an animal of a conquered nature, domitm 

 naturce. 



Nobody can doubt, if we could devise some useful purpose of work 

 that they could readily be compelled to do it, but they are useless as far 

 as we know, to-day, for any practical purpose. It may be different in 

 the development of time, but when it comes to hypothesis and conject- 

 ure, then I leave the British Commissioners to open the door. There- 

 fore, when I stated yesterday that these were practically domestic 



