124 SEAL LIFE ON THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. 



be plainer than that it is the most expensive mode of capturing seals. It requires 

 the expenditure of a vast sum in vessels, boats, appliances, and human labor, which 

 is all unnecessary, because the entire increase can be reaped without them. This 

 unnecessary expense is a charge upon the consumer, and must be reimbursed in the 

 price he pays. In no way can pelagic sealing result in a cheapening of the product, 

 except upon the assumption that the stock of seals is inexhaustible and that the 

 amount of the pelagic catch is an addition to the total catch, which might be made 

 on the land if capture were restricted to the land; and this assumption is admitted 

 on all hands, and even by the commissioners of Great Britain, to be untrue. 



If there were any evil, or inconvenience even, to be apprehended from a confine- 

 ment of the capture of the seals to the breeding places, it might serve to arrest atten- 

 tion; but there is none. Much is said, indeed, in the report of the commissioners of 

 Great Britain concerning a supposed monopoly which would thus be secured, as is 

 pretended, to the lessees of the breeding islands, which would enable them to exact 

 an excessive price for skins ; but this notion is wholly erroneous. (Argument of the 

 United States counsel, p. 98.) 



The whole herd owes its existence not merely to the care ami protection but to 

 the forbearance of the United States Government within its exclusive jurisdiction. 

 While the seals are upon the United States territory during the season of reproduc- 

 tion and nurture that Government might easily destroy the herd by killing them 

 all, at a considerable immediate profit. From such a slaughter it is bound to refrain, 

 if the only object is to preserve the animals long enough to enable them to be exter- 

 minated by foreigners at sea. If that is to be the result, it would be for the interest 

 of the Government, and plainly within its right and powers, to avail itself at once 

 of such present value as its property possesses, if the future product of it can not 

 be preserved. Can there be more conclusive proof than this of such lawful posses- 

 sion and control as constitutes property, and alone produces and continues the exist- 

 ence of the subject of it? 



The justice and propriety of these propositions, their necessity to the general 

 interests of mankind, and the foundation upon which they rest in the original prin- 

 ciples from which rights of ownership are derived, have been clearly and forcibly 

 pointed out by Mr. Carter. (Argument of the United States counsel, p. 134.) 



Tims it will be seen that the danger menacing the seals in Bering 

 Sea by hunting in July, August, and September was well understood 

 by American counsel at Paris, and pointed out by them to the arbi- 

 trators with rare ability and conciseness. 



As I write, the Congressional Record of December 12 is on my desk 

 with a letter from Mr. Elliott in which he speaks very disparagingly of 

 our agents and counsel at Paris, and of their lack of knowledge of the 

 subject-matter before the Tribunal of Arbitration, thus: 



At the time these articles of the Paris award were published immense stress was 

 laid upon the fact that firearms were prohibited in Bering Sea by our agents, whe 

 declare that this prohibition would discourage and break up the business of the 

 pelagic sealer. They were strangely ignorant of the truth in the matter, at least 

 the lawyers were, and they had nobody on our side with them at Paris who really 

 knew anything about the life and habits of the seals, who could teach them better. 



That they were neither infallible nor omnipotent is freely admitted; 

 that they may have made some mistakes may be true; but that they 

 left behind them in America an equal number of men knowing one- 

 half as much as what they knew about seals has not been, nor can it 

 be, shown. 



If mistakes have been made at all they were made when we first 

 agreed to arbitrate the questions that have since been decided against 

 us by the Tribunal of Arbitration ; and it is now too late to enter into 

 idle discussions, criminations, and recriminations as to who was right 

 and who was wrong. 



Having once put our case into the hands of the tribunal, we must abide 

 fcy its decision until we can with honor and dignity, worthy our country, 

 bring about other arrangements. 



That the regulations, made in good faith, do not accomplish all that 

 -was expected of them is so patent to everyone that it needs no discus- 

 sion here, and the proper steps ought to be taken as soon as possible 

 to remedy their defects. 



Of one thing we may rest assured, and that is that August and Sep- 



