COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 63 



favour. Everything that was written in strange tongues was care- 

 fully translated for the choice bits of mention which could be found 

 of Alaska's value. Hence his speech on the subject possesses this 

 interest.* It is the enibodiment of everything that could be scraped 

 togetl er, having the faintest shadow of authenticity, by all of the 

 eager friends of the purchase, which gave the least idea of any valua- 

 ble natural resources in Alaska; therefore, wlieti, in summoning all titis 

 up, he makes no reference whatever to the seal islands, or the fur-seal itself, 

 the extraordinary iynorance at home and abroad relative to the I'ribylov 

 Islands can beivell appreciated. 



The above refers especially to Mr. Sumner's coiiclvicling" British Case, 

 summary. Mr. Sumner did, in fact, make a reference to the p.'*8i^" ^'^" '' 

 fur-'^eal in the body of his oratiou, though in a single para- 

 graph only of his long speech; but the perusal of that 

 speech, and the absence of any mention of the fur-seal in 

 his recapitulation of principal points, show the relatively 

 small importance which he attached to the fur-seal fishery. 



In the same Eeport Mr. Elliott also writes: 



It will be remembered by many people, that when we were ratifying " Seal Islands 

 the negotiation between our (Tovernmeut and that of Russia, it -was "* '^'''^^'''"P-^'- 

 made painfully apparent that nobody in this country knew anything 

 about the subject of Russian-America. Every schoolboy knew where 

 it was located, but no ])r()fessor or merchant, however wise or shrewd, 



knew what was in it. Accordingly, innnediately after the pur- 

 72 chase was made aud the formal transfer effected, a large number 



of energetic and sneculative men, some coming from New Enij- 

 land even, but nu)st of them residents of the Paciiic coast, turned 

 their attention to Alaska. They went up to Sitka in a little fleet of 

 sail and steam-vessels, but among their number it appears there were 

 only two of our citizens who knew of, or had the faintest appreciation 

 as to the A'alue of the seal islands. One of these, Mr. H. M. Hutchin- 

 son, a native of New Ham))shire, and the other a Captain Ebenezer 

 Morgan, a native of Connecticut, turned their faces in 1868 toward 

 them. Mr. Hutchinson gathered his information at Sitka. Captain 

 iiorgan had gained his years before by exjierience on the South Sea 

 sealing-grouuds. 



Professor W. H. Dall also, who visited the islands in 

 1808, IS quoted on another page of the United States Case, 

 as follows : 



During my visit to St. George Island in 1868, this vast territory of t^nited States 

 Alaska had jnst fallen into the possession of the United States, aud Ca.se, p. i;i2. 

 the Government had not yet fairly established more than a beginning .. Appendix, vol. 

 of an organization for its. management, as a whole, ivithout mentioning ^^'^' 

 such details as the Pribiloff Islands. 



Mr. Elliott has since repeated the opinion expressed in 

 the above quoted Eeport, in the evidence which he gave to 

 the Committee whose Keport is quoted at p. 75 of the United 

 States Case : 



MU. ELLIOTT ALSO TESTIFIES THAT liUSSIA DID NOT VAUE TUH SEAL- 

 ING INDrSTRY. 



Tlie Russians made no effort to hold these islands, at the time of the 50th Cong., 2nd 

 transfer, simply because they did nut then value their sealing indus- Sess., H. it. Ke- 

 try — it was of small consequence then — a skin only being worth from P°i'* ^°- ^^^' P- 

 3 to i dollars in London. 



They failed to properly develop the market, as the lessees have done 

 under our Government. 



* Speech on cession of Russian-America, United States Senate 1867, 

 "Summary," p. 48. 



