COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 125 



CommeDting ou Judge Swau's statements, and addi- 

 tional facts adduced by Professor D. S. Jordan, the well- 

 known ichthyologist, Professor Allen himself writes : 



These observations, aside from tlie judicious suggestions made by Ibid., p. 773. 

 Mr. Swan, are of special interest as conlirming those made some years 

 ago by Captain Bryant, and already briefly recorded {ante, p. * ) in 

 this work. They sceui to show that at least a certain number of fur- 

 seals repair to secluded places suited to their needs as far south as the 

 latitude of Cape I'lattery, to bring forth their young. 



Evidence appended to the United States Case is suffi- United states 

 cient to show that fur-seals are found in the vicinity of Case, Appendix, 

 Cape Flattery, not only in the winter and spring, but also ^"^ "■pp=^'^6-399. 

 in smaller numbers during the greater part of the summer. 

 Nearly all the Makah Indians of Cape Flattery state that 

 seals are observed there till July. Further evidence to the 

 same effect is contained in the Appendix to this Counter- Appendix, vol. 

 Case, and is such as to show that fur-seals are found to the "pp- 27-29. 

 S0iUt?h of the Aleutian Islands during July, August, and 

 September; while Indians state that they are to be seen off 



the coast of Vancouver Island all the summer. 

 145 Some facts showing the resort of fur seals to new British Com- 



places and their attempts to form new rookeries ^re "'j^s^o^ers' ^r e^- 

 quoted in the Report of the British Commissioners. Fur-^*"^ , paras. 

 ther interesting particulars relating to the establishment of 

 new rookeries have since been obtained. These refer to 

 Mooshir, Rakokai, Shrednoi, and Ketoy Islands of the Appendix, vol. 

 Kurile Group; Bittern Kocks oft" the north-west coast of "' pp-^'^'Ss. 

 Nipon Island and St. lona Island, in the Sea of Okhotsk. 



WHERE BEGOTTEN. 



The particular locality in which the seals may be begotten, 

 though importance seems to be attached to this in the Case 

 of the United States, does not appear to be one of any 

 si)ecial interest in connection with a claim to "property" 

 in seals as snch. The statements made on the part of the 

 United States in this matter appear to be prompted by a united states 

 disinclination to admit that any function necessary to the ^^^''' p- '^®^- 

 existence or propagation of the fur seal species is or can be coition fre- 

 performed beyond the territorial limits of that Power. It Ji^'^'^^^t^iy^^por- 

 may be snfficient here to say that the views now upheld by ° ™ 

 Bryant and Allen on this subject, and quoted in the United 

 States Case, are diametrically opposed to those formerly 

 maintained by them; and that a sufficient body of inde- mi^siom^rs'^R™- 

 pendent evidence has been obtained to show that coiticm P"'t. paras. 295- 

 frequently occurs a.t sea. This cir(;umstance is also quite" see also Proc. 

 in accord with what is known of the hair-seals. ^"3^0 ^"'■■' ^^'*^' 



CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE TO THIS EFFECT. 



As this i)oint has been raised in the discussion by the Appendix, vol. 

 United States, it may be added that, in connection with"' ^'P'^*^'^*- 

 other facts relating to seal life obtained from pelagic seal- 

 ers, no less thau oG of these men affirm that they have 



