142 COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



measures applicable to sealing at sea is insufScient and 

 inconclusive. No doubt total i3rohibitiou of pelagic sealing 

 would be favourable to the owners of the Pribyloft' Islands 

 as leaving them unaffected, while disposing of the compe- 

 tition of their rivals (the sealers) on the high seas; but 

 such prohibition would be manifestly unjust to the other 

 interests concerned. 



It is therefore scarcely necessary at this stage to follow 



n any detail the arguments advanced in the United States 



Case against the several modes of regulation there selected 



for discussion, or to indicate how erroneous are the grounds 



on which the suggested regulations are there condemned. 



For instance, a close season as applied to sealing at sea 

 is supposed to be sufficiently condemned by pointing out 

 that differences of opinion exist amongst the witnesses as 

 to the time of year Avhich it should cover. 



United states Again, Profcssor Huxley's opinion is referred to as in 

 vof.'i'i.p.^ST'^'''' fa^vour of total prohibition of pelagic sealing; but on ref- 

 erence to his statement, it Avill be seen that he is 

 166 careful to point out that, under the circumstances of 

 tlie case, total prohibition is impossible, and, to use 

 his own language, is " out of the question." 



See ante, p. 163. The propositiou that a protective zoue should be estab- 

 lished round the Pribyloff Islands is treated as an absurd- 

 ity, although, writing as late as the 17th December, 1890, 

 Mr. Blaine himself made this proposal in words already 

 quoted. 



In the Case of the United States, frequent allusions are 

 made to the opinions expressed in letters by certain well- 

 known naturalists as to the best mode of preserving and 

 protecting the fur-seal. The method in which these opin- 

 ions were obtained, and the data nj^on which they were 

 based, require some notice. 



In Article IX of the Treaty of Arbitration it is provided 

 that — 



each Government shall appoint two Commissioners to investigate con- 

 jointly with the Commissioners of the other Government all the facts 

 having relation to seal life in Behring Sea, and the measures necessary 

 for its proper protection and preservation. 



The four Commissioners shall, so far as they may be able to agree, 

 make a Joint Report to each of the two Governments, and thoy shall 

 also report, either jointly or severally, to each Government upon any 

 points npon which they may be nnahlo to agree. 



These Reports shall not be made public until they shall be submitted 

 to the Arbitrators, or it shall appear that the contingency of their 

 being used by the Arbitrators cannot arise. 



In view of the above provisions, and particularly of the 

 last-mentioned one, which enjoins the privacy of the 

 Keports, the British Commissioners have preserved the 

 strictest reticence with regard not only to the Joint 

 Eeport, but also in the matter of their Several Report, 

 and have not disclosed in any way the conclusiors at which 

 they have arrived on the various points. 



However, Dr. C. Hart Merriam, one of the United States 

 Commissioners, has submitted to certain naturalists a 

 "Circular letter" bearing on the subject-matter prepared 

 for the consideration of this Tribunal. 



