COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 151 



show that the difficulty in securing the "quota" on the 

 islands was felt as early as 1879, or at a date two years 

 before any vessels had entered Behring Sea for purposes of 

 pelagic sealing. If therefore the scarcity of young males 

 then apparent on the Pribyloff Islands be attributed to 

 killing at sea, it must have resulted from, such killing in 

 1875, 1876, and 1877, which in those years (assuming the 

 figures printed by the United States) amounted only to 

 1,G4G; 2,042; and 5,700 seals in all; and this entirely 

 outside the area of Behring Sea. 



NO DECREASE OBSERVED AT SEA. 



It must further be remembered that the number of 

 173 skins constituting the North-west Catch as stated on 

 the part of the United States is known to include all 

 skins brought by vessels to Pacific ports, and that of these 

 a considerable proportion (particularly in the earlier years) 

 was derived from raids made ui)on the Kurile and Com- 

 mander Islands. Further, that the scarcity of young male 

 seals upon the Pribyloff Islands, so far from establishing 

 general decadence in seal life, has been counter-balanced, 

 according to a great mass of trustworthy evidence, by an 

 increasing abundance of seals at sea. 



REASON FOR DIFFERENCE OF BRITISH AND UNITED 

 STATES STATISTICS. 



The difference actually existing between the figures given 

 for pelagic sealing in the Case of the United States and in 

 the Keport of the British Commissioners, results chiefly from 

 the absence of data respecting the catches of vessels sailing 

 from United States ports and engaging in this industry. 

 For years previous to 1885, reasonably accurate approxi- 

 mations exist for the catch of Canadian vessels, and from 

 that year onward correct statistics are available for these 

 vessels. The wholly untrustworthy character of the infor- 

 mation available in respect to United States sealing vessels 

 cannot be better illustrated than by a reference to the data British com- 

 sui>plied for the year 1892, and quoted in the Keport ()f JlorT" Appemiix 

 the British Commissioners. Therefore, the general state- ^''' '^'"Me (C). p. 



, . i. i.1, T> -a.- 1 /-, • • ■ 1 206. Seep. 207. 



ment given by the British Commissioners is much more 

 accurate than that printed on the part of the United States, 

 which has nevertheless been employed above as a basis of 

 argument. 



DATE OF DECREASE FIXED IN THE UNITED STATES 

 CASE OPPOSED TO PREVIOUS OFFICIAL REPORTS. 



It must not be forgotten, in this connection, that the posi- h. r., 5 1 s t 

 tion now taken and the dates fixed in respect to a decrease Ex°^ijoc!*45o,^p'. 

 of seals by the United States are both wholly new. As ^i- Also h/jj 

 late as 1888, the Special Treasury Agents on the Pribyloff ses-s-.^iif port 

 Islands had reported a continued increase of seals there, ^s-^^, p. 72. 

 and the whole of the evidence now brought forward on this 

 point rests, not on the c()ntemi)oraneous IJeports of Agents, 

 but on retrospective affidavits and opinions of a very late 

 date, together with certain observations on the islands them- 

 selves, made in 1891, which are subsequently referred to. 



