COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRTTATN. 199 



NO EFFICIENT CONTROL ESTABLISHED IN 1870, THE FIRST 



YEAR OF LEASE. 



Tlie iGvSsees, in consequence of the late date at which 

 they obtained their lease, did not enter into any full control 

 of the Pribyloff Islands in 1870, and the nnmber of seals 

 killed in this year is again not known with certainty. The -„, .^^.• 

 natives were allowed (as in the previous year) to kill seals "Monograph of 

 not only for food, but also for the purpose of obtaining pi'^[^|'p^™n"pp" 

 supplies by the sale of the skins. Captain Bryant, who^oi, :^98. 

 was at the islands in this year, and General Davis, esti-missioners' i™^ 

 mate that the natives thus killed 85,000 seals. An official po^t,^i.ara^8io^^ 

 return of seals killed of which the Government officers had 83, 'uth Cong.,' 

 actn: 1 cognizance (made up in 1871) shows a killing of ^''J^^^^g'-™^^*^;^ 

 23,lTo, of which less than 10,000 skins in all were saved, p. to. 



229 FACTS WHICH SHOULD HAVE GUIDED THE UNITED 

 STATES IN ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF SEALS 

 TO BE KILLED BY THE COMPANY. 



After a full examination of the data respecting the con- 

 dition of the Pribyloff Islands during the Eussian tenure, 

 the British Commissioners write: 



From the experiences thus reeonled, it appears to be very clearly British Com- 

 shown that in the average of years the killing' of 40,000 to 50,000 seals missiom-is' Re- 

 on St. Panl w;i8 more tlmn tijis, the principal seal-bearing island, could P"""*' P^^ra. 664. 

 stand, while that practised during the later years of the Russian con- 

 trol scarcely fell short of the figure at which all continued increase in 

 number ol seals would cease. 



When therefore the Alaska Commercial Company was 

 placed in possession of the Pribyloff Islands by the United 

 States Government, any examination of the Russian rec- 

 ords would have shown it to be necessary, on the most 

 ordinary prudential grounds, to limit the number of seals 

 to be taken in accordance with ftumer exjierience. Indeed, 

 the extraordinary slaughter which had characterized the 

 inception of the United States control jDoiuted very strongly 

 to the necessity of restricting the killing to a very low num- 

 ber for several years following, and to a subsequent permis- 

 sion of a gradual increase, if the conditions actually existing 

 from year to year should be found to warrant such increase. 



THESE WERE NOT CONSIDERED, BUT A "QUOTA" MORE 

 THAN DOUBLE THAT BEFORE TAKEN WAS FIXED ON. 



No such safe policy was pursued. The number of skins ibid..rnra8.47, 

 to be taken annually was, on the contrary, arbitrarily '^"d^''^^|[''^i^g, , 

 without sufficient data, and, as it was admitted at the time, senate, Ex. doc. 

 experimentally, fixed at 100,000. While it is true that the ^^;,i |^/,* ^°^\f,- 

 Act of Congress reserved the right to the Secretary of the "Alaska,'" pp. 

 Treasury of reducing the number if found necessary, no 

 reduction was in fact attemiited during the continuance of 

 the lease of the Alaska Comniercial Company, or till the 

 year 1890, though information was not wanting in some 

 subsequent years, as to the deleterious change which had 

 begun and was progressing upon the rookeries. 



