COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 2G1 



per cent, of the total fur trade of Great Britain. Of this 

 4i50,(K)0/., at least 170,000^. represents seal-skins derived 

 from other sources of supply than the Pribyloff Islands, so 

 that it will be seen that the value of the seal-skins coming 

 from the Pribyloff Islands does not exceed 24 per cent, of 

 the whole fur trade of Great Britain. 



As regards the amount of the total labour bill to be 

 apportioned to seal-skins, it should be remembered that 

 other furs, being for the most part cheaper, are more 

 numerous than seal skins proportionately to their respec- 

 tive prices, and tlRn-etbre would, as a matter of fact, require 

 more hands to deal with them. 



CAPITAL, FOR MOST PART NOT SUNK IN BUSINESS. 



It should also be borne in mind, with reference to the 

 large cai>ital engaged in the business, that so far as bro- 

 kers, merchants, and wholesale and retail furriers and 

 dressers are concerned, their capital is not in any way 

 sunk in the business, but is only temporarily embarked in 

 it from year to year, and is not permanently invested, as 

 the capital of the Canadian schooner owners is invested. 



Should the seal-skin trade diminish, either through 

 change in fashion or scarcity of supply, other furs would 

 no doubt be nuide fashionable in their stead, and furriers 

 would at once, without loss or dihiculty, transfer their capi- 

 tal to them. 



This is nlso true, to a lesser degree, of the dyers engaged 

 in the business, whose plant would, to some extent, be 

 available, provided the new skin made fashionable was one 

 which required dyeing. 



It is, therefore, obvious that apart from those engaged 

 in the actual capture, there cannot be said to be a separate 

 and distinct fur-seal industry in the sense suggested by 

 the United States, but that the trade in seal skins forms 

 in truth but one portion of a larger and more important 

 industry. 



THE SEAL-SKIN BUSINESS EXISTED IN ENGLAND PRIOR 



TO 1870. 



The conten tion, that the seal-skin business in Great 

 307' Britain owes its existence to the eftbrts of the 

 Alaska Commercial Company and their London 

 agents, is no doubt advanced by the United States in order 

 to base upon it a claim to priority of consideration for the 

 United States interest. 



The contention is, however, it is submitted, quite errone- Appendix, toI. 

 ous, and is disproved at once by a reference to the Tables "-p- ^^^ 

 given in the Api)endix, which are summarized hereunder, 

 clearly showing that the seal-skin industry has, at all 



