864 APPENDIX TO COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



No. 2. 



Examination of Leon Bevillon, on his Deposition sworn on the 26th June, 

 1892, and appearing at p. 589, United States Case, Appendix, vol. ii. 



1. Q. I desire to ask you, Mr. Eevillon, for an explanation of certain 

 points which arise on your deposition made in June last. Have you 

 any objection to my doing so? — A. Certainly not; I have no interest or 

 bias either way, and I desire to put at the disposal of both parties any 

 information I have. 



2. Q. The first point on which I desire an explanation is as to the 

 statement in your deposition that "you have often heard, and from 

 different sources, that the majority of the north-west skins are the skins 

 of the female seal." As a matter of fact, Mr. Eevillon, have you, in 

 the course of your business, to consider the question of sex at all? — A. 

 Ko ; we never buy or sell by sex. It is never mentioned in any sale 

 catalogue. We buy in lots, which are made up according to sizes, such 

 as middlings and smalls, large pups, small pups, &c. 



3. Q. Any of these lots, then, may contain both male and female 

 skins ? — A. Yes. 



4. Q. The question of sex, therefore, is not an element which you con- 

 sider in the price, and is one which you never have to consider? — A. 

 That is so. 



5. Q. The next point, Mr. Eevillon, is as to the last paragraph of 

 your deposition, of which the marginal note reads: "If pelagic sealing 

 is not stopped Alaska fur-seals will disax)pear." Does that marginal 

 note fairly represent what you meant to convey? — A. Ko, I do not 

 think it does. I did not intend to convey that I was in favour of any 

 particular way of regulating the question. All that I meant to say 

 was, that if what I heard was true I thought some sort of Eegulation 



was necessary for the protection of the seals. 

 231 6. Would not the total suppression of all the pelagic sealing 



have the effect of giving the Company leasing the islands an 

 absolute monopoly of the business in this class of seals ? — A. This might 

 be so; I do not know. 



7. Q. Well, assuming that that would be so, do you think it would 

 be a result that would be beneficial to the fur-seal business? — A. It 

 depends how the monopoly is managed, but speaking generally, I am 

 against monopolies, and in favour of a free market. I think monopolies 

 injure the progress of business. 



We, L^on Eevillon, of No. 135, Queen Victoria Street, in the City of 

 Loudon, and of No. 79, Eue de Eivoli, in the City of Paris, and Charles 

 Eussell, of No. 37, Norfolk Street, in the County of Loudon, Solicitor, 

 solemnly and sincerely declare as follows : 



The above is a correct report of the interrogatories addressed by the 

 said Charles Eussell to the said L6on Eevillon, and of the answer of 

 the said L6on Eevillon to such interrogatories. 



And I, the said Leon Eevillon, for myself, say that I am the same 

 person as L6on Eevillon a copy of whose deposition made on the 20th 

 June, 1892, appears at p. 589 Appendix of United States Case, vol. ii; 

 and I further say that the statements contained in my answers to the 

 above interrogatories are true to the best of my knowledge, information, 

 and belief. 



