APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 481 
been able to make, I am of the opinion that no more than 100,000—75,000 on St. Paul 
and 25,000 on St. George—can be annually taken without incurring the risk of again 
diminishing the yearly production, as we observe the Russians to have done in 
former years.” 
See also Wick, Chief of Land Service, Russian-American Telegraph Expedition, 
who reported in 1868 on undiminished condition of the seal fishery. (H.R. Ex. Doc. 
No. 177, 40th Congress, 2nd Session.) 
Six million seals had been taken from this sea between 1841 and 1870. (Vide Dall 
on “ Alaska and its Resources,” 1870, p. 492.) 
2. In 1868 Hutchinson and Morgan, the promoters and founders of the Alaska 
Commercial Company, and afterwards lessees of the islands, saw that, unless restric- 
tions were imposed upon the islands, there would be ruin to the rookeries (H. W. 
Elliott, ‘‘Our Arctic Province,” pp. 247, 248); consequently, by Act of Congress 
approved the 27th July, 1868, the killing of fur-seals on the islands was prohibited 
(W. H. McIntyre, Special Agent, Treasury Department, H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 36, 41st 
Congress, 2nd Session, p. 12). Notwithstanding the Act to which reference has been 
made, 50,000 were killed on St. George and 150,000 on St. Paul by traders in 1868 
(Dall, p. 496), 100,000 in 1869 (W. H. McIntyre, H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 36, 41st Congress, 
»3)). 
% ae Wardman, an Agent of the United States Treasury at the Seal Islands, in his 
“Trip to Alaska,” published 1884, on p. 92, says: 
‘General onslaught, threatening extermination, by American vessels during the 
interregnum of departure of Russian and installation of United States Governments 
took place.” 
And the same officer, in his own sworn testimony given before the Congressional 
Committee, stated that 300,000 were killed in 1869. 
3. Notwithstanding this condition of affairs, Secretary Boutwell reported in 1870 
(H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 129, p. 2, 41st Congress, 2nd Session) that ‘“‘if the animals are pro- 
tected, itis probable that about 100,000 skins may be taken each year without dimin- 
ishing the supply,” and that ‘‘ great care was necessary for the preservation of the 
seal fisheries upon the Islands of St. Paul and St. George.” 
So Dall, in his book on Alaska (1870, p. 496), in referring to slaughter by Russians, 
believed that 100,000 seals could safely be killed annually under Regulations, and 
Mr. Blaine, in his despatch to Sir Julian Pauncefote of the 27th of January, says: 
“Tn the course of a few years of intelligent and interesting experiment the num- 
ber that could be safely slaughtered was fixed at 100,000 per annum.” 
Mr. Boutwell, as will be seen on reference to his Report, was opposed to a lease, 
and remarked that it was necessary in any event to maintain in and around the islands 
an enlarged naval force for the protection of the same. This Report was followed 
by the legislation under which a lease was executed in May 1870. 
4, In drawing the terms of the lease and Regulations concerning the islands the 
United States permitted, in the then state of affairs, the lessees to take 100,000 seals 
a-year for twenty years, and they were permitted to make up this number from any 
male seals of 1 year of age or over. 
5. The natives were allowed to destroy on the islands pup seals of either sex for 
food, numbering in some years 5,000. 
6. The 100,000 could be killed by the lessees in the months of June, July, Septem- 
ber, and October. 
Upon p.8 of the Appendix to Mr. Blaine’s note the opinion of the Committee of 
House of Representatives is given to the effect that the protection of the islands is 
not enough, but that the seals must be protected in their annual migrations to 
and from the rookeries, and for 50 miles south-east of the rookeries to their feeding- 
grounds. Thisis a far different proposal from that submitted by the Secretary of 
State, since it does not embrace the whole of the Behring’s Sea, but locates the feed- 
ing grounds, so called, within 50 miles of the islands. 
The other points on p. 8 of the Appendix to Mr. Blaine’s letter to Sir Julian 
Pauncefote of the 3rd instant, need hardly be dealt with in discussing the necessity 
for a close season, reference being made therein to the sorting of the herd for killing 
on land so as not to kill the females. This is admittedly wise, since the killing is 
done 14th June when the pups are being dropped. The rest of p. 8 of Mr. Blaine’s 
Memorandum raises the point that a seal is not a fish. 
So on p. 9 testimony is cited, touching the necessity for not killing females on the 
rookeries, when wholesale slaughter of 100,000 a-year goes on, and this is not here 
controverted. The opinion of Mr. Glidden, whose experience was confined to the 
land operations, regarding the proportion of seals recovered when shot in deep sea, 
cannot be of weight. It is, therefore, unnecessary to dwell upon the fact that he 
is a Government employé, giving his views in favour of his Government’s contention 
in 1888, after the seizures of 1885 had taken place. This officer was on St. George 
Island from the 25th of May to August in 1881 only. His opinion that an 
439 “open policy” would not preserve the value of the seal fisheries, and that it is 
BS, Pf V——31 
