APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 485 
‘Doubtless when they have been attacked through the columns of the press they 
have employed this individual, who is unquestionably possessed with the cacoethes 
scribendi, to reply to unjustifiable onslanghts, and paid him for it as they would any 
other penny-liner who makes literature and writing for the press his profession.” 
His evidence in 1888 is open advocacy of the United States contention. His writ- 
ings and Reports prior to the dispute will be referred to, and it will be submitted 
that his statements and experiences before 1888 hardly support his later theories. 
His statement on p. 17 of the Appendix, that wounded seals swim away to perish at 
a point never to be seen again, is contradicted by the last witness, Mr. McIntyre, 
who picked handfuls of buckshot, &c., out of seals clubbed on the islands. His 
theory of the difficulty of shooting seals is contrary to the known practice of the 
hunters to creep upon the seal as it lies floating in the calm waters of the sea, and 
by his own testimony before quoted, of the nnerring aim of the Indian hunters. 
Mr. Tingle, an Agent of the Treasury, in charge of the fur-seal islands from April 
1885 to August 1886, is quoted by Mr. Blaine (Appendix, p. 17). 
Mr. Tingle is not able to go so far as Mr. McIntyre, although he was at the islands 
in 1886 (Evidence, p. 153), but he stated ‘there has been a slight diminution of seals, 
probably.” He estimated 30,000 were taken by marauders, and to do this he euesses 
that 500,000 were killed. This gentleman, as an Agent of the Treasury, was con- 
fined to the islands during his tenure of office (Evidence, p. 153). 
He bases his contention on the log of a marauding schooner which fell into his 
hands. This log was, it may be remarked, not produced, and no excuse is given for 
withholding it. He produced what he said was a copy. As his opinions are based 
upon this curious statement, his testimony can hardly be seriously pressed. He 
testified to insolence of sealers when seized, though he does not appear to have been 
present at any of the seizures. ‘The log-book, it should be observed, is said to have 
belonged to the ‘Angel Dolly.” 
This is not the name of a Canadian sealer, and it may here be stated that no 
Canadian sealer has ever been found within the 3-mile limit. The operations on the 
schooner ‘“‘Angel Dolly” must have been rather expensive, and they do not corrob- 
orate, the allegation that large catches were made, since 300 rounds of ammunition 
(Mr. Tingle said) were wasted for the capture of one seal. 
Another supposed entry in the log is most extraordinary for the captain of a 
sealer, under any circumstances, to make. ‘The statement referred to is as follows: 
“Tt is very discouraging to issue a large quantity of ammunition to your boats 
and have so few seals returned.” 
There is not a Magistrate’s Court in the country that would listen to this oral testi- 
mony as to the contents of alog. A reference to this pretended log—a copy of a 
portion thereof only being produced by Mr. McIntyre (p. 332 of Evidence)—shows 
that the captain had an exceptionally bad crew. The captain described them in the 
following terms: ‘‘ The hardest set of hunters in Behring’s Sea;” he ‘‘never will be 
canght with such a crowd again; they are alla set of curs.” The captain added, 
however, that if ‘“‘we only had hunters, we would be going home now with 1,500 
skins at the very least;” and from the log it would appear that he had no regular 
hunters on board. 
It is worthy of remark that the statements made by Mr. Tingle respecting the 
entries in this alleged log are not contirmed by an inspection of the transcript Mr. 
McIntyre produces (on p. 332 of Evidence). 
Mr. Tingle contradicts Mr. McIntyre regarding the number of seals on the island. 
He states (p. 162, Evidence) that there had been an increase of seals since 
442 Mr. Elliott’s count in 1876 of 2,137,500. He expressed natural astonishment 
(p. 163) at the statement of Mr. Elliott regarding a decrease. He says: 
**T am at aloss to know how Mr. Elliott gets his information, as he had not been 
on the islands for fourteen years.” 
Pushed by the Chairman of the Committee by the following question, viz., ‘It is 
Mr. McIntyre’s opinion that they have not only not increased, but have decreased,” 
the witness, in reply, stated that ‘there has been a slight diminution of seals, prob- 
ably. 
The next authority quoted by the United States is William Gavitt, a Special Agent 
of the Treasury at St. George Island from May 1887 to August 1888. The evidence 
of this witness is not referred to at any length by Mr. Blaine. ~ The witness testified 
before the Congressional Committee, however, that the employés of the Company 
(the lessees) did not respect the laws of God or man. He named particularly Mr. 
Webster, Dr. Luty John Kirk, and John Hall (p.180). And he added that the rules 
of the Company were violated. The Committee handled this witness rather roughly, 
Mr. Jeffries saying to him (p. 188): 
“You had better understand what you are talking about.” 
On p. 191 he rebukes other officers of the Treasury who had testified positively to 
matters without the means of knowledge. The witness was asked: 
“What was the result of your observations and opinions that you deem reliable in 
respect to the unlawful killing of seal annually?” 
