APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 487 
All these opinions are put forward in support of the main proposition of the 
United States, viz., that since 1882, and especially since 1884, the number of seals 
usually collecting on the breeding-ground has constantly diminished. 
The Canadian Government joins issue upon this, and the counter-assertion is made 
that there has been no appreciable diminution of seals frequenting the rookeries, and 
it is claimed that the seals are more numerous and more valuable upon the rookeries 
to-day than ever in their previous history; that this is the fact notwithstanding the 
rookeries have been for twenty years practically unprotected from frequent and 
most dangerous raids upon the actual breeding-grounds, and many other injuries, all 
within the control of the Government of the United States, as hereinafter specified. 
The Canadian Government asserts that the seal life upon the islands cannot only 
be maintained, but greatly increased by the adoption on the part of the United 
States of— 
1. An efficient means for the patrol and protection of the islands. 
2. By the prohibition of the killing of pups by the natives for food. 
3. By reducing the number of yearling seals to be killed by the lessees. 
4, By not permitting any killing of seals upon the islands, excepting in July, August, 
and September. 
5. By preventing the Aleuts from killing seals on their migration through the 
Aleutian Islands on their way to and from the breeding-grounds, 
In Mr. Blaine’s despatch to Sir Julian Pauncefote of the 27th January, 1890, he 
proceeds upon a somewhat different ground than the evidence already reviewed, in 
order to show the necessity for prohibition of sealing in the waters of Behring’s Sea. 
The ex parte evidence before the Congressional Committee satisfied that Committee 
that ‘the present number of seals on St. Paul and St. George Islands has materially 
diminished during the last two or three years,” viz., from 1886 to 1889, while Mr. 
McIntyre, whose evidence is so much relied upon by the United States, dates the 
decrease from 1882. 
Mr. Blaine, however, adopts the view that the rookeries were in prime condition 
and undiminished until 1885, when, as he says, Canadian sealers made their advent 
into Behring’s Sea and the injury began. 
It is therefore important to point out that the operations of the Canadian sealers 
were absolutely harmless compared with the numerous depredationus upon the islands 
for the last century, which, however, have not yet begun to affect the value and 
number of seals on these wonderful rookeries: 
Already evidence has been cited in this paper establishing the fact that extraor- 
dinary slaughter occurred prior to 1870, and that after all this, when the total num- 
ber of seals on St. Paul and St. George Islands was admittedly less than now, it was 
deemed safe to permit 100,000 male seals of 1 year or over to be killed annually for 
twenty years, &c. 
Tn 1870 Collector Phelps, of San Francisco, reported: 
“Tam assured the entire number taken south of the Islands of St. George and 
St. Paul will aggregate, say, 10,000 to 20,000 per annum.” (H.R. Ex. Doc. No. 35, 
44th Congress, 1st Session.) 
The Acting Secretary of the Treasury Department, in September 1870, gave per- 
mission to the Company to use fire-arms for protection of theislands against marauders. 
(H. R., 44th Congress, Ist Session, Ex. Doc. No. 83, p. 30.) 
In 1872 Collector Phelps, to Mr. Secretary Boutwell, reports expedition fitting out 
in Australia and Victoria for sealing in Behring’s Sea with the object of capturing 
seals on their migrations to and from St. Paul and St. George Islands. Secretary 
Boutwell did not consider it expedient to interfere with these operations if they were 
carried on 3 miles from land. 
In 1874 Mr. Secretary Sawyer, writing to Mr. H. W. Elliott, referred to British 
vessels taking fur-seals in the United States waters and to the seals becoming more 
numerous. 
In 1875 Mr. William McIntyre, an Assistant Agent of the Treasury, describes hav- 
ing been told thatthe crew of the schooner ‘‘Cygnet,” as she lay at anchor in Zapad- 
nee Bay in 1874, were shooting seals from the deck, skinning them, and throwing the 
careases overboard, which was alarming the seals and driving them from their 
breeding-grounds. And he said: 
“‘T wished to give the captain of the vessel timely warning before proceeding to 
harsh measures. Ehad armed the natives with the intention of repelling by force 
any attempts to kill seal on the rookeries or within rifle-shot of the shore, if the crews 
still persisted in doing so after the receipt of my letter to the captain.” 
He described the operations of the “Cygnet” under the cliff near the rookery, 
which alarmed the seals so that they left the rookery in large numbers. (Ex. Doc. 
No. 83, p. 124, 44th Congress, Ist Session.) 
This vessel is again reported by Special Agent Bryant in 12th May, 1875. (Ex. 
Doc. No. 838, p. 125, 44th Congress, 1st Session.) 
