APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 857 
tion of these islands by the Government of the United States. He argues that to 
the fact that in those earlier days the skins were air-dried (not salted as now) is due 
the fact that the seals were not years ago exterminated, the work of sealing being 
then far slower and much more difficult than now. 
In his opinion the inability to rapidly cure the skins for shipment alone saved the 
Pribyloff rookeries from utter extermination, as at least thirteen trading organiza- 
tions were engaged on these islands continuously for seventeen years in taking the 
tur-seal skins; and he believes, had they possessed the knowledge of salt curing now 
in vogue, they would have killed every fur-seal which showed itself. Yet further on 
he quotes from Bishop Veniaminoy, that, in 1803, 800,000 seal-skins had accumulated, 
of which 700,000, having spoiled, had to be cut or thrown into the sea. Thus on one 
occasion enough skins were destroyed to cover seven years of the total take of the 
former American lessees, or nearly twelve years’ take of the present Company, under 
the terms of their lease, adopting the basis of 60,000 skins per annum. : 
The system, or even want of system, which permitted such drains as this upon the 
seal life of these islands by so many Companies must have been less hurtful to seal 
life than the organized methods pursued under the supervision of the United States 
Government; for though the earlier sealers did not know how to preserve the skins 
when they got them, the present lessees, it is alleged, cannot get them to preserve, 
though only one organization has been engaged for twenty-two years, as against thir- 
teen organizations indiscriminately working for seventeen years; and the one organi- 
zation began operations with the rookeries admittedly in ‘splendid condition,” and 
considered by Mr. Elliot to be practically inexhaustible. 
This opinion of Mr. Elliot might have been correct in the main, but it is evident 
some other and more provident method of reaping the seal harvest on the islands 
must be devised if the stock is to be perpetuated. 
The Undersigned sees no reason to reverse his opinion as to the relative effect upon 
the rookeries of hunting seals in the open waters of Behring’s Sea, nor can he con- 
ceive it possible that such method of sealing could materially assist in bringing 
about the disastrous results now alleged. In his opinion it could have no more 
effect upon the permanency of the sealing industry than would the legitimate pur- 
suit of any other business in like manner. 
Mr. Elliot concludes by stating that, after a careful review of his investigations, 
he is warranted in urging— 
“1. That no driving and killing of fur-seals for tax and shipment on the seal 
islands of Alaska be permitted by the Government for a period of at least seven 
years from date (1890); and 
“2. That the co-operation of Great Britain and Russia be secured in perfecting 
our international close time, by which all killing of fur-seals in the open waters of 
Behring’s Sea will be prohibited during the breeding season of these animals, and 
in order that the Representatives of Great Britain and Russia may see the truth of 
my statement as to what threatens to exterminate these animals if pelagic sealing 
as well as terrestrial sealing is not at once stopped, that a Commission of 
87 British, Russian, and American experts be invited to visit the seal islands next 
summer, and report fairly upon the subject.” 
The first of these propositions, which does not affect the Canadian sealers, the 
Undersigned considers calls for no further reference beyond the remark (even in the 
light of Mr. Elliot’s Report) that it is somewhat remarkable that only at this late 
date, after over twenty years of annual operations under Government supervision, 
that the United States Government is possessed of information upon which it bases 
the necessity for such a drastic measure. 
On the second proposition the Undersigned remarks that the recent negotiations, 
resulting in the present modus vivendi, and the departure of the British and Canadian 
experts for the seal islands to report upon the conditions of seal life, dispose for the 
time being of the main feature contained therein. 
Before leaving the subject, however, the Undersigned desires to invite the atten- 
tion of your Excellency to the words, ‘‘in perfecting our international close time, by 
which all killing of fur-seals in the open waters of Behring’s Sea will be prohibited 
during the breeding season of these animals,” contained in the second proposition. 
The words italicized by the Undersigned appear to imply the existence of an inter- 
national close time for seals in the open waters of Behring’s Sea, which it is proposed 
to perfect. This is misleading, as no such close time exists, and the only Regulations 
pertaining to the seal fishery of Behring’s Sea are provided by enactment of the 
United States Congress, and applicable to the citizens of that nation alone. 
With regard to the remainder of the quotation, the Undersigned observes that this 
question is included in the subject of the inquiry now proceeding. ‘The Undersigned, 
however, would again revert to the proposal forwarded by Sir Julian Pauncefote to 
Mr. Secretary Blaine, 13th April, 1890, which provided for just and equitable close 
times for seals in Behring’s Sea, covering the migrations to and from the breeding- 
grounds; and which was rejected by the United States Government. 
