358 
OBSERVATIONS ON THE GREY SEAL. 
EDMUND SELOUS. 
(Continued from page 284). 
At length the mother Seal came out on the rocks, but the 
young one was unable to get up into the proper juxtaposition, 
and, after a little while, she came off into the sea again. There 
was now another lengthy interval, and, during a part of the 
time, the male Seal was often in the near neighbourhood of 
the mother and calf, though never quite closetothem. Finally 
the mother went up on the rocks again, either at the same place 
or very near it, and, the tide being now a good deal higher, her 
calf was able to follow her and suckling took place. It was, 
however, brought to a somewhat premature conclusion through 
a wave washing over the rock, and drawing the young Seal 
down with it as it receded. The mother, whose bulk was not 
so easily shifted, remained for a little on the rock and seemed 
waiting for the young one to come back. This however, it did 
not do, nor did I see it again till sometime afterwards. Now, 
however, appeared the male, and, swimming right up to the 
rock on which the female was lying, he raised his head a little 
up the face of it and seemed asking her to come off, as in a 
moment or two indeed, she did, when they swam away together 
—the usual varied degree of proximity that isto say. A little 
before she did so, at the time, more or less, of the male’s close 
arrival, a cry, very like the moaning of the calf to be fed, arose, 
and was attributed by both King and Heatherley (who were 
here joint watchers with me) to the female Seal. I certainly 
did not see the calf during the time of its utterance, nor had I 
since the backwash of the wave took it off. Moreover it had 
been pretty well fed before this occurred. The above incident, 
together with what else evidential on the subject I have seen 
hitherto, seems to point to these Seals being monogamous and 
also very affectionate in their conjugal relations. Heatherley, 
however, formed the opinion that the male Seal saw us and 
gave the alarm to his mate. In this I do not concur. I saw 
no evidence of alarm on his part and the whole of his conduct 
is easily accounted for by supposing him impatient for the 
company ofthe female. The cry was not his, but hers. It was, 
I think, of the nature of a greeting, and her going off, after 
uttering it, was naturaland much after the manner of her usual 
departure after suckling the calf. Even without the induce- 
ment of the male, she had so nearly finished doing this before 
the slight contretemps mentioned, that I feel sure, from previous 
experience, she would not have waited long for the quite 
problematical return of a well-fed child. Again, both the 
Naturalist, 
