The

the fur and elephant seal. At none of them is any number of seals found to-day. English exploring ship "Challenger" visited Kerguelen Land in 1873-76, and reports:

"Two of the whaling schooners met with at the island killed over seventy fur seals in one day, and upwards of twenty at another, at some small islands off Howe Islands to the north. It is a pity that some discretion is not exercised in killing the animals, as is done at St. Paul Island, in Behring's Sea, in the case of the northern fur seal. By killing the young males and selecting certain animals only for killing, the number of seals even may be increased; the sealers in Kerguelen Island kill all they can find." (See "Report of the Scientific Results of the Exploring Voyage of Her Majesty's ship Challenger,' 1873-76. Narrative of the Cruise. Vol. i, in two parts. 4to. Published by order of Her Majesty's Government, 1885.")

In these volumes will be found similar references to other seal islands visited by the 'Challenger." In referring to Marion Island the Report says:

"The ruthless manner in which fur and elephant seals were destroyed by the sealing parties in the early part of this century has had the effect of almost exterminating the colony that used these desolate islands for breeding purposes." (Vol. i, p. 294.)

To recapitulate concerning seal rookeries south of the equator, I may say that there is no single place where any number are now known to resort except on the Lobos Islands, off Peru, and at the mouth of the Rio de la Plata, and on the neighbouring hauling grounds at the cliffs of Cabo Corrientes. Here they are, and have long been, protected by the Argentine Republic or Uruguay, and the rookery appears to remain about the same size, with little apparent increase or decrease in the number of animals, as may be seen by statistics of the catch in the Table above given.

The small rookeries or hauling grounds at Diego Ramirez Islands, Cape Horn, and the rocky islets in that vicinity, from 1870 to 1883 or 1884 yielded some return to the hardy sealers of Stonington and New London, Connecticut, from which ports a half-dozen vessels have been annually sent. Even this last resort of American sealers is practically exhausted, and only by much search is a profitable voyage made there. Dr. Coppinger, who was at Cape Horn in 1878-82 ("Cruise of the Alert,'" by R. W. Coppinger : London, 1883), tells of the difficulties of sealing at Cape Horn, and of the profits made when even a few skins are secured. In 1880 Captain Temple "came through the western channels of Patagonia, having entered the straits at Tres Montes;" and on the Cavadonga group of barren rocks he says he found some thousands of seals.

Had the great southern rookeries been protected by Government, it is altogether probable, according to all authorities, that they would to-day yield many thousands of skins, in some cases equal to the valuable returns of the Pribyloff Group.

In proceeding up the Southern Pacific from Masafuera we pass St. Felix, the Lobos Islands, off Peru, and the Galapagos Islands, on which, as well as on other islands in that ocean, the fur seal once was found, but whence it has been exterminated. North of the equator we meet, first, the Guadaloupe Islands, where in 1878 there were a few fur seals, presumably migrations from the Pribyloff Group. Moving northward, along the Californian and north-west coast, the fur seal is found in winter and early spring on its way to the great breeding grounds on the Pribyloff Islands. It is during this migration that the Pacific sealing-schooners of British Columbia and San Francisco capture them, and it is probable that if the fleet increases in size, with a corresponding increase in the number of seals taken, there will ere long be an appreciable decrease in the number of seals on the Pribyloff Islands. This cannot but be the result, for many seals are killed and not secured, and there is the same indiscriminate slaughter as regards young and old, male and female, that was practised at the southern rookeries. The statistics showing the present growing condition of the north-west coast fishery, and the efforts of the fishermen to follow the seals even into Behring's Sea, are already a matter of record, and need not be repeated here, except to refer to the Annual Reports of the Department of Fisheries of Canada. In the Report for 1886 will be found (on p. 249) the names of the British Columbian fleet, aggregating 20 vessels, manned by 79 sailors and 380 hunters, and their catch is given at 38,917 skins, as compared with 13 vessels, taking 17,700 skins, in 1882. The American vessels in this fleet in 1880 and their catch is given by Mr. Swan in sec. 5, vol. ii, of the quarto Report of the United States' Fish Commission.

It is not necessary that I refer to the condition of the rookeries on the Pribyloff Islands. There can be no question concerning the advisability of regulating the number of animals to be killed, and the selection of such animals as will not interfere with the breeding of the species. The history of the islands at the beginning of the century, when there was an indiscriminate slaughter of fur seals, and the protection of the animals in 1808 and thereafter by the Russian and American Governments, is fully told by Veniaminov and by Ellictt, and need not be repeated here. (Veniaminov's "Zapieskie,"

&c., St. Petersburgh, 1842, vol. ii, p. 568, quoted by H. W. Elliott in "Seal Islands of Alaska," pp. 140-145, vol. viii, Tenth Census Report.)

The Commander Islands (Behring and Copper Islands), in Behring's Sea, and Robben Reef, near Saghalien, in the Okhotsk Sea, are leased by the Alaska Commercial Company, and are protected by the Russian Government in much the same manner that the Pribyloff Islands are protected by the United States' Government. A description of the seal industry on those islands is given by Professor Nordenskiold in "Voyage of the Vega," a translation of a portion of his Report being given by Mr. Elliott on pp. 109-115 in "Seal Islands of Alaska." At Robben Reef it is impossible to establish a station, the rock being often wave-washed; but the Alaska Company send men there in the season, to gather from 1,500 to 4,000 skins each year. The agent of the Russian Government confers with the Alaska Company's agent each year to determine the number of skins that shall be taken in the Commander Islands.

The seals taken by the Japanese are those migrating from the Commander Group, and are not secured in large numbers, the average being about 4,000, though some years as many as 11,000 are taken.

Schedule (A.)-MEMORANDUM of Seal-skin Seizures, Vessels, &c., in Behring's Sea,

ARRIVAL of Sealing Schooners from Behring's Sea in 1887, as far as reported to October 5,

Inclosure 3 in No. 93.

Mr. Elliott to Mr. Bayard.

Sir, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., December 3, 1887. DURING the course of my extended studies of the fur-seal on its breeding and hauling grounds in Behring's Sea, I was led naturally into a very careful examination of the subject of its protection and perpetuation. This investigation caused me to give much attention then to the effect which pelagic sealing would have upon the well-being and the conservation of these anomalous and valuable interests of our Government as we view them upon the Pribyloff group.

When preparing, in 1881, a final arrangement of my field notes and memoranda for publication in my Monograph of the Seal Islands of Alaska (10th Census U. S. A.), the late Professor Baird suggested that I omit the discussion of this theme of pelagic sealing, because it might serve to invite an attack which otherwise would never be made upon these preserves of our Government,

This attack, however, has recently been made, and the thought occurs to me now that a brief epitome of my study of the effect which this plan of sealing will have upon the integrity and value of our fur-bearing interests in Behring's Sea-that such a brief, yet accurate, statement will be of service to you. I therefore venture to present the following transcript.

It is now well understood and unquestioned—

1. That the fur-seal of Alaska is obliged to haul out annually upon the Pribyloff Islands for the purpose of breeding and shedding its pelage.

2. That from the time of its departure from these islands in the autumn of every year up to the time of its return to them in the following spring it lands nowhere else.

3. That it arrives en masse upon these islands in June and July, and departs from them in October and November.

4. That when leaving the islands in the fall it heads directly for, and rapidly passes out from Behring's Sea into, the waters of the North Pacific Ocean. Its paths of travel are bee-lines from the Pribyloff group to and through the numerous passes of the Aleutian Archipelago; the passes of Oonimak, Akootan, Oonalga, Oomnak, and the Four Mountains are most favoured by it.

5. That it returns from the broad wastes of the North Pacific Ocean by these same paths of departure.

Therefore, if you will glance at the Map of Alaska, you will observe that the convergence and divergence of these watery paths of the fur-seal in Behring's Sea to and from the Seal Islands resembles the spread of the spokes of a half-wheel-the Aleutian chain forms the felloe, while the hub into which these spokes enter is the small Pribyloff group.

Thus you can see that as these watery paths of the fur-seal converge in Behring's Sea they, in so doing, rapidly and solidly mass together thousands and tens of thousands of widely scattered animals (as they travel) at points 50 and even 100 miles distant from the rockeries of the Seal Islands.

Here is the location and the opportunity of the pelagic sealer. Here is his chance to lie at anchor over the shallow bed of Behring's Sea, 50 and 100 miles distant from the Pribyloff group, where he has the best holding ground known to sailors, and where he can ride at any weather safely swinging to his cable and in no danger from a lee shore if it should slip. The immediate vicinity, however, of the Aleutian passes is dangerous in the extreme to him. There he encounters terrible tide-rips, swift currents, and furious gales formed through the entrances, with the very worst of rough, rocky, holding ground.

But up here, anywhere from 3 to 100 miles south of the Seal Islands, in Behring's Sea, in that watery road of the returning fur-seal millions, he has a safe and fine location from which to shoot, to spear, and to net these fur-bearing amphibians, and where he can work the most complete ruin in a very short time.

His power for destruction is still further augmented by the fact that those seals which are most liable to meet his eye and aim are female fur-seals, which, heavy with young, are here slowly nearing the land, reluctant to haul out of the cool water until the day and hour arrives that limits the period of their gestation.

The pelagic sealer employs three agencies with which to secure his quarry, viz. He sends out Indians with canoes and spears from his vessel; he uses rifle and ball, shot-guns and buck-shot; and last, but most deadly and destructive of all, he spreads the "gill-net" in favourable weather.

With gill-nets, under run by a fleet of sealers in Behring's Sea, across these converging paths of the fur-seal, anywhere from 3 to 100 miles southerly from the Seal Islands, I am extremely moderate in saying that such a fleet could and would utterly ruin the fur-seal rookeries of the Pribyloff Islands in less time than three or four short seasons. If these men were unchecked every foot of that watery area of fur-seal travel in Behring's Sea above indicated could and would be traversed by these deadly nets, and a seal would scarcely have one chance in ten to safely pass such a cordon in attempting to go and return from its breeding haunts.

Open these waters of Behring's Sea to unchecked pelagic sealing, then a fleet of hundreds of vessels-steamers, ships, schooners, and what not-would immediately venture into them, bent upon the most vigorous and indiscriminate slaughter of these animals. A few seasons then of the greediest rapine, then nothing left of those wonderful and valuable interests of the public which are now so handsomely embodied on the Seal Islands. Guarded and conserved as they are to-day, they will last for an indefinite time to come, objects of the highest commercial value and good to the world, and subjects for the most fascinating biological study.

It is also well to note the fact that not an eligible acre of land is barred out from settlement or any other fit use by our people, and not a league of water is closed to any legitimate trade or commerce in all Alaska by this action of our Government in thus protecting the fur-bearing rookeries of the Pribyloff group.

Such are the facts in this connection. They are indisputable. No intelligent unselfish man will advocate for a moment the policy of destruction in this instance; he never will if fully aware of the facts bearing on the question.

There are only two parties in this controversy. The party of destruction demands the full right to unchecked pelagic sealing in Behring's Sea, while the party of preservation demands the suppression of that sealing. Comment is unnecessary.

Very truly, &c. (Signed) HENRY W. ELLIOTT.

No. 94.

My Lord,

Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.-(Received February 21.)

Washington, February 10, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith an article from the "New York Herald" on the Behring's Sea seizures and closed seas.

I have, &c. (Signed)

L. S. SACKVILLE WEST.

Inclosure in No. 94.

Extract from the "New York Herald " of February 8, 1888.

CLOSED SEAS.-An Ottawa despatch states that Professor Dawson is on the way to Washington, as agent of the Canadian Government, in relation to complaints of that Government about wrongs suffered by some of its people in Alaska.

This refers probably to the seizure of a number of Canadian sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea and their condemnation at Sitka. The "Carolina," "Onward," and "Thornton," all confessedly Canadian sealers, were seized in August 1886 by an American Revenue-cutter, while over 60 miles from land, in Behring's Sea, and were later condemned by the United States' Court. About the same time several American sealing-vessels-the "San Diego," Sierra," and others-were also seized, under similar circumstances, and also condemned. Early in 1887 the President ordered the discontinuance of the proceedings against the Canadian sealers and their discharge, but the American vesssels captured and condemned were held. Subsequently, in July 1887, five other Canadian sealers-the "Grace," Dolphin," ""Alfred Adams," "W. P. Sayward," and "Anna Beck"- were seized, also at a distance from land. For all these seizures, and the losses inflicted on the owners and crews, damages are claimed by the British Government. In considering these claims, the question whether the United States can hold Behring's Sea to be a closed sea turns up.

66

We suppose that if it were not for a desire to preserve the valuable fur seal fisheries this question would not be raised, because Behring's Sea, geographically, is plainly an integral part of the Pacific Ocean. Russia, when she owned both shores of it, may have

claimed it as a closed sea, just as Spain once claimed the exclusive right to navigate the whole Pacific Ocean. But in modern times such claims have been considered preposterous, and have been shelved. Our own Government has been in the past most persistent in its opposition to "the headland" theory, and to the assertion by other Powers of exclusive rights to waters much more closely land-bound than the Behring's Sea. The United States were the first to resist the claims of the Barbary Powers to attribute for entering the Mediterranean. Our Government resisted the payment of the "Sound dues" to Denmark as "inconsistent with just principles of international law," and asserted "the freedom of the Baltic Sound," and "insisted on the right of free transit into and from the Baltic."

Later, the United States even refused to acknowledge the right of Turkey to exclude our vessels from the Black Sea, and we have always refused to acknowledge Great Britain's claim to make the Gulf of St. Lawrence a closed water. We do not suppose, therefore, that the Government will defend the seizure of the Canadian sealers on the ground that it can prevent foreign ships from entering Behring's Sea, or from fishing or sealing in it beyond 3 miles from the shore. That northern extension of the Pacific Ocean is, it seems to us, undoubtedly an open sea, in which all nations may freely sail and fish, keeping outside the 3-mile limit.

The preservation of the seal fisheries is, of course, of interest to the Government, which draws a revenue from these fisheries sufficient, we believe, to pay the interest on the cost of Alaska.

It has often been urged that, if any one may capture seals in the Behring's Sea, the animals will soon become extinct. So the Canadians represent that if our mackerel fishers are allowed to use the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the mackerel fishery there will be destroyed for the Canadians, the American seines destroying, as they allege, the young fish. We have not noticed that much attention has been paid here to this plea of the Canadians.

Perhaps, if our fishermen will agree not to fish in Canadian waters, the Canadians will agree not to seal in Behring's Sea?

Meantime, there is a bill of damages on each side; for the Canadians have dealt with great severity, not to say brutality, with our fishermen in their waters.

No. 95.

The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.

Foreign Office, February 22, 1888.

Sir, I TRANSMIT herewith, for your information, a copy of a letter from the United States' Minister in London,* inclosing a copy of a despatch addressed to him by Mr. Bayard on the 7th instant, in which attention is called to the necessity for the adoption of measures for the protection of the fur-seals in Behring's Sea.

I am, &c.

(Signed)

SALISBURY.

No. 96.

(Extract.)

The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.

Foreign Office, February 22, 1888.

THE United States' Minister called to-day at the Foreign Office, and spoke to me about the question of the protection of the fur seals in Behring's Sea.

He said that the difficulties in regard to the seal fisheries in that sea were mainly connected with the question of the close time, and that no attempt had been made by the authorities of the United States to stop the fishing there of any vessels at the time when it was legitimate.

Mr. Phelps then made a proposal on the bases embodied in Mr. Bayard's despatch of the 7th February, a copy of which accompanies my previous despatch of this day's date.t

Mr. Bayard there expresses the opinion that the only way of preventing the destruction of the seals would be by concentrated action on the part of the United States, Great Britain, and other interested Powers to prevent their citizens or subjects from killing