statements. evident that the period could not have been six Capt. Bryant's weeks according to his own statements in 1869. Ten years later, after eight years of experience on the Pribilof Islands, he states: "The females after giving birth to their young, temporarily repair to the water and are thus never on shore all at once."1 my He carefully omits to give any definite period between the birth of the pup and the excursions of the cow for food. This omission is of importance in this connection, as he prefaces his statement at this time with the following note to Dr. Allen: "You will understand that where any of former statements are omitted or changed, it is due to correction made necessary by my longer experience." It is evident, therefore, that Capt. Bryant had publicly discarded the opinion used. by the Commissioners to maintain their position. One native of the Commander Islands is, there-ity fore, the sole authority for the statement of the British Commissioners. 2 The one authorfor the Report's position. H. Townsend. The United States deny the sufficiency of this Testimony of C. evidence and offer the testimony of Mr. C. H. Townsend, of the United States Fish Commission, to sustain such denial and to prove to what extent 'Monograph of North American Pinnipeds, p. 386. Testimony of C. the nursing females had already extended their H. Townsend. food excursions even in the last days of July.1 The same witness states that on the 27th of July, 1892, large numbers of the females were away from the rookeries on St. Paul Island, and that four-fifths of the seals on the breeding grounds were pups. It may be noticed in this connection that this was the same date at which the British Commissioners arrived on the Islands in 1891 (Sec. 759), when they state that "the rookeries were still at their fullest" (Sec. 3). Mr. Testimony of J. Stanley-Brown, whose special study of seal life Stanley-Brown. on the Islands in 1891 and 1892 has made his opinions of the utmost value, states that the females leave the rookeries within fourteen or seventeen days after the birth of their pups, and he shows by what observations he became convinced of the fact.2 Affirmation of its possibility by the Report. 4. Aquatic coition. The Report states that "most writers," for certain reasons, have advanced "an erroneous statement" that the place where fecundation of the female seals occurs is on the land (Sec. 295). The Commissioners affirm, on the contrary, that it is not only possible for seals to copulate in the 1 Post p. 393. its possibility by water,' but that such act is of great frequency Affirmation of when the males are insufficient in number on the the Report. rookeries (Sec. 297). This allegation as to the possibility of pelagic coition is stated in the Report to be established by "ample proof" (Sec. 246). favor of aquatic An examination of this "ample proof" shows The evidence in that it consists of the following: The opinion of coition. Capt. Bryant, contained in his report to the Treasury Department in 1869 (which, as has been shown, is entirely superseded by his paper in the "Monograph of North American Pinnipeds"), and two statements made by him in the latter work (Sec. 295), the references being to pages 385 and 405 (footnote, p. 52), both of which clearly allege the possibility of coition in the water. Besides these statements of Capt. Bryant, the Report quotes Mr. W. H. Dall, who made a statement to Prof. Allen that the female seal receives the male in the water (Sec. 296, p. 53). The remainder of the "ample proof" consists of "special inquiries" made by the Commissioners, which "have fully confirmed Bryant's original statements, the evidence obtained including that of four or five gentlemen who have had long experience with the Pribilof and Com Mr. Grebnitzki, an authority recognized by the Report, declares that he believes copulation in the water to be impossible, Post p. 364. favor of aquatic coition. The evidence in mander Islands, and several intelligent and observant hunters who have been engaged in scaling at sea" (Sec. 296). The latter generalization of information, in which neither the names of the "four or five gentlemen" nor those of "the intelligent and observant hunters" are given, can not be considered in the light of proof to substantiate the position of the Report on this question. Capt. Byrant as an authority. W. H. Dall as an authority. It is a significant fact in connection with the proofs advanced by the Commissioners that, notwithstanding the observations made by these officials on and about the Pribilof and Commander Islands, they fail to have seen, or at least to record, a single instance in which the act of coition took place in the water, although it would seem that instances must have been frequent in the waters about their vessel, if their statements as to the scarcity of the adult males on the Islands are to be accepted. As to the opinion of Capt. Bryant, relied upon by the Commissioners, the attention of the Arbitrators is directed to his deposition submitted with the Case of the United States. The other authority cited in the Report, namely, Mr. W. H. Dall, gives the following testimony in relation to pelagic coition, after saying that his statements. 1 Appendix to Case of the United States, Vol. II, p. 6. "as to copulation in the water rest largely upon W. H. Dall as an authority. assumption," and after reciting his observations as to seals seen playing in the water: "I have never had an opportunity to assure myself that the pairs of seals seen playing in the water were of opposite sexes, or, if they were, that their play was of a sexual nature, or, if it was, that the act was complete or effective." 2 of the evidence Report. In view of the facts stated and of the quantity Insufficiency of testimony on this point published with their advanced in the Case, the United States submit that there is no proof, "ample" or otherwise, to support the assertion that coition takes place in the water. (Sec. 246, p. 43.) of the Report. The United States further claim that the posi- Inconsistencies tion taken in the Report on the question of when the female seals leave the rookeries after the birth of their young (ante, p. 57) is entirely inconsistent with the proposition maintained by the Commissioners "that the time of impregnation of the female is not necessarily comprised within the period during which she seeks the shore for the purpose of giving birth to her young" (Sec. 297), and the statement made in the Report that the breeding females remain for several weeks on shore after bearing their young (Sec. 30). As the period of 1 Post p. 359. 2 Appendix to Case of the United States, Vol. II, pp. 14, 42, 165, etc. |