$3
rssideiate

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA

HEARINGS

BEFORE A

SUBCOMMITTEE OF
THE COMMITTEE ON CLAIMS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
SIXTY-FOURTH CONGRESS

First SESSION

ON THE

JOINT RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT FOR
SERVICES RENDERED IN THE FUR SEAL
INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA

* FEBRUARY 23 anp 24, 1916

YY

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1916

- aMthdD v0 fon ae

i eagle cease PONT ION
SINK Writs Li id
yowess earl

any 40)

ie j OW. THAMTLT HOT OVAAIVORT HOLE TIOeIs TY
bh TANG WOAH MT UMad ML Baivase ys
AAG ah Beprenten YI

JUN 7 1916

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON CLAIMS,
Houst or REPRESENTATIVES,
Tuesday, February 23, 1916.

The subcommittee met at 10.30 o’clock a. m., Hon. Hubert D.
Stephens presiding.

There were present before the subcommittee Hon. John H. Rother-
mel, a Member of Congress from the State of Pennsylvania; Hon.
John H. Stephens, a Member of Congress from the State of Texas;
Mr. Henry W. Elliott; and Mr. Andrew F. Gallagher.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. Gentlemen, this hearing is on a joint
resolution introduced by Mr. Stephens of Texas, providing for the
payment of certain sums of money to Henry W. Elhott and Andrew
F. Gallagher for services rendered in regard to the fur-seal investiga-
tion in Alaska, made by the Committee on Expenditures in the De-
partment of Commerce.

Now, Mr. Elliott, we will hear from you first in regard to this
matter.

STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT.

(The witness was duly sworn by Mr. Stephens of Mississippi. )

Mr. Exxiorr. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, on
the 20th of last June the Committee on Expenditures in the Depart-
ment of Commerce were in possession of the fact that if an agent of
that committee could reach the seal islands without publicity he
would be able to get for the use of the committee and the Attorney
General certain evidence which was necessary to enable the Govern-
ment to successfully prosecute the lessees of these islands and recover
from them several million dollars.of which the said lessees had
robbed the Government during the interval of their lease, from 1891
to 1910, inclusive. The fact that the Government had been robbed
had been developed in previous hearings of that committee begin-
ning May 31, 1911, and closing July 30, 1912. These hearings de-
veloped the fact that these lessees had killed more than 128,000 seals,
which were specifically accounted for, in violation of the law. But
the full proof, the physical evidence of that fraud, was lacking, and
it was necessary for the committee to have that full proof in order
to strengthen the case in the hands of the Attorney General.

On that day, the 20th of June, 1913, the committee having these
facts in its possession and the House being without a quorum—meet-
ing day by day by a “ gentleman’s agreement ” not to come together
for a quorum until the 14th of July—the chairman of the committee,
‘Mr. Rothermel, asked me if I could go up there as an agent of the

3

4 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

committee and secure that prooof. I told him that if I went up
without publicity, without any advertising of my errand I could get
the skins and more than likely I could also get the proof from the
journals of the killing w hich had been done, and of which sworn
testimony had been taken. I outlined these facts to him, and he said
that he believed it was proper for the committee to send us up; aor
he would call the committee together and they would consider t.
The committee was called to meet that day.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. Would it not be well to suggest at this
point that we had hearings on this matter before and the committee
was in possession of the facts outside of these statements that you
refer to, and you were sent up there to get the evidence to verify
those facts?

Mr. Exniorr. Yes; I am coming to that. I am speaking now of
the fact which caused me to be brought in.

The committee met on the 20th of June, 1913, and on motion of
Hon. John T. Watkins the following resolution was adopted :

Ordered, That Henry W. Elliott is hereby appointed as a duly qualified expert
to gather certain information touching the conduct of public affairs on the seal
islands of Alaska as the chairman of the committee shall require, and that
Andrew F. Gallagher is hereby appointed as a duly qualified expert Stenographer
and notary to accompany Mr. Elliott and record the details of that information
as it shall be developed under the instructions of the chairman.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. Let me ask you, Mr. Elliott, are all
the salient facts that you propose to present to us now set out in
writing there ?

Mr. Exxiort. They are in here; yes.

Mr. SreruHens of Mississippi. If so it would not be necessary for
you to go over the whole matter, unless the gentlemen of the com-
mittee would like to have you do so.

Mr. Exniorr. I was going to briefly sketch it to the committee
and let this go into the record without going into the whole. matter.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. Very well, do so as briefly as you
can.

Mr. Roruermer. Might I make the suggestion that this was done
with the sanction of the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary
of the Treasury.

Mr. Exxiorr. I was going to bring that in.

Mr. Roruermen. And the fact that they had to go without au-
thority from the House was necessary because they could not have
gotten the authority in time to reach the islands at the season of the
year when the seals come in.

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes; I am going to bring that in.

Mr. Scorr. Why was it necessary to have a committee of the House
go there in order to get information upon which the Department
of Justice might act?

Mr. Extiorr. Because there was no one in the Department of
Justice who could have gone up there, and in this time, absolutely
limited between the 10th and 20th of July, have secured that evidence.
There was no man in the Department of Justice who possessed the
knowledge and the understanding of the ground, who could have
possibly gone up there and secured what I secured.

Mr. Scorr. Why couldn’t the Department of Justice employ you
to go up there?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, i)

Mr. Exuiorr. There was no time to see the Department of Justice.
We had to go cn this day or not at all, because it was necessary that
we reach the islands not later than the 10th of July—betyveen the
10th and 20th of July. It was absolutely necessary that we should
be there at that time to secure this evidence.

Mr. Scorr. Why ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Because that is the “height of the sealing season,
the time in which the skins must be secured in order that there might
not be any controversy in the courts as to their being out of season.

Mr. Scorr. Where were you; where did you start from ?

Mr. Extiorr. From Washington.

Mr. Scorr. Why was it impossible to use the Department of Jus-
tice ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Because there was nobody there who could have
gone up there and secured these skins.

Mr. Scorr. But why was it impossible for you and those inter-
ested in your going to communicate with the Department of Justice ?
Why couldn’t you communicate with the Department of Justice
just as easily as with Mr. Rothermel ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Because this work had been done under the auspices
of the committee. These facts had been gathered and were in the
possession of the committee; the whole case centered upon that evi-
dence, and I was the only man that knew how to get up there and
get that Pacers physical exhibit. If we had gone into negotia-
tions with the Department of Justice we might have gotten away
perhaps by the 1st of September cr October, when it would have been
too late.

Mr. Scorr. You were in the Government employ at that time?

Mr. Exxiorr. Not at all. I was a voluntary witness for the com-
mittee, and I waited and waited for something to be done by the
House, and I saw that if we had to wait so long it would have to be
dropped altogether, and I told Mr. Rothermel

Mr. Scorr. What was your business at that time? You say you
were not in the Government employ.

Mr. Exuiorr. My business is real estate and fruit growing at
Cleveland, Ohio. ‘That has been. my business for years before I
came here.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. You had been in the employ of the
Government years ago, had you not?

Mr. Exniorr. Yes; away back there. I am older than you think.
I am 69 years old, and in early times I was in the Smithsonian In-
stitution. I made an elaborate investigation at the instigation of the
Smithsonian as far back as 1872, 1874, and 1876 on these islands.
Then, again, I went up under authority of a Special act of Congress in
1890, as a special agent of the Secretary of the Treasury and the
Ways and Means Committee, and secured certain evidence, which I
brought down and which they used. Then, again, I went up this
time in this way. But I have never been connected with the Gov-
ernment as a hired employee, as a clerk, except at these brief inter-
vals when I had to sign the pay roll as an agent of the Government
going to the Islands. I have always done my work by the piece,
by contract, as an artist and naturalist.

Mr. SterHeNs of Mississippi. How long have you been engaged in
this particular work ?

6 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Exxiorr. I first went up in 1872.

Mr. Srerpuens of Mississippi. I mean for which you are asking
compensation now.

Mr. Exuiorr. I have the dates here. I started on the 20th of
June—on the evening of the 20th of June—and I got back here on
the 22d of August and filed my report on the 31st. Then they re-
quired a supplemental statement, which was laid before the committee
on October 13, when they held their first meeting after I got back.
That was incorporated in the record of January 17. Following
that, all of these gentlemen who are specified in these details and
accused of fraud and collusion with the fraud were notified, and
copies of this statement and the testimony and evidence gathered on
the islands was sent to them all, from Secretary Nagel down—17 or
18 of them. They all received these notices and, with the exception
of two men, they all declined to come before the committee and deny
it, because they could not deny it. The two that came, the evidence
shows that they simply fastened themselves deeper and firmer in the
clutches of the law than they were before.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. Did you seize any skins up there, and, if
so, what did you do with them?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes; the way I got the skins was this: The new ad-
ministration came in on the 4th of March, 1913, and all these men
who had been connected with the lessees engaged in this illegal kall-
ing—that is, the relics of them—are still on the islands. They were
still in charge at that time, and they would be so until the new man
appointed by the new administration could arrive there and take
charge; and I knew that unless I got up there and got the work from
their hands as they had been doing it for the last 20 years I would have
no proof to connect them with it for the past 20 years. So I had to go
up there without their knowing it. I got up there and I got 400
skins, taken just as they have been taking them for the last 20 years,
by the same men, under the same direction, so that we have the
physical evidence—the physical exhibit showing that they “ loaded ”
these little skins with blubber so as to make them weigh into the class
of big skins. That is the whole detail of the fraud which has been
practiced on the Government for 20 years, whereby thousands and
tens of thousands of small skins have been taken, “loaded” with
blubber, so that they weighed as much as big skins. I got the evi-
dence which shows that they were illegally taking the little skins of
yearlings instead of the big skins of 2-year olds, which they swore
they had taken. Then we took their evidence.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. Of the men who had been in charge for
20 years?

Mr. Extiorr. Yes. We got their evidence and their admissions
and their specimens of the yearling skins laid down there on the
table, which tallied exactly with the sales records of London. It
was necessary to get them exactly as they had been taken, and by
the same men; I knew that if we went up there without publicity
and without their knowing that we were coming up, they would begin
to take the skins as they always had done. We got up there without
their knowing it, and landed. Before we landed, on July 7, they
had taken 400 skins just as they have always taken them for the last
20 years. As soon as I landed on July 9, I went to the salt house,
and said, “I want these skins undisturbed until I weigh and measure

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, |

them.” There I had them. Those 400 skins are, to-day, in the
possession of the Secretary of Commerce; and we have just got a
resolution through Congress which enables the Secretary of Com-
merce to hold them until the Department of Justice wants them.
They were taken in violation of the law. The same men who were
there during the lease were there when we got there. Secretary
Redfield has removed all of them since, but they were there when this
work was done. |

Mr. Steruens of Texas. In what respect did they violate this lease
by the taking of these skins?

Mr. Exxrorr. The law and likewise the lease was violated in this way.
The Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary Carlisle, in 1896, issued
an order, May 14, that no yearling seals should be killed and no
seals having skins weighing less than 6 pounds should be taken.

Mr. SrepHens of Texas. what about females?

Mr. Exuiorr. Females, of course, are excepted. This refers to
killable seals, those out on the hauling grounds. No yearlings should
be killed and no seals having skins weighing less than 6 pounds.
Now, to overcome that difficulty, and to take these little seals whose
skins immediately after they are properly taken, weigh only 44
pounds, they instructed the natives up there in skinning, to leave
half an inch of blubber attached to the skin, so that when that little
3 or + pound skin was put on the scales it would weigh all the way
from 64 to 8 pounds. That is all admitted by these men under oath.

Mr. Steruens of Texas. You have the evidence of the men who did
this skinning, stating that they had been so instructed, to blubber
those skins in that way for the purpose of making them weigh 6
pounds or more?

Mr. Extrorr. Yes; that is all in the testimony.

Mr. Scorr. Now, what did you do with that testimony ?

Mr. Exniorr. That testimony will be used by the Attorney General.

Mr. Scotr. He can’t use that. It is not admissible in any criminal
prosecution.

Mr. Exxiorr. These men can all be brought down here to testify.
I have located the men; I have got their statements and the Attorney
General can subpcena:- them and bring them down here and use them
as witnesses. But it was necessary to locate these men, and get these
skins taken by these men just as they have been taking them for the
last 20 vears, and to do that it was necessary to go up there without
publicity, because if they had known that we were coming up there,
they would have skinned them properly.

Mr. Rornermet. You discovered the Carlisle rules on the islands,
didn’t you?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes.

Mr. Roruermen. But they were nowhere on record in Washington.

Mr. Exxrorr. They were concealed in Washington. They have been
concealed for two years by the officials in charge of the Bureau of
Fisheries. Their existence had been denied to us, and of course I
could not question that denial; but; I told Mr. Rothermel, among
other things, that Mr. Carlisle had in these early days, issued regula-
tions, although I could not, in the face of these sworn statements
prove it; but, if I could get hold of the journals up there, the
records of the facts, I could find those regulations. And I did find

8 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

them, beautifully.engrossed, and I brought copies down and they are
admitted now. They are in files of the bureau.

Mr. Steruens of Texas. The originals are found now ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes.

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. Is that all in the hands of the Depart-
ment of Justice /

Mr. Euuiort. Yes, sir.

Mr. Sreprens of Mississippi. Has the Department of Justice
taken any steps in this matter ?

Mr. Exniorr. There were two things under consideration by the
Department of Justice. The first was whether to bring a criminal
indictment against these men. The statute of limitations lets out
the lessees; it does not let out the Federal officials; but, we found
that we could not hold these high officials with a criminal indict-
ment because it would be necessary to show that they had full
knowledge of it, although I thought that the “ guilty knowledge ”
which they possessed, could be fastened upon them. TI have been all
over that with the Assistant Attorney General and it has been
decided that we could not do that; but, civil suits and prosecutions
to recover, are undeniably and unquestionably good.

Mr. Scorr. To recover what?

Mr. Exniorr. To recover the money from these lessees for those
skins which they have taken in violation of law.

Mr. Steruens of Texas. What bond do they have?

Mr. Exxiorr. They have a bond; but that is only a small part of
what the Government will eventually get. Not only will the Goy-
ernment recover the bond, which is £500, 000, but it will recover the
value of each and every one of these skins which has been taken in
violation of law. There are 128,000 specific skins that we have got.

Mr. SrerueEns of Mississippi. No suits have been filed have they ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Application for suit has been filed; but there is
no hurry about the civil suits because they might run along for
months, or a year or two, without prejudice. But the criminal mat-_
ters we found that we could not carry through. I think it is right,
too, the way the Federal statutes are drawn, because it is impossible
for a man coming down here to know everything that the men under
him do. And that is all right, although I am sorry that a certain
man can not be held, because I do believe he had full guilty knowl-
edge. We have the civil suit, and we have been assured there is no
question about the validity of that. There 1 is no hurry about that;
the persons are there, and the evidence is there, and I told them,
“Tam ready whenever you want me.”

Mr. StepHeNs of Texas. Who paid your expenses up there?

Mr. Exxuiorr. I advanced them. I never thought anything about
it at the time. I had no time to discuss it, or do anything about it.
I had to make arrangements with the Secretary of Commerce to
Jand on the islands, and that was all done that day, and letters were
sent after me that caught me the day I was ready to sail. Mr.
Rothermel made arrangements with the Secietary of Commerce
and the Secretary of the Treasury and sent their letters to me. I
made arrangements to go over from Unimak Pass on the revenue
eutter to the seal islands, because it was necessary that I should be
there between the 10th and 20th of J uly, or this evidence and skins

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 9

secured would be “ out of season,” and I knew what that would mean
in a law court.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. The employees would have been changed,
too, if you had waited.

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes; and we would not have had that connecting
link. Now we have got the same men, the same working force that
has been on the islands ever since 1899.

Mr. Steruens of Mississippi. I notice that the amount asked for
by you as compensation for this work is $6,182. How did you arrive
at that amount ?

Mr. Exxiorr. I have it right here. This has all been gone over by
the Committee on Accounts, and those gentlemen agreed upon it—
Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Ten Eyck, and Mr. Parker. They said it was
all right.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. Did you estimate it on the amount of
money you paid out and then a per diem?

Mr. Exxiorr. I will read it to you right here. It was a difficult
thing to do. i disliked very much to place a valuation on my serv-
ices, but they insisted that I do so. I wanted them to fix it. I have
the whole thing here:

For services as a duly qualified expert witness in attendance on the
committee from June 20, 1913, to April 2, 1914; 286 days, at

OMAGH CL] ene we ete ke wea le ke a a, eS (D0. 00
To traveling expenses and subsistence from Washington,

D. C., to seal islands and return, June 20 to Aug. 27, 1913

(10,280 miles traversed), as per items, to wit:

Railroad ticket, Washington, D. C., to Seattle, Wash____ $73. 60
Sleeping car, \/ashington, D. C., to Seattle, Wash.
(Dy EV St Seine {Eaichs TASTE) esa 9 eo eS 7.50
Meise eam it LELESIL jet oe Aa, ta wie A EOS 15. 00
Seattle, 5 days subsistence and lodging_...________-_____ 25. OO
Swe vacioma-, ticket to Nome; AlaSkas 22222. fos) wes 100. 00
Hxpenses,, OUbit, ete, on Seal) islands: +: 2.04. ot 50. OO
Hxpenses Om the revenue cutters____..--._____ -..__ =. 50. OO
Railroad ticket and return expenses, Seattle to Wash-
Hersoneptiom Neyamnte: == 2 4ees ron | fer PTT eed STEEN As eal bist is 106. 15
Seattle (5 days subsistence and lodging) ___.___________ 25. 00
462. 25
Ctra) RC (BR VITL 2 SRS ga a a a 6. 182525

Mr. Scorr. What was that per diem ?

Mr. Exxiorv. $20 per day, 286 days from June 20, 1913, to April 2,
1914. I was in constant attendance on the committee during that
time, preparing statements of the case for them. I will give you the
evidence or some of it, and you can see in a moment what it means.
Here is a syllabus of the testimony. Here is our report made by Mr.
Gallagher and myself with all the details of that work all sworn to,
Then here is the testimony taken.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. When does your employment with this
committee end?

Mr. Exusorr. April 2, 1914.

Mr. Srernens of Texas. Have you been around here since that
time ?

Mr. Extrorr. Oh, yes; but that was on my own account.

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. Is the Government paying you anything
now ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No; oh, no.

10 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Sreruens. So the amount you are asking here is all that the
Government will be out?

: Mr. Exxiorr. That is all that the Government is responsible to me
or.

Mr. Stepuens of Texas. Notwithstanding the fact that you have
spent considerable time on it. |

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. S1rpupns of Mississippi. Who helped you in this work ?

Mr. Extiorr. Mr. Gallagher.

Mr. Steruens of Mississippi. Is he the only one?

Mr. Exxiorr. He is the only one; the only assistant I have had
from start to finish.

Mr. SrerpHens of Mississippi. What was Mr. Gallagher’s business?

Mr. Exxiorr. I never met Mr. Gallagher until I met him in Seattle.
On the day I left Washington I told Mr. Rothermel, “ I can’t go up
there alone. I want an assistant. I want a man of unquestioned
integrity, and one who has two good stout legs under him, because
he will have a lot of walking to do.” I also told him, “I want him
to be an accomplished court reporter, because I will take testimony
up there, and the value of his notes will be absolutely essential if we
have any proceedings in the Department of Justice. I want a man
who is recognized as an expert reporter, so that in everything which
we do up there his notes, if carried into court, will have value.”

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. I understood you to say that he was a
commissioner authorized to take this testimony.

Mr. Exxiorr. We did not need that, because there was one on the
revenue cutter.

Mr. SrerHens of Texas. And you could use that commissioner ?

Mr. Exriorr. If necessary, we could use him; but we found it was
better not to swear these natives, because it would scare them. So
we took the testimony which they gave voluntarily and then had
them sign it in the form of a deposition. If we had gone in there.
and asked them to hold up their hand and swear, they would have
been scared to death, and would not have known anything.

Mr. Scorr. What was Mr. Gallagher’s business at the time of this
employment ? .

Mr. Exniorr. He was a court reporter here in Washington, and
one of the very best.

Mr. Scorr. You were living in Ohio at the time you say ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Cleveland, Ohio. I have lived there for 69 years
nearly.

Mr. Scorr. How did you happen to become connected with this
matter ?

Mr. Exxiorr. In early days?

Mr. Scorr. No; at the time you started on this trip or just before.
How was your selection made?

Mr. Exnrorr. Because I had been before the committee, you know,
during the previous Congress. I brought these charges before the
Ways and Means Committee, and the Ways and Means Committee
took me over there. On the 11th of May, 1911, the Ways and Means
Committee passed a resolution to make this investigation, and then
when the charges were laid before them they found they had so much
work to do with their tariff schedules, and all that sort of thing, that
Mr. Francis Burton Harrison and Mr. Underwood and Mr. Rainey

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, a

decided to have me taken to Mr. Rothermel’s committee. They said,
“There is a little committee that has nothing to do, and that can go
to the bottom of it, but we have got so much to do that we won’t have
time, so we will take you over there.” At first I demurred to being
taken to that little committee; but they said, “ Don’t you worry about
that; they can go just as far as we can. They can go clear to the
bottom of it.” So I was taken over there from the Ways and Means
Committee and introduced to Mr. Rothermel and I laid the charges
before him. He spent nearly two weeks considering them. He went
over on the Senate side and saw the Republican Senators who were
back of me, and he finally said, “All right, Mr. Elhott, we will take
this up.” That was on May 31, 1911, and I appeared and made these
specific charges. Then I demanded that these men who were guilty
of these shortcomings be examined here before the committee and
put under oath. That was drawn out until the 29th or 30th of July
of the following year, when these hearings closed. That, of course,
brought me very close to the committee, and they knew that I was
thoroughly familiar with the matter.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. Before that time you had been connected
with Secretary Hay in drawing up the fur-seal treaty, had you not?

Mr. Exxiorr. I had been called in by John Hay on the fur-seal
treaty. That is my treaty.

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. With the object in view of stopping
pelagic sealing ?

Mr. Exxurorr. Yes; and also stopping killing on the islands.

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. Stopping killing on the islands?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes. These charges followed that.

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. You had been employed by John Hay,
Secretary of State?

Mr. Exuuiorr. Yes; and I was engaged with him at work on the
treaty when he suddenly fell sick, March 14, 1905, two days before
Senators Nelson, Dillingham, and Patterson had consented and
signed the treaty draft up. Then Hay died, and the treaty laid it
the State Department for seven years; the lessees got into the saddle
again as soon as he died.

Mr. Scorr. When was this bill introduced ?

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. I introduced it on the 18th, for the pur-
pose of getting them paid. That was all.

Mr. Scorr. Why has this resolution been delayed until the last
few days of the session?

Mr. Exuiorr. Because I asked Mr. Rothermel, April 2, 1914, not
to put in this resolution for my payment until the minority report
was filed. They had given notice that they would file a minority
report.

Mr. Srepnens of Texas. You had agreed that they should file a
report ¢

Mr. Exurorr. Oh, yes; and we agreed, on the evening of April 2,
1914, Mr. Gallagher and myself, in the evening of that day, to the
consideration of these sums by the committee. Then I asked Mr.
Rothermel not to move in the matter until the minority report was
filed, because there might be something in the minority report which
would make it necessary for the committee to recognize. It might
be necessary for me to explain something. I waited four months
until that report came in, which was the 28th day of July. When

12 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

the minority report came in there was nothing in it but abuse of my-
self, gas and nonsense; no denial of these “facts whatever, no at-
tempt. Then I said, * Now, Mr. Rothermel, I wish you would put
in my claim for compensation.’

Mr. Rornermen. I was authorized by the committee to make the
arrangement.

Mr. Exxiorr. Oh, ves; I know that; but I asked you to hold it up.
The record shows you were authorized to do it. Then the Committee
on Accounts took it up, and they found what they called “ irregu-
larities.” In other words, we had not gone into the House and asked
for this money. Then I brought up the Belknap precedent to show
that it was not necessary to go to the House first. But I did not
press it: I did not push it. T did not chase them up and it drifted
along. I have the Belknap case here, and it furnishes a good and
indisputable precedent for the action of the House Committee on
Expenditures in the Department of Commerce. June 20, 1913

The Belknap precedent, which occurred in 1875, is this: In De-
cember, 1875, the House Committee on Expenditures in the Depart-
ment of War received information of certain rank abuses in the con-
duct of the Army posts, with the collusion therein of the Secretary of
War, W. W. Belknap, and that certain witnesses vital to the success
of the object of abating and reforming these abuses could be secured
if they were secured before any advertisement of their intended
seizure was made.

Now, here is the first parallel. In June, 1913, the House Commit-
tee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce received in-
formation that certain proofs of fraud perpetrated in the seal islands
of Alaska could be secured for the use of the Attorney General if
steps were taken promptly to get it without publicity. So much
for the first parallel.

In 1875 the Belknap committee organized and secretly sent three
agents into the far West to secure the witnesses and other evidence
and proof, and did so without going into the House to ask for an
appropriation to meet the expense thereof.

Now, here is the second parallel. The Committee on Expendi-
tures in the Department of Commerce organized on June 20, 1913,
and secretly sent two agents to the seal islands of Alaska charged
with the duty of securing the proof of that fraud.

Now, here is the third parallel. The agents of the Belknap com-
mittee in 1875 secured the witnesses and the evidence which resulted
in the hasty resignation of Gen. Belknap and the complete abate-
ment of the public abuses under him in the Army posts.

The agents of the Committee on Expenditures in the Department
of Commerce in 1913 secured the proofs desired, and this evidence
which is necessary for the successful prosecution by the Government
to recover from parties to that fraud, is now in the hands of the
Attorney General, or at his command,

Mr. Scorr. Who would they recover from ?

Mr. Exxiorr. From the lessees of the islands, from the estate of
D. O. Mills, the estate of ex-Senator Elkins, and from Tsaac Liebes,
who is living in San Francisco, worth eight or ten million dollars.

Mr. Steruens of Texas. Where does Liebes live?

Mr. Exxrorr. In a marble palace in San Francisco.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 13

Mr. Scorr. You say you will collect it from these estates. These
men are all dead?

Mr. Exxiorr. The estates are living.

Mr. Scorr. Do you expect to recover more than the bond? How
much does the bond amount to?

Mr. Expiorr. $500,000.

Mr. Scorr. These men have been dead several years.

Mr. Exxiorr. That doesn’t make any difference.

Mr. Scorr. It usually does.

Mr. Exniorr. But not in this case.

Mr. Rornermen. Mr. Isaac Liebes is still living in California.

Mr. Scorr. How is he connected with it; is he one of the lessees ?.

Mr. Exniorr. Yes; he was at the time these frauds were perpe-
trated. He was the president of the company at the beginnig and,
then, afterwards he put in a dummy president.

Mr. Scorr. Was the lessee a corporation ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. Is that corporation alive?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes; it has not been dissolved that we know of. But
the lawyers say that they can hold the estates, the legal represent-
atives, for all these violations of the law. These men were alive when
these violations of law took place.

Mr. Roruermet. I have made inquiry and I find that the Elkins
estate is tied up for 20 years. It can not be settled before that time.

Mr. Scorr: That may be, and still the limitation -within which
claims could be filed might not necessarily continue. In most States
the limitation within which claims may be filed expires at the end
of a year. In some States it is two years.

Mr. Exxrorr. Well, I understand that under the Federal statutes
there is no limitation in a case of this kind.

Mr. Scorr. The Federal statute would not control in that case.
The State law would have priority.

Mr. Exurorr. Well, they can hold Mr. Liebes. He is living and is
worth about $10,000,000.

Now, here is the fourth parallel. The expenses which the Belknap
committee incurred amounted to some $8,000, and they were all paid
out of the contingent fund of the House from time to time, as they
were rendered.

The expenses which the committee on expenditures in the De-
partment of Commerce incurred totalled some $9,500, and they have
been duly certified to the House Committee on Accounts, August
7 to October 7, 1914.

Here is the fifth parallel. Had the Belknap committee gone to
the House and asked for an appropriation before it had taken action
incurring those expenses, the publicity of its intention would have
resulted in a complete failure to get that evidence, which was neces-
sary and vital for the public good.

Had the committee on expenditures in the Department of Com-
merce gone to the House and asked for an appropriation before it
had taken action incurring those expenses, this publicity of its in-
tention would have resulted in defeating the very object which was
otherwise successfully attained.

14 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

Mr. Scorr. Of course it is customary, I suppose, to handle these
matters from money available for the judiciary department, the mat-
ter of obtaining evidence. It is very unusual to obtain evidence
through a committee of the House for the purpose of Government
suits. I was wondering why this evidence was not procured in the
usual way.

Mr. Exxiorr. Because it could not have been procured in any
other way except in the way I have outlined. There was nobody
over there who could have gone up to the islands and gotten the
evidence.

Mr. Scorr. Why couldn’t they employ you?

Mr. Exxiorr. Because there was no time to go into negotiations.
I would probably not have gotten started till September.

Mr. Evans. Hadn’t you had charges before the Department of
Justice, before this matter came up?

Mr. Exxiotr. No, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Wasn’t the Department of Justice’ familiar with this
matter ?

Mr. Exutorr. No, sir. I told Mr. Rothermel when we closed the
hearings on July 20, 1912, that we lacked this physical exhibit of
fraud, and I believed that back of that lay these records of the
killing which had been concealed from us.

Mr. Scorr. Now what does the Department of Justice at present
recommend in this matter?

Mr. Exntorr. The Department of Justice has no recommendation
to make, except to go ahead in the matter.

Mr. Scorr. I know; but with respect to this resolution, what
recommendation does the Department of Justice make?

Mr. Exxrorr. They have had nothing to do with it.

Mr. Scorr. They have made no recommendation ?

Mr. Exniorr. Certainly not.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. Have you been over there?

Mr. Ex.iorr. Oh, yes.

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. I believe you have not explained that this
committee recommended to the Department of Justice the bringing
of these suits and furnished them with all the evidence.

Mr. Exxiorr. That was done, and that was my reason for going
into the facts of it. That was done on the 13th of last August. And,
as I stated in my opening remarks, I did labor with them. I was
anxious to get criminal indictments against certain high officials,
because I believed that they had guilty knowledge, but we could not
hold them.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. What officials of the Department
of Justice did you talk to?

Mr, Exssorr. Mr. Warren and Mr. Underwood, Assistant Attor-
neys General; with both of them.

Mr. Scorr. I understood you to say that the purpose of this evi-
dence which you were procuring was that it was to be used by the
Department of Justice?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes; they can examine the witnesses because I have
located them.

Mr. Scorr. But the Department of Justice was not consulted be-
fore any of these steps were taken?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 15

Mr. Exxiotr. How could it be? There was no time to do it.
There was no time to go into any negotiation. It had to be done
at once or not at all. If we had waited the men who could give the
evidence would have left the Islands.

Mr. Strepuens of Texas. This matter was unloaded onto the Com-
mittee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce by the
Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Scorr. At that time?

Mr. Exxviot7. The 15th of May, 1911.

Mr. Scorr. Not between the 15th of May, 1911—when did you
start ?

Mr. Exxiotr. On the 31st of May.

Mr. Scorr. You started north on the 31st of May?

Mr. Exxrorr. No, no: I was called and the investigation was
made. I did not start to Alaska until the 20th of June, 1913.

Mr. Steruens of Mississippi. Two years after the matter had
been taken up by the committee.

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes.

Mr. SterHens of Mississippi. Had any consultation been had
with the Department of Justice?

Mr. Exxuiorr. Oh, no; we had not reached the point where we
could do that. We did not reach the point until we were in pos-
session of these skins, and we did not have possession of these skins
until the 29th of July, 1913.

Mr. Scorr. So you simply prepared the case for the Department
of Justice without any agreement with the department?

Mr. Exnutorr. We could not agree with them until we had the
facts.

Mr. SrerHens of Texas. I understand that to be the purpose of
all these expenditure committees to ascertain whether there have
been any frauds perpetrated on the Government.
~ Mr. Exxiorr. That was the idea that I got of the duty of this
committee. That was pointed out to me by Mr. Harrison when he
took me over to Mr. Rothermel.

Mr. Evans. Did I understand you to say, Judge Stephens, that
this investigation might have involved somebody in some of the de-
partments?

Mr. Srernens of Texas. They had some knowledge of it, that the
law was being violated and that seals were being killed in violation
of the agreement between the Government and the lessees, and if
they had guilty knowledge of it they would be just as guilty as the
men on the islands, under the doctrine of agent and principal.

Mr. Evans. But was that used as an argument or reason for not
going to the department before making the investigation ?

r. StepHeNs of Texas. We thought if we would get the evidence
of the work as we did get it, then we would go to the department
and see what they knew about the matter. And you will find the
hearings full of that evidence.

Mr. Exxiottr. There are thousands of pages of that testimony taken
from those men where they are pinned down under oath, and they
admit these things.

Mr. Stepuens of Mississippi. My understanding is that matters
of this kind are ordinarily taken before the Committee on Accounts.

Mr. Exxtorr. That is correct.

16 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Steruens of Mississippi. And you went there?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes.

Mr. SrerHens of Mississippi. Why didn’t the Committee on Ac-
counts pass upon this matter ?

Mr. Exxiorr. They claimed that we ought to have gone to the
House first and secured an appropriation. They claimed that we
were entitled to compensation, but they had no money to pay us
with.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. They stated the fund was exhausted ?

Mr. Exuiorr. They stated that there was no money appropriated.
They are an auditing committee, not an appropriating committee,
and of course the House can do as it pleases. They can order our
payment it it is brought up on the floor of the House. The com-
mittee tried to find some way in which they could get around it.
They worked on this Belknap precedent for some time.

Mr. Srepuens of Mississippi. Did that resolution to pay the
Belknap committee come through the Committee on Claims or the
Committee on Accounts?

Mr. Extiorr. The Belknap committee did not go into the House
for any money at all.

Mr. SrerHens of Mississippi. Was there any question about set-
tlement ?

Mr. Exxiorr. It was put into the Committee on Accounts. The
account was rendered just as we rendered ours. The Belknap agents
rendered their accounts to the Committee on Accounts and they were
paid.
ai Mr. StrerHens of Mississippi. So there is that precedent for them
to go to the Committee on Accounts rather than to come to this
committee 4

Mr. Exniorr. I think so, but the lawyers thought it was best not
to do that.

Mr. Streruens of Texas. My object in the matter, if the chairman
will permit me, was that I felt the necessity of getting this pay for
these gentlemen, for their services, because I was instrumental in
part, as a member of the committee, in sending them up there. I
agreed to everything and helped. ferret this thing out. I was sure
that they would make good, as they have, and that the evidence
would be worth a great deal to the Government in the final recovery.
And I think we have laid before the Department of Justice a
splendid case from our investigations.

Mr. Evans. How did your committee stand on the payment of this
claim ?

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. There was a minority report against it,
signed by two members, Mr. McGuire and Mr. Patton.

Mr. Evans. How many men are there on the committee ?

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. Seven.

Mr. SrepHens of Mississippi. Five signed the. majority report?

Mr. SrepHens of Texas. Yes.

Mr. Evans. Do you recall what was the objection of the minority
members to the payment of the bill?

Mr. Exuiorr. They said it was not authorized.

Mr. Sreruens of Texas. I think they claimed that we had no au-
thority for this investigation.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 17

Mr. Exaiorr. Mr. Mann said on the floor that we had full authority
to make the investigation, but that we had no authority to make that
expenditure without an order from the House.

Mr. Srepuens of Texas. I think that is the contention all through.
They do not deny the facts, but they deny the authority.

Mr. Exxrorr. Here is the request to the committee, signed by Mr.
Rothermel, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Bruckner, and Mr. Walsh October 7,
Se Mr. Watkins was absent at the time but he was in full accord
with it.

Mr. Evans. There is no question about the employment of these
gentlemen ?

Mr. SrepuHeNs of Texas. None whatever, and that is the reason
I feel under moral obligation to see that they get their pay in accord-
ance with the understanding.

Mr. Evans. The majority of the committee signed the report
in good faith.

Mr. Exuiort. Yes, sir.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. Was there any agreement in regard
to the compensation of these men?

Mr. Stepuens of Texas. No; it was to be left for further considera-
tion of the committee.

Mr. Exxiorr. In the first place, when we started up I never thought
about it. The question was to get up there, and I left directions with
Mr. Rothermel how to get Secretary Redfield and the Secretary of
the Treasury to get permits to land there. And I had to go imme-
diately, that very night, because I knew from long experience in going
to those islands that if I did not make the Government revenue cutter
at Unimak Pass on the 7th of July we would not get to the islands
in time, and the whole work would be lost.

Mr. SterHens of Texas. We thought that Mr. Elliott having been
an expert and having been employed as an expert in other cases we
would be better able to form an idea as to what we should pay him
after the work was done. I did not know anything about this kind
of work, but we were willing for that matter to be ascertained after-
wards.

Mr. StepHens of Mississippi. You had been employed by the Gov-
ernment in an expert capacity before?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes.

Mr. Srervens of Mississippi. What was your compensation ?

Mr. Exxiotr. I was engaged first an an expert, as a collaborator,
for the Smithsonian Institution. Then I got in with John Hay, »
and, of course, he died before I was fully paid. In this case I told
these gentlemen I did not like to fix the value of my services; that
they could look into the records of similar experts and see what men
had been paid, and they did look into the matter here in the Dis-
trict and found that experts had been paid all the way from $30
to $100 a day, and I said take it all in all I do not want to appear
as though—although I am perhaps as prominent an authority as
there is in the world on this subject—I said I did not like to put in
my services at the top, so make it an average of $20 a day—make
it modest.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. What compensation had you been
paid by the Government for the word done by you?

44682—16——_2

18 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. ‘

Mr. Exxiorr. I was paid by piecework, as an expert.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. always?

Mr. Exxiorr. I went up once as an agent at so much per day.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. What was it per day /

Mr. Exxrorr. Twelve dollars per day and my expenses. There is
where I gathered this knowledge which constitutes me an expert.
It gave me the experience away back there in 1872, 1878, 1874, and
1890. You see you gather your knowledge and you gather your in-
formation by this experience, from the years of study I have spent
on the whole question. My work has been published all-over the
world in different languages. You can go into any library in the
civilized world and you will find my work on pinnates and seals.

Mr. Rornermen. I wish the committee would permit Mr. Elhott
to write out a short sketch of his experience along this line.

Mr. Sreruens of Mississippi. We would be glad to have anything
he may desire to submit, of course.

Mr. Exxiorr. That is all in the testimony.

Mr. SrepHens of Mississippi. There is a call of the House now.
Shall we recess and come back here at 12.30, or would you gentle-
men prefer to come to-morrow morning?

Mr. Scorr. Our time in the afternoon is always very uncertain.

Mr. Steruens of Mississippi. Suppose then we make it 10 o’clock
to-morrow morning to conclude this matter The committee will
stand adjourned.

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON CLAIMS,
House or ReEpreseNTATIVES,
Wednesday, February 24, 1914.

The subcommittee met at 10 o’clock a. m., Hon. Hubert D. Stephens
(chairman) presiding.

STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT—Continued.

Mr. Sreruens. Mr. Scott, do you wish to examine Mr. Elhott?

Mr. Scorr. Yes, sir; I want to ask him a number of questions. Mr.
Elliott, I would like to see your itemized bill.

Mr. Exuiorr. The stenographer has it. I gave him the only copy
Thad at the hearing yesterday, and I presume you can get it from the
committee room. I do not think I have it carried out in detail in
those papers [indicating]. I have these traveling-expense items; but
T have in the other statement that $437 itemized for tickets, meals,
and everything. That is in the official statement. That statement
was agreed upon between Mr. Rothermel, Mr. Gallagher, and myself
on the evening of April 2, 1914. That amount was fixed.

Mr. Roruermet. I did not understand that statement.

Mr. Exsiorr. I say that Mr. Gallagher and myself were called on
by you on April 2, 1914, to submit our accounts, and after a two
hours’ discussion we agreed upon these sums of $6,000 for myself and
$3,500 for Mr. Gallagher.

Mr. Roruermer. If I may be permitted, Mr. Chairman, I would
simply say that it was immaterial to me as to whether the amount
was too large or too small, because it was to be submitted to the com-
mittee to determine the amount.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, “19

Mr. Exxiorr. Andyou did that in obedience to the order of the
committee made that morning; at least, you informed me that that
was the order of the committee made in executive session and pub-
lished in the public records.

Mr. Roruermen. So far as that question was concerned, it would
not matter to me whether it was $1,000 or $10,000.

Mtr. Scorr. Of this total amount of $6,182.25, what amount is for
services and what amount is for expenses?

Mr. Exxiorr. What I consider to be for my services is the per diem
there for my services as an expert, and my traveling expenses come in
there. That I did in obedience to Mr. Abercrombie’s request on
August 25, following, that we itemize it. It is itemized and is in the
official record. :

Mr. Scorr. Then your claim for services is $6,182 ?

Mr. Exxtorr. Yes, sir; for my services as an expert for that num-
ber of days.

Mr. Scorr. And Mr. Gallagher’s claim for services is what amount—
$3,000 ? ;

r. Exiiorr. For services and living and traveling expenses, $3,300.

Mr. Scort. Is it $3,318?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. What part of that is for services?

Mr. Exxiorr. I am partly responsible for that; because after he
and Mr. Rothermel had worked over this thing that evening of
April 2, 1914, and neither one of them could quite agree on the
matter, they referred it to me, and I said, “I will take it up in this
way: Mr. Gallagher is an expert court reporter, and he makes from
$25 to $30 a day; he has been engaged for 83 days with us on this
work, and that would be $2,500 for his services, and, then, for his
living and traveling expenses I would give him another $1,000.”

Mr. Scorr. How many days did you say?

Mr. Exusorr. He was actually engaged with us for 83 days.

Mr. Scorr. Was that on the trip to Alaska?

Mr. Exutorr. Yes, sir; and on his return he was engaged in help-
ing to prepare the report you have there.

Mr. Scorr. How many days were you gone on this Alaska trip ‘

Mr. Exxiorr. We started on June 20 and we got back on August 22.

Mr. Scorr. That was about two months?

Mr. Extiorr. Yes, sir. I will say with reference to that work of
preparing the report that with Mr. Gallagher’s help it was placed in
shape and sumbitted on August 31.

Mr. Scorr. It was submitted in that form?

Mr. Exxtorr. No, sir; in manuscript form. Most of the typewrit-
ing was done by Mr. Gallagher in his office, and the rest of it was
done in longhand by myself.

Mr. Scorr. His services terminated at what time?

Mr. Exxiorr. When we finished that report; he had to go to St.
Louis for several days in November following as an expert witness.
He went there for the purpose of assisting in the separation and
identification of the 400 skins which were brought from the islands
and which are, to-day, set apart for the use of the Attorney General.

Mr. Scorr. Was there a hearing held at St. Louis?

20 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Exxiorr. It was not a hearing. That was for the identifica-
tion of those skins that had arrived from the Islands. There were
400 skins, plus certain others, making 2,200 or 2,300 altogether.

Mr. Scorr. Were those skins identified in Alaska?

Mr. Exurorr. Yes, sir; and then, when they were received here at
the department, they were sent to St. Louis, where they wanted to
sell these skins; then, Mr. Redfield said that he wanted to hold up
and seperate these 400 skins. Then Mr. Gallagher, with the coopera-
tion of Mr. Rothermel, went down there for that purpose, as he was
the only man whe had worked with me on the islands and knew every
skin.

Mr. Scorr. How did he identify them?

Mr. Exxiorr. They were identified on the islands and tagged.

Mr. Scorr. Then, why was it necessary to send a man to St. Louis
to identify them if they were tagged ?

Mr. Exxrorr. Because they wanted to have the identification made
perfect for the use of the courts.

Mr. Scorr. Now, you arrived and began your work in Alaska about
July 10?

Mr. Exxrorr. I got there on the evening of July 8. We anchored
off St. Paul Island and went ashore. The next morning, July 9

Mr. Scorr (interposing). I think we could get along faster if you
would simply answer my questions and then stop. I suggest that
because we will never get through with the examination if you con-
tinue talking after answering the questions. The purpose of my
question was simply to fix the date of your arrival there.

Mr. Exxiorr. We arrived on July 8; landed July 9.

Mr. Scorr. I wish you would enumerate specifically and as briefly
as you can just what information you discovered in Alaska that was
not available here or that had not been discovered before.

Mr. Exuiorr. In the first place, I discovered in the official agent’s
journal the “ Carlisle rules,” published there on June 17, dated May
14, 1896, forbidding the killing of yearling seals. Those rules had
been concealed from the committee.

Mr. Scorr. Well, you have answered the question? °

Mr. Exxiotr. Yes, sir. ;

Mr. Scorr. Then, I want to take that up. Had you before that
time made any investigation here in Washington in the Department
or Bureau of Fisheries where the order was issued ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Secretary Carlisle issued the order on May 14, 1896.

Mr. Scorr. He was Secretary of the Treasury ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Had you made a full investigation here in Washington
in the Treasury Department to ascertain whether there had been
kept here the original order or any record of its issuance?

Mr. Exuiorr. The agent of the Bureau of Fisheries was put under
examination and denied that there was any such order, and I was
there to make the investigation

Mr. Scorr (interposing). Then, you had made no investigation in
the office of the Secretary of the Treasury ?

Mr. Exxiorr. I could not, because it was denied that there was any
such order.

Mr. Scorr. Do you know now whether the original order is in
existence here in Washington or not?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 21

Mr. Exurorr. Yes, sir; because we had a certified copy of it from
the Secretary of Commerce.

Mr. Scorr. Then it is in existence ¢

Mr. Exniorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And could have been obtained at any time by applying
at the right place ?

Mr. Exxiorr. It was asked for and denied.

Mr. Scorr. It was asked for by whom ?

Mr. Exxiorr. By the chairman of the committee. The chairman
of the committee asked him if there were any regulations of that
kind, and Dr. Everman, representing the Bureau of Fisheries,
denied

Mr. Scorr (interposing). But I am now talking about the Secre-
tary of the Treasury, the man who issued the order.

Mr. Exxrorr. I had no authority to dispute the statement of the
bureau officials here.

Mr. Scorr. I am not concerned about that. I want to know whether
or not this information with respect to this order was at hand and
available to the Department of Justice. Did they apply for it at the
place where that record is kept?

Mr. Exxiorr. I did not know there was any such record.

Mr. Scorr. I am not concerned with what you knew, but I am
concerned to know what was available to the Department of Justice.

Mr. Exniorr. They had nothing.

Mr. Rornermen. May I make a suggestion at this point? We
asked the bureau officials to bring all of the regulations before the
committee.

Mr. Scorr. I understand that.

Mr. Rornermen. And this was not in it at all, and they claimed
that those were all of the regulations.

Mr. Scorr. What I want to ascertain is this: It was stated here
yesterday that this investigation or trip to Alaska was made for
the purpose of procuring evidence for the benefit of the Department
of Justice, and I want to know what was obtained there that was not
available to the Department of Justice here.

Mr. Exuiorr. That was obtained there because it was denied to the
Department of Justice.

Mr. Scorr. So that this order, of which you discovered a copy in
Alaska, is in fact an original order on file here?

Mr. Exxtorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. What other piece of evidence or what other facts did
you learn while in Alaska that were not available here in Wash-
ington ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Well, we got this physical exhibit of 400 skins.

Mr. Scorr. Now, what bearing has that exhibit of 400 skins upon
the subject of the investigation !

Mr. Exurorr. It shows exactly the method by which the lessees
loaded the little skins so as to make them weigh up to what the regu-
lations prescribed—that is, to make them weigh as big skins.

Mr. Scorr. Now, what was the limit that the regulations permitted
that year ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Five pounds.

Mr. Scorr. Do you know what the purpose of that limit was?

Mr. Exxiorr. It was to prevent them from killing little seals.

22 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Scorr. How little?
Mr. E LLIoTT. Ye arling seals.
Mr. Scorr. What is a yearling seal ?

Mr. Exuiorr. A yearling seal is a seal that has returned to the —

islands after its first winter’s migration.

Mr. Scorr. For how long a time is that seal considered to be a
vearling ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Until it returns to the islands the next year after its
second winter’s migration.

Mr. Scorr. How old, in fact, would it be at the time you would
call it a yearling?

Mr. Exxiorr. “Anywhere from 11 to 16 months.

Mr. Scorr. And after that it would be called what?

Mr. Exriorr. After its return to the islands from its second win-
ter’s migration it is called a 2-year-old seal.

Mr. Scorr. So that there is no specific time within which a seal
is a yearling, and it is only an approximation ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir: it is not an approximation. It is a distinct
and specific thing, and there is no approximation abcut it. They are
called “yearlings * when they return to the island from their first
ae migration—they are called yearlings then, from start to

nish

Mr. Scorr. From the time they return from their first winter’s
migration until

Mr. Exxiorr (interposing). Until they leave.

Mr. Scorr. Until they leave again?

Mr. Exniotr. Yes, sir; they are yearlings.

Mr. Scorr. How large is a yearling?

Mr. Exxiorr. A yearling seal weighs about 38 pounds, and is about
38 or 39 inches long.

Mr. Scorr. How “long are they on the islands from the time when
they return from their first winter’s migration until they leave again?

Mr. Exxiorr. They come in June and July and leave in November.

Mr. Scorr. Do they grow during that time?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir: but they are still yearlings and are recog- |

nized as yearlings.

Mr. Scorr. So that the Were of a skin taken from a yearling
seal might depend largely upon the time it was killed, just as it
would be in the case of cattle and hogs?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; with this marked difference: These seals
are practically all born at one time every year and grow uniformly,

while cattle and horses are born in every month of the year. The

seals are born only in the middle of the year: nine-tenths of them
betweeen the 4th and 20th of July. Therefore it is a thousand times
easier to place them as yearlings in the natural order of life beyond
any doubt or dispute than if they were horses, cattle, or swine.

Mr. Scorr. Those 400 skins you have referred to were taken from
yearlings ?

Mr. Exxrorr. No, sir: not all from yearlings. It is a physical

exhibit of that many skins, showing how they ‘covered up 139 year-

ling skins. They show that these yearling skins have an excess of

blubber attached to them, while the 2 and 3 year old skins are skinned
“clean” down free of blubber.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. o3

Mr. Scorr. Is there any other theory upon which young skins are
loaded or left with more blubber on them than the older skins?

Mr. Exxiorr. Certainly there is none. It is much easier to salt
them if the blubber is not on the skins, and naturally there ought
to be more on the old skins.

Mr. Scorr. I did not know but what the youth of the animal
might require a different method of treating the skin?

Mr. Exxiorr. Not the slightest.

Mr. Scorr. As I understand it, your theory is that these 400 skins
were below the limit ¢

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir; not all of them.

Mr. Scotr. Well, how many of them?

Mr. Exnxrorr. J think there were 139 in this 400 which are below
the limit. That is set out in detail in our report. If they had been
properly skinned, they would have been 4$-pound skins and below
the limit fixed in the regulations. As it was these little skins
weighed up from 54 to 8} pounds, and that exhibit shows you in a
minute just how it was done. We can lay that question before a
jury. We can take a 34-inch skin and show that it weighs 44 pounds,
and we have 18 of them in this catch. Then we can take another
skin of exactly the same length or size and show that it weighs 83
pounds because this excess of blubber is attached to it. Then the
testimony we brought out shows that the weights used as London
sales weights were fictitious weights, because they do not weigh
them individually in London at all

Mr. Scorr (interposing). You did not discover that in Alaska?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir; these London sales records were the ground
for laying the charges.

Mr. Scorr. What other evidence did you discover in Alaska?

Mr. Exuiorr. Then, we took up the very important and delicate
matter of getting the testimony of the natives so that they could be
identified as witnesses in the case, if the Attorney General wanted
them; and, that is where the great value, the supreme value, of Mr.
Gallagher’s services came in. His notes will be taken in any court,
before any jury, as being absolutely perfect. Now, we examined
those natives very quietly without disturbing them, or alarming them
in any way, and without asking leading questions. We have a depo-
sition or statement of their evidence.

Mr. Scorr. Does this report contain the testimony that you took?

Mr. Exniotr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Where is it?

Mr. Exxuiorr. Here it is [indicating]. That is the entire mat-
ter—that is, the entire meeting.

Mr. Scorr. Well. we will take up this matter. I notice here over:a
page and a half of testimony apparently signed by nine witnesses.

Mr. Exxiotr. Yes, sir; that is the testimony of the chief ones, o7
the active, leading men up there.

Mr. Scorr. Which one of these witnesses responded to these ques-
tions?

Mr. Exxiorr. It is all set out in the testimony. They got together
and formulated their answers and the spokesman answered through
the interpreter.

Mr. Scorr. Then. these answers are not in the language of any one
of these witnesses?

24 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Exsiorr. But they are the interpretations made by their
chosen agent to us.

Mr. Scorr. But they are not the answers of any one of the wit-
nesses.

Mr. Exssorr. No, sir; they are the collective answers of all of them,

Mr. Scorr. Do you mean that the interpreter would talk generally
with the whole crowd?

Mr. Exxisorr. To the whole crowd; and then they would put their
heads together and, after agreeing upon it, they would send it in as
their collective answer. Sometimes it was 20 minutes before they
agreed.

Mr. Scorr. Now, in this testimony, covering one and three-fourth
pages of this record, I wish you would state what particular evidence
vas developed that you deemed pertinent to this inquiry ?

Mr. Exniorr. Well, beginning in 1890 they turned away yearling
seals; they turned them away, and did not kill them; but in 1896 they
began to kill them for the first time. That is brought out here in
this evidence.

Mr. Scorr. I notice this testimony at the top of page 94:

Q. When, after this year, 1890, did you get orders to kill those small seals—
to kill all of them that came in the drives?—A. In 1896 we commenced to take
the 5-pound skins, to the best of our recollection.

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; and the London records show it. They un-
consciously and unwittingly confirmed the London records.

Mr. Scorr. The next question is:

Q. Who directed this work of killing the small seals (molodets) on the killing
grounds ?—A. We do not remember.

Was that the evidence?

Mr. Exxiorr. They go on further to say who was in charge. They
go on further and say that “J. Stanley Brown was the company’s
agent” at that time, and, of course, he directed it.

Mr. Scorr. That is a conclusion from the testimony, and it could
be drawn here as well as there.

Mr. Exxsorr. I could not do it until I saw them and heard them.

Mr. Scorr. Was this the only testimony you took there?

Mr. Exxtorr. No, sir; there is lots of it, and it is pregnant with
facts—every paragraph of it.

Mr. Scorr. Now, if you will find the other testimony——

Mr. Exniorr (interposing). We asked them if the Government
agents objected, and they did not remember any objection; and then
they said that when the small seals were ordered killed they got
orders to leave some blubber on those skins, and that they still have
it at this time.

Mr. Scorr. I am asking about the other testimony.

Mr. Exxtorr. Then this question was asked: ‘“ Did you drive and
kill seals last summer?” and the answer was “ Yes.” Then this
testimony was given:

Q. How large were they?—A. We killed them by ages, as we had killed them
before.

Mr. Scorr. You do not understand my question. I am asking you
whether in this document you have other testimony besides this one
and three-fourths pages?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, iy

Mr. Exxtorr. This is testimony that is pregnant with facts for the
Attorney General.

Mr. Scorr. Was there any other?

Mr. Exxrorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. What I want to find out is how much of this document
is devoted to the testimony of witnesses in Alaska ?

Mr. Exxiorr. It is right here—it is identified here.

Mr. Scorr. Is there any other testimony contained in that docu-
ment ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir. It is in this volume of sworn testimony.

Mr. Scorr. Then this page and three-quarters of testimony ap-
pearing here is not all of the testimony taken ?

Mr. Exxrorr. It is sufficient to bring those witnesses down here

Mr. Scorr (interposing). But there is other testimony ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; but I regard that as the pregnant testimony.

Mr. Sreryens. It is not a question of what you regard as the
most important testimony, but Mr. Scott wants to know about the
volume of the testimony.

Mr. Exxiorr. It is in here [indicating].

Mr. Scorr. This contains letters, extracts from other hearings,
and many things that have no relation to that trip to Alaska.

Mr. Steruens. Is that [indicating] the same report as this [indi-
cating | ?

Mr. Exxtorr. No, sir; I will go further and show you some of it.

Mr. Scorr. I will say to Mr. Gallagher that these are the only two
points in this report where I have been able to find any questions
propounded and answers given. Are there any others?

Mr. Gautuacuer. There were two hearings of the natives.

Mr. Exxiorr. If he wants the other testimony we have here, I will
show it to him.

Mr. Scorr. This testimony, beginning at the bottom of page 93
and continuing to page 95, and beginning again at page 97 and con-
tinuing to page 100—these pages contain the only testimony that
was take in Alaska by you and Mr. Gallagher and brought back?

Mr. Exxiorr. That is the testimony of the witnesses. That is all
we wanted. It was sufficient, and it covers the ground completely.

Mr. Scorr. Aside from taking the testimony of these witnesses
identified on these pages and procuring these skins, what other facts
did you learn in Alaska on that trip, not available here?

Mr. Exxrorr. The fact that in 1891 the President’s order restrict-
ing the lessees to the killing of 7,500 seals had been violated on the
islands, and we brought down from the records there the whole cor-
respondence entered in the journals, and I have had them certified
in the Treasury Department. '

Mr. Scorr. What records of that character did you bring back?

Mr. Extiorr. The single season’s work of 1891 uncovered frauds
amounting to $791,000.

Mr. Scorr. During all the years?

Mr. Exxiorr. In 1891; for just that one year.

Mr. Scorr. Mr. Elliott, you are not a lawyer?

Mr. Exurorr. But I have been with lawyers, the best in the House.

Mr. Scorr. But you are not a lawyer? ;

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir. I am an artist and naturalist, a real estate
man and a fruit grower. There [exhibiting] is Exhibit H; that will

26 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

enable the Government to recover $791,000. There [exhibiting] are
all the documents, which have all been certified to by the Secretary
of the Treasury. That record of fraud in a single season’s work
will enable the Attorney General to recover $791,000.

Mr. Scorr. I notice that this begins as follows:

On Saturday, August 5, 1911, Mr. Bowers read into the record of this com-
mittee, for the purpose of discrediting me

Mr. Exxiorr (interposing). That leads up to what I have here. I
showed before the committee what they were doing and what was
done in the islands.

Mr. Scorr. Did you find what was done in the islands?

Mr. Exuiorr. That is all set out here in this report in detail, show-
ing that on the 27th of May, 1891, they were ordered specifically to
restrict all killing on the islands to 7,500 seals, yet I found in the
records that they had killed nearly 14,000 in spite of the President’s
order.

Mr. Stepnens. Fourteen thousand ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; 14,000.

Mr. Scorr. How did you ascertain that?

Mr. Exuiorr. From the daily records of the killings in the jour-
nals, and then I traced it back in the Treasury reports.

Mr. Scorr. Seven thousand five hundred was the limit that year?

Mr. Exuiotr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. The 7,500 related simply to the two islands?

Mr. Exuiorr. The two islands. The entire killing allowed by the
President for that entire year.

Mr. Scorr. Were there more islands?

Mr. Exuiotr. No, sir.

Mr. Scorr. All the seal herds were on those two islands?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; nowhere else. The islands of St. Paul and
St. George.

Mr. Scorr. Did it occur to you that it might be pretty difficult to
go back nearly 25 years and make a civil case against anyone to
recover ¢

Mr. Exuiorr. Mr. McGillicuddy, one of the best lawyers in the
House, says that it is a perfect case, and that there is no difficulty
at all. I will leave that to the lawyers to settle.

Mr. Scorr. That, of course, is immaterial here.

Mr. Exuiorr. I have acted entirely on their suggestion.

Mr. Scorr. Do you know of any specific legislation of Congress
relative to civil liability for taking the seals?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; that is all in the statutes, and also itemized.
I have it somewhere here.

Mr. Scorr. Can you turn to it?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir. It is in the hands of the Attorney Gen-
eral now. I have it all verified. Here [exhibiting] it is. I have a
more elaborate report for the Attorney General.

Mr. Scorr (after examining statement). These are simply cita-.

tions?

Mr. Exuiorr. They cover the statutes, and cover the very case that
we are talking about.

Mr. Scorr. But that does not do any good here. I did not know
but what you had the provision of the statute before you there.

Mr. Exttort. No, sir.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 27

Mr. SrepHens. It does not set out the text of the statute?

Mr. Exuiorr. No, sir. Every lawyer has that at his command.

Mr. Scorr. Mr. Elliott, what other evidence or fact did you dis-
gaxer in Alaska that was not available here in the records or other-
wise

Mr. Exxiorr. In regard to fraud?

Mr. Scorr. In regard to this subject which you went to investi-
gate.

Mr. Exniorr. Those are the three salient features—the most im-
portant.

Mr. Scorr. Just enumerate them.

Mr. Extiorr. The concealment of the killing records for 12 years,
in violation of the Carlisle rules (the existence of which was denied),
the physical exhibit of the 400 skins, and the testimony of these
natives.

Mr. Scorr. Did you perform any other service in Alaska?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; we took a census of the herd.

Mr. Scorr. You took a census of the herd?

Mr. Extrorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. The report shows that ?

Mr. Exniorr. Yes, sir; we were very careful about that.

Mr. Scorr. A census of the seal herd taken by an estimate ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; necessarily so.

: =, Scorr. You found a much larger herd than you expected to
nd?

Mr. Exusorr. No; I did not know what I would find. I had said
for years that the Bureau of Fisheries figures were evidently faulty.
That is all in the sworn testimony.

Mr. Scorr. What directions had you from the committee at the
time you left here?

Mr. Exxrorr. My letter of instructions is here. No; I left that
copy with the reporter.

ate, Scorr. The resolution was passed by the committee on June
20 2

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And provided for your appointment as a qualified ex-
pert to gather such information as the chairman of the committee
~ shall require?

Mr. Exrorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. After the passage of thfS resolution, what did the
chairman of the committee do in the way of specifying the informa-
tion that he desired you to procure in Alaska /

Mr. Extiorr. He gave me a letter of instructions.

Mr. Scorr. Have you that letter?

Mr. Exxrorr. No; the reporter took the copy of it yesterday.

Mr. Scorr. Is that incorporated in this report?

Mr. Exiorr. No, sir.

Mr. Scorr. I would like to see it.

Mr. Exxiorr. Mr. Fitzgerald, the chairman of the Committee on
Appropriations, has the original letter.

Mr. Scorr. We should like to have the original letter or a copy.

Mr. Exxiorr. Mr. Fitzgerald has the original letter, and, also, the
letters from Mr. Redfield, Secretary of Commerce, and Mr. McAdoo,
Secretary of the Treasury, are in his hands.

28 FUR SEAL [NVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

Mr. Scorr. What letter do you refer to from Mr. McAdoo, the
Secretary of the Treasury ¢

Mr. Etuiorr. The letter in which he put the Revenue-Cutter Serv-

ice under orders to take us where we wanted to go and to come and
take us away. Mr. Redfield’s letter authorized us to land on the
islands, and to make this investigation, and asking the Government
representatives to extend every facility and courtesy to us. The
original letters are in the hands of Mr. Fitzgerald, and the copies
are in the hands of vour reporter. I gave them to him yesterday in
order to save time.

Mr. Scorr. How many members are there on the Committee on
Expenditures in the Department of Commerce ?

Mr. Exxuiorr. Seven.

Mr. Scorr. There seems to have been only three present when the
resolution was passed ?

Mr. Exxrorr. There were four present.

Mr. Scorr. Mr. Stephens and Mr. Watkins voted aye, and Mr.
Patton voted no: only three? ~

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir: but the chairman. Mr. Rothermel, was
there. It did not need his vote or he would have cast it. There
was a quorum of the committee present.

Mr. Scorr. After you returned from Alaska in August, and sub-
mitted this report, what services did you perform that make up for
the other 280 days?

Mr. Exnrorr. As soon as the report was submitted, I said to the
chairman of the committee that that made it necessary for me to
prepare a statement going into every detail showing the loss which
the Government had sustained by this fraud. .
Mr. Scorr. Where is that statement?

Mr. Exxiorr. That is a part of the hearings of January 17.

Mr. Scorr. Was there any authority obtained from the House or
from the committee to perform those services?

Mr. Exxiorr. Certainly; the committee authorized this work.

Mr. Scorr. In what way?

Mr. Exxiorr. By that resolution.

Mr. Scorr. This resolution simply authorized you to go to Alaska
and to secure such information as the chairman of the committee
might direct you to get.

Mr. Exxiorr. Here it is:

Mr. SterpHENS. On December 15, 1913, the said Henry W. Elliott filed with
the chairman of this committee a supplementary and complete report and ex-
hibits of the said special agents of the committee upon the conditions of the
fur-seal herd of Alaska and the conduet of the public business relating
thereto, as ordered by the committee.

That is the statement.

Mr. Scorr. But the fact is the committee did not order anything
except in this one resolution?

Mr. Exxiorr. Not at all, as I understand it.

Mr. Scorr. Do you know of more than one resolution being passed
by the committee?

Mr. Exxrorr. It was not necessary.

Mr. Scorr. But I asked you if you there was more than one resolu-
tion passed by the committee ?

Mr. Exxiorr. There was not anything more. Why should there be?

FUR SEAL. INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 29

Mr. Scorr. I am not under interrogation here.

Mr. Exxiorr. No; but I should like to know.

Mr. Scorr. I am trying to ascertain whether the whole service
performed here, over 200 days, after you had submitted your report,
is to fall under the authority of the original resolution.

Mr. Exxrorr. It must have been so, because the committee author-
ized it; the committee must afterwards have ordered it.

Mr. Scorr. The supplemental work?

Mr. Exurorr. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. That is simply the remark of one member of the com-
mittee. I want to find out whether the committee, as a committee,
took any action other than that contained in the original resolution ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Why, certainly. Here it is:

Mr. STEPHENS

Mr. Scorr (interposing). That is simply a remark by Mr. Ste-
phens.

Mr. Exxiorr. It is a part of the official record of the committee’s
proceedings.

Mr. Scorr. I am trying to ascertain whether there was any other
resolution ? ‘

Mr. Exxrorr. That is exactly what I am talking about.

Mr. Sreruens. What page is that?

Mr. Exxiorr. Page 162. Mr. Stephens made the motion on Decem-
ber 15, 1913, that I file with the chairman of the committee “a sup-
plementary and complete report.” That was done in obedience to
the resolution.

Mr. Scorr. What resolution ?

_ Mr. Exxitorr. The resolution you just read.

Mr. Scorr. The resolution of June 20?

Mr. Exutorr. Yes, sir; is not that perfectly plain ?

Mr. Scorr. What I am trying to ascertain is whether there was
any other resolution ever passed ?

Mr. Exxiorr. It did not need any.

Mr. Scorr. But you do not understand that there was any?

Mr. Exxiorr. Certainly not. Mr. Stephens moved that this whole
thing be put in the record of the committee as the act and order of
the committee. The motion was made by Mr. Watkins and was
unanimously adopted by the full committee. I do not see that there
was anything more to be done.

Mr. Scorr. What time was devoted to this matter by Mr. Galla-
gher?

Mr. Exxrorr. I do not like to speak for him. He is here.

Mr. Scorr. What time did he devote to it?

Mr. Exuiorr. He started on the 21st of June as my assistant. I
did not meet him until we took sail on the 1st of July from Seattle.
I went ahead to make arrangements. We had only a day or two. I
consider that he was under the service of the committee from the
day he left here, or that he entered the service of the committee that
day and ended the service about 83 days later.

Mr. Scorr. That would be after his return?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir. The work on this report—the typewrit-
ing—was all done down in his office. I dictated to him on the islands.

Mr. Scorr. There are very few notes here.

30 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Exxiorr. He wrote that right from my lips as we walked over
the rookeries.

Mr. Scorr. The bulk of this is made up of excerpts from other
documents ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; and from my original work. You have to
have excerpts.

Mr. Scorr. After Mr. Gallagher returned here his services were
doing the clerical work—aiding you in formulating this report?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; expert clerical work.

Mr. Scorr. The subsequent work of 200 days, or such a matter,
that you put in he did not colabor with you?

Mr. Eraiorr. No, sir; no man could have done that—without any
reflection on anyone.

Mr. Scorr. So Mr. Gallagher’s work, the result of it, is all repre-
sented in this report that was submitted ?

Mr. Exxiorr. He appeared as an expert witness before the com-
mittee once or twice and gave sworn testimony.

Mr. Scorr. Upon what matter?

Mr. Exuiorr. In regard to the skins.

Mr. Scorr. What do you mean by an expert witness?

Mr. Extrorr. I call him an expert witness because he has been up
there.

Mr. Scorr. Would that make him an expert upon the seal question ?

Mr. Exxrorr. No; but an expert upon what he testified to, the
natives’ testimony. ;

Mr. Scorr. He is an expert because he took down the testimony
in shorthand and reproduced it in typewriting?

Mr. Exniorr. Yes, sir; and also an expert able to identify those
skins in the courts, because he handled them with me. In that way
he becomes an expert witness.

Mr. Scorr. He is an expert in so far as he may be required to
transcribe or to read the notes?

Mr. Exniorr. Yes, sir; and give eveidence bearing upon those
vital points.

Mr. Scorr. He went with you as a stenographer?

Mr. Exxuiorr. Yes, sir; as an expert stenographer, not a common
stenographer. ‘

Mr. Scorr. As a capable and qualified stenographer ?

Mr. Exxiorr. As one of the best; yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. That was the limit, however, of his performing duty?
Mr. Exxtorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. He was not, in fact, an agent of the committee, as you
were?

Mr. Exziorr. Well, I do not know. TI like to feel that he was my
equal in the premises, because what he saw and witnessed. is vital to
what I saw and witnessed.

Mr. Scorr. Is that the reason you changed his status in the prep-
aration of this report from the original resolution ?

Mr. Exntorr. I do not regard that I changed his status. He was
ordered to colabor with me. He is a collaborator.

Mr. Scorr. The resolution calls for a qualified stenographer to
record the details of the information?

Mr. Exxrorr. Yes, sir.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, ob

Mr. Scorr. So fat as you know, Mr. Gallagher’s services were
confined to the taking down of such dictation as you gave him on
the islands, all of which is embodied in this report ?

Mr. Exniorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And the record of the testimony of those witnesses
that you have identified ?

Mr. Eurotr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And witnessing the tagging of the skins?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; not only witnessing, but to make the notes.

Mr. Scorr. To make a record of the tagging.

Mr. Enxiorr. Yes, sir; in the salt house at St. Pauls village in
cooperation with the officials of the bureau.

Mr. Scorr. When this testimony was taken you say that there
were nine natives there and the interpreter, and this interpreter
would finally, after discussing with all of them back and forth,
crystallize the composite answer of the nine and then would recite
it to you?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. In taking testimony in that form would there be any
difficulty in you writing down in longhand the answer direct from
the interpreter ?

Mr. Exuiorr. I should say so; I would not attempt to do such a
thing.

Mr. Scorr. The answers are all very short ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And all the testimony covers less than two pages?

Mr. Exxiotr. Yes, sir; but we did not know how long the answers
would be, and no man could tell. I wanted the exact language of
those people.

Mr. Scorr. As a matter of fact, as you did take that testimony,
there would have been no difficulty in writing these answers in long-
hand and doing it in less than 30 minutes?

Mr. Extiorr. I do not know any man who is qualified to appear
as an authority for the answer of another man, who can not take it
down exactly as it is spoken, and at the moment it is spoken.

Mr. Scorr. When the interpreter finally crystallized in his own
language the composite answer of the nine witnesses, the short
answer—of course you would have no difficulty in writing out your
own questions, and the answers, as short as these answers are, “ Yes,”
“No,” and “ We do not remember,” none of them probably more
than a line or so—you would not have any difficulty in writing the
answers given in that way?

Mr. Ex.xiorr. But you must bear in mind that we could not antici-
pate that their answers would be short; and we were prepared to take
anything which came.

Mr. Scorr. You were not anticipating taking the testimony in the
language of the natives?

Mr. Exziorr. We practically got it in their language. That is,
their language. That is an exact transcript of their language.’

Mr. Scorr. Their native tongue?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. This is a final interpretation by the interpreter of the

meaning of the various statements made to him by the nine witnesses?

32 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Expiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Brought under one answer 4

Mr. Exvsisorr. Yes, sir. We did not know what range it might take,
and we wanted to be ready to get it. We did not solicit, we did not
qualify, or lead them on; and, we stopped when we ought to have
stopped. With these questions, now the Attorney General can go
into any detail he wants.

Mr. Scorr. You arrived in the islands on the 8th of July?

Mr. Exuiorr. We came to anchor there then right off the wharf;
yes, sir; and went to work the next morning.

Mr. Scorr. How long.were you on the islands?

Mr. Exurorr. Until the 30th of July.

Mr. Scorr. You were busy about 20 days?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; about 22 days.

Mr. Scorr. I notice that your actual work began on the 10th?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; but we were pretty busy all day on the
9th, preceding.

Mr. Scorr. Except in this particular instance, the taking of the
testimony and your subsequent dictations as you proceeded, the ste-
nographer was not busy with you?

Mr. Exxuiorr. Yes, sir; he had to accompany me. We were five
days going through the journals, a great stack of journals as high as
that [indicating]; we had to go through all of them. I dictated to
him wherever we were.

Here [exhibiting] are the instructions, at least a copy of the letter
of instructions. The original is in Mr. Fitzgerald’s hands.

Mr. Scorr. This is not a copy of the letter of instructions?

Mr. Exurotr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. This is apparently a copy of the record.

Mr. Exxiorr. That is the way it starts. Here [indicating] is the
letter of instructions.

Mr. Scorr. I see. Who wrote this letter?

Mr. Exxiorr. I do not know; I was not here. It was sent to me
by mail. I left before it was written. Mr. Rothermel would know.
It was typewritten, and I received it at Seattle June 26. I had no
time to lose and had to go up there and get in time the clear sailing
~ directions, so that we would not lose the Onimak Pass transfer.

Mr. Scorr. Your instructions were to ascertain, ‘first, the con-
dition and number of the fur-seal herd as it exists at the ‘height of
the season on those islands; second, the conduct of the work of kill-
ing fur seals as annually pursued since 1890” ?

Mr. Exuorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And the ages and sizes of the seals taken by the lessees
and agents since that date; and, third, to procure for the use of the
committee the sworn statements of those men who have done the
work of killing. That was some of your directions?

Mr. Exxiorr. That is some of it; yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And this report contains all of that information ?

Mr. Extiorr. Yes, sir; with reference to the work on the islands.

Mr. Scorr. Now, for the work you did in about 20 days you re-
quired about 200 days’ time in which to submit this report and to
prepare this supplementary work. Was that necessary in order to
understand what you had stated in this report with respect to these
three points?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 33

Mr. Exxiorr. Certainly; absolutely; it reached out and branched
back 40 years, and that was necessary in order to make it perfectly
clear, leaving no stone unturned and no possible chance to evade or
doubt or hide.

Mr. Scorr. When was the first mention made of this trip to you,
and who suggested it ?

Mr. Exaxsorr. Mr. Rothermel mentioned it to me on the morning of
June 20 for the first time.

Mr. Scorr. Of 1914?

Mr. Exxiorr. June 20, 1913.

Mr. Scorr. Congress was in session at that time, was it not?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; but there was no quorum present, and under
a “gentlemen’s agreement” they were adjourning from day to day,
and there was to be no quorum until the 14th of July. I told Mr.
Rothermel that that would be too late, and that if it was not done
before then he had as well stop the whole business. I said that if
we did not get the testimony of those men up there they would dis-
appear by the 1st of August, and it would be too late.

Mr. Scorr. Why did you think that they would disappear ?

Mr. Extiorr. Because I knew they would be removed, and a new
set of men would be sent up there, and then we might not get all of
these past records.

Mr. Scorr. Who would remove these men ¢

Mr. Exxiorr. They were removed. They were removed by act of
Congress, or they were removed by the Secretary of Commerce.

Mr. Scorr. But the records are still extant?

Mr. Ex.iorr. I know; but, if you have a new set of men up there
killing seals next year, or have it in charge of other persons, the work
would be done right, perhaps. But having the old men up there, not
knowing that I was coming, it would be done as they had been doing
it, and I would get a perfect link connecting them with the past.

Mr. Scorr. That evidence, you say, rests in the 400 skins?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And that you regard as the really important part of
the work?

Mr. Exssorr. Yes, sir; and getting the testimony of the natives. I
could have led them beyond what they said here, perhaps, but that
would have been wrong. I regard the lining up of these natives there,
and getting their testimony, getting possession of this evidence of
fraud, and the uncovering of the killing regulations or orders which
had been secreted from this committee, as the three vital objects
attained, and successfully attained, by going as we did. There would
have been no use in going up there a year later; there would have
been no use in going after “the height of the season,” and there
would have been no use in waiting until the 14th of July, when there
would be a quorum in the House, because it was absolutely necessary
that we should be up there between the 10th and 20th of July.

Mr. Scorr. However, after you returned, was there any exigency or
emergency that required this extra work to be done immediately and
before any authority from Congress could be procured ?

Mr. Exxiorr. There had been no suggestion that it was being done
without authority. The committee did not mention that to me.

44682—16——_3

84 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Scorr. You knew, of course, that your first employment was
without authority of law? ;

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir; and I still believe it was with full authority.

Mr. Scorr. But you knew that the House had taken no action on it?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; but that does not signify anything. That
has been done before. There are many things that are done without
the action of the House that have been approved afterwards.

Mr. Scorr. But after you came back and submitted your report, at
the end of a little more than 60 days, there was a subsequent em-
ployment for more than 200 days. Now, that was not occasioned by
any emergency,.was it?

Mr. Exxniorr. Yes, sir; it was the natural sequence of this begin-
ning. After we closed that up it was necessary for us to get ready in
order to call these men if they would come. All of them were
particeps criminis to these things, and we had to prepare indict-
ments of them, and statements of the evidence which they would have
to face when they came. That was done in this statement of mine,
but all of them were afraid to come here and meet it, except two.

Mr. Scorr. Still, the Department of Justice had made no order in
the premises?

Mr. Exxiort. No, sir.

Mr. Scorr. And, in fact, they had not been consulted ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Why should they be? We had to get the facts before
them first.

Mr. Scorr. Don’t you understand that it is usual before preparing
such a case in detail to at least consult the Government ?

Mr. Exxiotr. Do you suppose if we should go to the Attorney
General without any facts, that he would pay any attention to us?
You try it. ,

Mr. Scorr. I presume you would have to have some facts, but
don’t you think that the report you submitted to the committee early
in August contained sufficient facts to at least call the matter to the
attention of the Attorney General ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir. He would want these men connected up with
the fraud and would want to know what they said about it. f

Mr. Scorr. All of that could have been done after the report had
been brought to the attention of the House, and then authority could
have been obtained.

Mr. Exxiorr. They did not need any authority. I still do not
believe that they needed authority. Mr. Mann said on the floor of
the House that they had perfect authority to make this investigation.

Mr. Scorr. But $10,000 is a considerable sum.

Mr. Exxrorr. $10,000,000 is blown away in a breath and you do
not know anything about it.

Mr. Scorr. I know all about this, though. Who gave you direct
orders to go on and do this supplemental work after you submitted
this report ?

Mr. Exxiorr. The chairman.

Mr. Scorr. Mr. Rothermel ?

Mr. Evxrorr. Yes, sir; and I will say further that I was in con-
sultation with Mr. Watkins, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Bruckner, and Mr.
Walsh almost every day. .

Mr. Scorr. Did you consult them with reference to this supple-
mental work?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 35

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes; sir.

Mr. Scorr. And each of them told you to go on and do the work?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; they were delighted with it. They were
pleased with it, and I consulted them and showed them the progress
that was being made with it.

Mr. Scorr. Was there any discussion as to what the cost of it
would be?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir; I do not think they ever raised that question.
I can not remember it. I do not remember anything of that, except
once when Mr. Watkins said, “ I hope you will be well paid for this,”
and “ we can not pay you enough.”

Mr. Scorr. Returning again to Mr. Gallagher’s bill here, so far as
you know, the time he devoted to this was slightly over two months?

Mr. Exxiorr. It was about 84 or 85 days. He can tell you the
exact number of days.

Mr. Scorr. That would be approximately at the rate of $1,000
per month. .

Mr. Exxiorr. This is the way I figured that: Mr. Gallagher was first
consulted in the matter on the evening of April 2, 1914, in the com-
mittee room, and that was the first time he brought up the question
of compensation. It had been taken up in the committee in the
morning, and the committee in executive session had ordered the
chairman to arrange with us for filing our accounts and expenses.
They made an agreement in that executive session that a certain sum
should be paid the secretary of Mr. Rothermel—$1,200, I think

Mr. Scorr (interposing). What was that for?

Mr. Exuiorr. For extra services.

Mr. Scorr. In connection with this matter?

_Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir. That is all over and past. That went
through the House.

Mr. Scorr. I want to be clear about that. Was the sum allowed
Miss Kirby in the House for work done in connection with the
formulation of this report?

Mr. Exxtorr. No, sir; not that I know of. That was for services
in the committee. There is no reference to her services in connection
with these reports, because she had no hand in it. She typewrote
the committee’s report. She was of no use so far as I was con-
cerned, and that is all she did.

Mr. Scorr. Now, does this bill cover the services of any other
person ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir. As I said, the committee asked the chairman
in the morning of April 2, 1914, to arrange with Mr. Gallagher and
myself as to our compensation, inasmuch as he had no bills from
us in his hands and as no account had been rendered to him.

Mr. Scorr. Is it the understanding that if this bill is allowed
you are to pay for the services of any other person?

Mr. Exuiorr. No, sir; not at all. That was all thrashed out in the
Committee on Accounts December 5 last. That was sworn testi-
mony and I wish you would get it.

Mr. Scorr. That was upon what subject?

Mr. Exxiorr. On this very subject you are inquiring about, whether
I made an agreement with anybody to pay them anything.

Mr. Scorr. Is there any understanding that one Mr. Cole is to
receive any part of this money?

36 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Exxirorr. Not from me.

Mr. Scorr. Are you to pay Mr. Cole for any services in connec-
tion with the committee work ?

Mr. Exnrorr. Not a cent for this work; not a cent.

Mr. Scorr. For any other work?

Mr. Exniorr. I told him that after this thing was over and the
business was finished I would reimburse him handsomely for any
personal service he had done for me in the way of writing letters,
ete.—not in connection with the committee or this work—but personal
letters written by him, just as you would call in a stenographer from
the outside and have him to write your letters.

Mr. Scorr. But was not there some conversation between you and
Mr. Cole with reference to his being paid by you a considerable sum
of money—many hundreds of dollars—for work done for Mr. Roth-
ermel ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Not a word.

Mr. Scorr. You and he never discussed that ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir; we never did. He never asked me a ques-
tion about it, and I volunteered that statement to him. I knew that
he was hard up.

Mr. Scorr. And you never discussed that subject with Mr. Roth-
ermel ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir; naturally I would not.

Mr. Scorr. So that Mr. Cole’s work had nothing to do with any
part of your work?

Mr. Exsniorr. No, sir; not with any part of it.

Mr. Scorr. At any stage of it?

Mr. Exuiorr. No, sir. That was finished on the 2d of April, 1914,
and he could not have had anything to do with it, because he did
not come to Mr. Rothermel until May. I never saw him in the field,
nor did I talk to him about it. It was closed on the 2d of April,
1914, and I was simply waiting for the minority report. It had not
appeared, and when it did appear it was nothing but mendacity,
abuse, and vituperation.

Mr. Scorr. Who made the report?

Mr. Exxitorr. Mr. McGuire and Mr. Patton.

Mr. Scorr. I never looked through this. Is it in here?

Mr. Exxiort. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. I can not find it in any of these documents.

Mr. Exxiorr. Here it is.

Mr. Scorr. Have you the minority report there?

Mr. Exxrorr. No, sir; it was not submitted until July 28; I
answered it here. It is itemized here. I faced these gentlemen for
three years and they never made any of those statements to my face,
ea they will never go under oath and make them to my face again,
either.

Mr. Scorr. I will not bother about that now. I have not read the
minority report. Has this matter ever been laid before the Depart-
ment of Justice at all, or do you know?

Mr. Sreruens. Not that I know of.

Mr. Extrorr. Yes, sir; it was.

Mr. Scorr. I mean the matter of this claim?

Mr. Rornermer. Do you mean this claim of Mr. Elliott and Mr.
Gallagher ?

,
|

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 37

Mr. Scorr. Yes.

Mr. Rornermen. I .spoke to some of the assistants, and they said
that they had nothing at all to do with it, and that it was for Con-
gress to fix it.

Mr. Scorr. You see it is quite customary with the Committee on
Claims, when a claim is made on account of any matter connected
with any department, to get the recommendation of that depart-
ment, and it occurred to me that it was very pertinent that we should
know whether the Department of Justice would take the responsi-
bility of recognizing this as necessary work to be done. It might
be a very important thing, but that is for the Department of Justice
to say. It is for the Department of Justice to say whether this
information that was obtained is necessary, whether it can be used
by the department, and whether it is valuable. ,

Mr. Sterpuens. Mr. Elliott, how many reports did you make to the
committee with reference to your work in Alaska ?

Mr. Exxiotr. All of them are embodied there.

Mr. Srepuens. How many different reports did you make?

Mr. Exsiorr. There would be three.

Mr. Stepuens. Do you regard this [indicating] as a part of your
report?

Mr. Exxrorr. That is my report.

Mr. Strepuens. This document containing 848 pages?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir. That is the testimony of the witnesses, and
we had to do that work.

Mr. Streprens. You collected a lot of letters, newspaper clippings,
statements of witnesses, etc., and incorporated them here?

Mr. Exxiorr. There are no newspaper clippings there.

Mr. Srepuens. I think I remember seeing them. There is a clip-
ping here from the Washington Star.

Mr. Exxiorr. I only bring that in incidentally.

Mr. Srepuens. How long did it take you to prepare this report?

Mr. Exxiorr. I was occupied with it incessantly from the time
I started until the report closed on the 2d of April, 1914.

Mr. Srepuens. Then you made a preliminary report before that.

Mr. Exxiorr. That is the one you have been going over.

Mr. Scorr. The real report was made 60 days after your return.

Mr. Sternens. When was this first report made?

Mr. Exxiorr. That was filed with the chairman on August 31.

Mr. Sreruens. Within a very few days after your return from
Alaska ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir. You see we lost no time in getting these
things into shape. We did it as quickly as possible.

Mr. Srernens. Did the committee call upon you to make a sup-
plementary report?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; the chairman of the committee said that it
was necessary that we should go into further detail covering these
matters, so that when these men appeared before the committee we
could get their answers and the facts. There were serious charges
made there.

Mr. Roruermen. I suggested that the facts ought to be arranged
so that they could be more readily understood. I did that because
this matter has been ina tangle for years and years, and that is the

38 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

reason I suggested that the matters should be analyzed and simpli-
fied.

Mr. Srernens. At the time you filed your first report, on the 31st
of August, all of these other facts were before the committee, were
they not?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir. y

Mr. Sternens. You had hearings after that?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; that covers hearings. There was quite a
series of hearings.

Mr. Steruens. After the filing of that report?

Mr. Exsiorr. Yes, sir; beginning October 13 and ending on March
19. That became necessary because the work on the islands opened
’ up fresh channels of information.

Mr. SrerHens. We had Mr. Elliott before us yesterday, and he
went over this matter. Mr. McGuire, do you want to ask some ques-
tions or make a statement ?

Mr. McGure. I do not care to ask any questions, but I desire to
make a statement.

Mr. Scorr. I want to ask Mr. Elliott a few more questions. Now,
the subsequent work that you did, after the filing of your first re-
port, is embodied in these two volumes?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir. There is a syllabus there. While waiting
for the minority report I made a syllabus of this testimony taken
during the last hearings.

Mr. Scorr. Then, your subsequent work is embodied in this volume
of 849 pages entrtled “ Hearings before the Committee on Expendi-
tures in the Department of Commerce” ?

Mr. Exuiotr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Is that the only volume of hearings that was published
in connection with that investigation ?

Mr. Extrorr. No, sir; the past Congress had another volume.

Mr. Scorr. I refer to this particular investigation.

Mr. Exxiorr. Everything is there. That is the syllabus which I
prepared after the hearings were closed.

Mr. Scorr. This syllabus, so-called, is entitled “A Report.” This
contains 260 pages and is based upon the volumes entitled “ Hear-
ings,” containing 849 pages?

Mr. Exxiorr. These hearings containing 1,100 pages cover the
whole ground.

Mr. Scorr. This is, in fact, an elaborate brief or argument?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; prepared for the use of the Attorney
General.

Mr. Scorr. This document [indicating] was prepared for the use
of the Attorney General ?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; it was not generally distributed.

Mr. Scorr. It was published as a report of the committee?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes and no, sir; it was published in the name of the
committee, but not as a report.

Mr. Scorr. The Attorney General had not been consulted in the
matter at the time this was formulated ?

Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir; he could not have been.

Mr. Scorr. It was submitted to the House as the report of Mr.
Rothermel and his committee?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 39

Mr. Scorr. And this very large volume of 849 pages was submitted
by Mr. Rothermel as the hearings of his committee ?

Mr. Exxiorr. The sworn testimony. The other is not sworn to.

Mr. Scorr. And the compilation and preparation of these two
volumes represent the services for which your bill is filed ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. With the exception of the sixty or more days’ service
that you devoted to obtaining the testimony and preparing the
original report filed in August?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Will you as clearly and definitely as you can state the
length of time, after the date on which you submitted this first
report, that you devoted to this task, up to the time of the submission
of that report? Can you state the number of days?

Mr. Extiott. Yes, sir; it is from the 31st of August until the 2d
of April, 1914. I devoted night and day to it.

a Scott. From the 31st of August, 1913, until the 2d of April,
1914?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. You devoted all of that time to the preparation and
compilation of these two volumes entitled ‘“ Hearings of the Com-
mittee ” and “ Report of the Committee”?

Mr. Exsiorr. I could hardly be credited with “compiling” the
sworn testimony of these men who appeared before the committee.
I segregated it. I appeared also as a witness, and I brought that
testimony in.

Mr. Scorr. You brought it in with that which you compiled ?

Mr. Extiorr. Yes, sir; this is a résumé of it. I did not put any
charge in for that.

Mr. Scorr. Upon what date did you submit this first report ?

Mr. Exxiotr. On the 31st of August, 1913.

Mr. Scorr. Were you busy all of the time from June 20 to August
31 upon that part of the work?

Mr. Exxiorr. Certainly I was, every moment.

Mr. Scorr. Was Mr. Gallagher busy with you all of that time?

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; so far as I knew, he was.

Mr. Scorr. After the filing of that report, do you know of any
services performed by Mr. Gallagher in connection with this matter,
except the trip to St. Louis? ;

Mr. Extiorr. He had to come here and go over these notes, and
they had to be typewritten. He could not do any typewriting on the
island, and these notes were transcribed.

Mr. Scorr. That was done before August 31, was it not?

Mr. Exxiorr. The notes were not transcribed there.

Mr. Scorr. But he did it before August 31?

Mr. Exniorr. No, sir. This report was not ready for printing
until along in October. We filed the manuscript and called atten-
tion to the notes. ,

’ Buss Scorr. He did not file his manuscript or his notes in short-
and?

Mr. Exniorr. No, sir; we simply cited the notes. We went to
work to get the matter in shape, and as soon as we got it in shape
the committee was called together to receive it—that is, the me-
chanical part of it.

40 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Scorr. The mechanical part of it was not very voluminous?

Mr. Exxio1r. No, sir; but it had to be done.

Mr. Scorr. But the testimony was not voluminous?

Mr. Exxiorr. You can see what it is.

Mr. Scorr. It is three or four pages of testimony.

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; and many lawyers’ briefs would go many
times over that.

Mr. Scorr. I believe that is all, Mr. Chairman.

TESTIMONY OF MR. A. F. GALLAGHER.

(The witness, being first duly sworn, testified as follows:)

Mr. Srernens. Mr. Gallagher, you have a claim against the Goy-
ernment for something over $3,000. I wish you would state to the
committee how that claim arises? .

Mr. Gatiacner. Perhaps I had better start at the beginning and
state my connection with the committee ?

Mr. Sreruens. Yes, sir.

Mr. Gauuiacuer. In June, 1913, I saw a newspaper article to the
effect that the Committee on Expediture in the Department of Com-
merce was going to make an investigation of the fur-seal conditions
on the Pribilof Islands. Mr. Rothermel was the chairman of that
committee, and my home town being Allentown, Pa., which is Mr.
Rothermel’s district, and I being a court reporter with offices in this
city, I went to Mr. Rothermel and asked him for the employment to
report whatever proceedings the committee would require reported
while on that trip.

Mr. Rothermel said that he would arrange for the employment, and
I think it was the 20th of June, 1913, Mr. Rothermel called me up
on the telephone and told me that the committee had decided that in
view of the conditions in the House at that time the committee itself
could not go, but they had authority to send agents or somebody to
represent them, and he told me then that the committee had taken
action to send Mr. Elliott and myself up there. I told Mr. Rothermel
that I would come and see him. I thought the matter over and came
to the conclusion, as I was to go with only one other man and as the
amount of my compensation as reporter would depend on the amount
of testimony I took, that I did not think it was going to be a paying
proposition for me, and IT went and saw Mr. Rothermel and talked
with him along that line, and he said, “ Never mind; you will be well
paid. You will be paid as an agent of the committee.” I accepted
the employment upon those terms.

Mr. Stepnens. Was there any mention made of what the compen-
sation would be?

Mr. Gatiacuer. There was not, sir, except that I would be well
paid. I also understood from what Mr. Rothermel said that my
expenses would be paid on a mileage basis of 10 cents a mile. In
view of that statement, I kept no expense account—no detailed ex-
pense account—and could only estimate it.

Mr. Srernens. What is the amount of the account you filed?
Three thousand three hundred and some odd dollars?

Mr. Gatuacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Sreruens. How do you figure out that amount?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, i 4]

Mr. Gauiacuer. Mr. Chairman, I should like to say right here
that I am not here trying to justify that amount, but I am here try-
ing to fix on some amount. I have never adhered to any particular
figure in this matter, and always told Mr. Rothermel that I was
willing to agree on any figure that anybody fixed as reasonable. I
also made that statement before the Committee on Accounts.

Mr. Srernens. We should like to have the benefit of your judg-
ment as to what is reasonable for the services rendered ¢

Mr. Gatiacuer. Of course, in this matter of compensation I take
into consideration a lot of things that I do not seem to be able to
make other people take into consideration. If you should ask me
how many days I was employed on the work I would say 80 days, ap-
proximately ; but here are two days which, if I had not been engaged
on this particular work, I would not have lost my present employ-
ment; and there have been days out of number that I have spent
around the committee on the same proposition.

Mr. Sreruens. We can not consider to-day, nor yesterday, nor any
other day except those on which you were actually engaged in this
work. :

Mr. Gatiacuer. I understand.

Mr. Srepuens. We can not pay you for making an effort to collect
what you think is due you.

Mr. Gauiacuer. I want to make a statement right here. If I were
paid the full amount called for in the resolution I would not consider
myself overpaid.

Mr. Srernens. For the 80 days spent on the work?

Mr. GaLLaGcHER. Yes, sir.

’ Mr. Scorr. Is there any legal provision for a per diem for court
ceporters in the District of Columbia?

Mr. Gattacuer. No, sir. Now, there is one way in which I might
arrive at the amount. In the last year, 1914, I earned $6,200, and
I suppose I made that amount in about nine months’ work. For 365
days that would be approximately $17 a day.

Mr. Sreruens. But you are charging nearly twice that much here?

Mr. Gatnacuer. Yes, sir. I had no positive understanding with
anybody as to how much I was to receive for doing this work, and
after having completed the work I asked Mr. Elliott one evening
what he thought, he knowing what I had done, would be a reasonable
compensation for me, and he said “$8,500,” and I said “ All right.”
That is the way the $3,500 was arrived at—without any itemization
or anything of that kind at all.

Mr. Srepuens. You have not answered the question as to what is
your best judgment as to the amount which should be paid. You
have just stated that you fixed the amount at $3,500, because Mr.
Elliott made that suggestion to you?

Mr. Gauiacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Sreruens. You have also stated that you made an average of
about $17 a day during the last year?

“Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sit.

Mr. Srernens. While engaged on other work; but you have not
answered the question as to how much you should be paid for this
particular work, the 80 days you were actually engaged on it?

Mr. Gatiacuer. I consider this particular work more unpleasant
and more hazardous than my daily employment. If I had had as

42 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

much foresight as hindsight, I would not have become connected
with it for anything. I have not answered your question yet. Take
the figure which is fixed by the House of Representatives as compen-
sation for stenographic work, which is $5,000 a year, the reporters
in the House of Representatives do not work every day in the year,
but let us say $20 a day for the days they work—if I received $20 a
day for 75 days, to make it sure, I would be satisfied.

_ Mr. Scorr. That is $1,500?

Mr. Gauuacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Steruens. What was the amount of your expenses in making
this trip?

Mr. Gatiacner. As I said, I did not keep a detailed expense ac-
count. I tried to approach it, and I estimated some $450, but I do
not believe that will cover it.

Mr. Extiorr. It cost me $500, but I could itemize only $467.

Mr. Sreruens. You left here on the 20th of June, 1913?

Mr. Gatiacuer. No, sir; I left on the 22d day of June, 1913.

Mr. Sreruens. When did you return?

Mr. GatiacHer. On the 21st of August, 1918.

Mr. Sreruens. How many days did you spend on this work after
your return from Alaska?

Mr. Gatiacuer. I spent every day in connection with this work
up until the 3d of September, when I signed the report. I not’ only
spent my own time, but I employed typewriters to do the work. Mr.
Scott seems to think that there was no typewriting done. I paid a bill
of $19.60, which would indicate 196 typewritten pages.

Mr. Scorr. That included the copying of the exhibits and the mat-
ter prepared by Mr. Elliott?

Mr. Gatiacuer. No, sir; it did not. It included what I took right
up on the islands.

Mr. Exxiorr. The work you refer to I did in longhand.

Mr. Steruens. You took 196 pages of testimony in Alaska?

Mr. Gatiacuer. Not testimony; but testimony and other matter.

Mr. SrepHens. Documentary papers?

Mr. Gauuacuer. Yes, sir. I went with Mr. Ellott all over the
different rookeries and took notes at his dictation.

Mr. Exxiorr. Let me say that as we went along I dictated and
Mr. Gallagher took it right down, and that is an exact transcript.
When the wind is blowing and the rain is falling it is almost impos-
sible to make notes there, and at night we would come in late, worn
out and tired out, and get up early the next morning, and so there
was no time to transcribe anything there.

Mr. Srernens. Is there anything else which you would like to say
to the committee, Mr. Gallagher ?

Mr. Gatiacuer. I would like to say that by making the trip to
St. Louis at the time I did I suffered a loss of between $500 and $700.

Mr. SreruHens. When was the trip made?

Mr. Gatuacuer. In November, 1913.

Mr. Srernens. How long did you remain there?

Mr. Gauiacuer. Five days.

Mr. SterHens That is all the work you did for the committee after
the 3d of September in regard to this matter ?

Mr. Gauiacuer. I appeared before the committee and testified.

Mr. Strerpuens. As a witness you made a statement ?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 43

Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sir. I also came up here at other times when
other people were testifying, because I was wanted, and I also con-
ferred with the chairman of the committee at various times, all of
which took my time.

Mr. Scorr. When did you go to St. Louis?

Mr. Gatuacuer. I believe I went to St. Louis on November 19,
1913. The trip covered nine days in the middle of November, 1913.

Mr. Scorr. What did you do after you arrived there; what par-
ticular service did you render? :

Mr. Gauuacuer. After I arrived there I went to the fur house of
Funsten Bros. & Co. Funsten Bros. & Co. had then received a
shipment of approximately 2,200 sealskins from the islands, rep-
resenting the catch of that season, I believe. Among those 2,200
skins were 400 skins on which a test had been made on the islands
as to the weights, measurements, etc. I was sent down there to
separate those 400 skins from the balance of the 2,200 skins.

Mr. Scorr. Were those 400 skins baled ?

Mr. Gatiacuer. Bundled; yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Bundled together ?

Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Were they all in one bundle?

Mr. Gauiacuer. No, sir; there were two skins in each bundle.

Mr. Scorr. They were not baled in large bundles?

Mr. Gatuacuer. No, sir; two skins in each bundle.

Mr. Scorr. Those skins were labeled—the bundles were labeled?

Mr. Gauuacuer. The bundles were not labeled on the outside, but
each skin was tagged on the inside separately, the tag being hidden,
and we had to open the whole 2,200 skins in order to find the 400
that we wanted to identify.

Mr. Scorr. They were put in indiscriminately ?

Mr. GatuacHEr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Why were not those skins separated; why were they
not separated after they had been tagged and inspected in Alaska,
do you know?

Mr. Gatiacuer. No, sir; I do not know.

Mr. Extiorr. Will you permit me to answer that question ?

Mr. Scott. Certainly.

Mr. Extiorr. Because, if we had given the faintest hint of what
we were going to do, they would have opened them and destroyed the
evidence.

Mr. Scorr. You suspected that they might do so?

Mr. Exiorr. Yes, sir. That is the reason we had no outward sign
given to those people. I was going to claim those skins. Then I
went to the Secretary of Commerce and he cooperated with me and
we got them.

Mr. Gauuacuer. Mr. Scott, you tried to show during your exami-
nation of Mr. Elliott that my work apparently did not amount to
very much. I think that is outside the question. I think if I made
that trip and did not do a single minute’s work, the fact that I gave
my time to the committee and accepted the employment in good faith
justifies me in seeking compensation.

Mr. Roruermen. May I ask the witness a question ?

Mr. SterHens. Certainly.

44 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Roruermen. You went to St. Louis at the suggestion of the
Secretary of Commerce ?

Mr. Gaxriacuer. Well, I did not know that at the time I went
down there with you. I thought I was accepting employment from

the committee. /
Mr. Roruermen. On that trip to St. Louis there was a man from

the department / ; ;
Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sir; a gentleman from the Department of

Commerce accompanied me.

Mr. Srernens. Mr. Scott asked Mr. Elliott a few moments ago
about the compensation of Mr. Cole. I want to ask you whether or
not you know anything about Mr. Cole’s connection with this affair
and any agreement to compensate him?

Mr. Gatiacuer. Mr. Chairman, that same question was asked me
before the Committee on Accounts, and I can only answer in the
same way, that on the 5th of August, I believe, after this report of
the committee was submitted to the House, Mr. Rothermel, Mr.
Elliott, and I got together in Mr. Rothermel’s room and conferred
upon this question of compensation, and Mr. Elliott at that time said
to Mr. Rothermel: “There will be no clerk business in this; I will
take care of Charlie.”

Mr. Scorr. Who said that? ~

Mr. Gautnacuer. Mr. Elliott.

Mr. Srepuens. Who is Charlie?

Mr. GauiacHer. Mr. Cole.

Mr. Scorr. This Mr. Cole, here?

Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Sreruens. He was employed there by the committee?

Mr. GatuacHer. Yes, sir. .

Mr. Stepnens. And he worked in the committee room?

Mr. GaLLacHer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Stepnens. And Mr. Elliott’s statement was that there would
be no clerk hire in this; that he would take care of Charlie?

Mr. Gattacuer. That there would be no clerk’s business in this,
Mr. Elliott having in mind the Kirby matter.

Mr. Sreruens. Did Mr. Elliott ever mention Mr. Cole to you in
regard to his pay, and so on?

Mr. Gauiacuer. Mr. Elliott did, but he never led me to believe
that he was going to give him any great sum. Mr. Cole always told
me that Mr. Elliott had agreed to pay him as clerk of the committee,
but I always felt in my own mind that there was some variance be-
tween Mr. Elliott and Mr. Cole as to what Mr. Elliott was to pay
Mr. Cole.

Mr. Stepuens. Mr. Elliott never made any statement to you as to
the amount he was to pay? ;

Mr. Gatuacuer. No, sir.

Mr. Exxrorr. May I say one word there?

Mr. Srrpuens. Certainly you may.

Mr. Ex.tiorr. When the statement was made to which Mr. Qalla-_
gher refers, which is entirely correct—it was not “I will take care
of Charlie,” but it was “ We will take care of Charlie ”—I had refer-
ence at that time to the fact that Charlie was an applicant for a
pasion in the Department of Commerce in Alaska, and three letters
nad been written, one by Mr. Rothermel, one by Mr. Palmer, and

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 45

one by Mr. Lee, urging his appointment as an agent of the salmon
fisheries, and I told Charlie when this thing was over I would go
up there and personally see Mr. Redfield and urge his appointment.
That is what I meant by taking care of Charlie, plus anything else
I might do for him, which would be a small matter. That is the
matter I had in mind about taking care of him, getting him a job.

Mr. Scorr. How did that matter become pertinent to the conversa-
tion you were having at the time?

Mr. Exuiorr. It had reference to the fact that Charlie was without
means and needed something that would help him.

Mr. Scorr. He had been acting as clerk of the committee for some
time ? “

Mr. Exuzorr. I do not know whether he was acting clerk of the
committee.

Mr. Scorr. He had been present ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir; as Mr. Rothermel’s secretary. I never
heard him called the clerk.

Mr. Scorr. As his secretary ?

Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, sir. I never had any conversation with Mr.
Rothermel about Charlie, what he was paying him, or anything; I
never asked him a question and Charlie never told me.

Mr. Steruens. Was there any other secretary to the committee at
that time?

Mr. Exxiorr. Not at that time.

Mr. Scorr. In your conversation with Mr. Elhott you came to a
tentative agreement as to the amount that each man was to be
allowed and the figures were taken to Mr. Watkins to get his
opinion ?

Mr. Gauuacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. What was the amount that was to be apportioned to
each man under that tentative agreement?

Mr. Gauutacuer. Well, I only know directly about my own, Mr.
Scott, I know by hearsay what Mr. Cole carried down there—what
Mr. Cole told me himself.

Mr. Scorr. You were present at that time?

Mr. GALLAGHER. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. What was the arrangement, temporary, tentative, of
course ?

Mr. Roruermen. At whose instance did he carry it to Mr.
Watkins?

Mr. Gatuacuer. I do not know at whose instance.

Mr. Scorr. You were talking, free and easy, among yourselves?

Mr. Gatxiacuer. I have an idea now that Mr. Elliott, as a matter
of compensation, was to get $5,000, and later he told me that he
eee intended to include $1,000 for his expenses in addition to
that.

Mr. Scorr. It was subsequently raised to $6,0007

Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Is it not a fact that out of the $1,000 he was to take
care of Cole’s work for the committee, did you so understand it?

Mr. Gauiacuer. I so understood from Mr. Cole, but the statement
Was never made to me by Mr. Elliott.

Mr. Scorr. Was there any explanation ever made for the raise
from $5,000 to $6,000 to you or in your presence ?

46 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Gatiacuer. Mr. Elliott said that the $1,000 was to cover his
expenses.

Mr. Scorr. What expense do you mean; car fare, etc. ?

Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sir; the expenses of the trip.

Mr. Scorr. Do you know what figures Mr. Cole took down to Mr.
Watkins for approval?

Mr. Gatiacuer. I do not think that I could testify from my own
knowledge, except I know Mr. Cole told me that there was $8,500 on
on the slip.

Mr. Scorr. And that was to cover everybody ?

Mr. Gatuacuer. Yes, sir.

Mr. Srernens. When did he go down to see Mr. Watkins—imme-
diately after you gentlemen had this conversation in regard to
compensation, which you have already referred to?

Mr. GALuacHeERr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Sreruens. In that conversation which you gentlemen had
was $8,500 the amount agreed upon, or what was the amount actually
agreed upon ?

Mr. Gatiacuer. I do not like to testify positively about Mr.
Elliott’s compensation. He never did mention the fact of the amount
of money that he was to receive in any way at that particular time.
I had an idea that he was to get $5,000. I think that was to cover
everything. He told me later that there was $1,000 additional, which
was to cover his expenses.

Mr. Srerpuens. What sum was mentioned in the conversation when
you were discussing compensation ?

Mr. Gauiacuer. As I recall, $8,500 was mentioned.

Mr. SrepHens. The very amount which Mr. Cole told you he took
to Mr. Watkins?

Mr. GALLAGHER. Yes, sir.

Mr. Roruerme. I want to ask a question.

Mr. SrerHens. Certainly.

Mr. Rornermen. The committee had instructed me to get the bills
from you and Mr. Elliott. How did it happen that they were sub-
mitted to Mr. Watkins? That is what I do not understand. This is
the first that I have heard about it.

Mr. Gatiacuer. I remember Mr. Cole going out of the room with
a slip and coming back and saying that he had been down to see Mr. ©
Watkins. I do not recall that he said what Mr. Watkins told him.

Mr. Roruermen. This is the first time that I have ever heard of
that. ;

Mr. Gatiacuer. Mr. Cole evidently supposed that he had some
onenae interest in the matter, because he took a particular interest
in it.

Mr. Sreruens. Did he engage in the conversation with you when
you discussed the compensation—Mr. Cole, I mean?

Mr. Gatiacuer. I do not remember, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Steruens. He was in the room?

Mr. Gatiacner. Yes, sir. Then he took this paper and went out.

Mr. Scorr. Did the conversation had at that time and place be- —
tween you and Mr. Elliott in the presence of Mr. Cole leave you —
with the impression that Mr. Cole was to receive a part of the ag-_
gregate of $8,500?

a

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 47

Mr. Gatiacuer. Mr. Cole always told me, and I had an idea that
we was to be compensated by Mr. Elliott. To what extent I do not

now.

Mr. Scorr. The question is, did that conversation there leave you
then with the impression that part of the $8,500 was to go to Mr.
Cole; some part of it?

Mr. Gauuacuer. I would say, yes; although that is a hard ques-
tion to answer. Having been told by Mr. Cole that he was to be
paid by Mr. Elliott, and having been told also by Mr. Elliott that
he was going to give Charlie some compensation, I do not know that
I could separate that. :

Mr. Rornermen. Let me say this: The committee had instructed
me to inform Mr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher to submit their bills,
and it was immaterial to me as to the amount because that was
to be left open to be passed on by the committee, and if anything
had been said in my presence I would not have tolerated it for a
minute. That is the truth. I had an understanding with Mr. Cole
and he was regularly paid for being in the room.

Mr. Scorr. He had already been regularly paid?

Mr. Roruermen. Yes, sir; on the contract he had with me. I
only say this to refresh Mr. Gallagher’s recollection.

Mr. Gatiacuer. I want to say in view of Mr. Rothermel’s sugges-
tion that I,always hand an entire misconception of this thing. The
committee having employed me, through Mr. Rothermel as chair-
man, I thought when it came to the matter of compensation that
Mr. Rothermel, as chairman, could fix the compensation. When
Mr. Elliott suggested $3,500, I said, “All right.”

Mr. Exxiotr. I might say that that suggestion was made on April
2, 1914, at night?

Mr. Gauuacuer. It was the same night after Mr. Rothermel had
called me up during the day.

Mr. Exuiorr. When was that?

Mr. Gatuacuer. You said that it was April 2.

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes; at night, was it not?

Mr. Gatuacuer. About that time.

Mr. Exxiorr. Then we remarked upon the sums. I was to have
$5,000 and $1,000 for living and traveling expenses, and you were
to have $3,500, and Mr. Rothermel made a pencil note in order to
draw up the resolution, and I asked him to hold it until the minority
report was filed, and you agreed.

Mr. Gatuacuer. I agreed to anything.

Mr. Exuiorr. That agreement for $9,500 was made April 2, 1914.
Mr. peSweDENE! Do you wish to say anything further, Mr. Gal-
agher ?

Mr. GaiacHER. I should like to submit now the figure to which
I think I am entitled. I think, to make matters sure, that I spent
at least 75 days on this work, and at $20 a day that would be $1,500,
and I think I actually spent $500 for expenses.

Mr. Streruens. Making $2,000?

Mr. Gatiacuer. Yes, sir; making $2,000. I have never been re-
imbursed for 1 cent of my expenses. I do not want to lose any
more time about this matter, and if the committee does not see fit
to pay me, wipe it off.’ I do not want to be running around and

48 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

having these people call me on the telephone to come to committee
meetings and hang around here. If it is not satisfactory, wipe it off.
I did not know that I was accepting employment on a gamble or I
would not have made as much noise as I have.

Mr. Sreruens. If you have nothing further to say, Mr. Gallagher,
we will excuse you and promise that this committee will not call you
again. .

STATEMENT OF HON. BIRD McGUIRE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA.

Mr. Srernens. Mr. McGuire, we should like to have you make your
statement in your own way, and if we want to interrogate you per-
haps we will do so later.

Mr. McGuree. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the subcommittee,
I have been one of the members of the Committee on Expenditures
in the Department of Commerce since these hearings began. There
was an investigation in 1911 on charges preferred by Mr. Elliott.
Mr. Madden, of Illinois, and myself were the minority members of
the committee at that time. Everything was completed, the majority
report was filed, and the minority presented its views, and we closed
the hearings—closed anything. The committee then changed to some
extent, and Mr. Patton, of Pennsylvania, came on the committee.

Mr. Rornermen. May I suggest that Mr. Patton was a member of
the committee in the previous Congress and that there were three of
you?
~ Mr. McGuire. Maybe that was it. Mr. Madden went off the com-
mittee; perhaps that would be better.

The committee, as we viewed it at that time, without any authority
whatever under the rules of the House, and in face of the fact that
there had been exhaustive hearings and all of the reports had been
filed, proceeded again with another hearing. That was over the
protest of Mr. Patton and myself.

We are making the contention that there was absolutely no author-
ity whatever given by the House, and there was not; that the com-
mittee was acting outside of and beyond its jurisdiction; that as a
matter of law there was no right, and that as a matter of fact there
was no occasion for anything of the kind. The hearings had been
so exhaustive—and Mr. Elliott’s statements seemed to be the storm
center of misinformation and of contradiction with himself—that
we really tried to prevent any further investigation. Seemingly he
took charge of the committee room, and I could not call wp the com-
mittee over the phone that he did not answer. He was always there
and always in charge, and he was the man who had made the charges
of fraud in Alaska. I have abundant evidence that he wrote this
report, and I think he did.

Mr. Scorr. Which report do you refer to?

Mr. McGutre. The majority report.

Mr. Scorr. He has said that he did.

Mr. McGuire. He said that he wrote the report.

Mr. Scorr. I understood you to say that you prepared the report.

Mr. Exxiorr. That was this report [indicating].

Mr. McGuire. Here was the man who preferred the charges, a
man discredited, as I will show you by quotations from leading men

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 49

of the country, from Republicans and Democrats alike, and who, in
my judgment, had discredited himself in a hundred different ways
in his testimony—it is the most reckless testimony that I ever heard
in my life—yet, this man was sent wrongfully and unlawfully by the
committee to investigate his own charges. His own testimony states
that he was told to remain away from the Government officials on
the island. I will not go into the details, but such facts as were re-
ported by him after he returned with respect to the number of seals
corroborated exactly the department officials theretofore, and then
contradicted himself completely and thoroughly. The only reliable
fact he obtained, in my judgment, in view of all the evidence—and
I have heard this evidence time and again—as I say, the only fact
that he obtained while up there was what everybody but Elliott
knew, and that was as to the approximate number of seals.

Now, I want, to read a few documents, gentlemen, in part contra-
dictory of Mr. Elliott’s statements here. These documents, taken in
connection with other things which I know bearing upon the same
question as to the employment of various persons “before the com-
mittee, will disclose to some extent the lamentable state of affairs that
existed in that committee. I will now read you from this communi-
cation which is addressed to myself:

Confirming my conversation with you this afternoon in reference to my con-
nection with the Committee on Expenditures in the Department of es of
which committee you are a member and which I served as its clerk. I desire
to say that during my service Mr. Rothermel as chairman did very little in
reference to the work of the investigation of the fur-seal matter.

Mr. H. W. Elliott, I am prepared to say. wrote up the report of the chairman,

and it was then sent to Miss Clara Young, at Reading, who copied it on the
typewriter and returned it to Mr. Rothermel.

Now, gentlemen, the man who preferred the charges, the man who
was selected to go up there, and the man who compiled all of this
stuff, which is largely a repetition of what he has said heretofore and
put in the record himself, wrote the report, according to this state-
ment. The letter continues:

After same was received by him he looked over it and requested me to
insert some parts of the hearings, and which Mr. Elliott suggested as he was
better familiar with it he would do it, and he did. I then handed to several of
the newspapers copies of it, and the original Mr. Rothermel kept and presented
it to the House for action, and I have since learned that no action was taken
by the House. After it was discovered that the House took no action Mr.
Rothermel went to see the Attorney General with the suggestion that he should
bring suit agninst the lessees of the seal islands. The matter was also taken
up by me, at Mr. Rothermel’s suggestion, with the Secretary of Commerce, so
that he would act in conjunction with the Attorney General, and Mr. Redfield,
in a letter to either Mr. Rothermel or Mr. Elliott, stated that he could do
rothing as no congressional action was taken.

Mr. Elliott then got busy and wrote several letters in longhand addressed to
the Attorney General and the Secretary of Commerce, and I copied them on the
typewriter, and Mr. Rothermel signed them as chairman of the committee.
Mr. Elliott also made several trips in person to the Attorney General and to
Secretary Redfield, and I think that on one of these trips he was accompanied
by Mr. Gallagher. In the report to Hon. James T. Lloyd, chairman of the
Committee on Accounts which was considering the payment of the $9,500
resolution, Mr. Elliott also wrote the letter, and Mr. Rothermel signed it, to
show the Committee on Accounts the great work that was accomplished by Mr.
Elliott and Mr. Gallagher in going to Alaska and stating a number of other
reasons stating why his (Mr. Lloyd’s) committee should pass favorably upon
the payment of same.

44682—16—_4

50 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

There were quite a number of various reports that were gotten up for the
miujority members of the committee, which I wrote on the typewriter under
instuctions from Elliott, and Mr. Rothermel signing same as chairman. Mr.
Elliott has a key to the committee room, and during my seven months’ service
he was the whole thing.

Sincerely, yours,
Cuas. L. Core.

Mr. Roruermen. May I ask a question there, Mr. Chairman?

Mr. SterHens. Certainly.

Mr. Roruermen. Did you read the letter to Mr. Lloyd, in which I
asked him to pass favorably on this bill?

Mr. McGuire. I did not even know you wrote a letter.

Mr. Rornermet. You said it was signed by me.

Mr. McGuire. I have been reading Mr. Cole’s letter.

Mr. Roruermen. Did you see a letter to Mr. Lloyd which I signed,
asking him to pass favorably upon this bill?

Mr. McGuire. I did not say that I saw any letter. I was reading
Mr. Cole’s letter, and I have some other letters I would like to read
in that connection.

Mr. Rornermet. Did you say you did not see such a letter?

Mr. McGuire. I have already ‘said I did not see any letter. Iam
reading Mr. Cole’s statement made in a letter to me. I do not know
what the purpose of the gentleman is in asking the question.

Mr. Rornermen. The purpose was to see whether there was any
evidence outside of this.

Mr. McGutre. Here is another letter. This letter is dated January
5, 1914. The other letter was dated January 4, 1914. Gentlemen of
the committee, I regret anything of this kind, but I think I have a
duty to perform, and I have seen so much of this matter that it seems
to me Congress is entitled to know some of the facts, for whatever the
facts may be worth to us. This letter, which is dated January 5,
1914, is addressed to “ Hon. Bird S. McGuire, House of Representa-
tives, Washington, D. C.,” and it says:

Confirming my conversation with you this afternoon in reference to the
Kathryn Kirby matter—
that is the Miss Kirby who is now Mrs. Hummel and who was at one
time employed by the committee—

I desire to say that on or about April 23, 1914, Representative John H. Rother-
mel gave me a check for $50 on the National Capital Bank and asked me to go
to the office of the Sergeant at Arms and get him the cash, which I did. Upon
my return I found that Miss Kirby was with him, and after I handed Mr.
Rothermel the $50 he handed same to Miss Kirby, at the same time asking her
to sign a paper which he handed her. Miss Kirby glanced at the paper and then
refused to sign it, whereupon Mr. Rothermel stated to her that then she could
not have the $50. She stated that under no circumstances would she sign the
paper, and she then left the office and Mr. Rothermel kept the $50. I did not
know at the time what she was supposed to sign, but later on I met Miss Kirby
and asked her in reference to the matter and she told me that the paper that
Mr. Rothermel requested her to sign was a receipt dated back six weeks, which,
if she signed, would make it appear that he (Mr. Rothermel) had paid her
everything he owed her up to date, and appearing as it did it would lead people,
and especially Members of Congress, to believe that the statements she made
before the Committee on Accounts prior to the paying her of the $1,200 were
untrue and that she had been paid everything that Mr. Rothermel owed her up
to April 28 appear as to have been paid her six weeks before.
I remember very well the whole transaction, because Mr. Rothermel remarked
to me after Miss Kirby left that I was a witness to the transaction and saw

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, Pen

that she refused to accept the money. Mr. Rothermel never showed me the
paper that he wanted her to sign, nor informed me as to its contents, which I
afterwards learned from Miss Kirby herself.
Very respectfully,
CuHas. L. Come.

Mr. Rormermen. May I ask a question right there?

Mr. SrerHens. Certainly.

Mr. Rorurermen. Are you aware of the fact, Mr. McGuire, that
Miss Kirby had been regularly paid by me, according to an under-
standing we had? Did you not hear that in the House?

Mr. McGuire. I heard that statement, Mr. Rothermel; something
to that effect.

Mr. Rornermet. And did not Mr. Lloyd state that she told him she
had been regularly paid ?

Mr. McGuire. Had you paid her at that time?

Mr. RoruerMet. Yes, sir.

Mr. McGutre. You had completely paid her at that time?

Mr. Rornermer. Yes. Now, there is just one more question I
want toask. I want to clear up some things here so that you will see
what some people say who are hanging around here.

Mr. McGuire, on the 23d of April I offered her the $50 a week
in advance and asked her to sign a receipt in full. She walked out
and refused. I have the papers in my office in regard to that. I
offered her $50 a week in advance, and Judge Watkins knows it.
There is not a word of truth in what you get from Mr. Cole. —

sae McGutrr. I believe you said you had paid Miss Kirby at that
time?

Mr. Rorurermen. Yes; except the last month, and that I offered
her on the 23d, which was several days before she was entitled to the
money, according to contract.

Mr. McGourrr. Then you had not paid her all. When did you pay
her the last payment? Have you ever paid her?

Mr. Rotuerme.. Yes.

Mr. McGuire. When ?

Mr. Roruermen. A week or two ago. She said Mr. Cole went to
see her and asked her whether or not she would not testify against
me, according to the story he has told you here.

Mr. McGuire. I have another letter from Mrs. Hummel which
states the facts with reference to the last payment. There was $50
paid a few days ago. I have the letter from Mrs. Hummel that
would be very interesting to the committee, I am sure. I thought I
had it here, and I had intended to read it in connection with the
other letter, and that was the only purpose I had in reading the other
letter. I do not seem to have Mrs. Hummel’s letter here with me,
and I want to ask leave to file that letter with the committee. I have
it in my oflice. I thought I had it here. It is simply a statement of
what transpired the other day when the $50 was paid.

Mr. Strepuens. I do not exactly see the pertinence of this matter
in connection with the question under investigation at the present
time.

Mr. McGurre. It might be regarded as irrelevant, but I will say
this, that I will make a statement on the floor of the House, and I
think I will be able to prove what the relations of the chairman of

.

52 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

the committee with this man have been; that they have been rather
strange for a man who has preferred charges against Government
officials. I shall make a statement that he retained a key to that
office. I shall make a statement on the floor of the House that the
evidence is that he wrote the reports, based on his own charges and
his own investigation.

Mr. Sreruens. I understand that, but I was speaking particularly
in regard to his paying or not paying Miss Kirby, and his dealings
with her.

Mr. McGuire. I only brought that in, as I say, in order to show
something in regard to the controversy—and there is a controversy
between Mr. Elliott and Mr. Cole, and I simply brought it in as a
matter, you might say, of impeachment, and Miss Kirby’s letter
may disclose my purpose. It is simply a question of impeachment
of Mr. Elliott. I want to show that he has contradicted everybody
who comes in contact or conflict with him, if they do not agree with
him.

Mr. Sreruens. That Mr. Elliott does that?

Mr. McGuire. Yes. Now, then, he has made a statement here
at great length as to what he has accomplished and what he has done.
My position, of course, is that there is not any part of that which is
very true. He assumes in his statement made here that there is
great fraud, and all that sort of thing. Exactly the opposite is true.

Mr. Steruens. Of course this committee is not bound by the strict
rules of law and evidence as a lawyer would be if he were trying a
case in court, but it seems to me it would be better to have Mr. Cole
make his own statement rather than read letters he has written, and
that it would be better to let Miss Kirby make her own statement
rather than read into the record statements she has prepared and
sent in by means of a ketter. Do you not think that would be better?

Mr. McGuire. As a matter of strict evidence, certainly.

Mr. Strernens. As a matter of strict evidence, it would have to
be that way.

Mr. McGurre. I was simply proceeding on the theory that from
a moral point of view and from a legal point of view, this bill, so
far as Mr. Elhott is concerned, should not be paid.

I am proceeding on the theory that Mr. Elliott is unworthy of
belief. I brought these things in for purposes of impeachment, and
itis only a small part of w hat I intend to present.

Mr. Srernens. I do not see how the failure to pay Miss Kirby
supports either one of those theories.

Mr. McGuire. Not the question as to whether she was or was not
paid. Mr. Rothermel raised the question by interrogation, after I
had read the letter. I had no intention of going into the details as
to whether she was or was not paid in full. I had the facts.

The chairman is quite right in saying that Mr. Cole should make
his own statement. These are letters which he wrote me, and I
sumply want to show the relations between Mr. Cole and Mr. Elliott,
and almost everybody else to Mr. Elliott, in order to find out who
is telling the truth in this matter, because all the presons are not.

Mr. Srepuens. Have you something else you desire to put into the
record ¢

Mr. McGuire. Yes, sir; I have.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 53

As I say, I always found Mr. Elliott in the committee room. He
would always answer the telephone, from the time Miss Kirby left,
and generally while she was there. In the course of the hearings
there were accusations made by Mr. Elliott against a great many dif-
ferent people, and as one of the members of the committee my idea
was to ascertain whether Mr. Elliott was reliable. I proceeded to
do that by an investigation as a member of the committee. These
charges were just a rehash of Mr. Elliott’s. He would refer to the
record to prove what he said, and there was something else in the
records in the past showing what Mr. Elliott had said. It then
became a material question as to whether Mr. Elliott has ever been
in the employ of the Alaskan Commercial Co.

I undertook to make an investigation as to whether Mr. Elliott
had been in the employ of the Alaskan Commercial Co. That was
the first company that ever took a lease on the islands. Their lease,
I think, extended from 1870 to 1890. There was a controversy be-
tween this Alaskan Commercial Co. and the North American Com-
mercial Co., or sealing company. My first information from Mr.
Elliott—this might be backed by the record—my first information
from Mr. Elliott was that it was an awful imposition to say he had
ever been in the employ of the Alaskan Commercial Co., that it was
a slanderous and an outrageous thing. Mr. Madden will tell you the
same thing. So it ran on until we finally looked back and found an
old record in a hearing before the Ways and Means Committee, after
Mr. Elliott had stated that he never had been in the employ of the
Alaskan Commercial Co.; we found this record. He finally con-
fessed that he had been in their employ and had received thousands
of dollars from them.

Mr. Exxiorr. Where are the records? Bring out the records.

Mr. McGutrr. I have the records right here now.

Mr. Exuiorr. I have the record, too.

Mr. McGurre. I brought these other matters up simply to de-
termine the veracity of the parties concerned, and to show, in view
of that most unfortunate condition that in regard to this material
matter, he testified over and over again both ways, and the minority
of the committee felt it could not do justice to either itself or to the
Congress without recommending that he be prosecuted, and so the
recommendation is contained in this minority report, that the De-
partment of Justice look into it, and there can not be any doubt
about the outcome if he is prosecuted. There can not be any possible
doubt about that.

I want to read to the members of the committee a few of the ob-
servations of the minority.

Mr. Exxiorr. There is an answer to that.

Mr. McGuire. Of course, after the minority report was made Mr.
Elliott had to write another report. He has continued to write re-
ports, and charges them to the Government.

I want to read to you what the minority report says on page 12:

Perbaps nothing can better demonstrate his methods than to bring out his
invariable habit of imputing, improper motives to and otherwise charging all
public men who, in legislative or administrative matters relating to the seals,
either disregarded the gratuitous and offensive advice of Elliott or who took

action in such matters in a manner which did not meet with Elliott's approval.
It is impossible for the undersigned in the short time available to review El-

54 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

liott’s history during the many years he has been pursuing his tactics, and to
cite all the vicious and unjust criticisms of public men he had published in
that time. The present hearings, however, afford sufficient examples to suffi-
ciently portray his methods. In them, for instance, he has accused vartous
public men of irregularities in connection with the seal question. They are——

Mr. Sreruens. They all appear in the record?

Mr. McGuire. The record is full of them.

Mr. Exxiorr. It is all borne out in the testimony.

Mr. McGuire. The record goes on to say:

They are: Presidents Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland. (Hearing
4, p. 193.) The following Secretaries of departments: James G, Blaine and
John W. Foster. (Hearing 3, second series, p. T85.) Charles Foster. (Hear-
ing 10, p. 668.) L. J. Gage. (Appendix A, p. 8.)

You will find all these references on the pages which are noted, so
that you may see just what he says of them in the record.

The report goes on to name some other public men to whom he
refers— -

Elihu Root. (Hearing 4, p. 201.) Richard Olney. (Hearing 4, p. 201.)
Charles Nagel. (Hearing 1, second series, pp. 221, 237.) Assistant Secretary
Cc. S. Hamlin. (Hearing 12, pp. 763, 767.) The following Senators: John T,
Morgan. (Cleveland Plain Dealer, Jan. 12, 1908.)

T will show you a little later what Mr. Morgan had to say about
Mr. Elliott—

Cc. W. Fairbanks. (Hearing 4, pp. 212, 218.) S. B. Elkins. (Hearing 10,
p. 568.)

The following Congressmen: C. H. Grosvenor. (Cleveland Plain Dealer,
Jan. 12, 1908.) Sereno E. Payne. (Hearing 10, p. 620.)
and many others solely because of the fact that they differed with
Elliott as to manner in which a public trust legally imposed upon
them should be administered.

He has stigmatized as ‘scientific prostitutes,” “carping and incompetent

critics,” “ hogwash experts,” and various other like terms such reputable men as

David Starr Jordan, president of Stanford University ; Dr. F. A. Lucas, curator
in chief of the American Museum of Natural History; Dr. C. H. Townsend, in
charge of the New York Aquarium; Dr. Leonhard Stejnegar, curator in chief
of the United States National Museum; Dr. Barton W. Everman, director of
the museum of the California Academy of Sciences; and all other scientifie men
who have opposed his erratic contentions regarding conditions surrounding seal
life, and his equally unfounded conclusions regarding the actions of the Govy-
ernment officers and of the legally constituted lessee of the sealing right in
connection with the taking of sealskins. To quote the extravagant expressions
of vituperation which Elliott has heaped upon these above-mentioned men,
because of their having had the temerity to appear at these hearings and testify
in a manner to refute Elliott’s testimony, would be to give additional publi-
cation to expressions that, to say the least, are not currently used among
decent men. (Hearing 1, 2d ser., p. 6; hearing 7, p. 301.)

It is hardly necessary to state that Elliott has been repudiated by the
scientists named above and by many others, all of whom have examined the
seal rookeries and, as a result, have reached conclusions wholly divergent from

those advanced by Elliott. In fact, Elliott stands alone, repudiated by all save |

and except the majority members of this committee.

During the years in which Elliott’s charges have been made to Congress they
were referred in each instance to and were examined and repudiated by the
Committee on Ways and Means so many times that the dates and sessions need

not be specified. <

Mr. Exxrrorr. You can not specify one of those sessions.

Mr. McGuire. The whole thing—these charges have been stand-
ing for 20 years, and they have been before the Ways and Means
Committee a number of times, regardless of party.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 55

Mr. Exxiorr. I deny that.

Mr. Srepuens. Do not interrupt the witness, please.
Mr. Exxiorr. I beg your pardon.

Mr. McGutre. The report goes on to say:

In more recent years the Ways and Means Committee, after an exhaustive
series of hearings on his charges, became so disgusted with his baseless com-
plaints and with his vituperation of public men of high standing, then dead,
that they refused to publish the hearings and virtually hooted him out of the
committee room.

We are taking this from the testimony.
Mr. Exxiorr. There is no testimony to that effect.
Mr. McGuire (reading) :

In that hearing, which was held in 1907, Mr. C. H. Grosvenor, of Ohio, in-
formed Elliott that he (Elliott) was the most contemptible and insulting witness
that he had ever heard before any committee. In the hearing on the bill to
give effect to the seal treaty now in force, held before the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, January, 1912, Elliott appeared and testified at length, pur-
suing his customary tactics of slandering all those who differed with him.
The committee, however, reported to the House a bill which was directly op-
posed to Elliott’s recommendations, which bill the House passed by a vote of
2 to 1. The Foreign Relations Committee recently, in a hearing to con-
sider confirmation of the appointment of the present Commissioner of Fisheries,
had Elliott before it as a witness, and, after listening to his testimony, in which
he strongly opposed the confirmation, took action directly at variance with
Elliott’s protest.

There are a number of incriminating documents that were secured
for the purpose of that hearing, and I think I can produce those
documents. The Secretary of Commerce and Labor secured them.
He wanted the confirmation and took them over to the committee.

Tf you will remember that point and read Mr. Ellott’s testimony
near the close of these hearings, in connection with his examination
over there, when he was confronted with the documents, it may be
of some interest to the committee.

The report goes on to say:

The opinion of the undersigned regarding the unreliability of Eliott—the
sole witness by whom these charges are sought to be substantiated—is not
founded solely upon his testimony, his actions, and demeanor before the com-
mittee, although they are of a nature sufficient to allow any unbiased person to
form a correct estimate of Elliott’s lack of trustworthiness. The following
persons, men of unquestioned integrity and judgment, have had this to say
of him:

Gen. O. H. Howard: “ During the year 1865, Mr. Elliott, then an employee of
the telegraph company that attempted to establish a line from America to Europe,
via Siberia, was stationed at Puget Sound, about 800 miles from the southern
boundary of Alaska, and never approached it nearer than that until the year
of 1872, when it had been five years American territory.

“ On the strength of this Mr. Elliott asserts that he has been in Alaska before
the American advent. We will now show what experience he has had in the
country since.

“Mr. Elliott went first to Alaska in the spring of 1872 in a subordinate
position, being assistant to Capt. Bryant, who was then the Government agent
on St. Paul, the largest of the fur-seal islands, where he, Mr. Elliott, married
a native girl. Mr. Elliott remained on the island about a year, returning in
1873, without having seen anything of the rest of the immense territory except the
little Aleut village on Unalaska Island, where he touched on his way up and down,
After his arrival at Washington he published a work on the habits of the fur
seals and made himself conspicuous by preferring charges against Capt.
Bryant, who, by the way, had proved himself not very pliable in the hands of
the Alaska Commercial Co., and consequently was anything but popular with
them.

56 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

“Mr. Elliott’s report is, just now, as the Alaska Commercial Co. desires,
and might be mistaken for a statement written by a member of that company.

“The aim and purpose of such arguments are too transparent to need any
comment, and although we have no doubt that it does not pay for Mr. Elliott
to have any different views, yet we are surprised to find him so little shrewd as
to come out with such undisguised and clumsy praise of the Alaska Commercial
Co., which lets at once the cat out of the bag.”

That was in a report which Gen. Howard made to the War Depart-
ment on Alaska, in 1875.

Mr. Exuiorr. He repudiated that himself; Gen. Howard said that
he had been imposed upon.

Mr. McGuire. This is what Senator Morgan, of Alabama, had to
say and I am quoting now from the records of the proceedings of the
tribunal of arbitration, at Paris, volume 1, page 108:

I know Mr. Elliott, whom the British Government has dubbed “ professor.”
I have respect for his character and sprightliness. He is a painter in water
colors of no mean pretensions, but his use of color does not stop with his can-
vas. It enters into all he says, and makes him too vivid an enthusiast for a
safe reliance on questions of measurements, statistics, and cold facts.

That comment arose over a question of measurements of sealskins,
and that is taken from the record. Then I have also the statement
made by Gouverneur Morris, a special Treasury agent in Alaska,
in which Mr. Morris says, in a report to the Secretary of the Treas-
ury, dated November 25, 1878:

The general reputation of Harper’s Magazine heretofore borne for truth
and veracity and the care with which its articles have been selected have given
it a world-wide reputation; but any publication of the kind is likely to be taken
in, and from the very high character enjoyed by the magazine it can not be
denied that the article of Mr. Elliott has had a very damaging effect upon
Alaska. It is written with a certain air of varisemblance, calculated to deceive
the unwary and grossly impose upon the credulity of the reader. It is not so
charged in express words that such was the intention of the writer. I prefer
to ascribe it to gross and palpable ignorance rather than to intentional design.

So little is known about Alaska that whenever anything comes up in Congress
relating to it information is sought wherever it can readily be found. The
“informant” is ever on hand, with his work on fur seals comfortably tucked
underneath his left arm, to impart all the knowledge extant about the country,
“for he knows more about Alasaka than any man living.”

A decade has passed since we acquired this Territory, and for a decade it has
afforded employment and subsistence for its present sense keeper and it is
about time this bubble was pricked and the bladder not quite so much inflated.

IT am fully aware of all the consequences to be dreaded, the responsibility
assumed, when rash enough to dispute the heretofore self-established authority
from the Arctic Ocean to the Portland Canal.

This man seems to be the natural foe of Alaska, prosecuting and persecuting
her with the brush, the pencil, and the pen of an expert whenever and wherever
he can get an audience, and I attribute the present forlorn condition of the
Territory to-day more to his ignorance and misrepresentation than to all other
causes combined.

Gouverneur Morris, in another reference to Mr. Elliott in the
report already referred to, says:

As for Mr. Elliott, I desire simply to say that he has not been in Alaska at
all for a dozen years or more, and never spent a week of his whole life in the
southeastern section, where more than nine-tenths of the white population is
to be found. He has no interests whatever in Alaska; the “ fox farm” of which
he claims the ownership is a myth; his only interest in Alaska, according to his
own statement before the House Committee on Territories last spring, is that
of a paid lobbyist of the Alaska Commercial Co., in Washington, where he is
invariably to be found at every succeeding session of Congress, ready to bob up
and give wholly disinterested (?) information to the honorable Senators and

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. tT

Members, whenever any measure designed to promote the settlement and develop-
ment of Alaska or better the condition of her people is broached in either
House.

The fact is. either Mr. Elliott entertains a mistaken idea of the duty he
ewes to his employers (the Alaska Commercial Co., by whom IT am unwilling
to believe him prompted in his persistent misrepresentations of Alaska and
her people), or else he must be governed by a malicious hatred of the people
of this Territory, among whom he is chiefly noted on account of the colossal
impediment with which his veracity seems to be afflicted.

And then I desire also to refer the committee to the statement of
Hon. E. J. Phelps, one of the counsel for the United States in the
tribunal of arbitration of Paris, in which Mr. Phelps says

There was a violent competition at Washington about the renewal of the
lease, and the new company (the North American Commercial Co.) got it
from the old, and Mr, Elliott’s side was defeated, and then immediately after-—
that is to say, within two or three months—he made his appearance on the
islands. Then what took place? For the first time he makes the discovery
that the virility of the herd is being destroyed by the business of over-
driving.

The discovery of Mr. Hlliott was an attack on the administration of the new
company that had got it. You see what it is: A violent rhetorical attack upon
the business that the company was carrying on. If you read his field notes,
they will be found to contain an ounce of observation to a pound of rhetoric.
A scientific observer would make field notes out of doors and put them down as
a basis for subsequent collation and analysis—as statistics; but his statistics
are all rhetoric.

You will notice Mr. Phelps says “ for the first time he makes the
discovery that the virility of the herd is being destroved by the
business of overdriving.” That is after his company had paid him,
I think he said, something like six or seven thousand dollars. He
said that in his own testimony, and he previously said he had not re-
ceived that.

Mr. Exurorr. I deny that.

Mr. McGuire. Here are some contradictions.

Mr. Strernens. Could we not save a little time by making that re-
port a part of this hearing without reading it?

Mr. McGuire. I would like to read some of the contradictions, but,
of course, if you do not care to hear them I will simply imsert them as
a part of this record. :

Mr. Sreruens. Of course, it is very interesting, and we want it
before us, but I thought perhaps we might save a little time by simply
inserting that in the record. However, I am willing that you shall
read that, if you desire to do so.

Mr. McGuire. There are only a page or two of the contradictions.
Tt will only take a few min utes.

Mr. Sreruens. All right; go ahead.

‘Mr. McGuire. Here is a quotation from Mr. Elliott. It is found
on page 16 of the report:

In 1872 I was selected as an agent of the Smithsonian Institution to pro-
ceed to the seal islunds of Alaska and made an extended biological study of

the life thereon. TI was qualified—notice this—I was qualified for the work by
10 years’ service at the Institution as a w orking naturalist and trained artist.

That is found in hearing 1, page 5.

Then here is another quotation from Mr. Elliott, found in hearing
4, page 205:

I was never in the employ of the Smithsonian Institution but for four months
in my life, and then when I was a boy.

58 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Extiorr. That is entirely correct.

Mr. McGuire. Then, in hearing 2 of the second series, on page 6,
we find this from Mr. Elhott:

As an associate and collaborator of the Smithsonian Institution, I was asked
by Prof. Henry and Prof. Baird, secretary and assistant secretary, to go to
the Pribilof Islands in April, 1872, there to study the biology of the fur seal.

Here I quote again from the record of the testimony of Dr. Ever-
mann, in hearing 10, on page 585:

I want to say he is not a collaborator nor an associate collaborator of the
Smithsonian Institution, and the report of the Smithsonian Institution to-day
shows that he is not.

Elliott has testified he was. |

That is his testimony, that he is not in the employ of the Institu-
tion, whereas his testimony was that he was there.

Then here is a letter addressed to Mr. Elliott by Prof. S. P.
Langley, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, found in hear-
ing 7, page 314:

I have hesitated to speak to you ahout representations which are made to
me that the fact of your having in the past occupied a room in the Institution,
and that you are still addressed here under the supposition that you are yet
an oecupant of the building, together with the association of its name with yours
in a correspondence, interviews, and Government documents, have given rise
to misapprehensions. j

Such remonstrances have been made to me, both from official and private
sources, upon the alleged use of the Institution’s name in connection with
your own in regard to such debatable matters as the fur-seal fisheries that I
feel obliged to speak to you about the matter.

Mr. Exsiorr. Read the rest of the letter.
Mr. McGuire. Yes; I will be glad to read the rest of it.

I know your early connection with the Institution and your continued re-
gard for it, and I am persuaded that you would be yourself the last person to
wish to cause it trouble.

I have thought it best, therefore, in view of all this, to write you as I do,
leaving future action to your good judgment.

Mr. Exuiorr. If the subsequent letters were printed they would
show that I did exactly what was right.

Mr. McGurre. There is a great deal of other matter in the report.
I read from the report, for this reason—that it is all copied from
these hearings. There can be no question as to the truthfulness of
the report, because it is not the testimony of any particular witness,
but it is copied from the hearings.

Mr. Exxiorr. What does Gen. Howard say ? ;

Mr. McGuire. These are the facts taken from this record and —
the record before the Ways and Means Committee. |

Now, then, Mr. Chairman, recently I have received a number of —
letters from different Congressmen disclosing to me a letter to them —
by Mr. Elliott, franked from the Committee on Expenditures in the
Department of Commerce and Labor, with his name signed to the
letter, sent in a franked envelope.

Mr. Exxiorr. Bring them in here.

Mr. McGuirr. I will furnish them. I can furnish a dozen of
them.

Mr. Exxitorr. They are not franked.

Mr. McGuire. Scott Ferris has one. They were franked, and I
have some of them in my office.

Mr. Exxiorr. Bring them in.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 59

Mr. McGuire. This thing has been going on in this way, and I
confess that I do not feel that it is treating the Congress of the
United States right to have these things going on, in committee or
elsewhere, by a person who has been repudiated by practically
everybody.

I will say this, Mr. Chairman, that when you read this report
carefully—these minority views—I do not think the members of the
committee can avoid reaching a conclusion that Mr. Elhott ought
to be prosecuted for perjury. I have convicted, perhaps, 50 men
for perjury, and I never had-a better case than this one in my life,
and I can say frankly that I thought as a matter of law and as a
matter of right I ought to be able to do what little I could to pre-
vent this party being allowed anything after he has been investi-
gator and charger and report writer.

Gentlemen of the committee, suppose Mulhall had been given the
keys to Mr. Underwood’s room, or the keys to anybody else’s room,
and suppose he had been permitted to write a report, and suppose
he had been sent to investigate his own charges, do you not suppose
he would have found that somebody was wrong?

Here is a man very much more discredited than is Mulhall. I

really think it is one of the most unfortunate things which has
occurred in my experience since I have been in the American Con-
gress. I think what I am doing is a duty I owe to the American
Congress.
_ Now, then, as to Mr. Gallagher, I have absolutely nothing to say.
He is a young man who is not presumed to know the law. He was
called upon for this foreign service and lost his time. In a strict
legal sense, I presume, Congress does not owe him money. But there
is such a thing as a moral obligation, and it seems to me—I may not
make any objection to Mr. Gallagher’s account being paid: that is,
some reasonable and proper amount.

Mr. Streruens. I am glad you mentioned that, because I intended
to ask you in regard to that.

Mr. McGurtre. Now, as to Mr. Cole, I do not know. If Mr. Cole
has done work for which he has not been paid I should think he
ought to be paid for it. I can not get anything out of the com-
mittee, because I can not get anything there that has not been
touched by the accuser and the report writer and the investigator.
We did not have any clerk to whom I could go without getting
matter that was contaminated and doctored.

In that connection there is one place where Mr. Elliott showed
unanimous action by the committee saying he should have pay.
That is not true. I have always fought it, and Mr. Patten has
always fought it, and I think when it comes on the floor of the
House there will be some other gentlemen who will have something
to say about it.

Mr. Extiorr. Somebody certainly will have something to say
about it.

Mr. Srepuens. You mean members of the committee?

Mr. McGutre., Yes; I think so. If they do not I shall be very
much surprised, in view of what they have said to me. I know some
of the things that have been said. I am waiting to see what these
gentlemen will do. I take it that the gentlemen are square and
honorable.

60 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Gentlemen, I never could content myself to acquiesce in this mat-
ter, which I regard as the most unfortunate, in fact, the most out-
rageous thing that I have ever had anything to do with since I have
been a Member of the American Congress. There ought to be an
investigation here by a joint committee. With all due regard to
the gentlemen who are friends of mine, I think they have let some-
thing slip by them. If there is a joint investigation, as we recom-
mend here, a joint investigation by a Senate and House joint com-
mittee, my opinion is that there will be some prosecutions.

Mr. Exxiorr. There certainly will be.

Mr. McGuire. As to the former recommendation of the Depart-
ment of Justice, I have looked into that, and there will not be any
prosecutions. The law is well known, and there is no action being
taken. But I wish we had some action from the Department of
Justice, so that we might see what they think about it.

As to Mr. Cole’s claim, I know nothing about that. This did not
come up in the course of the investigation. There was nothing said
in regard to Mr. Cole’s matter. Of course, if the committee thinks
he ought to be paid I have nothing to say about that. I do not
know anything about that.

Mr. Sreruens. This resolution does not cover Mr. Cole’s matter
at all.

Mr. McGuire. Yes; I know it does not.

Mr. Svepuens. It refers to Mr. Elliott and to Mr. Gallagher. Of
course it is contended that Mr. Cole’s claim is included in Mr. °
Elliott’s claim, but that is a controverted matter. On the face of
the resolution it does not have anything to do with that.

Mr. Roruermet. I would like to ask Mr. McGuire a question.

Mr. Steruens. Certainly.

Mr. Rormermen. I have two papers which I want to show Mr.
McGuire, and I want him to look at these papers, and I want to ask
him about them.

Mr. Srernens. All right.

Mr. Rormermer (exhibiting paper). I want to know whether this
paper is dated back six weeks. That is a memorandum I had drawn
for Miss Kirby. I submit this memorandum in the hope that when
Mr. McGuire finds that he is mistaken that he will withdraw the
Cole letter from the record. Look at these two papers, Mr. McGuire.
I drew up that receipt the week before she was entitled to that
money, and it was written out on the typewriter, and I laid the cash
down for her and she walked out without signing that paper. I
would like to have Mr. McGuire read those papers | handing papers
to Mr. McGuire}.

Mr. McGuire (examining papers). Did you want me to read these
into the record ?

Mr. RornermMen. No.

Mr. McGuire. The committee should know what these are, unless
the members of the committee have looked at them.

Mr. Srerirens. You might read them into the record.

Mr. McGurre (reading) :

WASHINGTON, D. C., April 23, 1914.
Fifty dollars.

Received of J. H. Rothermel $50, balance in full payment at the rate of $50

a month, from August, 1913, to April 21, 1914.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 61

Mr. RornermMen. That is dated on the 23d of April.

Mr. McGuire. That is not signed.

Mr. Rorurermen. That is what I told her to write on the type-
writer and sign and handed her the money, and she would not do it
and left the money.

Mr. McGutre. The other one reads:

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 30, 1915.
Received of John H. Rothermel $50 balance in full for services rendered to
the said J. H. Rothermel from August 21, 1918, to April 21, 1914.
In this connection I will state that the said J. H. Rothermel offered me the
said amount in cash on April 23, 1914, in his office and asked me to sign a
receipt for the balance in full, which I declined.

M. KATHARINE KirBy HUMMEL.
Attest.

J. T. WATKINS.

This is dated January 30, 1915. This is only a few days ago.

Mr. Roruerme.. She wrote me that she would like me to pay her
now.

Mr. McGuire. It has been running all this time without being
paid?

Mr. Rornermet. I did not know where she was.

Mr. McGutre. Did you not make a statement on the floor of the
House that all this had been paid?

Mr. Rornermen. No; not the last month. That was not due.

Mr. McGuire. She did not work for you any after that.

Mr. Roruermen. She came to my office.

Mr. McGuire. But you made a statement on the floor of the House
that you had paid Miss Kirby in full.

Mr. Rormermen. I had paid up all that was due*

Mr. McGutre. She never worked for you afterwards, and why
was not this due?

Mr. Rornuermen. It was not due until the Ist of the month. I
advanced this on the 23d, and now Cole has handed you a letter say-
ing that I wanted her to date the receipt back six weeks.

Mr. McGuire. I am rather of the opinion that you are mistaken
about the money not being due, because she had not worked for you
for some time prior to the time when you made a statement in
February.

Mr. Rornermen. Whenever the check came she was to be paid out
of the check. That is what I have stated on the floor of the House.

Mr. McGuire. Well, the record will show. If I am mistaken
about that the record will show what is the fact. This paper reads:

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 30, 1915.

Received of John H. Rothermel $50 balance in full for services rendered to
vhe said J. H. Rothermel from August 21, 1913, to April 21, 1914.

In this connection I will state that the said J. H. Rothermel offered me the
said amount in cash on April 23, 1914, in his office and asked me to sign a
receipt for the balance in full, which I declined.

M. KATHARINE Kirpy HUMMEL.

Attest.

J. T. WATKINS.

In that connection I have the letter which I mentioned awhile
ago, which, with the consent of the committee, I would like to put
into the record and which will throw some light on this.

Mr. Rormermen. I am going to ask Mr. McGuire to withdraw that
Cole letter which he submitted here in proof of the facts that he has

62 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

stated, and in regard to that matter both Miss Kirby as well as I
myself can specify to that.

‘Mr. McGuire. As to whether the Cole letter becomes a part of the
record, that is for the committee to decide, but I will say this, that I
will put the Cole letters and everything else I have in connection with
this matter in the Congressional Record, in case it gets to the floor
of the House, and all those things can speak for themselves.

Unless there are some questions which the members of the commit-
tee would like to ask me, that is all I have to say, gentlemen.

Mr. Exxiorr. Mr. Chairman, may I make a brief statement at this
time?

Mr. SrerHens. Yes; provided you do not take too much time.

STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT.

Mr. Exxtorr. Mr. Chairman, I want to say a few words in regard
to some of the things which Mr. McGuire has said. I want to say
that he has not stated this thing truthfully. He stated here that I
had denied being in the employ of the Smithsonian Institution and
then he subsequently brought in the “proofs” that I had been. I
volunteered a statement that I had been in the employ of the Smith-
sonian Institution at one of the first hearings; I think it was in July,
1911, but only for a few months; and that I had, as an associate
and collaborator, occupied a room there and had done work there as
an artist and a naturalist by contract.

Mr. Scorr. When was that?

Mr. Exxiotr. That was from 1862 or 1863 until 1890. For 25 years
I occupied the room in that Smithsonian Building as an “ associate
and collaborator”; and I will bring in for you and lay before you
a monograph on the seal islands, in ‘which Prof. Baird, the secretary
of the Institution, nominates me as an associate collaborator, and
states that he has sent me to the seal islands for that purpose. This
is my “ Monograph,” submitted to the Tenth Census, United States of
America, and printed in Volume VIII by the authority of Prof. Baird
in regard to that. I could not have been in the employ of the Smith-
sonian Institution and at the same time have been given a relation to
it of that kind. I was an independent “associate and collaborator.”
For 25 years I occupied a room there in the north front between Prof.
Theo. N. Gill, on the west side, and Dr. Elliott Coues, on the east
side, and I did an immense amount of work there as an artist and

naturalist for Government bureaus and different scientific societies;
doing that work by contract, making anywhere from $2,500
a year, even in the beginning when I was a mere boy, and some years
I made as much as $10,000 in five months. Do you suppose I would
be a mere clerk there, drawing a measly salary, if I had such an op-
portunity to make more money and live better? Was that not
natural ?

Then later I became an associate and collaborator, “to whom the
institution returns its grateful acknowledgment” for collections
large and valuable, and I have the letters I received in connection
with that. And then because somebody tricked my good friend Wal-
cott, and my good friend, the late Dr. Langley, into believi ing these
lying statements such as those of Mr. McGuire, they wrote me those
letters he quotes in my absence; then when I explained the matter

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 63

to them, they said, substantially: “‘ You come back here; we are
sorry this has been done.”

Then there is another point here. He has “quoted from the
records,” he says. He says he has quoted from the report of Gen.
Howard. Gen. Howard has made no such record about me. In
Gen. Howard’s report—in the “appendix” to Gen. Howard’s re-

ort—among the miscellaneous letters and documents therein assem-

led, is a so-called “appeal,” published by a so-called “civic asso-
ciation” of San Francisco. No such association ever existed, and
Gen. Howard was imposed upon. The man who wrote it was a de-
frocked Greek priest, a scoundrel. That villian’s words abusing me
as a blackmailer have been put into Gen. Howard’s mouth as an in-
dictment of me. Gen. Howard repudiated the thing. A letter was
written by him to Prof. Henry, saying that he was sorry that such a
thing had gotten in there. That is a sample of these McGuire
“records.” He says I am “ quoting testimony of my own,” etc. All
through the sworn record here I quoted nothing but that testimony
of his own guilty people. I do not use my own words; I do not use
my own finding. I use their own, and then I confront them with
their lying denials, or contradiction of it. Nowhere do I bring in my
own statement; nowhere do I use my own individuality. I quote
their lying statements to Congress to deceive committees, and then
bring in the official record of their own making, which contradicts
them; their own official words, which convict them. That is what I
have been doing. Of course, I have been very much abused. I
expect that.

He says he “ would prosecute me for perjury.” He would not dare
do it! He can not bring in a single thing that anybody, if even a
knave, would base an indictment for perjury on. He brings in a lot
of scurrilous language and indecent statements. Look at the records
and see what they brought in about me—these lying and false state-
ments, such as he has just spewed out.

Then he brings in a letter from Mr. Cole, putting words in my
mouth. I heard Dr. Cole admit under oath, December 15 last, that
he was a thief, when being examined before the Committee on Ac-
counts. He puts the word of a thief against my word! And that is
considered “ dignified” by this minority member of the Committee
on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce!

I want him to bring it on the floor of the House. I have friends
there who will gladly take up my end of the case on the floor of the
House and present the facts. I am a good Republican! I am not a
“greasy” one; and, when I was beaten in a Democratic House, I
went to my Republican friends in the Senate and then we beat you
over there. We beat the combination of “greasy Democrats” and
“greasy Republicans.” But the good Democrats stood with me
over there and in the House. We won the fight and you were
whipped. .

__ He says that the Ways and Means Committee made an investiga-
tion. They never have made an investigation. They never have
acted on the charges. They heard a few statements made by people
who came before them January 14-28, 1907, and they never took
those charges up in committee.

__The first time it was ever taken up was by order of the Ways and
Means Committee May 11, 1911. I was taken to the Committee on
.

64 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Expenditures in the Department of Commerce and Labor and set
to work there by the Ways and Means Committee, and in this way
this investigation was taken up first by order of the Ways and
Means Committee, and this business was set on foot.

I have not been “ discredited ” by any committee of either House.
The record of the Ways and Means Committee, which I have here,
is one that any man can be proud of. I have been through that com-
mittee with three bills; and those three bills have been passed
through the House, following my recommendation before the com-
mittee. :

The only setback I ever got was in the Committee on Foreign
Affairs, when Sulzer was chairman. There is no politics in this
thing at all. We will have—

Mr. Srernens. We will have to conclude in a few moments, Mr.
Elliott.

Mr. Exuiorr. I am through.

Mr. Roruermen. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a short
statement in regard to this matter.

Mr. Srepnens. We will take a recess now until half past 2 o’clock
this afternoon.

(Thereupon, at 1.15 o’clock, the committee took a recess until 2.30
o'clock p. m.)

AFTER RECESS.

Mr. Sreruens. Do you wish to make a statement now, Mr. Roth-
ermel ?

Mr. Roruermen. If Mr. Cole is to make a statement I prefer to
wait until he finishes.

Mr. Sreruens. Very weil. We will hear from you now, Mr. Cole.

TESTIMONY OF MR. CHARLES L. COLE.

(The witness was duly sworn by Mr. Stephens.)

Mr. Sreruens. Mr. Cole, where do you live?

Mr. Cour. In Allentown, Pa. -

Mr. Sreruens. That is Mr. Rothermel’s home town?

Mr. Coir. No, sir; 36 miles away, but in the same district.

Mr. Srepurns. Were you ever employed by Mr. Rothermel since
he has been a Member of Congress and chairman of this Committee
on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce ?

Mr. Cone. Yes, sir.

Mr. Stepuens. When did you enter that employ ?
Mr. Corr. On or about the 23d day of April, 1914.

Mr. Srernens. What was your contract with Mr. Rothermel with
reference to your salary ?

Mr. Core. That I was to be paid $12 a week for personal work,
and then I was to do the committee work, for which an allowance
of $125 a month was paid by the Government.

Mr. Sreprens. Were you to receive the $125 in addition to the
$12 a week for personal services?

Mr. Coxe. Yes, sir; I was.

Mr. Srepnens. Did you receive this salary of $125 a month?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 65

Mr. Core. No, sir.”

Mr. SteeHens. What money did you actually receive‘

Mr. Corn. About six weeks after I entered his employ—Mr.
Rothermel was home very busy during the campaign—which was
in May or in the beginning of June, when he came back, I asked for
some money and he gave me a $25 check on the National Capital

Bank, and I told him that was not all he owed me, and he said he
was a little short but he would make it up. Then I asked him about
the clerk’s money, and he told me, “Joe is sick, and I don’t like to
take him off the roll.”

Mr. Sreenens. To whom do you refer when you refer to “Joe”?

Mr. Core. J. M. Baker, who was carried on the roll as clerk of
the committee—that he had to introduce a resolution to pay for
the services of Mr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher, and he would include
me in there for as'‘many months as I was with him until Joe came
back, leaving me under the impression that Joe was sick and would
come back. I did not say anything further about it, and the matter
drifted on until we came to—in fact, I told Mr. Gallagher, the first
one I told about it, and Mr. Gallagher said it didn’t look very good
to him; and later on I told Mr. Elliott, and, if I remember the
right words, Mr. Elliott says, “The old fool. Does he want to get
himself in a worse mess than he did in the Kirby affair? You can’t
be included in there.” I said, “I don’t want to work for nothing.”
He said, “It will never go.” Later on—I don’t know whether Mr.
Elliott spoke to Mr. Rothermel about the matter or not—but, at any
rate, he said he would take care of me.

Mr. SrerHens. Who said that?

Mr. Cons. Mr. Elliott—that I was not to appear because, he said,
“That will knock the whole matter out.” We had lots of talk about
it, almost every day, on the matter.

Mr. Steruens. How long did you serve that committee as clerk?

Mr. Corts. From that time on until about the middle of October.

Mr. Srepuens. About how many months?

Mr. Cots. Seven months; maybe not quite seven months.

Mr. Srepuens. Did you receive any money except the $50 re-
ferred to? .

Mr. Cos. I received all told from Mr. Rothermel $175. On June
3, that is the $25 dollars I had reference to; June 16, $15; July 3,
$35; August 1, $50; August 28, $10; and September 2, $40.

Mr. SterHens. How much is due you now for your services?

Mr. Corr. I claim the clerkship of the committee for which I
was not paid.

Mr. Srernens. What would that amount be?

Mr. Corr. That would be seven months at $125 or $875. I might
add there, Mr. Stephens, that maybe I was there about two months
when Mr. Rothermel gave me a receipt signed by Joe Baker on the
disbursing clerk of the House to get his check for $125. I went

-over and got that check. Then Mr. Rothermel says, “You indorse
this check as acting clerk.” I indorsed it “J. M. Baker,” by my
initials. Then Mr. Rothermel indorsed his name right under there,
“ John H. Rothermel, chairman,” and I went over to the sergeant-
at-arms and got the money for that and handed it to Mr. Rother-
mel. That is all I know about it. What he did with it I do not

44682—16

5

66 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

know. If I rightly remember, once he paid me $40 out of that
money. Once or twice he paid me out of his regular secretary’s
check, and then several other times he paid me the money he got
out of his pocket—where from, I do not know, of course. Along
in September Mr. Gallagher, who is from my own town—we had
been talking of going home and spending a week at the fair, and I
was short of funds, and I asked Mr. Rothermel for some money,
and he said he would give me some before I had to go. He had
been away from the office three or four days or a week, and when
the time came to go the following week he was at the hotel sick,
and I left on Saturday to go home after I had found out he had
gotten 10 days’ leave of absence. You remember the docking rule
was in effect at that time in the House, and I think I had a dollar
and some cents in my pocket, and as I had been accustomed to
going over there and getting that check every month, as I told you,
I went over there and asked Mr. South whether I could get the
September check, and he stated if it would not be cashed before the
end of the month, I could. So he gave me that check for $125.
I indorsed that check “J. M. Baker,” per my initials, and then
signed on it “Charles L. Cole, clerk,” and I got that check cashed
through a friend of mine at home, with the understanding that he
would hold it until the end of the month, so as to not get in the
Treasury before that. That money I got also. I got it because I
didn’t have a penny, and I had to have the money. In the mean-
time I had come across this correspondence which showed Baker
was carried as clerk of the committee from December, 1913, because
of poe notes against Mr. Rothermel.
_ STEPHENS. So in addition to the $175 which Mr. Rothermel

paid you, you have received $125?

Mr. Coir. That one check; yes, sir. That would make $300 all told
that I had got.

Mr. SrepHens. Do you claim that $175 is for the personal work
covered by that $12 per week vou received ?

Mr. Coz. Yes, sir.

Mr. Sternens. Then you have received $125 on your clerk’s salary ?
Mr. Corr. Yes, sir. I should have received, according to contract,
$350 for personal services for seven months plus the “other, and .

figure that, of course, he gave me $300 all told.

Mr. SrePHENs. Who else worked in that committee room besides
yourself ?
Mr. Corr. Nobody but Mr. Elliott and the chairman, Mr. Rother-
mel.
Mr. Sreruens. There was no other employee there ?
Mr. Cor. No, sir.
Mr. Sreruens. Except yourself?
Mr. Cotz. No, sir; nobody did a bit of the work from the time I
entered until I left.
Mr. Stepnens. Was Mr. Baker there at any time?
Mr. Core. I saw him there one day in June or July. He had come
on from Ohio. He was there one day and went out once or twice
with Mr. Rothermel.

st SrepHens. Where was Mr. Baker during all this time?

. Cote. In Ohio.
Me STEPHENS. Is there any further statement you want to make?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN -ALASKA, 67

-Mr. Corr. As I said, I left Mr. Rothermel after he came back in
October; I don’t know what day it was; maybe the middle or maybe
the early part; and he wanted me to go over and get this check then,
and I told him what I had done—that I had got it already, because
I had no money—and he got furious about it. He told me it didn’t
belong to me, and I said he knew it didn’t belong to Mr. Baker, and
I was doing the work, and he said, “ That makes no difference,” and
then we had some other words and I went out of his office and left
him. Then this. matter was before Mr. Lloyd’s committee. I had
gone over with Mr. Rothermel and Mr. Elliott several times to get
books and documents and papers, and Mr. Lloyd finally, one day,
after I had been sent over several times to inquire*the progress of it,
I met Mr. Lloyd on the street car, and Mr. Lloyd asked about this
matter, and he said, “ We will not do anything until we get more of
the Kirby matter; we want to know more about this Kirby matter.”
Mr. Elliott came in, and Mr. Gallagher was present at the time, and
instructed me to remain away from the Committee on Accounts. He
had found out they were questioning me and wanted some informa-
tion. Mr. Lloyd had asked me, and I told him I didn’t know whether
I ought to make any statements; that I wanted to get some advice
before I did that. He said, “ You get all the advice you want, but we
will get at the bottom of this matter.”

I spoke to several Members of Congress and told them the exact
‘situation, and they advised me to tell the truth, and if I had any-
thing to prove it by to show it. I told Mr. Lloyd then what I knew.
‘Then Mr. Lloyd inquired whether I saw letters—actual letters—
from Baker to Mr. Rothermel which proved that Baker was being
‘carried on the roll as clerk because he held notes against Mr. Rother-
mel. I told him I did; that I run across them accidentally in the
office; I found one in my desk, and the other two I found in the
drawer of the table. He said, “You hold those letters, because I am
going to call you and question you under oath, and I want the proof.”
I took them over and showed them to Mr. Lloyd, and he read them
‘and advised me to keep them and not to part with them. I went
home then, and my father received a letter from Mr. Rothermel
in which he stated that he had discharged me for irregularities
‘and a series of matters, and that I would be prosecuted under
‘the State laws, and that he hated to tell my father this, but be-
ing that he knew my father and my father’s brother so well,
he felt he ought to do it. This was five weeks after this tran-
spired. Then he tried to make me trouble up home indirectly with
my family, because I couldn’t give more than a nominal support as
I should have, because I didn’t get my money to do it with, and that
‘didn’t work. Then he went to the Department of Justice and
‘charged information against me that I was taking valuable papers—
that I had taken valuable Government papers from his office.
They sent a detective to see me, and I made a statement. The next
day the chief asked whether I would come up and bring the papers.
I went up with the three letters I had, and they took photographic
copies of those letters and advised me to keep them until this matter
was all thrashed out by Congress and then turn them over to them.
Since that they have tried on two different occasions to have me
rrested under hoaxed charges, connected with the same matter.

68 FUR SEAL. INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. -

Mr. Rothermel has tried his best to prevent me getting work wher-
ever he could, simply because I told what I knew in this matter. I
have since turned the letters over to the Department of Justice, as
per their instructions, photographic copies of which I have here and
which I would like to submit to the committee, and which will prove
beyond a doubt why Baker was carried on the rolls. He never did a
stitch of work during Miss Kirby’s time, so she told me. I know he
has not in my time. I have the letters here, and if you care to have
them read, I will read them.

Mr. Steruens. We will not take time to read them now: just leave
them with us.

Mr. Core. All right. This resolution, Mr. Stephens, which was
introduced on August 7, House resolution 587, called for a lump sum
of $9,500. This was written up—I wrote this up myself—and Mr.
Rothermel signed it, and I took it on the floor of the House. That
was to be $3,500 for Mr. Gallagher and $5,000 for Mr. Elhott, and
my amount of $875 was in there. It was agreed, though, on that day
that Mr. Elliott made the statement and said, ‘* There will be no
clerk matter in this; I will take care of Charlie.” Mr. Rothermel
said, “I have also two ladies, two stenographers, who must be paid
out of this,” and he hinted as much as if Mr. Ellott was going to
take care of me this way and that Mr. Gallagher should take care of
these ladies and pay them. In other words, so nobody else would
be shown up in this deal to bring the truth out. Of course, the in-
vestigation that is on was made by the Committee on Accounts, and
why they didn’t act, I don’t know, but I am sure if you will speak
with Mr. Lloyd in his committee, they will be able to enlighten you
a lot on what they found, not only in the testimony, but what they
got from several departments in reference to this matter.

I am only asking for what I worked for all through last summer.
Mr. Elliott says I did personal work for him. I ask him to prove to
this committee or bring in here any letter or any statement that I
wrote for him that had any bearing of a personal nature to him. I
want to see that.

Mr. McGuire read a letter here this morning in which I stated to
Mr. Elliott that I drew up letters to different departments in the
matter and Mr. Rothermel merely signed them. I have here a letter
of August 10, to Mr. Lloyd, chairman of the Committee on Accounts,
which Mr. Elliott wrote out in longhand and which I copied on. the
typewriter as it is here, and which Mr. Rothermel merely signed and
I delivered. Elliott wrote out letters to the Attorney General and
to the Department of Justice, trying to bring this suit to a head
when Congress did not act in the matter, and Mr. Rothermel merely
signed his name to them. I want to present this letter merely to
show that the statement I made to Mr. McGuire is true. There are
some changes in this letter which have been made by Mr. Elliott’s
own handwriting that he can not dispute.

Mr. Srepuens. By Mr. Elhott?

Mr. Core. Yes, sir.

Mr. Extiorr. That is not a committee letter.

Mr. Cour. He erased and wrote it in himself with pen and ink, to
show that he went over the letter there and saw it was all right, and
Mr. Rothermel signed it as chairman of the committee. I would
like to hand that in.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 69

Mr. Srepuens. Very well: you may file that.

Mr. Exxrorr. That is not a committee letter. The committee letter
follows that on October 7, 1914, and was drawn by the committee in
Mr. Stephens’s room before I ever saw it. That letter of Mr. Rother-
mel, August, was followed by the committee letter, which IT have
shown you. We may as well have that cleared up now. There is no
use having that drifting along. That is not signed by anybody ex-
cept Mr. Rothermel, and it is really a personal letter. Here [indi-
cating | is the committee letter which was drawn up by Mr. Stephens
in his office, and I never saw it. It was circulated and signed before
I saw it.

‘Mr. Steruens. When was this first resolution filed, providing for
compensation ?

Mr. Exxiorr. August 7.

Mr. Corr. The date of the letter, Mr. Stephens, resolution No. 587,
was filed August 7.

Mr. Stepruens. The letter which you present and which was signed
by Mr. Rothermel is dated August 10, 1914. and begins by saying:

DEAR Mr. CHAIRMAN AND GENTLEMEN: I am sending you herewith, for the
kind consideration of you and the committee, House resolution No. 587, ealling
for the sum of $9,500 to be paid out of the contingent fund of the House for
expert services rendered the committee, ete.

Mr. Exxiorr. That was prepared by Mr. Rothermel or Mr. Cole.
I never saw that. Parts of that are mine, and I‘prepared it because
they explain my direct work. Mr. Rothermel asked me to do that;
but the introduction is Mr. Rothermel’s or Cole’s own work. I
remember that.

Mr. Srepuens. The letter Mr. Elliott presents is signed by four
members of the committee and refers to the same matter.

Mr. Exxrorr. That is the committee letter.

Mr. SterHens. But it is dated October 7.

Mr. Exxiorr. That is the committee action.

Mr. Strepuens. This letter is not signed by Mr. Watkins.

Mr. Warxrys. At that date I happened not to be in the city, Mr.
Chairman. I do not suppose my name is signed there.

Mr. Srepuens. No; it is noted:

Mr. John T. Watkins was absent from the city, but since then has said that
above is in exact accord with his views.

Mr. Watkins. I do not know what it is now, but if it could be
read I could tell.

Mr. SrepHens. You may see the letter, Mr. Watkins, if you wish.

Have you anything further to state, Mr. Cole?

Mr. Coxe. I want to state that shortly after I started to work there
T wrote a letter to every member of the committee, stating that I had
been appointed the clerk, that if they wanted any information or any
paper, or anything in reference to any matter, I would be glad to
be at their service if they would command me. I wrote every mem-
ber of the committee. I also acted at one meeting we had there in
my capacity as clerk. 'That is when Mr. McGuire stopped me in the
Hall of the House and gave me the minority report and told me to
hand it in as clerk of the committee, which I did. The chairman
then sent it back, claiming they had no authority, but several nights
later we had a meeting in which Mr. Watkins, Mr. Abercrombie, Mr.

70 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Rothermel, and Mr. Elliott were present, and we went over the
minority bill. I read the report, and stopped when I was told to—
stop, and they discussed it, and I think every member of the com-
mittee knows I was there and knows I did the work; and I was not
paid for it or I would not ask for it. There is no doubt there is—
proof right there that this man that has been receiving the money—_
for awhile toward the last, of course, he had not been receiving 1t—
had no more right to it than anybody had. I am only asking for ~
what is fair and just. If this matter had not got into the Committee
on Accounts through the Kirby matter, I do not suppose it would
have come up, but I was advised to state what I knew, and that is”
what I did, and for that reason they have been persecuting me ever —
since in every imaginable way. e

Mr. Srepuens. Do you want to ask any questions, Mr. Rothermel ? |

Mr. Rormermer. Yes, Mr. Chairman. .

Mr. StreruHens. Proceed, then. |

Mr. Rorpermen. You came to the committee room and sat there-
nearly every morning, when you were not wanted around there. Is
not that true?

Mr. Core. I came there before I started to work; I came there to
100k at the home papers. You never told me I was not wanted.

Mr. Rornermen. Didn't I tell you to go home to your family; that
your wife had given birth to a baby in the hospital?

Mr. Corr. No, sir; you did not tell me anything of the kind.

Mr. Rornermen. Didn’t I tell you if you did not go I would oppose
you getting any position in Washington if you did not go?

Mr. Corre. You told me, prior to Christmas time—a few days be-
fore Christmas—that nothing could be done until after the holidays
and that I should go home. I went home, too.

Mr. RornermMen. You said you would go on Monday.

Mr. Cote. And I went on Monday.

Mr. Rornermen. I did that because your wife had two children
and you paid no attention to them, and I told you so.

Mr. Corr. You did not tell me anything of the kind.

Mr. Rornermen. Didn’t I ask you to go home?

Mr. Corr. Because you could’ not do anything for me until after
the holidays.

Mr. Rornermen. You came in there and were about there every
day, when I had no use for you.

Mr. Coie. You never said that. You told me to come in any time,
and I came around occasionally to look at the home papers; yes, sir.

Mr. Roruermen. Does not Mr. Elhott know that you sat there at
the end of the table every morning when I came in?

Mr. Corr. I do net dispute that. I was not there every morning,
but I came in frequently to look at the home papers.

Mr. Rornermen. Did you look at my papers when you had nothing
to do with them? “i

Mr. Corr. At your newspapers from home: yes, sir—and read
them.

Mr. Rornermer. Did you look at any other papers?

Mr. Corr. No, sir; I did not look at anything.

Mr. Rornermen. Scouting around there all the time?

Mr. Cote. No, sir. |

Mr. Scorr. What time was this?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, fa

Mr. Corr. This was in December.

Mr. Sreruens. This was before you employed him, Mr. Roth-
ermel ?

Mr. Corr. Yes, it was.

Mr. Rornerme. Finally, I told you that Miss Kirby had made
complaint about you being on the telephone and telephoning to
women all the time when I was not there.

Mr. Corr. And when you made that complaint, I called Miss
Kirby in and she denied it.

Mr. Rornrrmen. Miss Kirby stated it and told you that.

Mr. Cots. But she denied it.

Mr. Rorurermen. Are you sure? You are under oath.

Mr. Cote. I am sure she denied it. You called her out and she re-
fused to say anything.

Mr. Rornermen. Ah! She refused to say anything?

Mr. Cots. She denied it. She said, “I don’t know that he spoke
to any girls on the telephone.”

Mr. Roruerme.. Is it true that your wife lives in Allentown and
has two children over there?

Mr. Core. Mr. Chairman, I don’t see that that has any bearing.
Why should he bring my family affairs into this matter? He has
been doing it right along.

Mr. RoruermMen. One moment. I have some correspondence here
that will throw some light upon that.

Mr. Steruens. Just a moment, Mr. Rothermel. We have taken
a rather wide range in this matter to-day and touched on a good
many matters that are really not relevant. I do not see how this
is pertinent at all, this reference to his family and how many children
he has and whether he deserted them or not.

Mr. Roruermet. He said he needed the money for his family, and
he brought the family in.

Mr. SreruHens. I understand, but I do not see that that would
throw any light on this transaction at all. So far as I am concerned,
T do not think it is permissible or proper to go into it. Do you agree
with that or not, Mr. Scott?

Mr. Scorr. I think that is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Srepnens. Then we will leave the family affair out of this.

Mr. Roruermet. I have to bring it in in connection with that check
he took and concealed, and he said he needed that for his family, and
here is his wife’s letter that she hadn’t received a cent from him.

Mr. Sreruens. That would not be competent evidence in any view
of the case.

Mr. Rornermen. He told me, and I am going to ask him, that when
he had kept the October check, he went to the office and got it in the
beginning of September and concealed it from everybody until it was
cashed in October. Then I said, “ What right have you to do this?”
He said he needed money for his family.

Mr. Coxz. I did not conceal it from anybody. I went over to Mr.
South and I asked him about it, and I told Mr. Gallagher the same
day I got the check, and he will back me up in that.

Mr. Roruermen. Did you tell me‘

Mr. Core. You were not here to be told.

Mr. Rornerme.. I was here.

72 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Cote. You were not. If I wanted to I could tell the commit-
tee why you were not here, but I do not like to go into personal
affairs of yours, like you did into mine.

Mr. Roruermer. I was away in September, and you did not tell
me, and when I told you to go and get the check on the 2d of October,
you concealed it, and then next day you came in and told me.

Mr. Cote. I told you when you came back to Washington.

Mr. Roruermet. I asked you on the 2d or 3d of October whether
you had drawn the check as you always did, and you did not tell me,
and I asked you to go and do it, and you did not even tell me then,
but next day you came and told me.

Mr. Core. I do not know whether it was that day or the next day
that I told you, but I told you what I had done.

Mr. Rornermer. You told me then you needed it for your family.
Mr. Corr. I said I needed it because you had not paid me any
money, and I could not live on nothing.

Mr. Roruermen. Here is your w ife’s letter, in which she says you
had not paid her a cent.

Mr. Corr. But I had paid her some money. I could not pay what
I ought to have paid her, but I would have paid her if you had acted
honest in your transactions and given me the money T worked for,
and my family would not have suffered then.

Mr. Roruermer. You came to the office and asked me for work.
Mr. Corr. You sent for me.

Mr. Rorurermen. After Miss Kirby went out.

Mr. Corr. You sent for me to fetch you the $50 to pay Miss Kirby,
and she refused to sign that paper.

Mr. Roruermen. I am not talking about that. I had a distinct
contract with you that you were to work for me for $50 a month.

Mr. Corr. Twelve dollars a week for personal services, and I was
to do the committee work, which I was to be paid for at the higher
rate.

Mr. Rornermen. Don’t you know I never mentioned that?

Mr. Core. I know you did mention it. Do you think if I have a
wife and two children I could support them there and me here on
$12 a week? You brought my- family in and I will bring it in
now, too.

Mr. Sreruens. No; leave out the family.

Mr. Corr. But he brought it in, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Roruermen. You had a distinct understanding with me for
$50 a month, or $12.50 a week.

Mr. Corr. Twelve dollars a week for the personal work.

Mr. Roruermer. And I arranged with you told you when Baker
would come back you would not be there at all, and that I would
divide the checks between you and Baker.

Mr. Cote. Why should Baker have anything?

Mr. Rorurrmen. Answer the question.

Mr. Core. You did not tell me you have been paying Mr. Baker
because he was sick then.

Mr. Roruermen. Then you got the $50 a month.

Mr. Coir. No; I did not get my $50 a month.

Mr. Rornermer. Did not you go and draw the checks and take your
money ‘out of it?

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 73

Mr. Corr. No; I brought the money back to you.

Mr. Roruermen. Did not you draw your $50 every time you had
the money in your possession ? ; '

Mr. Core. No, sir; because I gave you the full $125, and you paid
me yourself, twice at least, by check. Once you paid me out of your
secretary check and once you gave me a check on the National Capi-
tal Bank, and twice you gave me cash out of your own pocket.

Mr. Rornermet. When you had the money in your possession
and had $50 coming to you, why didn’t you keep it?

Mr. Core. When I did keep it one month you were going to put
me in jail for keeping my own money. That is what you tried to do.

Mr. Roruermen. We never talked about that.

Mr. Corr. When I kept that one month’s check you did not? You
tried to hold it up at the treasurer’s office and tried to have me
arrested.

Mr. Roruermen. And when you took the $125 you should have
gone to jail, too.

_ Mr. Corz. Because I took what belonged to me?

Mr. Roruermen. The Pennsylvania laws will take care of that.

Mr. Corr. All right; we will see about the Pennsylvania laws.

Mr. Roruermer. Did you sign my name to a document to buy
clothing in Washington?

Mr. Cote. No, sir.

Mr. Roruermer. Did you use my stamp?

Mr. Cote. No, sir.

Mr. Roruermen. Did you leave a paper there that you stamped my
name Bo as chairman of the committee, to purchase goods at Saks
& Co.?

Mr. Corr. No, sir. I got an order from you for $10 or $12 to buy
goods from Saks & Co., which I wrote out on the typewriter and to
which you signed your name, and if you will get your original letter
from the firm it will show plainly it is your own signature which you
gave me.

Mr. Roruermev. Did you sign my name with the stamp?

Mr. Core. No, sir.

Mr. Roruermen. And state, “To whom it may concern,” that I
recommended that they should deal with you?

Mr. Cote. No, sir.

Mr. Roruermet. I have the letter.

Mr. Cots. Then produce the letter.

Mr. Roruermen. That is what I will. That is another thing that
happened in my office.

(Mr. Rothermel handed a paper to Mr. Stephens. )

Mr. Rornermet. Did you send these scurrilous letters through the
mail under Congressman Lewis’s frank? Is that [indicating] Mr.
Lewis’s frank?

Mr. Core. Did I send girls letters ?

Mr. RornerMe.. Scurrilous, libelous, blackmailing letters?

Mr. Cote. If I signed them I can identify them.

Mr. Roruermet. Is that right [showing a paper to the witness| ?
Don’t take it; you can see it without taking it in your hands. I don’t
trust you.

74 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Core. Then I don’t want to see it. If I can look at it right, I
will answer it, but not when you hold it up. You can not bulldoze
me hike that.

Mr. Roruprer (showing the witness another paper). Is this your
signature ?

Mr. Corr. Yes, sir; I think it is.

Mr. Rornermen. And here is Lewis’s name. Did you have au-
thority from Lewis to use his franks to send your own documents?

Mr. Corr. That has nothing to do with this matter.

Mr. Roruermen. Did you have authority from Lewis?

Mr. Core. I refuse to answer, because it has nothing to do with this
matter.

Mr. Rornermen. Mr. Chairman, he will have to answer that.

Mr. SterHeEns. State your question again.

Mr. Roruermert. Did you have authority from Fred E. Lewis,
Congressman, to use his frank for your personal matters?

Mr. Core. I never used his frank for personal matters.

Mr. Rornermen. Did you have authority from him?

Mr. Core. I used his stationery right along, and I used his en-
velopes right along, and he knew I did. I had been around in his
office right along. I had been sending his mail—coming down and
sending some mail to him.

Mr. Rornermet. I havea letter from him that you had no authority
to do it.

Mr. Cote. I used his letterheads right along, and he never objected.

Mr. Rornermen. Will you say you had authority to use his franks?

Mr. Corr. I do not know whether he ever told me to use his en-
velopes or not, but he knew I did. I was doing work for him and
when I wrote him letters I used his envelopes.

Mr. Rornermen. If he says you had no authority, will you still
swear ? |
Mr. Corr. He never told me I had no authority. I know if he let
me be in his office and gave me a key to his office to send him his mail,
he would not object to me using his letterheads to write letters on. |

Mr. RornrrMen. Let me read this to you: |

[Fred E., Lewis, Pennsylvania. | ;

Hovusr OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D. C., February 8, 1915.
Hon. JoHN H. RorHERMETr,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

My Drar CoLLEAGuE: Your letter informing me that Charles L. Cole has been
sending mail matter out under my frank has come to me as a surprise, as he is
not in my employ nor has he any right to use any of my stationery.

Some months ago, at the time you and Cole had a misunderstanding, he asked
me for the privilege of having his mail directed in the care of my office. As
a constituent of mine, I felt that it was his privilege to ask this favor and
granted it. Mr. Cole is not in my office, as you state, merely going there at
the time mail is delivered to obtain his mail and place mine in a large envelope
preparatory to forwarding to me when I am at home. Mr. Cole offered to per-
form this service for the privilege of receiving his mail at my office. He is not
an occupant of my office and has no key, to my knowledge, nor have I ever
authorized any person to give him a key.

I am glad you called my attention to this matter, as I do not in any way
want to get mixed up in the matter or matters in which you and Cole are con-
tending, as you are both friends of mine and it is the order of the day, in minor
and greater wars, to remain neutral.

Very truly, yours,

Frep E. Lewis.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, (5

Mr. Srepuens. What is the date of that letter ?

Mr. Roruermen. February 23. I wrote to him.

Do you say you had authority to use his franks?

Mr. Coxz. I have been in there right along.

- Mr. Roruermer. Do you say you had authority from him to use
his franks?

Mr. Coir. He never told me that I did not have.

Mr. Roruermen. Did he tell you to use them ?

Mr. Cote. He saw me writing there right along. I made my
reports in there on this matter right along.

Mr. Rornermet. That is a direct question which can be answered
yes or no.

Mr. SrerHens. Answer the question, Mr. Cole.

Mr. Coxe. He never said I could and he never said I could not,
but Mr. Lewis has been there time and time again when he saw me
using his stationery and his envelopes, and never said a word. When
the detective from the Department of Justice came down I wrote my
statement up over there, and Mr. Lewis was present, and he did not
say I could not use his paper, and I had been using it right along.

Mr. Scorr. I notice you refer to stationery and letterheads, and
Mr. Rothermel refers to franks. What are we to understand about
that? Of course, a frank is a different thing from stationery.

Mr. Cote. When I made that statement to the newspapers after
he had been making statements right along charging me with every-
thing under the sun, I made statements to several papers and I
put them in envelopes and took them over to the press gallery of
the House. I had put them in Mr. Lewis’s franked envelopes, but I
took them over to the press gallery of the House myself, and if any
of them got through the mail I don’t know how it happened.

Mr. Scorr. Did you mail any of them?

Mr. Cote. No, sir. If they got through the mail they got through
accidentally. When I mailed letters through the mail I always put a
stamp on. I may have overlooked it once or twice, as I suppose any-
body would. The newspaper reporters had been after me and said:
“Mr. Rothermel is charging you with everything: why don’t you
make a statement?” I made them out and took them over to the
press gallery.

Mr. Scorr. Did you mail them?

Mr. Cote. No, sir.

Mr. Scorr. To whom did you give them?

Mr. Coz. Over in the press gallery.

Mr. Scorr. To newspaper reporters?

Mr. Cote. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Delivered by your own hand?

Mr. Coie. Yes, sir. I took them over myself, because one man by
the name of Amos Brown—TI think he represents the Philadelphia
Record—and several other men wanted statements. ‘There was so
much of it going on at the time that I really don’t remember. If
one or two of them did slip out in the mail I don’t know it. Very
likely that might have happened, but if it did I don’t know it. I
can not state that I did or did not. Mr. Lewis has written me also
about the matter, and I wrote and explained it to him.

Mr. Rornermer. To whom did I talk about you? Let us hear
that.

76 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Sreriens. Let us not go into that, gentlemen.

Mr. Roruermen. He said I had been talking about him.

Mr. Sreenens. We can not take up every little side remark and
follow ie out to a conclusion.

Mr. Roruermer. Did you see Miss Kirby about this—about her
$50?

Mr. Corr. Yes; and I asked her, “Do you remember the time I
fetched the money for Mr. Rothermel and you refused to sign the
paper ?”

Mr. Roruermen. I asked whether you saw her lately ?

Mr. Corr. I saw her about three weeks ago, perhaps.

Mr. Roruermer. Did you ask whether she would not be willing to
come to Reading and testify against me in a libel suit?

Mr. Coie. Yes. sir: : because they had written to me to try to find
her address and ask whether she would come up, and I did that. I
do not deny that.

Mr. Rornermet. Who asked you to go and see her?

Mr. Coir. That is a personal matter of mine.

Mr. Rornermen. | want to know.

Mr. Coxe. I will not tell you.

Mr. Roruermen. Mr. Chairman, I think that is right.

Mr. Coir. This is a hbelous matter that has nothing to do with
this $9,500 resolution.

Mr. Sreryens. Let us confine ourselves a little more closely to the
matter before the committee.

Mr. Rotnermen. These are personal attacks on me, and I think I
ought to have some latitude. Mr. Cole was there, and he has acted
badly before the Committee on Accounts. He said he would not
answer because it would incriminate him, and he has been sending
these scurrilous communications out to the newspapers without a
frank, and it has all been because my character is being assailed.
That is the sum and substance of it.

Mr. Warxins. Do you mean to say without a frank?

Mr. Roruprmen. Yes; without a frank?

Mr. Warxiys. Or with a frank?

Mr. Rornermen. Without a frank. Here it is Peet |

Mr. Warkins. You mean without a stamp.

Mr. RormermMen. Oh, yes; without a stamp.

Did you tell Mr. McGuire in that letter that I asked Miss Kirby
to date a receipt back ?

Mr. Core. I told Mr. McGuire in that letter what Miss Kirby told
me. She said the receipt was dated back six weeks, and that is the
reason she refused to sign it. I did not see the receipt, and I have
never seen it.

Mr. Rornermer. Why did you write that to Mr. McGuire?

Mr. Corn. Because I had reasons for doing that.

Mr. Rornermer. What reasons did you have?

Mr. Core. Reasons to show that if Miss Kirby said it, that the
veason you wanted it dated back six weeks was to knock out this
trouble you had in the House on the Kirby matter.

Mr. Rornermen. Here is the receipt of Miss Kirby [handing the
witness a paper]. |

Mr. Core. Yes; dated January 30, 1915. That is just a few days
ago.

‘
$

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. Ui
Mr. Roruermer. Read it and then you can see what the truth is.
Mr. Coie. I am not talking about this. I am talking about the

incident that happened last April.

Mr. Rornermer. Did not you come to me the very day when I re-
turned to Washington, after that was up in the House, and tell me
that Miss Kirby said you should go down and tell the Members there
was no truth in what they were saying about me withholding the
compensation ?

Mr. Corr. How is that?

(The stenographer read the pending question.)

Mr. Corr. No. IJ think I know what you mean. I was in the
gallery with Miss Kirby when the matter came on, on a Saturday,
and I went down after the dispute arose that nobody knew who the
clerk of the committee was. I went down to call Mr. Madden out.
and told him Miss Kirby told me the name of the clerk of the com-
mittee was Joseph M. Baker.

Mr. Roruermer. Did not you tell Mr. Madden that Miss Kirby
told you it was a mistake?

Mr. Cots. I did not tell him any such thing.

Mr. Roruermen. Didn’t you tell me so?

Mr. Corz. I told Mr. Madden who the clerk was.

Mr. Roruermen. She told you that there was no truth in that $50
business that the Members talked about and that you should go
down and tell them ?

Mr. Corr. That I should go down? I had nothing to do with the
matter.

Mr. Rorurrmen. Were you sitting with her in the gallery?

Mr. Core. I was; yes; but what right did I have to go down on
the floor? She asked me to tell them the name of the clerk of the
committee was Joe Baker and that is what I told Mr. Madden when
I called him out.

Mr. Chairman, since Mr. Rothermel has dwelt so much on this
franking business here it just reminds me of something I would
like to say in that connection that Mr. Rothermel had all kinds of
trouble about during my time in his office and had letters from the
Third Asssistant Postmaster General, Mr. Dockery, in reference to
Mr. Elliott using his franks. He went down one time to the
office and tried to explain it, Mr. Rothermel saying he had no right
to use his frank, and he had told him so, and Mr. Elliott and Mr.
Rothermel had a lot of fights about the matter. I suppose he will
deny that, but the letter is on file and Gen. Dockery can ascertain the
fact. I think Congressman Cramton was one of the men complain-
ing that he was tired of having this man Elliott sending matters
through the mail in which he was slandering Mr. McGuire and
others.

Mr. Rornermet. Don’t you know the Third Assistant Postmaster
General showed us the envelope, and it was not even postmarked ?

Mr. Exxrorr. And you came up here and cackled all over the room
about it. You cackled all over the room about it; I didn’t care any-
thing about it.

Mr. Corr. That has nothing to do with the case, but he brought
it up.

Mr. Stepuens. Let us get down to something that is relevant.

=
OO

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

Mr. Cone. Mr. Chairman, he had the privilege of asking me ques-
tions, and I would like to ask him one question.

Mr. Srernens. He will make a statement after you get through.

Mr. Corr. I would like to ask why Joe Baker was carried on the
roll as clerk of that committee.

TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN T. WATKINS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA.

Mr. Srervens. Judge Watkins, do you want to make a state-
ment ¢

Mr. Warkins. I would lke to ask Mr. McGuire a question or
two, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Srepuens. Very well.

Mr. Warxins. I have been informed, Mr. McGuire, that you read
a letter in the record from Mr. Cole in which Mr. Cole made the
statement that Miss Kirby had told him that the reason she did not
sign the receipt for the $50 for Mr. Rothermel was because the
receipt was dated back. If that is the fact that that letter is in the
record, I think, in justice to Miss Kirby, it would be proper for me
to ask the question if she did not both telephone you and write to
you stating that that was not true?

Mr. McGuire. In part.

Mr. Watkins. Did not she call you over the telephone and tell
you that the receipt was not dated back?

Mr. McGuire. Yes.

Mr. Warkins. Then did she write you a letter and state that the
receipt was not dated back?

Mr. McGuire. Yes; that it was not dated back. That is the letter
I had reference to a while ago that I wanted to get and show in
connection with the Cole letter. I now have it in my pocket. Miss
Kirby called me over the the phone and said to me that Mr. Cole
had misunderstood her if he stated that she had said to him that
the reason she did not sign the receipt that Judge Rothermel wanted
her to sign for the amount due her was antedated six weeks. I told
her that I had remembered her making this statement to me shortly
thereafter that she did not sign the receipt and he would not give
her her money, and the reason she did not sign the receipt was that
the receipt did not state the truth. I remember that very distinctly.
She said, “I will come up and see you.” She came to my office and
wanted to make a statement, and I said, “ Miss Kirby, the better
thing for you to do would be to write me a letter. If you want your
letter used, I will use it in connection with Mr. Cole’s letters and’
other letters which are in my possession,” that I had a while ago and
through inadvertence I did not use; I got to talking about some
other things. They are now in the hands of the reporter. She
said, “All right; I will write a letter to you stating the facts.” She
said, “I do not know how much to write.” I said, “Simply write
the facts.” She said, “TI feel like I should write you something in
connection with what transpired in Judge Watkins’s office when this
money was paid—this last $50, which was paid just a few days ago.”
It was within the last three weeks that we had this conversation. I
said, “ What transpired?” She said, “ Judge Watkins called a halt

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 79

on Mr. Rothermel for reprehensible conduct in his office. He said,
‘That does not go in my office.” I said, “I do not care anything
about what occurred between Judge Rothermel and Judge Watkins.
Just simply state in your letter that circumstance under which this
$50 was paid and how it came to be paid since you returned to
Washington this last time, when it has been due more than a year.”
She said she would write me a letter, which modifies the letter I
read this morning with respect to the antedated receipt—the so-
called antedated receipt—and gives Miss Kirby’s statement. I said,
“ Miss Kirby, I will read Mr. Cole’s letter to the House, then I will
follow it with your letter, with my statement of what you have said
to me, which was not that it was antedated, but that it did not state
the truth, and that there was the money for you and you refused to
take it because he wanted you to sign the kind of a receipt which
you stated to me was not the truth.”

So I have that letter and will read it now if you want me to. I
would have read it this morning had it not been that I had left it in
my office. I stated to the committee this morning that I would be
glad to put it in the record later.

Mr. Streruens. Mr. Watkins, we will be glad to hear from you
now.

Mr. Warxtins. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I
will state that when the allowance of Miss Kirby was before the
House for consideration I made a statement with reference to the
work that she had done for the Committee on Expenditures in the De-
partment of Commerce, and in connection with that statement it
was shown that it was part of a payment due to her by Mr. Rother-
mel for the private and individual personal work outside of the
committee work that she had done, and there was an amount due
which had not been paid to her. She married and went off to Iowa
a short time after she received the amount from the House which was
allowed her for the work which she had done for several months,
and upon her return here to Washington I saw her some time during
the month of January and told her the facts, that it was claimed
that the receipt which Mr. Rothermel had presented to her on April
23 was dated back and that that was the reason she had not accepted
the payment. She at once, with a great deal of vehemence, denied
that the receipt was dated back, and stated the reason why at that
time she did not feel disposed to sign the receipt for $50 and dis-
avowed the fact that it was dated back.

Mr. Sreruens. Judge Watkins, what was her reason for refusing
to sign the receipt? |

Mr. Watkins. This was a private matter between her and Mr.
Rothermel. Mr. Rothermel made a remark to her, she said in the
presence of Mr. Rothermel and myself—made a remark to her at the
time when he wanted her to sign the receipt which she considered
was offensive, and in her petulance, becoming offended on account
of Mr. Rothermel’s remark to her in connection with the trans-
action which had happened in the office and in the House, she be-
came offended and threw the receipt down and refused to sign it,
and walked out of the office. The remark which was made I hardly
think would be proper to repeat here.

Mr. Sternens. We are not asking for that.

80 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Warkins. It was a personal matter between her and Mr.
Rothermel. ;

Mr. Sreruens. I could not understand why she would not accept
the $50 due her.

Mr. Warxins. The fact is, Mr. Rothermel was not here when the
question was brought up in the House. He was engaged in the cam-
paign in Pennsylvania, and Mr. Rothermel resented the fact that that
was brought up in his absence, and they had quite a controversy
about that matter, and Miss Kirby was insisting on payment because
she gave me reasons why it was that she should be paid at that time.
Mr. Stephens. the ranking Democratic member of the committee,
and I took an active interest in seeing that Miss Kirby was paid what
we found to be actually due her. There was a personal feeling be-
tween her and Mr. Rothermel, largely growing out of that incident
of the fact that it was taken up in his absence, and he was not given
a proper opportunity of presenting his view of the matter, and the
remark which Mr. Rothermel made was calculated to offend the lady,
and she took offense at it, and at once left the office.

He presented her this pencil-written receipt, which is not signed,
and asked her in my presence whether that was the receipt which
he offered to her to sign at the time. She said it looked like the
receipt and she could not deny it: she did not say it was not the
receipt, however, but that she did not absolutely remember it and
she did not deny it. She was asked about the date of the receipt,
and while she did not know the exact date, she did not deny the date
of it at all. I told Miss Kirby that I thought it was my duty to let
Mr. McGuire know the fact; that I had been informed that Mr.
McGuire had a letter from Mr. Cole, and it would be an injustice to
Mr. Rothermel to have a statement of that kind made on the floor
of the House if it was not true, and so I called Mr. McGuire up over
the telephone first, and told him the fact, that it was a mistake about
the receipt not being dated; that is, it was a mistake that the re-
ceipt was dated back; and she then said she wrote him a letter, and
afterwards told me she had written a letter to that effect, that it
was not on account of not receiving money, but it was another matter,
and the receipt was not dated back. Perhaps the members of the
committee would not understand the full value of that at first, but if
a receipt had been presented to her, dated back, it would have con-
tradicted what Miss Kirby had said before the Committee on Ac-
counts, and it would also have contradicted the statements which
her friends had made on the floor of the House, and it was important
to know whether a receipt was offered to her, dated back, because it
would have contradicted absolutely some of the statements which
she had made.

T understand, Mr. Chairman, that the object of this inquiry is to
ascertain what compensation Dr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher are en-
titled to. If that is the object of it, I will be glad of the opportunity
to make a statement with reference to that.

Mr. Sreruens. We will be glad to hear from you on that point.

Mr. Warxins. So far as I understand it, that is the only question
before the committee for inquiry now.

Mr. Sternens. We have strayed off considerably, but that is the
matter we want to hear from you about now.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 81

Mr. Warxrns. So far as I recall, the first meeting of the committee
which I ever attended was the meeting of the committee at which it
was decided by the committee that it was necessary at once to send
some one or some persons, one or more, to the seal islands for the
purpose of making investigation to determine whether or not the
Government had been robbed of a large amount of money, growing out
of the seal industry under the contracts which were made with vari-
ous parties. We examined the law and we found that the com-
mittee did have authority to make the investigation, and at that
session of the committee, acting hurriedly, as we were compelled to
do on account of the season advancing. and on account of the fact that
we did not want the parties at interest to know this investigation was
going to be made, we agreed that Dr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher
would be sent there for the purpose of making this investigation.
They came back with their partial report and facts which they had
acquired during their stay in the island. Mr. Elliott began at once
to make a compilation of the various reports which had been made
on this subject for a number of years, and day in and day out and
night after night, and even Sundays. Mr. Elliott was constantly at
work for a good many months.

I was in very close touch with the work because of the fact that
Mr. Rothermel was at home a great part of the time, he having
quite vigorous opposition, and Mr. Stephens was also away, and I
was the next ranking Democrat on the committee, and on that ac-
count I was in very close touch with the work which was going
on in the office. I will say for Mr. Elliott that I never saw a per-
son more laborious, more faithful, more diligent, and who had ac-
quired a more vast amount of information on the subject than he had
on this subject of the seal industry. He was indefatigable in his
labor and rendered such service as is almost indispensable in connec-
tion with the digging up and developing of facts in connection
wth the depredations which had been made upon the seals, the vio-
lations of the contracts on the part of those who made the contracts
with the Government, resulting, I believe, in the saving of several
million dollars to the Government on account of the work which
he was able, through his expert knowledge and through his arduous
labors, to present first to the House of Representatives and then
to the Department of Justice.

As to Mr. Gallagher, I simply know he was sent there. I do not
know the extent of his work, but I do know that with reference to the
situation as to Elliott, his labors were very incessant, his work was
very effective. I do not believe there is a man living who could
have furnished the information that he furnished on that subject.

Mr. Sreruens. Do you care to say anything further, Judge Wat-
kins?

Mr. Warkins. No; I simply wanted to let the committee know
what work he had done, and how valuable his services had been.

_ Mr. Scorr. You say you examined the law and ascertained the
committee had authority to make this investigation ?

Mr. Watkins. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. To what law do you refer, Mr. Watkins?

Mr. Warxtns. The law was collated in Hinds’ Precedents,
though I believe we also examined the statute from which the law

. 44682—16——6

82 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

was taken and also the rules of the House. Hinds’ Precedents and
the rules of the House were the ones we had immediately before
us, but those Precedents referred to the law which was on the
statute books. I do not have before me—in fact I did not know
the committee was making an investigation until Mr. Rothermel
came around to my office a short time ago and told me an investi-

gation was being made. and I learned utter wards that word had
been left there for me. but I did not know an investigation was
being made until just a moment before I came in here.

Mr. Scorr. Do you mean there is any law extent which empowers
this Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce
to incur expenses without the action of Congress?

Mr. Warkins. To make the investigation would necessarily carry
with it the incurring of expenses. They are authorized to make in-
vestigations in connection with committee work, and that would
necessarily, as I understand it, carry with it the incurring of ex-
penses. I do not understand it has the right to designate the amount
which is to be paid. If the committee ‘had been authorized to do
that, it would not have come to this committee. Our understand-
ing was that the Committee on Accounts was the proper committee
to refer the matter to on the question of what the amount of the
expenditures should be. We could not have told at that time what
the expenditures would be. My understanding of the law is that
the law authorizes and the rules of the House also authorize the
investigations which were made. which would necessarily carry with
it the mcurring of expenses.

Mr. Scorr. To what particular rules do you refer?

Mr. Warxrns. I am very sorry I have not got them before me,
but I suppose Mr. Elliott has.

Mr. Exxiorr. It is in my papers if ‘you want it. It makes it a
very imperative duty as to the nine committees of the House, the
standing rules of the House.

Mr. Warxrns. I am reading now from the Congressional Record,
in which at that time, in the discussion of this matter of Mr. Elliott’s
account, I referred to these rules. I there said:

I read from Hinds’ Precedents, volume 4, page 831, section 4316, which says:

“The several committees on expenditures in the departments of the Govern-
ment, being charged by the rules with the duty of making investigations, have
assumed the right to do so without further specific direction of the House.”

That is a question from Hinds’ Precedents.

Mr. Exnrorr. Here [indicating] is the standing rule which gives
the order to do it.

Mr. Warxrins. I will read from the rule of the House, which was
also referred to.

Standing rules and orders of the House:

It shall be the duty of said committees

Mr. SternHens. What rule is that?

Mr. Warxrys. That is referring to the Committees on Expendi-
tures. It is the law from the Forty- fourth Congress, first session :

It shall be the duty of the said coOmmittees——
that is, the Committees on Expenditures—

to examine and inquire and report whether any and what abuses at any time
exists in the failure to enforce the payment of moneys which may be due to
the United States from public defaulters and others.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 83

I understand the object.of this investigation was to prove that
very thing—to show there had been defalcation on the part of those
who had made contracts with the Government in connection with
the seal-fur industry. That rule covers that matter.

Mr. Scorr. It was the opinion of the committee from that rule
and the citation from Hinds’ Precedents which you have just read
that that committee would have authority to employ special agents
to make this investigation and incur expenses 4

Mr. Watkins. Certainly. The rule there cites the legislative acts
on that subject. It would be perfectly useless to have a rule allow-
ing investigations to be made unless there was going to be some
compensation to those who were making the investigation.

Mr. Scorr. I presume that allowance could be made by resolution
of the House. I just wanted to get the idea of the committee and
the authority upon which they had assumed to act.

Mr. Warkins. That rule quoting the law on the subject, I think,
would cover the case thoroughly. We thought so at the time. The
fact they did the work was sufficient.

Mr. Scorr. You say that Mr. Elhott obtained very valuable infor-
mation on this trip. What facts did you understand that he ob-
tained while in Alaska ?

Mr. Warxins. I do not base my statements on the value of his
services on the fact that he simply went there and made an investiga-
tion of the physical facts which then existed and stopped right there ;
but on that one point I will say, that in going there he found out the
manner in which the fur-seal industry was being conducted and the
depredations which were being made, by interrogating the inhabit-
ants and citizens there—the people who lived on the island—and he
also reported back, and his report shows the weight of the skins; that
he made investigations to determine at what age the animals were
killed that bore that kind of skin—that size and weight of skin—and
he did make very valuable suggestions in his reports which enabled
us then to take these various reports which had been made from the
departments—to the committees and to the House and Senate pre-
viously—and show what the depredations amounted to. It was alto-
gether his work, and not simply going up there and coming back. It
was this laborious work which he did, covering several months’ time.

Mr. Scorr. It was after he returned and made his original report ?

Mr. Warxins. He was in the office of the committee from day to
day and even late at night, and nearly always on Sunday, working
and collating the facts as shown by the various reports which had
been made previously, and also furnishing us with the law upon the
subject, and even going so far as to give us the price current for the
sale of these skins in England.

Mr. Scorr. That information was gathered from other hearings
and documents and various sources here in Washington?

Mr. Warxrns. Yes, sir; vast volumes of documents.

Mr. Scorr. In that respect he was acting as the employee of the
committee ?

Mr. Wargrns. Yes, sir; he was acting under the authority with
which we vested him in making the investigation and obtaining the
facts that would enable us to make a report as the basis of the recov-
ery for the Government of the amount that was involved.

84 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

Mr. Scorr. Do you know whether this matter had been brought to
the attention of other departments of the Government before the
agents of this committee were sent to Alaska?

Mr. Warxins. I have been informed that during the former
régime attention had been called to the depredations, but I have
never been informed of any thorough and efficient investigation
having been made, such as to operate as a basis for recovery.

Mr. Scorr. In these investigations which it was proposed were to
be made by Mr. Elliott, had that matter been brought to the attention
of the Department of Justice and any consultation had before he was
sent ?

Mr. Warxins. Do you mean whether the Department of Justice
or any other department of the Government had sanctioned the send-
ing of Mr. Elliott and Mr. Gallagher up there /

Mr. Scorr. Yes; or was cognizant of their going at the time?

Mr. Warkins. I am not sure about that. I will not say definitely
about that, because what I have is what has been stated since they
went up there. I do not know that.I heard that stated before they
went up there. It was probably discussed before the committee at
that time, but I can not state definitely.

Mr. Scorr. I ask that because Mr. Elliott stated yesterday that the
purpose of this investigation by your committee was to obtain infor-
mation for the Department of Justice.

Mr. Warkins. There is no doubt about it being for the benefit of
the Government—to get information that would operate as a basis
for judicial action, either civil or criminal. That was the object of
it, but I can not recall right now whether it was before they went,
whether it was requested by any department of the Government.

Mr. Srernens. I will read what the rule of the House says in re-
gard to the authority of these committees. This has direct reference
to the jurisdiction of the various committees, beginning with the very
first and going through the entire list.

Expenditures in the several departments.

There are 10 committees on expenditures in the various departments of the
Government, etc.—

Whose duties are—

The examination of the accounts and expenditures of the several departments
of the Government and the manner of keeping the same; the economy, justness,
and correctness of such expenditures; their conformity with appropriation
laws; the proper application of public moneys; the security of the Government
against unjust and extravagant demands; retrenchment; the enforcement of
the payment of moneys due to the United States; the economy and account-
ability of public officers, ete.

I do not see anything here that would grant authority for an
investigation of this kind unless it be this particular matter, “ econ-
omy and accountability of public officers.’

Mr. Exxiorr. Yes; and also the moneys that the Government is
being robbed of.

Mr. Sreruens. “ The proper application of public money.”

Mr. Exxiorr. And doesn’t it speak of abuses?

Mr. Sreruens. “ The security of the Government against unjust
and extravagant demands.” That would not apply.

Retrenchment and enforcement of payment of money due to the United States.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 85

Mr. Exxiorr. This money is due, which these people robbed the
Government of.

Mr. Scorr. But there are other committees. The question is, to
what committees would that apply?

Mr. Srepuens. It says they shall all be subject within the juris-
diction of the nine departments as follows, and then names the
Department of State, the Department of Commerce and Labor, ete.

Mr. Exxiorr. And these seals come under the Department of Com-
merce. That is the very point—to compel the return of the moneys
the Government has been robbed of.

Mr. Warxins. If there is nothing further, Mr. Chairman, I will
ask to be excused.

Mr. Steruens. Very well, Mr. Watkins.

Do you want to make a statement, Mr. Rothermel, or have you
said all you care to?

TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN H. ROTHERMEL, A FORMER REPRE:
SENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYL-
VANIA.

Mr. Roruerme.. I simply want to state that Mr. Cole came to the
office and asked for employment when Miss Kirby left, I told him
distinctly and clearly that if he would want to work for $12.50 a
week he could do it; that somebody else was the clerk of the com-
mittee and I expected him back, and that is the understanding there
was about it. He has never mentioned it until he made these attacks
on me, and now says that I owe him $125 a month, and we never
spoke about it in our lives.

_ Mr. Scorr. Your understanding was that the $50 a month was
the entire compensation which he was to receive for all his services?

Mr. Rornrermer. He had been working for Congressman Lewis
here, and I expected he was getting compensation from him, and
that was our understanding, and I told him that as soon as Baker
came back that would end him.

Mr. Scorr. But your understanding then with him was that the $50
a month which you were to pay him was to be in full of all com-
pensation for services performed for you as your secretary, and also
all services performed by him in connection with the clerkship of
the committee ?

Mr. Rornermer. We did not make any specific contract about
that. I told him that was what he could get.

Mr. Scorr. Was that your understanding ?

Mr. Rorurermen. Yes; absolutely.

Mr. Scorr. That $50 a month was to cover ever y part of his service
performed for you personally and for the committee ?

Mr. Roruermen. Whatever work was to be done in the office. The
fact is the committee had hardly anything to do then any more.
When we had hearings we had no clerk to the committee. That was
during the summer, because we did not get any clerks to these com-
mittees until December, and the work of the committee was really
practically over.

Mr. Scorr. When did Mr. Cole ee work for you?

Mr. Rornuermet. I think it was about the 1st of May.

86 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Scorr. What year !

Mr. Rornermen. 1914.

Mr. Scorr. That was after Miss Kirby had left?

Mr. Roruermen. Yes. She left in April, and there was absolutely
no other understanding about it. He makes demands here for money
on everybody and w ants it from me and wants it from Mr. Elliott.

Mr. Scorr. We have gone into some matters here that seem, F
course. rather far-fetched, but they are here, and as long as they a
here I want to get the right understanding and not the wrong Red
standing. This man Baker’s name has been mentioned. When did
he first become clerk of this committee /

Mr. Rormmraen. In December.

Mr. Scorr. What year?

Mr. RoruerMen. 1913.

Mr. Scorr. When did he cease to be clerk of the committee?

Mr. Roruermen. I kept him on the roll until this other matter
came up in the House about the Kirby business.

Mr. Scorr. Until what time was that?

Mr. Rornermen. That was until the 18th of April. On the 23d 1]
answered those charges over there, and then I told them in the House
that Mr. Baker had been away and that as soon as he came back he
could have his place, and I told Mr. Cole so when he came there.

Mr. Scorr. When was he taken off the roll?

Mr. Roruermen. He was on the roll:

Mr. Scorr. When was he taken off?

Mr. Rornermen. I divided the checks between him and Cole.

Mr. Scorr. When was Baker taken off the roll?

Mr. RoruerMEt. He drew his last check in November, 1914.

Mr. Scorr. Was he taken off the roll at that time?

Mr. Rornermen. Yes. Congress adjourned then.

Mr. Scorr. Was Baker present at any time that he was on the
roll and did he perform any service here in Washington ‘

Mr. RoruermMen. Oh, yes.

Mr. Scorr. How long?

Mr. Rornermen. I can not tell you about that, but he was here
and drew his checks. I want to say this also: I have allowed him
latitude then when he was ill. He went out and saw his sister.
Every day in the year when he was done here in the folding room
he stopped and helped me without, any compensation at all.

Mr. Scorr. He worked in the folding room before he became clerk
of the committee ?

Mr. Rorurrmen. Yes. There was no compensation for him, and
he was at my office every day and helped me.

Mr. Scorr. When did he go back to Ohio and leave Washington
with respect to the time he was first enrolled as committee clerk?

Mr. Rornermen. I really can not tell you that without, probably,
looking into some memoranda.

Mr. Scorr. Was it just a few days or a few weeks?

Mr. RoruermMen. You mean after he was made clerk?

Mr. Scorr. After he became enrolled as clerk of the committee ?

Mr. Roruermen. I think he went away after he had been there
about three months. He went away to see his sister and became ill.

Mr. Scorr. Did he ever afterwards return and perform any
services ¢

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 87

Mr. Rornermen. Oh, yes; he was here afterwards.

Mr. Scorr. To perform services?

Mr. RoruerMen. He was about and helped whenever he was here.

Mr. Scorr. When was that?

Mr. Roruermer. After he came back.

Mr. Scorr. When?

Mr. Roruermen. I just said about three months or so after he was
designated as clerk.

Mr. Scorr. I understood you to say he left here and went back
to Ohio about three months after he was designated as clerk.

Mr. Roruermeu. No; he went out ona visit and became ill.

Mr. Scorr. Then he went out on a visit immediately after he was
designated as clerk?

Mr. Rorurrmen. No; I just said about two or three months after
he was designated as clerk.

Mr. Scorr. Then he came back how long after that /

Mr. Roruermen. I think he was here in June—May and June—
and I got along with these two fellows and had told them what
they were to do.

Mr. Scorr. This matter was up in the House in May, was it not?

Mr. Rorurermen. No; that was in April. I wish to state this,
that these two men have all the money of the secretary of the com-
mittee.

Mr. Scorr. What two men?

Mr. Roruermer. Cole and Baker. They tried to make it ap-
pear

Mr. Scorr (interposing). Has Cole received more than the three
months which he enumerated this forenoon /

Mr. RoruermMen. Cole received $50 a month when Baker could not
come. I told him that we would have to get Baker’s receipt. I told
him to go over to the disbursing office and find out what was re-
quired; otherwise it would have to be sent on to Baker if he did not
come. He went over and told me that they told him in the office
that if Baker’s receipts were filed, then they would pay him the
money. Every first of the month he had it ready and went and got
the money and kept his $50 that I had promised to pay him out of it.
He had the money in his possession.

Mr. Scorr. Did you have another clerk in your office during the
past summer, when Cole was with you, who acted as your secretary /

Mr. Rornermer. I do not know that he acted as my secretary.

Mr. Scorr. I am getting confused in this matter, there are so many
of them.

Mr. Roruermet. I wish you would let me finish the other proposi-
tion I was on. Then he went to the disbursing office and took Baker’s
receipt and they told him, so he told me, that they would pay him
the money if Baker’s receipts were filed. Then when September came
und he asked me to loan him $25 for his family when he went to
Allentown. He went to the Clerk of the House and persuaded him
to give him the October check for $125, and he kept the $25 and the
$125 and concealed it from me until I requested him twice to go and
get Baker’s check.

Mr. Scorr. And all that money——

Mr. RoruermMen (interrupting). One moment; you asked how
much he received. May, $50; June, $50; July, $50; August, $50;

88 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

September, $50; and the $125 that he took for October. How much
does that make ?

Mr. McGuire. $375.

Mr. Rornermen. And the $25 he borrowed from me at the Cochran
Hotel for his family.

Mr. Scott. ‘That is $400?

Mr. RornerMen. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. Commencing with April?

Mr. RornerMen. Yes.

Mr. Warkrins. Not the Ist of April.

Mr. Exniorr. Miss Kirby was paid up to the end of April.

Mr. Scorr. Baker received how much a month during that time?

Mr. Rornermen. Baker received the difference in the checks.

Mr. Scorr. Between what Cole got and the total check?

Mr. RoruerMen. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. That would be the check that went to the clerk of the
committee that you refer to?

Mr. RoruerMe.. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. The check that went to your private secretary—you had
another secretary that received that?

Mr. Roruermen. Oh, yes: Miss Young is my secretary at home.
She takes care of the offices at home.

Mr. Scorr. So your secretary at your home in Pennsylvania drew
the $125 a month ?

Mr. RorHerMeEn. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. She has drawn that during all this period?

Mr. RorHermen. Yes: she has been my secretary ever since I have
been in Congress. I ought to say this, that Miss Kirby drew $50
and that was taken out of Miss Young’s check.

Mr. Scorr. But after Miss Kirby left, Miss Young drew the whole
$125 ?

Mr. RoruerMet. Yes.

Mr. Scorr. But she never performed any services here in Wash
ington /

Mr. RoruermMen. She was here occasionally, but she takes care _
of the offices at home. I have more work over there almost than
in Washington. I have a statement somewhere, and I really do
not have it with my papers here, but it is in my office, where I
could give you the details about the money that was paid out, and
I want to say in this connection that I have a son and I have two
brothers that could have done this work better than Cole did and
also the secretary, but I never took on any of the relatives, and
they were constantly on my heels for jobs, and I divided these
checks somewhat as a matter of charity and to do effectual work.

Mr. McGuire. Mr. Chairman, I am feeling so badly that I believe
I will have to go to my office. I did not want to read this letter
into the record. I spoke about it this morning.

Mr. StepnHens. You may do that now.

Mr. McGuire (reading) :

2666 I Srreer NW.,
Washington, D. C., February 2, 1915.
Hon. Birp S. McGuire,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.
DeAR Mr. McGuire: In regard to the request you made of me by telephone

some days ago that I verify certain statements in the letter referred to by
you—

————

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 89

:

I made no request by telephone, but the young lady called me.
She had heard certain something about it, and I presume from what
Judge Watkins states that there had been something said about it.

I wish to say that I can not verify the statements contained in the letter to
the effect that Mr. Rohermel wished me to sign a receipt dated six weeks
back. In fact, I wish to deny that statement, and in regard thereto I submit
the following:

The writer of the letter in question, Mr. Charles L. Cole, telephoned me
the latter part of October, 1914, asking to see me about a matter which he
said concerned me vitally. More than surprised, I asked the nature of the
matter. He did not wish to discuss it over the telephone, but could he see
me? Yes; he could. Where? At my home. He came to my house one day
after noon, in late October, and among a maze of comments upon Mr. Roth-
ermel’s affairs, he asked me if Mr. Rothermel had not demanded that I sign
a receipt that was antedated. I replied quite positively in the negative. The
gentleman then said to me, “ Oh, I thought he did.” I said,-** No; Mr. Roth-
ermel desired that I sign a single ’—

Here she seems to give the reason for not signing the receipt.

“Mr. Rotherme! desired that I sign a single receipt covering the entire time
during which he had employed me.” But I wished to sign a separate re-
ceipt for each separate payment which he made to me, and include in each
such receipt the date upon which the money was due as well as the date
upon which the money was paid, so that those receipts would bear out any
statement regarding the inconvenience that I had experienced in receiving the
payments in question. The mildest thing I can say is that Mr. Cole has very
radically misunderstood me.

Another statement made in the letter in question leaves the impression that
Mr. Rothermel still owes me $50. This was entirely correct at the time the
letter in question was written, but to avoid any further misunderstanding I
wish to state that on Saturday, January 30, 1915, Mr. Rothermel paid me that
amount in the presence of Judge Watkins, of Louisiana. Upon the advice of
Judge Watkins I signed a receipt, which, though not entirely to my liking, Mr.
Rothermel seemed anvious to have, and he said, among other things, that he
had been at a grave disadvantage by not having the receipt long ago. In con-
nection with the signing of this receipt, Mr. Rothermel evinced some annoy-
ance with me because, as he said, I had made the statement that he had de-
manded my signature to a receipt which he has antedated, and he gave as his
authority for the assertion the name of the gentleman who has written the
same thing to you. My reply to Mr. Rothermel was to the effect that the same
gentlemen had not only said it, but had written it. I did not, however, indi-
cate that you were my authority for it.

Mr. Rothermel also desired that I append to this receipt a statement to the
effect that there had never been any difference between us ip regard to money.
I refused, as I could not in honesty do this. He expressed the fear that I
would show the receipt, and therefore refused to allow me to make a copy for
myself—a copy of the receipt.

I doubt the wisdom of dwelling at any further length upon this unpleasant
topic, but I do wish to reiterate that the statement that Mr. Rothermel wished
me to sign an antedated receipt is not true, and that while my interview with
Mr. Rotherme!l last Saturday was at intervals other than serene, Mr. Rothermel
did pay me in full.

I regret indeed that any conflict has arisen, but I thank you very much for
having acquainted me with these facts and for the opportunity to make a
{rue statement regarding the same.

I am, very respectfully,
IKATHARINE KirBY HUMMER.

Mr. Warxins. She has subsequently married a gentleman by the
name of Hummel. Subsequent to the time this first receipt was of-
fered her to be signed she married a man by the name of Hummel
and now lives in Iowa.

Mr. McGuire. That is my understanding.

There has been something said about franked envelopes. This
document [indicating] with these drawings and these clippings and

90 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

comments thereon and various other articles and interlineations and
clippings, one paragraph here and at some other point another para-
graph, brought in such form as to indicate it was continuous reading,
with this letter [indicating] was handed to me by Dr. Everman.
Whether this went through the mails, I do not know. It came to me
in that form, addressed in Mr. Elliott’s handwriting, to Dr. Chester
H. Stiles, Board of Public Health, Washington, D. Se

Mr. Stepuens. Is it postmarked or not ?

Mr. McGuire. There is no postmark on it. This was handed to me
by Dr. Everman. These other documents which I exhibit here to
the committee, with clippings and, in the handwriting of Mr. Elliott,
comments on the clhppings, pictures seemingly clipped from papers,
periodicals, or something, and all sorts of comments, were also
handed me by Dr. Everman, having been sent him, some of them
by Dr. David Starr Jordan, and others with the statements that they
have been inclosed to them under frank. That is in Mr. Elliott’s
handwriting. I any his work and his handwriting.

Mr. Exxiorr. I do not deny sending them out or handing them
under frank, but not through the mails unless stamped.

Mr. McGuire. Some time ago I received a letter from Mr. Ferris
and a few others, commenting “about the abuse of the fr anking privi-
lege, and I told my secretary to save them, but the only things I
could find are these, left with me by Dr. Everman. Mr. Ferris could
tell you, and T can get the names of several other Members, if the
committee desires them.

I merely incidentally throw these things in for whatever they may
be worth.

Will the committee be kind enough to excuse me now ?

Mr. SterHens. Certainly, Mr. McGuire.

(Mr. McGuire thereupon withdrew from the committee room.)

Mr. Srernens. Is there anything further, Mr. Rothermel ?

Mr. Rornermet. In this connection I want to make a statement
about this Kirby business. I was away on the 18th of April when
the Kirby resolution came up in the House. I had no knowledge of
it, and do not attach any blame to anybody for having considered it,
only the House was not in possession of the facts that I had paid
Miss Kirby according to the contract we had. The records of the
18th of April will show it, and she had been paid sev en months, and
the eighth month had not been due then. The fact is, the month
was up, I think, on the 21st of April, but I took her $50 out of the
secretary’s check and that was not payable until the end of the month.
That was the contract. On the 23d of April I appeared before the
House and then the truth came out, that that was all a mistake. It
was not only an attack on me there without my knowledge, but it
was really untrue. When I came back to Washington, Cole came to
see me and said what had happened in the House and came and
said that Miss Kirby told him that that fact was not true.
that I had paid her what T agreed to pay, and he told me that
he went and called Mr. Madden out and told him the thing was a
mistake, and that Miss Kirby said it was, and they were sitting in
the gallery together.

Then, on the 23d, I took the floor and submitted the truth under
the question of personal privilege, and then the whole thing came out
that she had been paid. She told Lloyd so, and Lloyd stated it on

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 91
the floor of the House. Everybody knew the truth, and when I came
over to the office then Miss Kirby came in and was excited. She was
sitting in the gallery and perhaps she thought that I was severe; but
I was not, to anybody in the House, as the record will show, but she
was somewhat flustered. She had carried my mail out of the office.
We talked about that, and I sent for the money and offered her the
money, but I did not want her to sign a general receipt only for the
last month, and wanted it “ Balance due for services” from such and
such dates. The lead-pencil memorandum there shows that. The
idea was not that she should sign this lead-pencil note. I asked her
to write it on the typewriter. I had just drawn that as a model, and
that receipt says that it is balance in full for services from such and
such date to the 21st of April. Then I said,“ You failed to sign the
receipts and put them in the desk,” as she did the first three, and I
said, “ You have your money; just sign the receipt and put it inside of
my desk.”

Mr. Scorr. That is the 21st of April of what vear?

Mr. Rornermer. 1914.

Mr. Warxkins. The 23d of April, because the receipt is dated
the 23d.

Mr. Rornermen. When I appeared before the House: yes. But her
month was up on the 21st of April.

Mr. Scorr. She quit vou then?

Mr. Roruermen. Yes. She wrote me a letter that I received at
home a couple of days before.

Mr. Scorr. And you had been paying her $50 a month ?

Mr. Rornermen. Yes; according to the distinct understanding, the
same as I had with Cole.

Mr. Scorr. You had been dividing the check between her and
Baker before that?

Mr. Exxrorr. No; Miss Young.

Mr. Roruermer. Miss Young. We had no clerk to the committee
until December.

Mr. Scorr. Between December and April you had been dividing
the check between her and Baker? Between December, when Baker
was first enrolled, and April, when Miss Kirby left, you had been
dividing the clerk’s check between Baker and Miss Kirby /

Mr. Rornermen. Baker was here.

Mr. Scorr. From December to April?

Mr. Rornermen. Yes. He was here, I think it was, from Decem-
ber to April. I really can not tell that exactly without my memo-
randa. Baker was here, and I think he was here until April or
March, but I will not be certain of that, because I really do not recall
it exactly.

I was not quite through with that receipt business that happened
in Judge Watkins’s office. Miss Kirby walked out of the office and
said that she made no claim to the money: that she did not like to
sign that receipt, and I said to her, I said, * You have received
$1,200; I think you ought to send the money to Miss Young.” She
said she made no claim to it, and she disappeared entirely.

Mr. Scorr. What money was that that should be sent to Miss
Young ?

Mr. Rornermen. The $50.

Mr. Scorr. The $50 she had received ?

92 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Roruermen. Yes. I said,“ In all fairness, I think Miss Young
ought to have that money, because you drew $150 a month from the
House.” Anyhow that was in the conversation. Then she walked
out, and said she wished me all the good luck, and so on, and gave
ine the impression she would never come back for the money. Then
I received a letter from her, Judge Watkins has the letter, asking
whether I would not be willing to pay her the $50. I went to see
Judge Watkins and asked whether he could not get her to the office
and then we would straighten the thing up. Then we straightened
it up, and cleared it up just as the receipt indicates here.

I can not understand why that Kirby business shall be brought
before this committee, when these men knew the truth. Cole knew
it because Miss Kirby told him it was not right: he told me so.
McGuire knows it; he heard it in the House. Cole knew it according
to the Kirby letter that was read. McGuire knew it and he brings
that letter in here and holds back the other one until he was pressed
this afternoon. Why should this matter, about which I was libeled
at home, be brought in here when they know the truth is different?
That is the thing I can not understand, either on the part of—well,
I do not expect much from Cole, but either on his part or on the part
of McGuire. Why did McGuire bring Cole’s letter in here after he
was told that that was a mistake? I do not want to be condemned
vy a lot of people who do not care for the truth and who have black
schemes in their hearts. I went through that, and I am going to
finish this, and it will only take a minute. They took the record of
April 18, and of the 23d, when I was in the House. They garbled
it, they forged it under the laws of Pennsylvania, and they published
it to make it appear that I had stolen this money. This man Cole
saw it, and knew it, and told me how false and malicious and libelous
it was. He knew all about it, and yet he writes McGuire a letter
that I wanted the receipt dated back. What occasion would I have
to date the receipt back when the money was due? What occasion
would there be for me to do it? How would it help my case? The
fact of the matter is I could have said to her, * You will have to
wait until the secretary’s check comes in.” I paid her a week ahead
of time according to contract.

I have brought libel suits at home. I must get protection for my
character somehow, and that men should come here and follow it up,
when they know it is a lie, is beyond my understanding and compre-
hension.

There is Mr. Elliott. When this check transaction came up in
the House Mr. Elliott was sitting there, and I said to Elliott, “ Here
is something that happened that is wrong.” I told Mr. Elliott that
Cole had taken Baker’s check and concealed it from me and Mr.
Baker. He coaxed it out of the Clerk of the House. Then Elliott
said, “ Why, Cole, you made a mistake.” He kept on talking and
told him that he had no right to do it, but he had done it and he
told us there that he needed the money for his family. Mr. Elliott
will bear me out—at least he told me—that Cole demanded from him,
and I think from Gallagher, too, that I would be given a day’s time
to make him clerk of the committee—a threat—and if not he would
do me harm, and instead of making him clerk of the committee I
kicked him out.

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA. 93

Mr. SterHens. Who told you that?

Mr. Rornermen. Mr. Elliott told me that—that Cole told him
that he would give me 24 hours’ time to make him clerk of the com-
mittee after he had stolen the check.

Mr. Steruens. You mentioned Mr. Gallagher. Did you hear that,
Mr. Gallagher ?

Mr. Gatiacuer. No; he never made any such statement to me.
Mr. Cole never made that statement to me.

Mr. Roruermet. Did he say anything to you about it ?

Mr. GatiacHeEr. No, sir.

Mr. Roruermen. Then I am mistaken about that. He said, “ He
dares go after me,” after he had the $25 he borrowed from me and
had $50 out of his monthly check, and then $125 check besides, and
his wife writes me a letter that he had not paid her a cent.

Mr. Srepnens. How long did you keep Mr. Cole after this $125
check incident ?

Mr. RoruprMe.. Just until the next day.

Mr. Srepuens. He left your employ, then, early in September ?

Mr. RornerMe.. Yes.

Mr. Corz. No, sir; the 1st of October.

Mr. Rorurrmer. The 1st of October; yes. He took the October
check in the disbursing office. The clerk gave it to him and he went
to Allentown and signed Baker’s name on it and passed it in the
Lehigh Valley Trust Co., and from there it passed through the
Philadelphia banks, and I did not find it out until the check was
cashed. Under the Pennsylvania laws it is as clear a forgery as you
can define for uttering a forged instrument under the law.

Mr. SrepHens. Reference has been made to Mr. Baker and his
absence from Washington, and some letters have been referred to.
I note in one of these letters reference is made to the fact that you
owe Baker a note. Did you owe Baker anything?

Mr. Rorpermet. Mr. Chairman, let me tell you, I really would
prefer to answer that in another way. These letters I never saw.
They are either forgeries or they are stolen goods. I have never seen
them until now. I do not owe Baker any money, and it would be
ridiculous. Baker, as I think, received in the neighborhood of a
thousand dollars, and Baker never had, perhaps, $100 to his name.

Mr. SrerpHens. In one of the letters Baker wrote you that if you
would let him have half of the clerk’s salary that he would destroy
the note or would not hold the note which you owed him against
you. To what does that refer?

Mr. Rornermen. I really do not know. I never saw it. Cole
epened my mail and he took this out, and I do not know anything
about it. I have been trying to get hold of these letters. He boasted
about it or put it in the newspapers, and I do not know whether
Baker wrete that or not; but let me say this to you, Mr. Chairman,
and I may make another statement in writing or in any way that the
committee will see fit, but I do not like to answer here when I have
not seen the letters, and I never wrote any letters to Baker about it.

Mr. SrerHens. You can see the photographic copies of the letters,
if you care to. We have not the originals; they are with the De-
partment of Justice, I understand.

_Mr. Rornermen. Ask Cole whether he has the original.

94 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA,

Mr. Srernens. No; | just stated they are with the Department of
Justice.

Mr. Corr. That is where they are; yes.

Mr. Scorr. That would not be at all material. As I understand,
Mr. Rothermel says he did not owe Baker any money at all at that
time. That was in March, 1914.

Mr. Roruermen. Let me tell you.

Mr. Scorr. Is that correct ?

Mr. Rornermen. What?

Mr. Scorr. You say at that time, at the time the letter purports
to have been written, in March, 1914, you did not owe Baker any
money at all?

Mr. Rovurrmen. No; I did not, and what is more than that I
never saw these letters and never answered them. They were taken
out of my office and opened, if they ever came there.

IL was going to say something else there, Mr. Chairman, in answer
to your question. Baker, as I said before, worked for me nearly
every day in the year when I was in Congress without any compensa-
tion at all, and that was the reason why I asked him to be the secre-
tary or the clerk of the committee: and, besides, you can trust him.
and there has not been the slightest understanding of anything at all
about paving off a note out of the clerk’s salary.

Mr. Scorr. There was no note?

Mr. RoruermMen. No.

Mr. Scorr. I noticed in one of these letters, also, he mentions that
he will send you a pele.

Mr. Rormermen. I do not know anything about that.

Mr. Scorr. Or return you a note.

Mr. Rornermen. I really do not know a thing about it. I did
not see these letters at all. Here we are dealing with a man that
opens the mail in a man’s office—a confidential clerk.

Mr. Scorr. Where does this man Baker live?

Mr. Rotnyrruen. Baker lives in Washington.

Mr. Steruens. Is he here now ?

Mr. Roruermen. Yes, sir.

Mr. Scorr. Do you know by whom he is employed now ?

Mr. Rotiermen. No; I do not. He has bought a small property
here.

Mr. Scorr. Is he in the Government employ ?

Mr. Rornermen. No.

Mr. Corr. I think Mr. Rothermel ought to know. His wife is in
his office. He ought to know where Baker is.

Mr. Roruermet. I do not know where he lives.

Mr. Scorr. Do you know Baker?

Mr. Corr. I say his wife isin Mr. Rothermel’s office.

Mr. Scorr. Baker’s wife is in Mr. Rothermel’s office ?

Mr. Corn. Yes; Mr. Rothermel and Mrs. Baker are together lots
of times.

Mr. Roruermen. I was asked where he lives. I do not know
where he lives. I have not inquired about that at all.

Baker received probably $1,000. How could he ever hold a note
from me for such an amount of money ?

That is about all I have to say, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Srepuens. All right; that ends the matter:

FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA, 95
FURTHER TESTIMONY OF MR. CHARLES L. COLE.

Mr. Cotz. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a further state-
ment.

Mr. StepHens. We will hear from you very briefly.

Mr. Coxe. In the first place, Mr. Rothermel said he had no respect
for anybody that did not answer the truth. Under the personal
privilege he tried to explain this matter on the floor of the House,
and he said this:

On April 13, 1914, I received the following telegram:

“Please wire at my expense, us requested, if nothing but clerkship can be
landed for the present, as doctor says operation is necessary, and I prefer to
be in Washington.

* JOE BAKER.”

I do not know what is wrong with the young man, but it is an official matter,
and the work is done. I did a great part of the work that the clerk ought
to do, but I did not mean to lay off Joseph M. Baker simply because he became
ill, when he had asked leave of absence for 10 days on account of his: health.

Mr. Wooprurr. Yes; but he had leave of absence extended to him for 10
days, and he has been absent for four months.

Mr. RorHerRMEL. That is true, and I have explained it to the gentleman.

He tried to state that Baker left Washington in April when he
left in January, 1914, and he was never in Washington since until
June, when he came back about the Kirby matter.

Mr. Rornermen. Mr. Baker asked about getting some other clerk-
ship in the Government. It was not this committee clerkship at all.

Mr. Scorr. Then is it your present recollection he did leave in
January ?

Mr. Roruerme.. I really could not tell you that. I said so a while
ago that I could not state definitely. I know he was here after-
wards, but he became ill and I explained it to the House.

Mr. SrerHens. That seems to be all.

Mr. Corn. I would like to state that after the Department of
Justice made this investigation they sent an agent out to Ohio to
interview Baker, and among other statements he made he said that
he did hold a note against Rothermel and this is the way he was
being paid off. Those records are in the possession of the Depart-
ment of Justice—I think, in Mr. Bielaski’s possession—and the De-
partment of Justice has photographic copies of those letters, and I
call the attention of the committee that this letter was dated March
4,and came to Mr. Rothermel over two months before I came to him.

_Mr. Roruermen. Let me see those letters. I never saw them.

Mr. Corr. I will hand these photographic copies to the chairman.

(Mr. Cole handed the papers to Mr. Stephens, who handed them
to Mr. Rothermel, who examined them.)

Mr. Rornermer. Mr. Chairman, this one states he wanded to make
@ proposition to me. There was not the slightest understanding on
my part about anything.

Mr. Scorr. When did Mr. Patton come on this committee ?

Mr. Roruermen. He was on for two terms.

Mr. Exxiorr. Sixty-second and Sixty-third Congresses.

Mr. Rorurermen. He and McGuire were both on.

Mr. Steprnens. Baker said in this letter, “ If you will let me have
my half of the clerk’s check I will call off the note I hold.”

96 FUR SEAL INVESTIGATION IN ALASKA.

Mr. Rorurermen. I do not know what he means about that. As
long as he was not here this man had knowledge that the checks
would be divided. There was not the slightest understanding at all.
These letters I never saw. This letter was taken out of my office and
opened.

Mr. Srepuens. I call your attention to the fact. that this letter is;
dated March 4, which was a couple of months before Mr. Cole began;
work for you. ;

Mr. Rornermen. I did not get that letter. That was opened.

Mr. Srrrnens. I believe this concludes the metter. The committee :
will stand adjourned.

(Thereupon, at 5.45 o’clock p. m., the committee adjourned. )

douee

tp

aa

ee Og

up -38

w
wn
uw
oc
©)
Zz
fe)
S)
Ww
Oo
>
a
<
oc
a
=)