HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE eo ay ye HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES & Investigation of the Fur-Seal Industry of Alaska ek COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Sixty-Toirp Coneress, SECOND SEssIon JOHN H. ROTHERMEL, of Pennsylvania, Chairman, JOHN H. STEPHENS, of Texas. ALLAN B. WALSH, of New Jersey. JOHN T. WATKINS, of Louisiana. BIRD S. McGUIRE, of Oklahoma. HENRY BRUCKNER, of New York. CHARLES E, PATTON, of Pennsylvania. HIN OF 186 } : hae? es tARIES z a scheint WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFIOE 1914 Pe ay za" 4 ie ti ey HEARINGS j WN \t BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Investigation of the Fur-Seal Industry of Alaska { os a ¢ — iA 5 ¢ eS Conc yess. - COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Sixty-TuHirp ConGREss, SECOND SESSION JOHN H. ROTHERMEL, of Pennsylvania, Chairman. JOHN H. STEPHENS, of Texas. ALLAN B. WALSH, of New Jersey. JOHN T. WATKINS, of Louisiana. BIRD S. McGUIRE, of Oklahoma. HENRY BRUCKNER, of New York. CHARLES E. PATTON, of Pennsylvania. JENN if \ NOV 3 = XQ he sie LIER AR 2 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFIOE 1914 <5 ree Ed Viste ac INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Hous oF REPRESENTATIVES, Monday, October 13, 1913. The committee this day met, Hon. John H. Rothermel (chairman) presiding. The CHarrRMAN. I see there is a quorum present. The committee has no clerk, so | suppose we will have to proceed without calling the rol. Mr. Walsh, Mr. Watkins, and Mr. McGuire are present, and so there is a quorum. ° Mr. Elliott, you may take the stand. STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT. (The witness was duly sworn by the chairman.) Secretary ReprreLp. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question ? The CHarRMAN. Certainly. Secretary RepFIELD. How much time am I wanted to give now to this investigation? That is one question which I wanted to ask, and whether it is the purpose of the committee that I should appear as a witness in any way, which I shall be glad todo. Iask that question because I have not yet read my morning’s mail, and there are matters of the very largest importance that I must act upon to-day. I have to leave the city on Thursday to be gone until the 4th of November, and it will not be possible for me toremain. In the meantime almost every hour of my time will be taken by pressing matters. My Assistant Secretary is absent from the city. If I am wanted merely as a matter of interest to me, I shall have to ask Dr. Jones to take my place, but if I am wanted to serve the committee, I shall be glad to do that. The CuarrMan. Mr. Secretary, we sent you a notice of the meeting so in case you saw fit to be present you would have an opportunity. Secretary RepFIELD. J wish J had nothing else to do. The Cuarrman. We certainly do not care to detain you here so far as the committee is concerned, but we thought that we would give you an opportunity to be present. Secretary REDFIELD. [ appreciate that. J am deeply interested in this whole subject; it concerns me very deeply. I appreciate and am erateful for the ight which Mr. Elliott throws upon the whole sub- ject matter. I should like very much, Mr. Elliott having been sworn, to take this opportunity to make a statement to the committee Hey you may or may not desire to have made a portion of your record. . The Cuarrman. You may proceed to make the statement, Mr. Secretary. : 3 4 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. Secretary Reprretp. And after that I will ask, if I may, to be excused, subject to your call at any time, and J] will ask Dr. Jones to represent me before the committee. J am in the fullest sympathy with the wish of the committee not only to throw the fullest light upon the present situation, but upon the past, and shall be glad to cooperate in any way that is within my lawful power or within the scope of my personal ability in carrying out to the spirit and to the letter what I regard as very wise and sound legislation for the protection of our seal herds. I should lke the spirit of the Bureau of Fisheries and of the department to be under- stood as in the broadest way to be in accord with the purposes of the legislation and of your committee. I think you ought to know that some weeks ago I instructed the Acting Commissioner of Fisheries to omit from the estimates for th» coming year the post now filled by the gentleman whose title is that of chief of the Alaska division, Dr. Evermann. I felt that that post was no longer necessary, that it was a needless expense, and I will frankly say that I also felt that Dr. Evermann’s attitude toward the legislation which is now the law was not such as seemed to me desir- able in the person holding that responsible position. At the same time I gave instructions that the employment by the department of Mr. Lembkey, who was, as I remember, the only survivor of the former staff at the islands, should be terminated, and several days ago I had the pleasure of approving and marking final his last pay check. These changes were made because I deemed it entirely desirable to be rid of any elements that were not in accord with the law as it stands, and because, as I say, the posts were deemed un- necessary. , The intended organization of the bureau under the estimates now pending and which will be presented to the next session will be to do away with the Alaska division, as it has been called, and to place the entire supervision of the Alaska work—fisheries, fur animals on shore, and the seal islands, all of it—under the direct responsibility of Dr. Jones, the deputy commissioner, so that there will be one officer, and he a prominent one, who will be directly responsible for that work. I have been obliged to proceed with this rather earlier than would have been the case, because of the fact that the law requires my esti- mates to be in on the 15th. That is in part the reason why I have not the time to remain at your session as I should be glad to do. I must meet with the President in the morning upon the estimates, as they must be ready by the 15th. In courtesy to the Commissioner of Fisheries, who is absent on important business in Europe, I would have preferred to defer making these changes until his return and defer the announcement of them until I could confer with him, but his absence from the city and the fact that these changes had to appear in the estimates, which must be submitted before he returns, have made it necessary to act thus in advance. I have felt it desirable to make this statement, so that you might know, in considering the whole matter, what the attitude of the department was on this subject. The CHarrMAN. Mr. Secretary, we thank you for appearing here and giving us this light on your policies, and unless there is objection we will make your statement a part of the hearing. Mr. McGurre. Mr. Secretary, may I ask you a question ? Secretary RepFieLp. Certainly. INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 5 Mr. McGuire. Do I understand from your statement that you are reducing the force on the islands ? Secretary Reprretp. No. That force, as I recall—Dr. Jones knows the details more intimately—is fixed by Congress. I think we are leaving out the post of naturalist, are we not? Dr. JonEs. Yes, sit. Mr. McGurre. The changes which you have made—— Secretary REDFIELD (Ginterposing). Were administrative changes. Mr. McGurre. Changes in the method ¢ ; Secretary REDFIELD. Changes, to be very frank, in what I re- garded as an injudicious continuance of personnel. Mr. McGuire. Principally because you did not regard them as in harmony with the administrative methods of the department ? Secretary REDFIELD. Principally because the places were unneces- sary, and I did not feel justified in continuing the expense, and also because they were out of harmony with the administrative policy of the department, and because I felt them to be out of harmony with the law, which law I regard as a sound and wise one. Mr. McGuire. What particular law is that? Secretary Reprretp. The law having to do with the five-year closed season for the seal islands. Mr. McGuire. You do not mean to say that they were not willing to comply with the law or to submit to the law? Secretary Reprievp. No; I do not mean to accuse those gentle- men of any act of disobedience, but I speak of their mental attitude, their past attitude, which seemed to be inharmonious with the law of Congress. Mr. McGuire. That is all. The CHarrMan. That is all, Mr. Secretary. Secretary Reprr=tp. I am very much obliged to you. The CuarrMan. In accordance with the action of the committee on June 20, the special committee visited the seal islands, and I under- stand they have a report to make. That report has been printed. Now, Mr. Elhott, will you take that up and submit it in your own way, unless some member of the committee has a suggestion to make ? Mr. Warxins. Inasmuch as the report is printed and we have access to it, I think it would be better for him to give us an outline and not go into detail, because that would take too much time. The CuarrMan. I understand that there are certain details which Mr. Elhott would like to explain from this map, as he suggested to me this morning. . Mr. Warxins. Anything which will throw any light on the report. The CHarrMan. Suppose you proceed with it in that way, Mr. Elhott. Mr. Ev.iotr (reading): The chairman and gentlemen of the committee On the 31st of August last, Mr. Gallagher and myself submitted to you our report of the condition of the fur seal herd of Alaska as we found that life last summer, and | also the result of our examination into the condu:t of the public business on the Pribilof Islands. This report has just been printed by order of the committee and is now on the table before us. Touching it I need say nothing more, but on submitting it to the chairman last August he requ sted me to prepare a statement as an ‘‘expert,”’ and one who for more than 40 years past has had a close personal understanding of the ques- tion, to prepare a statement for the use of this committee which would declare the real amount of property loss sustained by the Public Treasury—— 6 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. Mr. Watkins. You are reading now from a paper Wien. is not a part of your report ? Mr. Exxuiotr. Yes, sir. JI am coming to that point now. [Read- ing:] due to the mismanagement of the fur-seal herd by our own agents and officials during the last 20 or 25 years. I have done so, and now submit it to the committee. But, gentlemen, there is a certain personal equation between that seal-island business and myself which can not be well reduced to writing, and I am going at this point, and before I take up the subject of that loss and its cause, to digress a little. I do so in order that you may fully understand me and my understanding of the questions involved. 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 Pribilov Islands, in April, 1872, there to study the biology of the fur-seal herd and make draw- ings from the life and collections of specimens for the Institution. At that time there was absolutely nothing specific known about the herd; no naturalist and artist had ever lived with it or studied it until I did so during the seasons of 1872, 1873, 1874, and 1876; no naturalist had ever given to the literature of this life a single definite or cor- rect impression of it until I published my monograph of the seal islands of Alaska, in 1882, based wholly upon my field notes of 1872-1876, properly elaborated and sys- tematized. Those findings of fact published by myself 31 years ago have been verified by this committee in the hearings held by it during the last two years. All of the carping and incompetent critics—all of the ‘‘scientific” prostitutes who have been busy since 1890 in denying my work have been brought to book under oath here, and compelled to confess their complete ignorance, or worse, in the premises. Mr. Warxtns. Excuse me. I do not think language of that kind should go inte the report. The CHAIRMAN. No. Mr. Exrxic7r. Well, change it. As we go into the details, I believe you will see that it expresses the truth. The CHarRMAN. You will understand, Mr. Elhott, that the thing to do is to submit facts. Mr. Exxiorr. I am coming to the facts. These are facts which I am submitting. The CuarrMan. There should be no characterizations; just let us have the facts. Mr. Exxiorr. I have mentioned no names. Mr. Warxins. We understand; we do not care to go into this con- troversy. Mr. McGuire. My cwn persons! opinion is that I would like to have this go into the record, and I will be frank in stating my reason. I do not agree with Dr. Elhott «t sll, and he has exhibited an uncon- trollable feeling all through this matter, which I think makes him entirely incompetent, and there is no better, evidence of incom- petency than statements cf that kind. I think the Congress is en- titled to knew who it is m: Tere the statement and giving this testi- mony. Mr. Warkrns. I have not made any motion to strike out it, but I merely made a suggestion that it was extreme. Mr. McGutre. I think you are correct about the statement being extreme, and that is one reason I thought it should go into the record. Mr. Warxins. I withdraw my objection. The CuarrMan. We will let this go in, but the witness will have to be cautioned that he shall submit facts and nothing else. Mr. Exuiorr. I am going to submit the facts that a man called a “ag has charged me with being the head of a pelagic sealing obby INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA, 7 The CuarrmMan. If anybody has made that charge Mr. Exxiotr (interposing). That is in the hearings, sworn to and not denied. It is a matter of fact that a man called a “scientist’’ has written a libel on me which was used on the floor of the House, charging me with an infamous offense. The CHarRMAN. You are asked to submit the facts. Please pro- ceed. Mr. EviotrT (reading) : This is the personal equation of which I have spoken and which you gentlemen of the committee should understand before I go into the following details. Those critics have studied to deceive this committee, and the public in order that the im- proper and ruinous work of the private interests, or lessees, should not be checked up, and entirely abolished. : Mr. Warxrns. Is it not the idea that we will stand responsible for any statement of that kind that he makes in this hearing—that is not a part of his official report ? Mr. Exxrorr. No; this is a personal equation, which I wanted to explain before I go into the details of this matter. _ : Mr. McGurre. In other words, the doctor is giving us the vin- dictive part of the matter. Mr. EvxrotT (reading): Fortunately for the public interests involved, and most fortunately for my good name and credit, when I went up to the seal islands in 1872 I went fee and unbiased. I knew nothing about that life I was to see for the first time and study. No ‘‘dis- tinguished and astute” lawyers were busy asking me to prepare ‘‘evidence” to sus- tain their framework of a ‘‘case”; no lying ‘‘diplomats” were seeking to gain by my work; no greedy, lawless lessees were threatening me with “‘removal” and “‘dis- missal” from the islands if I failed to meet their wishes. Nothing of the kind was in my sight, or my hearing, or my knowledge from start to finish of my study of this herd, 1872-1876. Therefore, gentlemen, you observe that I enjoyed unusual advantages, and I used them. I landed on St. Paul Island April 21, 1872. I was there full two weeks before the very first seals arrived for the season right ahead. From the hour of the arrival of the first seal bulls in May up to the departure of the vast herd in November following, I followed every movement daily of its organization. I was on the rookeries with my notebooks (and there nights, too). I jotted down in them those hourly occurrences which I saw there; I placed the localities of these occurrences, the time thereof, and date upon every one. Again in 1873 I went all over the grounds, as I had in 1872. I made a final round-up of allthese notes. Again during the breeding season of 1874; then in 1876 I made a second final round-up of all these notes and in 1882 published my elaboration and systematic finish of them. I did all this hard work of earnest survey and investigation because I coveted the credit and honor which always comes to him who does anything well among his fellow men. It lives aiter his death, to his everlasting good name. Nothing else does. With this experience and that knowledge of the Pribilof fur-seal herd, Mr. Chairman, I started for the seal islands to carry out your instructions. Mr. Warxins. Give us the date, please ? Mr. Exxiorr. I have it here in the report. Mr. Warxins. That is all right. Mr. Ex.icrr. You first charged me to gain as near an accurate estimate or count of the seal herd as we could find. That we did, -Iay associate, Mr. Gallagher and myself, and before I start in to describe that I want to call your attention to what I mean by “rookeries” and ‘‘hauling grounds,” so that you will not misunder- stand me as we go along. This [exhibiting] is a sketch map from my survey of the island made in 1872, and published in my monograph of 1882, and on which I 8 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. located for the first time in the whole history of this herd, the areas of the rookeries and their locations, down to square feet. These red spots [indicating] are the rookeries, or breeding grounds, upon which ih old bulls and females breed. Inside of those breeding grounds no young bull under 6 years of age is ever allowed to stay by the old bulls. Therefore, they haul in back and outside of these rook- eries, in between them, and over ground which we call the ‘“‘hauling grounds.” The space occupied by these breeding seals is much smaller, because they have no regular order of concentration, but move around, and they wipe off every vestige of vegetation from those places of hauling. They occupied about 3,200 acres, while the breed- ing seals only occupied 144 acres in 1872. As I come to speak of the ‘hauling grounds” and the ‘rookeries” you will now have a clearer and better understanding of what I mean. There is some confusion in the mind of a person who has never been there, between the non- breeding and the breeding seals, and the ‘‘hauling grounds” and the ‘‘rookeries.”’ It was important that we should get there at the “height of the season,’’ when there would be the greatest number to be seen at an one: time in the year, and thet is between the 10th and 20th of July. We arrived there on the 8th of July and looked into every harem on every rookery of the two islands and made as close an estimate and count as any man with common sense could make. Our conclusions are tabulated on page 5 of our report, thus: Breeding bulls, 1,550; cows, 80,000; and pups born, 70,000; total, 151,550. Then came the question of how many nonbreeding seals there were on the Mr. Watkins (interposing). Does your report show the compara- tive number now and a few years ago, when you first went there ? Mr. Exxriorr. Yes; it is allin detail. Then came this troublesome question of estimating—because it is impossible to count them, or even see all of them—the nonbreeding seals. ‘The best we could do was to make an estimate based upon what the birth rate of last year must have been of pups, and then allowing 50 per cent loss as the maximum or 30 per cent as the minimum coming back as “ yearlings,” would have brought 30,000 yearlings; then adding 6,000 2-year-olds, 3,000 3-year-olds, and 400 4-year-olds, makes a grand total of bulls, cows, and pups for the season of 1913 of 190,950. In 1874 the grand total was 4,700,000; in 1890, when I made my second survey, the erand total was 1,020,000; and this year it is 190,950. The CuarrmMan. Can you tell what it ws in 1910, when the Gov- ernment commenced to do the business ? Mr. Exziotr. Well, we had a series of official census tables, which declared that in 1910 there were only 137,000, which shows that that was entirely inaccurate. There are 190,000 there this year, and I go into full discussion of that and show why these erroneous tables were sprung upon the committee—namely, that they started with Dr. Jor- dan’s census of 1896 and 1897, in which he said, at the close of 1897 there were only 376,000 seals there, when, in faci, there must have been a million. Mr. McGuire. You testified before the committee during the hear- ings and gave an estimate as to the number that there must be there. What was your statement ? Mr Ex.iorr. Taking their figures of 1904 as a starter, I said I could form no sensible conclusion, for if their figures were correct INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 9 there would not be a seal there by 1907 or 1908. (See pp. 605, 606, Hearing No. 10.) Mr. McGutre. I thought you estimated about 50,000. Mr. Exxiorr. I assumed there were that many breeding cows. Mr. McG@tree. Did you not give that testimony ? Mr. Exxiorr. Yes; I did not know; I had to assume they were there. (See pp. 1004-1012, Hearing No. 14.) Mr. McGuire. You took the figures of these men whose judgment and knowledge you thought so little of ? Mr. Exxiott. I had to do it. Mr. McGurre. For your basis in making an estimate? Mr. Exxtiotr. Yes; I had to; I could not dispute Dr. Jordan’s figures until I got up there this year; but I never have assumed that he started right. If he started right then these other censuses, based on his Mr. McGuire (interposing). The facts are that you did not know whether his figures were right, but now you assume, because there are more seals than you thought there ought to be, that he must have been wrong ? Mr. Exiiotr. But I did not know exactly about it. Mr. McGuire. The opinion of the agents of the Government was that they were increasing, but you said they were not. Mr. Exxiorr. No; they did not say they were increasing. Mr. McGuire. Yes; they said that they were increasing. Mr. Exxuiott. That was in 1912. Mr. McGuire. Well, their testimony will show. My recollection is that they said they were increasing. Mr. Erxiorr. That was last year, 1912. They suddenly doubled their figures of 1911. _ Mr. McGuire. You mean by that that they said they were increas- ing ? Mr. Exiiorr. But how could they be increasing when the killing was kept up during 1911? Mr. McGuire. What a minute, please; that is your statement. Mr. Exxiotr. That is their statement. Mr. McGuire. My recollection is that you said that if their figures were correct there were as many seals there as they said. Mr. Exxiotr. ‘Correct ?” Mr. McGurre. That is all. Mr. Exiiorr. That is right, but their figures were not correct, because there could not have been, with their census closing on the Ist of August, 1911, 127,745. (See p. 367, Hearing No. 9.) Mr. McGuire. Yes; but that is your conclusion. Mr. Exxiorr. Well, how could they: Mr. McGuire (interposing). But as to that, all the rest differ with you. Mr. Exxiorr (continuing). But how could they increase when they were killing right up to the Ist of August, 1911, and the pelagic fleet kept right at work until December 15th of that year? r. McGuire. But you do not know anything about that. Mr. Exuiorr. I know that they did not double, because seals do not double that way, and I know something about the law of life that governs their increasing and decreasing. They could not double in numbers during that year; it was a physical impossibility. 10 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. Mr. McGuire. I say that is your judgment. Go ahead with your statement. Mr. Exxiotr. That is afact. Passing now from that census, which I have described in detail here (every step of my census of 1872, every step of my census of 1874, and every step of my census of 1890 is detailed in this report), we come to another point of investigation. When we landed on St. Paul Island July 8 last, one of our first steps in looking into the conduct of public affairs on the islands was to ask the agents of the Bureau of Fisheries to give us their daily journals and official records (the ‘‘log books”’) from 1890 to date. They were brought to us, and we examined them. We found officially entered and recorded in them a specific order of the Treasury Depart- ment, dated May 14, 1896, issued by Secretary John G. Carlisle The CHAIRMAN (interposing). What page is that on? Mr. Extiorr. It is on pages 75 and 76—an official order issued through Secretary John G. Carlisle, in which the killing of ‘‘yearlings and seals whose skins weighed less than 6 pounds’’ was prohibited. This order was put upon the books of the agents in charge of the islands and published there before the killing began on June 17, 1896; but we find by the records of the London sales that out of the 30,000 that were killed that year over 8,000 of them were yearlings or seals whose skins weighed less than 6 pounds, if properly taken. Mr. Watkins. What evidence have you? Mr. Exriotr. I have offered it all in here. Mr. Watkins. I know, but what evidence have you that they came from that particular section of the country ? Mr. Exxrorr. Why, it is all certified here; even the daily killings are put in here, and everything is covered in detail. ) Mr. McGuire. You know that all of the authorities differ from you on that statement, do you not? Mr. Exuiorr. I have heard them each year, and you heard them say why they diffcr from me. Mr. McGuire. They all differ from you, and you have had no one to corroborate you. Mr. Exxiiorr. No one to corroborate me ? Mr. McGuire. No one. Mr. Exxiorr. Why do I want anybody to corroborate a fact ? Mr. McGuire. I am inclined to think you are right about that. Mr. Exvxiorr. Give me a fact and I care nothing for the thousands who may dispute it. Mr. McGuire. I think that is true. Mr. Exriorr. It is nothing to me at all—that is, whether they differ with me. The CHAIRMAN. Your statement is to the effect that with these regulations of Secretary Carlisle on the records, and known to these men, that they should not kill a seal whose skin weighed less than 6 pounds, they killed 8,000 in violation of those regulations ? Mr. Exxiotr. Yes, sir. The CHarrMANn. In 18962 Mr. Exxiorr. Immediately following the publication of that order which prohibited that killing. The CHarrMAN. How do you know that? Mr. Exxiorr. By the record of sales in London, which shows that out of 30,000 skins sent there that year . INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. iae Mr. WaTKEINS (interposing). Was it shown that they came from that territory ? Mr. Extiotrr. Yes, sir. The CHarrMan. Who is responsible for the killing of 8,000 seals in violation of that order, issued in 1896? Mr. Exxiort. I think the officials of the Government in charge at that time. The CHarrMAN. Well, mention the names, if you know of anybody. Mr. Extiotr. Well, I describe it in detail here, beginning with Dr. Jordan in 1896 and ending with Williams and I. Stanley Brown in 1890-91 and Lembkey in 1909-10. The CHarRMAN. Describe it to the committee. Mr. Warxins. You are sworn, and we are taking your evidence. Mr. Evxiottr. I am making a sworn statement. Mr. Watkins. What we want to know is what you now state under oath with reference to it. Mr. Exziort. | will state all of this detail in my report under oath. I wish to put my report in, under oath, to save the asking of all these questions, because the details are all there which the gentleman is asking for, and his questions would indicate that he has evidently not seen the report. Mr. Warxins. I have not. Mr. Exxiorr. Then I begin to understand why you ask these questions and J wish to have this put in, under oath, as my state- ment; that is, my report. The CHarrMan. That will go in, but I take it for granted—— Mr. Exxiort (interposing). I have got all the details in here, on pages 75-84, inclusive, of my report under “ Exhibit B.” Mr. Warxins. But his report is not to be incorporated in the stenographer’s report. The CHAIRMAN. Oh, no. Mr. Warxrins. Because it is already in print. The CHarrMAN. What I wish to ask you is this: Who was the special agent of the Government on the seal islands in 1896? Mr. Exrrotr. In 1896 the special agent of the Government in charge of the seal islands was one J. B. Crowley, who was placed under Dr. D. S. Jordan, by supplementary orders. Crowley entered this May 14, 1896—Secretary Carlisle’s—order of the department on June 17 followmg, but Dr. Jordan came up soon after, and took charge of the whole killing. J. Stanley-Brown was the agent of the lessees, and the two men cooperated together. Then Dr. Jordan sent a: report to the Treasury Department in which he said no yearlings were killed that year. The CuarrmMan. All of that is mentioned in your report ? Mr. Extrorr. It is all in here. He knew what a yearling seal was, and he knew that they killed 8,000 yearlings that year. Mr. McGuire. Mr. Chairman, there are gentlemen here who were not members of the committee at the time of the previous hearings, and probably they want to hear this in detail, but these details were all gone into some time ago. The CuarrmMan. You mean the hearings in the last Congress? Mr. McGurre. Yes. The Cuarrman. But we did not-know anything about these regula- tions being on record up there. That was news to me. 12 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. Mr. Exxiorr. They were suppressed from the committee. Mr. McGuire. I do not knew anything about the records up there, but we have in the testimony details as to the killing of seals. The department officials and scientists were brought here as to these measurements, and from that testimony Mr. Elhott reached his con- clusion that they were yearlings. But they all differed from Mr. Elliott. Now, personally I understand this to be just a recapitulation of the testimony that we have already received except as to these records about which he speaks. While I do care about the records, I do not care to go over this again; I know his testimony, and know the testimony of all the rest of them. The CHarrMAN. [ do not think he went into this; I never heard who was responsible for the killing of these young seals and whether there was an order from Secretary Carlisle on record when this was done, and if that is the case it brings us back to this: I would like to know who is responsible for killing seals in violation of Treasury orders, whether they were the lessees, the Government agents, or anybody else. I consider that the entire combination is responsible to the Government if that fact is true. Mr. McGurre. Certainly, but here is my position: That if Mr Elliott is permitted to recapitulate this for the sake of emphasis The CHAIRMAN. Oh, no. Mr. McGuire. That it would be proper to call persons who were more competent than he and who were in charge, and all that sort of thing, in order to determine whether any order of the Treasury Department was violated. Now, my position is that the preponder- ance of testimony is against Mr. Elliott; that is my position. The chairman may feel different about it, but the thing that seems unfair to Dr. David Starr Jordan, whom we all respect as one of the eminent men of the country, is to allow some statements to go in the record that might require his attendance or do him an injustice, and the same is true of the officials of the department, and I also doubt whether we want to go back and go over these hearings again. The CHarrMAN. I never heard that David Starr Jordan was to be held responsible for the unlawful killing of seals as a matter of vio- lating Secretary Carlisle’s order, and if it can be shown that he was on the islands and did order the killing of seals in violation of the regula- tions, we certainly ought to know it, and then Dr. Jordan can come here or stay in California, as he pleases. However, what I would like to ask Mr. Elliott is this: What facts can you submit to show that he is responsible for that ? Mr. Extiorr. They are all in this report, in complete, authentic detail. The CHAIRMAN. Explain it to the committee. Mr. Exuiotr. I have. I have said that he had full knowledge of those regulations, because they were published on the islands a week before he got there. He came up with swpp aaa orders, gov- erned everything, and took full authority. e had absolute control of the killing, and then he reported to the Treasury Department, on November 1, 1896, that 30,000 seals were killed during that year; that 20,000 of them were 3-year-olds, and that the balance were large 2-year-olds, when in fact not over 7,500 of them were 3-year- olds and eight thousand and odd—taking Lembkey’s testimony, INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 18 13,000 of them—were yearlings; but I say 8,000 to be safe and sure that I have got him. Mr. McGuire. Do you say that Lembkey’s statement was that there were 13,000 of them yearlings ? Mr. Extiorr. Lembkey’s statement of the length of a yearling skin was Mr. McGurreE (interposing). You just stated that Lembkey stated that 13,000 of them were yearlings. Did you or did you not say that ? Mr. Exxiorr. I mean, Lembkey—what I said I am not sure about— but I mean I had this in mind, that Lembkey’s statement before this committee was that a yearling sealskin was 364 inches long, and, taking his statement as my guide, over 13,000 of them were not over 364 inches long of this 30,000. Mr. McGuire. As a matter of fact, where you differ from all these other gentlemen is on your computation as to the measurement of skins, weights, ete. ? Mr. Exxiotr. There is no computation about it, it is a fact; they are so long and so wide. Mr. McGutre. I know; but your difference with the gentlemen is: as to the measurements and weights ? Mr. Exxiorr. But your scientists came before this committee, and said they did not know anything about it; not one knew anything about it; but Lembkey did. Mr. McGuire. They did not say that. Mr. Exxiorr. They did say that. Mr. McGuire. Well, they did not. Mr. Exxiorr. They said that before the committee, and you have got their testimony to the effect that not one knows a thing about a yearling seal. Mr. McGuire. That is your contention. Mr. Exxiorr. It is in the testimony; just look at their testimony. Mr. McGuire. I have looked at it, and you differ from them; that is all there is to it. Mr. Exxiotrr. I inquired of them and they could not say; they declared they did not know what a yearling seal was, and that is in the record here. Mr. McGuire. Well, if it is in the record that is all there is to it. The CuarrmMan. My recollection of that is this: That I asked these men to come here at the suggestion of Secretary Nagel and they came, and they said they did not remember anything about it; that is my | recollection of it. I may be mistaken, but we will look at the testi- mony in the hearings. Mr. McGutre. If you remember, he differed with them as to the measurements and weights; that it was a question whether the fat was left on the skins, and all that sort of thing; and they differed with Mr. Elliott and said there were no yearlings killed. Personally I have not followed this as closely as I might except since the Government took charge, but after the Government took charge I did follow it very closely. 1 am quite familiar with the testimony of those people and I know where they differed from Mr. Elliott and where they did not differ, and I know how many differed from him. The only reason I object—I really am not objecting, but from what I have read of the | testimony and the statements of Dr. Jordan, whom I regard as a man 14 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. of high character and a man of ability, I doubt whether it is doing justice to him to let these broad and sweeping statements mto the record without giving him a chance at least to make a statement afterwards. The CuarrMan. Oh, that right will be accorded him. Mr. Exxiotr. He ought to have come before the committee as pace as the swiftest train could bring him here when I publicly charged him with it, more than a year ago (see Hearing No. 14, pp. 950, 951), but he did not come, and why did he not come? Because, like every one of his associates, he did not know anything about it. Here is Dr. Stejneger, on page 915 of Hearing No. 14, saying that he did not know anything about the length or the weight of a year- ling seal. Here is Dr. Merriam ‘The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Please read it. Mr. McGuire. Let him go ahead and clear that up. Mr. Exxrorr. I will clear that right up now. [Reading:] The CHarrMan. Mr. Elliott, do you want to ask him any questions? Mr. Exuiorr. I have only a few questions to ask him. Dr. Stejneger, what is the length of a yearling fur seal of the Alaskan herd? Dr. StEJNEGER. I could not tell you. Mr. Exxrorr. Have you ever measured one of the Alaskan herd? Dr. STEIJNEGER. No. “Mr. Exxtiorr. You do not know anything about the length of a skin of a yearling seal as taken from the body? Dr. STEJNEGER. Of a yearling seal? I do not know; I have never seen a yearling seal killed on the American islands. Mr. McGuire. Have you read all of his testimony ? Mr. Exriorr. Yes, all on that point; then it goes on to another subject. ‘Lhat is all he states about a yearling seal in any of his testimony, Mr. McGurre. He does not say anything about the condition or weight of a seal ? Mr. Exvtiotr. Nothing; not a word. Mr. McGuire. Do the others? Mr. Exxtiorr. Not one of them. Now, I will come to the others. [Reading:] Dr. C. Hartt Merriam, member of advisory board, fur seal service, Department of Commerce and Labor (p. 692, Hearing No. 11): The CHarrMaNn. Well, how long have you been on the advisory board. Dr. Merriam. Since the beginning. I do not remember the date; but I have been absent from the city during a number of the sittings of that committee, as 1am engaged in field work in the West at least half of every year, and therefore have not been in Washington at the time most of these meetings were held. The CHarrMAN. Were you at the meeting of the advisory board that the previous witness referred to in his testimony? Dr. Merriam. I do not remember any such meeting. The CHarrMAN. Are you a member of the board now? Dr. Merriam. Yes. On page 99, Hearing No. 11: Mr. Extiorr. Doctor, while you were on the islands did you ascertain the length and weight of a yearling seal? Dr. Merriam. I did not. Mr. Extiorr. Do you know anything about the length and the weight of a yearling- seal skin? Dr. Merriam. Nothing. Mr. Extiorr. One question more: I understood you to say that you had not been in consultation with Mr. Bowers when he issued his orders for killing 13,000 seals in 1910. INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 15 Dr. Merriam. I do not think I was present at any conference when that matter was up. Mr. McGuire. J remember those things. Mr. Exttrorr. I will go through all of it since you have raised a question about my statements. Mr. McGurre. That is all right. Mr. Exxiorr. Everyone said they did not know anything about a yearling seal. Mr. McGurre. Did net Dr. Evermann and Lembkey testify about that? Mr. Exziorr. Lembkey knew; he testified and I have got him. Mr. McGutre. And so did some others, that some had not taken measurements, but that others had. Mr. Extiorr. No other man except Lembkey, knew anything about it, according to this testimony. You can not find a man who knew except Lembkey. Lembkey said a yearling skin measured 364 inches long; he knew all right, and I have got him for killing seals whose skins only reached 34 inches long; and, to be sure that I have got him, every one of these tabulations of yearling skins given by me to this committee has been based on skins not exceeding 34 inches long. Mr. Lembkey was the only man who knew, and these scientists came here and did not know anything about it when we got them under oath and confined them to facts; but they could go out behind my back and ridicule me; yet, they did not know. The CuarrMAN. That is neither here nor there. Were any skins taken by Lembkey under 36 inches? Mr. Extiott. He identified 7,733 skins out of 12,920, which he took in 1910, and not one of them exceeded in length 34 inches. The CHarrmMan. Were they skins taken in violation of the regula- tions ? Mr. Exxiotr. Certainly they were. The CHarrMan. How do you know? Mr. Exriotr. Because he himself testified that the regulations said that no seal should be taken under two years of age, and he himself (in Hearing No. 9, p. 372), said he was bound by those regulations. The CuarrMan. I notice the regulation provides that no seals shall be killed whose skins weigh less than 6 pounds. ' Mr. Exxtiorr. Yes; and then that no seals shall be taken under 2 years of age, and then they fixed a skin weight of 5 pounds to deceive the committee. Mr. McGuire. That is your statement and your conclusion. Mr. Exxiorr. The records in London will show that. The CHarrMan. Let me ask you a few questions. What were they reporting to the Bureau of Fisheries ? Mr. Exxiorr. Nothing but weights. The Cuarrman. Anything as to sizes ? Mr. Exxiotr. No. The Cuarrman. Were they reporting them as weighing 4 pounds, 5 pounds, or 6? Mr. Exuiotr. Yes; all kinds ot pounds, up to 8 and down to 44. Mr. Warxins. What would be the age of a seal that would give a skin weighing 5 pounds ? a Exiiorr. It would be a “long” yearling or a “short” 2-year- old. 16 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA, Mr. McGuire. That is another proposition on which you differ. The CuarrMan. Let me ask you whether the skins were reported by Lembkey and his agents by weights and not by sizes? Mr. Exxrorr. Not by sizes, but by weights; but they are all classi- fied in London by sizes, by measurements. The CaairMAN. What does the London classification show as to these 7,700 that you just mentioned ? Mr. Exxiorr. It shows that not one of them exceeded in length— not one of them was more than 334 inches long. . Mr. Watrins. Did it show anything about the weights? Mr. Exxiotr. The weights were put down, and I am going to bring that in. The CuarrMAN. But the London people did not go by weights? Mr. Evuiorr. No. The CuarrMan. But they reported them by weights to the Bureau of Fisheries ? Mr. Exxuiotr. Yes, sir. The CHarrMANn. What did it show there as to Mr. Ex.iott (interposing). It showed they were all big skins. The CHairMAN. How did they happen to be large skins ? Mr. Exxiotr. By putting blubber on the little skins. The CHarrMAN. But I have always understood you to say that the blubber did not make any difference. Mr. Exxiorr. I said it does increase the weight; that is, according to the blubber and salt used. Mr. McGuire. We have those London sheets here. Mr. Evxiorr. Yes; we have them right in the testimony. The CuarrMAN. I wish to say that I] have made it a pomt to look into that matter and J found that it is the best way to determine the ages of these seals, or as to whether they were killing undersized seals, and I found out how they had been making their reports as to the killing of seals to the Bureau of Fisheries by reporting so many skins that weighed, we will say, 6 pounds and 6 ounces, and so many other skins as weighing 7 pounds and 8 ounces, and so on, but never by size. Then, when the bureau sells the skins in London, they find out that skins that have been marked here as weighing about the same vary in size. When the blubber is taken out, one skin is found to be a large one and another skin is found to be a small one, while, according to the report to the Bureau of Fisheries, it is made to appear that, so far as the weights are concerned, they are of the same size. When the skins are tested in London as to size, it will be found that a certain skin was taken from a small seal, although a person looking at the report in the bureau would suppose that the skin was taken from a seal between 2 and 3 years old. You see, they leave the blubber on the skin, thereby adding to its weight, and the record here would indicate that it was taken from a seal between 2 and 3 years old. The record here would show that the skin weighed over 5 pounds so as to conform to the regulations. Now, if that is so, it looks to me like a deliberate attempt to make the skins appear as though they were taken from large seals, when, as a matter of fact, they are small skins and their weight is increased by reason of the blubber being left on them. Is that the result of your investigation ? INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 17 Mr. Ex.tiorr. You are entirely correct, Mr. Chairman, in your conclusions. It has been their regular practice; and, I give all the details of it in this report. Mr. McGuire. Have you any authority for that except this docu- ment? Is there any evidence or testimony given by anybody under oath as to that? The CuarrMan. I only meant to state in a general way what I had investigated and what was the result of my looking into the matter. It appears that these skins were reported by weight, but when, for instance, two skins were received in London, each weighing, say, 6 pounds and 8 ounces, according to the reports made to the bureau, yet, when the blubber was scraped off of them in London Mr. Ex.xiotrr (interposing). When they put the measurements on, Mr. Chairman. They put the measurements right on. The CuarrMAN. When they get rid of the blubber, they will find that one is a small skin and the other is a large skin, notwithstanding the fact that their weights were reported as the same. Mr. McGuire. The reason [| asked the question was that my recol- lection of the testimony of the witnesses is different. (f course I have made no investigation such as you have. The testimony was to the effect that they reported to the department by weizht and that the parties to whom the Government sold the skins in England bought them by measurement ? The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir. Mr. McGurre. And the tables of the measurements are on file here. The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir. Mr. McGuire. And the dispute has been as to the measurements; that is, the contention has been made that a skin might vary from _ two-eighths to five-eighths of an inch in size, depending upon where the skin was cut from behind or from the head and tail. I think they said there was a variation of from two-eighths to five-eighths of an inch, which showed that it was unsafe to go by measurement. As I understood the testimony here, that is where all of this difficulty came from. Witnesses have differed, and I think they differed from you on the question of the effect produced on the skins after they had been salted, some contending that salt would take out the juices and make the skins lighter and others contending that the effect of salt was to make the skins heavier; that is, that they could not extract it Mr. Warxkrns (interposing). Would not the application of salt add to the weight of a skin ? Mr. McGurre. Yes, sir; but the question was whether, after shaking and extracting the salt from the skins, it did not eliminate juices from the blubber, and thus make the skin lighter. All that is in the evidence, and there was a contention about it, the doctor here contending that the salt could not be extracted and that you could not take it out, while others, testifying from actual experience in the matter, contended that the salt causes the juices to exude from the skins, thus making them lighter. You will find that all through the evidence. Is that your recollection, Mr. Chairman ? The Cuarrman. My recollection of the evidence is that salting makes very little difference one way or the other. Mr. McGurrz. Makes very little difference ? 53490—14—_2, 18 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA, Mr. Exxiotr. It makes a difference of from one-fourth to one-half a pound in weight. I testified to that effect, and everybody opposed me Mr. McGurre. My recollection wa Mr. Extiotr (interposing). They all opposed me, but I alone brought in proof of my statement. I will read from our report (p. 112) what was done in 1904: Lembkey tells the truth in 1904, and records the fact that salting sealskins increases their weight. Chief Special Agent Lembkey makes the following entry on page 149 of the journal of the Government agent on St. Paul Island, Alaska, to wit: , SaTurDAY, JULY 23, 1904. On July 18, 107 skins taken on Tolstoi were weighed and salted. To-day they were hauled out of the kench and reweighed. At the time of killing they weighed 705 pounds, and on being taken out they weighed 7594 pounds, a gain in salting of 544 pounds, or one-half pound per skin. A true copy, made July 22, 1913. Attest: Henry W. EL.iort, A. F. GALLAGHER. Agents House Commitiee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce. But Lembkey falls from truth above—falls hard. (Hearing No. 9, pp.446, Apr. 12, 1912, House Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce and Labor.) Mr. Extiorr. Mr. Lembkey, you say you never have weighed these skins after you have salted them? You have never weighed them? Mr. Lempxey. IJ have never weighed them after the salting on the islands; no, sir. There is one of your authorities that impressed you, Mr. McGuire. Mr. McGuire. | do not see that it makes any change Mr. Extiotr (interposing). It does make a change of one-half a pound perskin of increase inweight. In Hearing No.9, pages445—446, April 13, 1912, House Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce and Labor, Mr. Lembkey goes on to say, ‘‘All our experiments show that the salting of skins slightly decrease the weight.” .The CuarrmMan. That was my recollection. Mr. Exxiorr. That was what the officials of the Bureau of Fisheries said, and here is their chief authority. The only practical man who has handled thousands and tens of thousands of skins, says that it does increase the weight. Mr. McGuire. Are you talking about Mr. Lembkey, Doctor? Mr. Extiortr. Yes, sir. Mr. McGuire. And he says it does increase the weight ? Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, sir; there was a gain in salting of 54% pounds, or one-half pound per skin. Mr. McGuire. Upon that question, if I remember the testimony correctly, it brought in the element of time, and the question of how much of the salt could be extracted. Now, I do not catch anything there in that testimony that would affect anything except the present time. Of course, it would increase the weight when first applied, but after the salt has had time to work out its effect upon the skin, after the chemical processes that go on have been completed, then, when you extract the salt, these juices are eliminated. You do not take this element of time into account. Mr. Exurotr. The element of time comes in with the British report. Here is their report. Let me read from page 113 of the report: Mr. Extiotr. Now, in Senate Executive Document No. 177, Fifty-third Congress second session, pages 117 and 118 (S. Ex. Doc. 177, pt. 7), counter case of the Uni INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 19 States, on page 118, the United States commissioners, Merriam and Mendenhall, have this to say touching the salted weights: The British commissioners further rely upon Mr. Elliott’s statement that skins weigh from 54 pounds to 12 pounds (sec. 672), and upon the comparison of such state- ment with that of Lieut. Maynard, an independent observer, who gives the average weight of bundles as 22 pounds and the weight of the largest as 64 pounds (sec. 672); this appears to the commissioners to require some explanation (sec. 673). The impli- cation is evident, and the United States offer the explanation in vindication of the officers of the Government who are thus charged. A bundle contains not only the two skins proper, but salt and blubber with which they are packed for their preserva- tion. This naturally adds greatly to the weight, as does also the moisture collected by the salt and fur. That sustains me completely about the increased weight of ‘‘green’’ skins after they are cured on the islands, and our Government carried that claim as a voucher to Paris. It was never disputed by either side at those sessions of the bering Sea Tribunal, held there from April to August, 1893. The CHAIRMAN. It is 12 o’clock, and I think we will adjourn now. Mr. McGuire. In case Mr. Elliott is to make any more statements, I think Dr. Evermann and Mr. Lembkey should be subpcenaed. The CuarrMan. Well, bring them in here; that is all right, but I do not care to subpena anybody. Mr. Jones. Dr. Evermann is out West, and he probably will not be at home until about November 1. He probably will not be here until then, unless you wish him to appear. I do not know where Mr. Lembkey is now. Mr. ALLEN. He is in the city, or was a few days ago. The CHarrMANn. It is my desire to allow everybody to come in now if they wish to hear what is going on. I wish to say this, that so far as I am concerned, though not speaking for the committee, it looks to me as if blubber had been added to the skins to increase the weight of skins taken from small seals that were killed on the islands, and I would like to have that cleared up. If the skin taken from a small seal is blubbered to the extent of about 2 or 24 pounds, and it is reported by our agent on the island to weigh as much as the skin taken from a seal that is much larger than that in order to bring it within the regulations, I think this committee and Congress ought to know it, and if that is done, I have no doubt the lessees on those islands should be held responsible. Mr. McGurre. I do not want to be misunderstood, but up to date from the hearings before the committee—I do not know what the outside information is—I differ from the chairman as to the amount of blubber that has been taken from the seals for the purpose of add- ing to the weight of the skins. There are various reasons for that view. In the first place, there is no occasion for it, because, after the Government took charge of the business, nobody could get anything out of it. Now, as to what occurred prior to that time, I have not gone into very extensively, but I never thought that a good reason. But I differ apparently from the chairman and from the testimony now given on the question of whether an unnecessary amount of blubber is left on the skins. I a!so differ from the doctor and from the chairman on the question of how many, if any, yearlings were taken. Now, the reason why I thought these parties ought to be heard, if the doctor is to run over this question of measurements again, is because it is evident that they all differ from him, and, to be frank about it, I think the doctor exhibited a good deal of animosity, and I think they did, too, or some of them did. I think Dr. Jordan is too © 20 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA, big a man to be affected by this matter, and, I think, the rest of them are. While the testimony of some of the witnesses was more com- plete than that of others, it always occurred to me that the burden of the testimony largely was that this was a fight by the doctor here on some scientific men and on some parties in the department. Now, if there is other testimony outside that has not come in, that there was blubber left on the skins, and if I am wrong about it, Mr. Chairman, I would like to know it. Mr. Evxiotr. The evidence is right before you. The CHarrMAN. Your testimony, Mr. Elliott, will likely be con- tinued, and I wish you would go over that proposition and submit it to the committee. I will ask you to do that. Mr. Extiott. It is all set forth here in detail The CHAIRMAN (interposing). But we want it in these hearings. If there is any testimony bearing on this proposition Mr. Exviort (interposing). It is all here. The CHAIRMAN (continuing). I want you to submit it to the com- mittee. Mr. Exxiotr. It has been submitted here In my report just sub- mitted to you, under oath. I can not see how any more evidence could be submitted than the 400 loaded skins and unloaded skins, all weighed and measured in public on the islands and certified to. The CHatRMAN. That is this case? Mr. McGuire. That was this summer ? Mr. Exxtiotr. Right now. It has been done that way since 1896. The CnatrrMan. The skins have been blubbered, and small skins, measuring, perhaps, 34 inches, weigh as much as skins measuring 39 inches or more. Mr. McGuire. Was that done this summer ? Mr. Exuiotr. Yes, sir. Mr. McGuire. These parties, then, are not responsible for what was done this year. Mr. Warxins. During this session of the committee a remark has been made, going to indicate that the witness had some animosity and that he had displayed a good deal of feeling in his statements. Now, if that statement goes into the record I would like to express the view that, while he has shown considerable feeling, it is due, in my opinion, largely to the fact that he is trying to defend himself against attacks made on him and not on account of any animosity he feels toward other people. Mr. Exxiorr. That is entirely so, and I thank you for that state- ment. The CHarrMan. The fact is that I would say the same thing of the other men who have appeared here—that is, that they have shown feeling. Mr. McGuire. It seems to be a quarrel. Mr. Exxiorr. I object to that statement; it is not a quarrel; it is no quarrel at all, and I object to your statement. Mr. McGurre. Do not say anything further to me now. (Thereupon, at 12.10 o’clock p. m., the committee adjourned sub- ject to the call of the chairman.) ¥ o INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 2] COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Housr or REPRESENTATIVES, Saturday, January 17, 1914. The committee met at 10.30 o’clock a. m., Hon. John H. Rother- mel (chairman) presiding. Present: Hon. John H. Rothermel, Hon. John H. Stephens, Hon. John T. Watkins, and Hon. Allan B. Walsh. The CHarRMAN. The committee will come to order. There is a quorum present, and we will proceed. Mr. StepHeEns. Mr. Chairman, this committee, on June 20, 1913, appointed Henry W. Elhott and Andrew F. Gallagher as its agents to report upon the condition of the fur-seal herd of Alaska, and the conduct of the public business on the Pribilof Islands; on August 31, 1913, they reported to the chairman of this committee as follows: THE REPORT OF THE SPECIAL AGENTS OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE UPON THE CONDITION OF THE FUR-SEAL HERD OF ALASKA AND THE CONDUCT OF THE PUBLIC BUSINESS ON THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS, AS ORDERED BY THE COMMITTEE JUNE 20, 1913, AND MADE BY THE SAID AGENTS AUGUST 31, 1913, TO THE CHAIRMAN, HON. J. H. ROTHERMEL, BY HENRY W. ELLIOTT AND ANDREW F. GALLAGHER, AGENTS OF COMMITTEE 23 FUR-SEAL HERD OF ALASKA. CoMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Hovust oF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., June 20, 1913. The committee met at 10.30 a m., Hon. John H. Rothermel, chaiman, presiding. Present: Hon. John H. Stevens, Hon. John T. Watkins, and Hon. Charles E. Patton. The Cuarrman. The meeting this morning is called for the purpose of organizing the committee and for the purpose of submitting ae piopemven of engaging certain persons to visit the Pribilof slands On motion of Hon. John H. Stevens, the chairman was authorized to select a clerk of the committee. On motion of Hon. John T. Watkins, the dacs resolution was adopted: Ordered, That Henry W. Elliott is hereby aanomtedy 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 tkat Andrew F. Gal- lagher is hereby appointed as a duly qualified expert stenographer and notary to accompany Mr. Elhott and record the details of that information as it shall be devel- oped under the instructions of the chairman. On the adoption of the resolution the vote was as follows: Ayes, Hon. John H. Stevens and Hon. John T. Watkins; noes, Hon. Charles E. Patton. There was no further business to transact, consequently the com- mittee adjourned at 11.10 a. m. to reconvene at the call of the chairman. REPORT OF THE SPECIAL AGENTS. Wasuineton, D.C., August 31, 1913. Hon. Joun H. RorHERMEL, Charman House Committee on Expenditures in Department of Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Str: On the 21st of last June we received from your hands our appointment as yee agents of your committee duly authorized by its action on that day. Your letter of notice ordered us to pro- ceed without delay to the seal islands of Alaska by the most direct 25 26 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. route and make a thorough examination into the condition of the fur-seal herd thereon as we should find it and into all details of the conduct of the public business thereon since May 1, 1890, up to date. We therefore proceeded direct to Seattle, Wash., and took passage on the Nome steamer Victoria, which sailed July 1, 3.40 p. m. ie this vessel never stops at the seal islands, through the kindness of the Secretary of the Treasury we were met in Onimak Pass on July 7 last and taken on board the United States revenue cutter Tahoma, Capt. Chiswell, who landed us at St. Paul Island on July 8 last. Agreeably to our instructions, we at once took up and finished the following subjects of direct personal study and investigation: I. July 10 to 20.—A personal survey was made of every one of the 17 breeding grounds or ‘“‘rookeries”’ of the fur seals on St. George and St. Paul Islands. We looked into every harem, and made as reasonable and accurate a count of the bulls and cows there as men of common sense can make.! We found this herd to-day is so far depleted from its form of 1872, and then of 1890, that the same methods of enumeration, which must be used as they were used then, by Mr. Elliott, when there were 4,700,000 and then later 1,000,000 seals, could not be employed; so, a careful estimate and counting of the adult breeding seals in each harem, when they were not ‘‘massed,”’ was made by us, and it gives the followmg figures and— (a) Has developed the fact that only a minute fraction of the proper number of young bulls were seen on the breeding grounds, and that the old bulls thereon were so few and far between that they often had harems of 100 to 120 females; that the average harem was at least 55 cows,’ instead of being 20, which is the normal number when the herd is in its best form. (b) This situation up there, as above stated, makes the case fairly desperate, and it would speedily result in the complete extermination of the male breeding life of these Pribilof preserves and ‘‘rookeries”’ if it were not for the close time now ordered by law of August 24, 1912, which forces a total suspension of all killing of young male seals on the islands, except for the food of natives, during the next five years. (c) There are some 56,000 cows on the St. Paul breeding grounds and about 16,000 on St. George, or 72,000 pupping cows this season of 1913. To this number we may safely add some 7,000 nubiles, making in all about 80,000 cows for this year of 1913. The 72,000 pups of 1913 (less about 2 per cent death rate for natural causes), or 70,000 pups in round numbers, and some 1,400 old bulls, with less 1 We gave the subject of the “counting” of “live pups” with a view to getting a fair idea of its sense and accuracy in determining the numbers of breeding seals on these Pribilof rookeries very close attention. A careful study of the work as it has been done on St. George and St. Paul Islands, beginning in 1901 and ending in 1912, warrants our statement that it is not an accurate census when said to be so made. It is an estimate only, and one that is arrived at by making a highly injurious disturbance on the breeding grounds; it should be prohibited as idle and positively detrimental. The unanimous objection of the natives to this job of ‘‘counting”’ live pups as one of the chief causes of injury to the herd is expressed in detail. (See Exhibit E postea.) That the men who have officially done this work of “counting live’ pups for an “accurate” census since 1901 to date do not believe in it, and think it is inaccurate and should be stopped, is well exhibited by copies of their entries made officially in the journals of St. George and St. Paul. Some of these we submit in proof of the above, as Exhibit F postea. 2 This average is misleading, in fact, though it is the only figure which can be used, unless it is qualified as follows: For instance, take a series of harems on the reef, between stations F and E; here there are 25; 1 bull has 200 cows, 6 bulls have each more than 100, 3 bulls have each 50, 10 bulls have from 12 to 25 cows each, 3 bulls only 2 cows, and 2 bulls have none; thus 25 bulls, 1,136 cows, or average of 45 cows to a bull. That is, in truth, not so. There are 10 bulls with 1,050 cows, or 100 cows each, while the other 15 bulls have but 186 cows between them. As they do not meddle with any cows except as hauled out in their respective harems, the average distribution of service, at 45 cows to the bull, is wholly misleading. INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA, 27 than 150 young bulls make up the following sum total of the breeding strength of the fur-seal herd for this season of 1913, to wit: Old bulls (8 to 15 years RT CLs)

2. ce oire e doen