The fur-seal industry of Alaska

THE FUR*SEAL INDUSTRY

OF ALASKA
Report from the Committe
Expenditures, Dept.

merce arid Labor.

House Calendar No. 377.

62p CONGRESS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. REPORT
3d Session. No. 1425.

a
THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA.

JanuARY 31, 1913.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

lf
ty = : : .
Mr. RorserMe., from the ,Committee on Expenditures in the
Department of Commerce and Labor, submitted the following

REPORT.

Mr. McGuire submitted minority views. |

The Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce
and Labor, proceeding under its general powers to inquire nto the
leasing of sealing privileges on the Pribilof Islands of Alaska, the
conduct of the lessees on the said seal islands, the management by the
officials of the Government in charge of the fur-seal herd after the
expiration of the said leases, and to inquire into the advisability of
the leasing by the Government of any privileges pertaining to said
islands, beg leave to report as follows:

Specific charges having been filed with the committee May 15, 1911,
alleging that the agents of the Government had conspired with the
lessees of the seal islands to take seals in violation of law and the
provisions of their contract, and also that the said lessee company
had secured the lease from the Government by fraud and perjury,
the committee determined to investigate these questions and report
its findings of fact to the House. Extended hearings were had,
beginning May 31, 1911, and ended July 25, 1912. The testimony
has been printed for the committee and covers a series of 31 sessions
and contains 1,013 pages.

The committee, after due and careful d-liberation, finds the follow-
ing facts:

I. That when the United States took possession of the fur-seal herd,
in 1867-68, by virtue of the treaty of cession from Russia, and leased it
to the Alaska Commercial Co., a corporation, for 20 years from May
1, 1870, the herd consisted of about 4,700,000 seals. (See pp. 184-193,
Hearing No. 4.) During the period of this lease, 1870-1890, the lessees
tapk 1,856,224 seals, deriving therefrom a net profit of $18,753,911.20,
while the net profit of the Government therefrom was but
$5,264,230.08. (See pp. 964, 965, Hearing No. 14.)

II. That on March 12, 1890, a second lease was entered into with
another corporation, known as the North American Commercial Co.,
of San Francisco, for a period of 20 years. That when this lease was

L
2 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. oN x Pi
D \) ay

executed, a survey of the herd Made in July of that year disclosed thé

fact that there were but 959,393 seals on the islands. ‘That this
reduction of the herd was due to the combined effect of killing
100,000 seals annually on land, since 1870, and the energetic prose-
cution of pelagic sealing, first begun in 1883-84 and actively prose-
cuted since 1888. (See pp. 5€-60, Hearing No. 2.)

That the herd had been depleted to such an extent in 1884 that
the Alaska Commercial Co. had difficulty in securing their average
annual quota. In spite of this fact, however, the said company
continued to take an annual average of about 100,000 seals, until
their lease expired in 1890. On the expiration of this lease the herd
had been depleted to such an extent that the new lessee, the North:
American Commercial Co., had great difficulty in obtaining their
quota and commenced to kill female seals and yearlings (see pp. 36—
43, Hearing No. 2), which is now and was then prohibited by law
and by the regulations of the department. This unlawful killing of
seals was reported July 31, 1890, to the Secretary of the Treasury,
Hon. Charles Foster, who took no steps officially to prevent a recur-
rence of such loss to the Government, but, on the contrary, imme-
diately removed the agent who reported it and assigned him to
another position in the service. (See pp. 54-55, 64-67, Hearing
No. 2; pp. 207-209, Hearing No. 4; pp. 662-672, Hearing No. 10;
pp. 939-944, Hearing No. 14.)

That the conduct of the lessees, the North American Commercial
Co., through its officers and agents, coupled with the work of and the
interest they had in pelagic hunting, so reduced the seal herd of
about a million seals that in August, 1910, the number of seals on the
islands did not exceed 133,000. (See p. 935, Hearing No. 14.)
That the lessees had killed in 20 years 343,356 seals, from which they
derived a net profit of approximately $4,976,574, and by reason of
which the Government after paying the expenses incident to the man-
agement of the fur-seal herd during said period derived no profit,
but, on the contrary, suffered a loss of more than $1,350,000. That the
record of 40 years of leasing of the seal islands of Alaska (1870-1910)
discloses the fact that the Government has suffered a property loss
of not less than $30,000.000, caused by the almost complete commer-
cial ruin of the said seal herd, while the net revenue received by the
Government, under both leases, amounted to but $3,914,000, approxi-
mately.

III. Your committee finds that the second lease which the Govern-
ment entered into, namely, with the North American Commercial
Co., was obtained by fraud, said fraud, in part, having consisted in
the filing of a false affidavit on the part of Isaac Liebes, president. of
said company. (See pp. 833, 835, 836, 837, 839, 840, 844, 846, 847,
848, 852-854, 855, 856, 857, 858, 859, 860, 861, 862, 864, 886-888,
889-890, Hearing No. 13.)

The pages of testimony referred to disclose the fact that the said
Liebes, as president of said company, did, on March 12, 1890, declare
under oath in the form of a written affidavit, which was placed on
file in the Treasury Department with the papers in the case, to the
effect that neither he nor any of his associate lessees were engaged in
the business of pelagic sealing, or in any violation of law. When in
truth and in fact he, the said Isaac Liebes, was, at the very time of
the filing of said affidavit, in full pogece of the fact that his asso-

BD. GF D. eae
FES 15 1918 oe

NT THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 3

™ ciate lessee, Herman Liebes, was the owner of the schooner James
- Hamilton Lewis, and that she had been outfitted by him, illegally
~ cleared January 10, 1890, for hunting fur seals at sea and for the very
§ purpose of committing depredations on the high seas and in American
waters and on the seal islands of Alaska during the summer of 1890.
That on September 17, 1890, he, the said Isaac Liebes, president, as
aforesaid, became part owner of said vessel James Hamilton Lewis.
That the said Herman and Isaac Liebes, officers and stockholders of
the said North American Commercial Co., and as owners of the said
James Hamilton Lewis, corresponded, combined, confederated with
one Alexander McLean, known as a notorious British pirate, for the
urpose of committing, and in fact did commit, depredations on the
igh seas, in American waters, and on the Pribilof Islands by way of
unlawfully killing fur seals belonging to the Government of the
United States.

Your committee is of the opinion that the conduct of the officers
of the North American Commercial Co. during 1890, 1891, and sub-
sequent thereto, was such that the officials of the Government
should have promptly revoked the lease and prevented this great
loss of property. In this connection it may be stated that the
following is a clause which appears in the lease:

The Secretary of the Treasury reserves the right to terminate this lease and all
rights of the North American Commercial Co. under the same at any time on full
and satisfactory proof that the said company has violated any of the provisions and
agreements of this lease, or any of the laws of the United States, or any Treasury
regulation respecting the taking of fur seals, or concerning the islands of St. George
and St. Paul or the inhabitants thereof.

That the said North American Commercial Co. gave a bond, dated
March 12, 1890, in the sum of $500,000, conditioned for the faithful
observance of all laws and regulations of the Treasury Department,
said bond being signed by I. Liebes, president; H. B. Parsons, assistant
secretary; and Darius O. Mills, Lloyd Tevis, Herman Liebes, by
D O. Mills, attorney in fact, and Stephen B. Elkins, as sureties,
and approved by William Windom, Secretary of the Treasury, and
wigeh said bond is on file in the department as part of the record in
the case.

IV. Your committee further finds that Isaac Liebes, president of
said North American Commercial Co., did correspond, combine. and
agree with one H. H. D. Peirce, then Third Assistant Secretary of State
of the United States, and Charles H. Townsend, ‘‘seal expert” of the
United States Bureau of Fisheries, in preparing, promoting, and col-
lecting a fraudulent claim in the case of the James Hamilton Lewis
(the sealing vessel owned and outfitted by said Isaac Liebes and
Herman Liebes) and Capt. Alexander McLean. the aforesaid British
pirate. The said H. H. D. Peirce and Charles H. Townsend, as repre-
sentatives of the Government, presented the claims of the said Alex-
ander McLean, who was master of the James Hamilton Lewis, a sealing
vessel owned by said Isaac and Herman Liebes, and which said vessel
was fraudulently registered at San Francisco on the 10th of January,
i890.

In 1891 the said schooner, the James Hamilton Lewis, commanded
by said Alexander McLean, was caught by a Russian vessel and under
the claim that the crew headed by the said McLean had raided the
seal islands belonging to Russia. Disputes arose as to the question

4 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA,

of whether the Russian Government had a right to seize the schooner
James Hamilton Lewis and its crew. Damages were claimed by the
owners of the vessel as weil as the master and crew thereof.

In 1893 proceedings were commenced in the State Department,
claiming damages on the part of owners, master, and crew of the
James Hamilton Lewis. H. H. D. Peirce and Charles H. Townsend,
“sealing experts,” of the United States Bureau of Fisheries, pre-
pared the cases for the parties interested and presented the claim
on the part of the United States against the Russian Government
at The Hague in 1902, which resulted in an award of approxi-
mately $50,000 in favor of the United States Government fot the
use of the parties interested, including Alexander McLean and
Max Weisman, November 29, 1902. The said H. H. D. Peirce and
Charles H. Townsend presented the claim of Max Weisman as the
owner of the vessel James Hamilton Lewis before the tribunal at
The Hague, when in truth and in fact the owner of said schooner
at the time of its seizure was Herman Liebes, of San Francisco.
The said H. H. D. Peirce and Charles H. Townsend represented to
the tribunal in the trial of said case that Alexander McLean, the
captain of said vessel, was an American citizen, when in truth and
fact he was a British subject and notoriously known as a pirate.
(See pp. 754, 755, Hearing No. 12.)

Ni Your committee further finds that, in spite of the ruinous
record made during the last 20 years by the North American Com-
mercial Co., under the supervision of the Treasury agents of the seal
islands of Alaska, H. H. Taylor, president of the said company; C. H.
Townsend; and George M. Bowers, Commissioner of the Bureau of
Fisheries, did recommend to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor,
Hon. Charles Nagel, to enter into another lease of the said islands
for 20 years. The testimony discloses that the Secretary of Com-
merce and Labor had intended to enter into another contract to
re-lease the islands to the highest and best bidder. Strenuous objec-
tions to any leasing of the islands, however, were made by public-
spirited citizens, and this prevented the renewal of the lease.

VI. That since the lessees were prevented from further killing
by the expiration of their lease and by the passage of the act of Con-
gress approved April 21, 1910, which act prohibited the re-leasing
of the islands for the purpose of killing seals, the Secretary of Com-
merce and Labor was placed in full control of affairs on the said
islands. That although the Government appears to have been
greatly benefited by Federal management, as demonstrated by the
testimony of Walter I. Lembky, special agent of the Government on
the seal islands (see p. 366, Hearing No. 9); also Secretary Nagel’s
report for 1912 (see p. 106), nevertheless, and in spite of the express
prohibition of the law, it is disclosed by the testimony that yearling
and female seals have been killed by the agents of the Government
in charge of the seal islands. (See pp. 5-23, Hearing No. 1; pp.
897-920, Hearing No. 14.)

VII. That the testimony taken by the committee was the basis
in large measure of the action by Congress, August 15, 1912, which
establishes a closed term of five years from said date to all commercial
killing of fur seals on the seal islands of Alaska.

THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 5

The committee therefore recommends:

(1) That the Attorney General be requested to take such steps as
may be necessary to collect the bond of $500,000 from the said North
American Commercial Uo. and the sureties thereon.

(2) That the Attorney General be requested to institute civil pro-
ceedings against Isaac Liebes naraeanlly to recover such damages
as he and his confederates did to the seal herd of Alaska from 1890
to 1910.

(3) That the State Department take up with Russia the matter
of the case of the James Hamilton Leuwxs for the purpose of rectifying
the wrong done by said Liebes, C. H. Townsend, and H. H. D. Peirce
against the Government of Russia, a friendly power.

(4) That with a view to carrying this recommendation into effect
the Clerk of the House be directed to forward to the Secretary of
State a certified copy of this report, together with a complete set of
the official hearings before this committee on this subject.

(5) That in view of the closed season of five years provided by act
of Congress, of August 15, 1912, the services of the Treasury agents
on the said Pribilof Islands can be dispensed with, resulting thereby
in a saving to the Federal Government of approximately $25,000
annually.

Joun H. RoTHERMEL.
Jas. T. McDERmorrT.
JAMES YOUNG.

D, J. McGrLiicuppy.

| i i ‘a sip
passe Hina oi

one male a jus
et Alias fos ;
a Lect er ie

, igi ite ep
v ea, ant .

A, : 4 rah Doing :
oy tien “a ho El
a tie) ‘tal ee

ie eae

, fs fawirt

| seine if wt nM M

=

aM ty fi
Abwit rica es on

ie a) ni fi Tab fe ait os iy
ail) Ae ry ay
Leeda Car

VIEWS OF THE MINORITY.

Mr. McGuire submitted the following views of the minority:

House resolution 73, as adopted by the House of Representa-
tives May 12, 1911, is as follows:

Resolved, That the Secretary of Commerce and Labor be, and he is hereby, directed
to furnish for the use and the information of the House of Representatives copics of all
letters received, reports, and documents from his agents in charge of the seal islands
of Alaska, together with copics of all instructions given to those officials aforesaid
since January first, nineteen hundred and four, up to date, which relate to the condi-
tion and management of the fur-seal herd, the conduct of the officers of the Govern-
ment in charge of it, and the conduct of the work of the lessees on the seal islands
aforesaid, since January first, nineteen hundred and four, up to date.

The chairman of the Committee on Expenditures in the Depart-
ment of Commerce and Labor has filed a report in which there is
recited what purports to be a history of the fur-seal herd from the
year 1867 down to the present time. Beginning with the year 1870
it deals largely with the conduct of the Alaska Commercial Co. and
the North American Commercial Co. under their leases for periods
of 20 years each running from the Ist of May, 1870, to April 30,
1890, and from May 1, 1890, to April 30, 1910, respectively.

The said report also devotes considerable space to the actions of
one Liebes, who was in the year 1890 president of the North American
Commercial Co., and of one Alexander McLean, said to have been a
notorious British pirate, and with certain alleged malfeasance in office
of one H. H. D. Peirce, formerly an Assistant Secretary of State, and
one Charles H. Townsend, in thit they presented a certain fraudulent
claim on the part of the United States against the Russian Govern-
ment at The Hague in the matter of the sealing vessel, the James
Hamilton Lewis.

All of these, with the exception of the last few years, are matters
that occurred before the creation or organization of the Department
of Commerce and Labor, July 1, 1903, and the unders'gned members
of the committee believe that they are justified in assuming that it
is not within the province of the Committee on Expenditures in the
Department of Commerce and Labor to investigate the action of
certain aliens and officials formerly connected with other departments
with regard to matters over whch the Department of Commerce and
Labor has never had jurisdiction.

We believe that our position in the matter is fully supported by the
wording of the resolution of Congress above referred to, adopted on
May 12, 1911, with reference to all letters, reports, and documents
regarding the fur-seal herd from January 1, 1904, up to date.

The undersigned do not wish to be understood as objecting to the
consideration of the matters above referred to or to referrmg them to
the Department of Justice and the Department of State, but it seems
clear that they should in nowise form a part of the report based upon
the House resolution already quoted under which the hearings were
held and the evidence taken.

Although the committee took more than 1,000 pages of testimony,
and the last hearing was six months ago, on July 31, 1912, the com-

7

8 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA.

mittee has never held a single meeting for the purpose of considering
the evidence, and the report made by the chairman was never sub-
mitted to the committee for its consideration, no meeting of the com-
mittee was ever held for that purpose, and we are not satisfied that
it has been approved by a majority of the committee. Carbon copies
of the report were given to the undersigned members of the committee
after the chairman had filed the original.

There are three matters which directly concern the Department of
Commerce and Labor that are discussed in the report heretofore filed,
all of which appear in the latter part of that report. It is stated that
H. H. Taylor, president of the North American Commercial Co., C. H.
Townsend, and George M. Bowers, Commissioner of the Bureau of
Fisheries, did recommend to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor a
re-lease of the said islands for another period of 20 years, and that
the Secretary did intend to re-lease the ase and that public-spirited
citizens prevented such arrangement.

The committee is probably not particularly interested in whether
Mr. H. H. Taylor recommended a renewal of the lease. Mr. Tay-
lor was a private citizen and it was his privilege to recommend
anything he thought proper.

Whether C. H. Townsend (a member of the advisory board, fur
seal service), George M. Bowers (Commissioner of Fisheries), or
Secretary Nagel recommended giving a new lease, can be easily
determined by an examination of the record.

In the first place, it must be remembered that up to April 21,
1910, the law made it mandatory upon the Secretary of Commerce
and Labor to re-lease the islands upon the expiration of the old lease.
(See secs. 4 and 5 of the act of July 1, 1870, Hearing No. 10, p. 462.)
As the lease then existing would expire April 30, 1910, it was nec-
essary for the Secretary to begin in due time consideration of what
should or must be done in the event that the law was not repealed.
It would have been poor administration to delay consideration of
the question until the expiration of the old lease.

On February 13, 1909, David Starr Jordan, in a letter to Oscar S.
Straus, then Secretary of Commerce and Labor, accepting the chair-
manship of the advisory board, fur-seal service, said:

Imay repeat here my hope that the Department of State will proceed zs rapidly as
possible tow:rd the abolition of pelagic sezling, and my hope also that the Govern-
ment will not under any circumstances le: se the products of the islands, at lezst in
such form 2s has been in vogue for the pest 40 years. I think that the Government
should, under the direction of its own naturalists, take the skins that can be spared
and sell these to the highest bidder. (See p. 813, Appendix A, Hesrings before the
Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce and Labor.)

On November 23, 1909, the advisory board, fur-seal service, had
a meeting in Washington, at which were present Drs. Jordan, Stejne-
ger, Lucas, and Townsend, and Hon. Edwin W. Sims, of the advisory
board; George M. Bowers, Barton Warren Evermann, Hugh M. Smith,
Walter I. Lembkey, H. D. Chichester, and Millard C, March, of the
Bureau of Fisheries; and George A. Clark, special scientific expert.
After protracted conferences six recommendations regarding the
management of fur-seal matters were agreed upon. No. 3 of the
recommendations is as follows:

It is recommended that there be adopted a system of regulations similar to those in

force on the Commander Islands, the Government to assume entire control in all
essential matters pertaining to ihe fur seals, blue foxes, natives, and the islands in

THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 9

general, and the lessee to be restricted to the receiving, curing, and shipping of the
skins taken. (See p. 814, Appendix A, hearings before the Committee on Expendi-
tures in the Department of Commerce and Labor.)

It should be noted that George M. Bowers and C. H. Townsend were
both present, participated in the discussions, and united with the
other gentlemen present in this recommendation.

On November 24, 1909, George M. Bowers, Commissioner of
Fisheries, transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor the
recommendations of the advisory board, in all of which he concurred.

On December 7, 1909, two weeks after the recommendation of the
advisory board had gone to the Secretary, which, if acted upon, would
eliminate the lessee about as completely as was possible under the
existing law, Senator Dixon introduced three resolutions (Nos. 90, 91,
and 92), the first of which recommended a revision of the Paris
tribunal regulations, suggested that the then existing lease should not
be renewed and that no commercial killing should be done for 10
years, the other two calling upon the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of Commerce and Labor for certain documents.

On December 15, 1909, the assistant in charge, scientific inquiry,
transmitted to the Commissioner of Fisheries a tentative draft of a
lease drawn in conformity with the terms recommended by the advis-
ory board. Accompanying the dra‘t was a memorandum showing
wherein it differed from the then existing lease. The draft and memo-
randum were transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor
on the same date. (Avpendix A, p. 737.)

On March 15, 1910, the President sent a special message to Congress
recommending the repeal of the law of jaly 1, 1870, which made it
mandatory upon the Secretary of Commerce and Labor to lease the
seal islands. (P. 253, Hearing No. 6.)

On March 17, 1910, Senator Dixon introduced S. 7242, providing
for the repeal of the law of July 1, 1870. The bill (S. 7242) which
Senator Dixon introduced was drawn in the Department of Commerce
and Labor by the Solicitor, upon the direction of the Secretary
(p. 480, Hearing No. 10), and became a law April 21, 1910. ‘The
Secretary appeared before the House and Senate committees and
advocated its passage. From this it is clear that the department
was not in favor of leasing the islands again, and would have done
so only if obliged to by the laws that were in force up to April 21, 1910.

In support of the statement that the testimony discloses that since
April, 1910, or the date of the department’s control, ‘‘ yearling and
female seals have been killed by the agents of the Government”’
reference is made to pages 5-23 of Hearing No. 1. An examimation
of those pages shows that the ‘‘testimony”’ referred to is merely the
assertion of Mr. Elliott which has not a particle of evidence support-
ing It.

The testimony of Agent Lembkey and the other seal agents, the
special investigators, C. M. Lampson & Co., and all others who have
been on the seal islands or who have seen the skins taken, is to the
effect that females have never been killed and that no yearlings have
been killed except a negligible few by accident or error in judgment.
The regulations then in foice required the killing to be restricted to
surplus males with skins weighing not under 5 pounds nor over 84
pounds. (P. 485, Hearing No. 10.) The record of the weights taken
on the islands shows that of the 12,920 skins taken in 1910, only 90

10 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA.

fell below the minimum weight. (P. 130, Hearing No. 3.) These
were green weights. The London salt weights of the same skins
showed 92 below the minimum weight, the agreement being almost
perfect.

In order to bolster up the claim that the island weights had been
reported heavier than they really were it was necessary for Mr.
Elliott to claim that salting increases the weight of the skin. (P. 133,
Heating No. 3.)

But very careful experiments show conclusively that salting has
exactly the opposite effect. (Pp. 564 and 974-977 of hearings.)
According to Mr. Elliott’s own tables a 5-pound skin is the skin of
a 2-year-old seal. (See Elliott’s monograph, pp. 46 and 168.)

‘As to the killing of females in 1910 or 1911, there is not a particle
of evidence indicating that any were killed.

Assuming that by the term Treasury agents are intended the
agents of the Bureau of Fisheries, it may be stated that the services
of said agents can not be dispensed with whether or not commercial
killing goes on. They are necessary to conduct food killings and-
prepare the seal skins for market and to conduct the fox business and
prepare those skins for market. The agents represent all govern-
ment on the islands and exercise a sort of quasi judicial authority.
To them the natives appeal for justice and redress of grievances among
themselves. The agents are the only persons on the islands who are
under bond and financially responsible for the payment of moneys
to the natives or the issuing of supplies to them.

On page 7 of the report it is stated that the North American Com-
mercial Co. combined and agreed with H. H. D. Peirce and Charles H.
Townsend in preparing and promoting and collecting fraudulent
claims in the case of the James Hamilton Lewis.

On page 8 it is stated that Peirce and Townsend prepared the case
for the parties interested and presented their claim on the part of
the United States against the Russian Government at The Hague.

These statements are not in accordance with the facts. C. H.
Townsend went to The Hague simply as a witness to testify regarding
pelagic sealing matters. Townsend had nothing to do with the
representing of claimants. He had nothing to do with preparing cases.
He was nothing more than a witness before The Hague tribunal.

As it has become necessary to file a separate report, the under-
signed members of the committee believe it is proper and advisable
to take up the matter of the charges and the answers thereto and to
incorporate in this report a full statement as to matters presented to
the committee.

Birp McGuire.
Martin B. MaAppeEn.
Cuas. E. Patron.

The Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce
and Labor, to which was referred House resolution No. 73, introduced
by the Hon. Edward W. Townsend, of New Jersey, and adopted May
12, 1911, directing the Secretary of Commerce and Labor to furnish
for the use of the House of Representatives certain correspondence
and documents relating to the condition and management of the fur-
seal herd, has the honor to make the following report:

THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. Rt

STATEMENT OF THE MINORITY AS TO MATTERS PRESENTED TO THE
. COMMITTEE.

House Resolution No. 73, as adopted by the House of Representa-
tives May 12, 1911, is as follows:

Resolved, That the Secretary of Commerce and Labor be, and he is hereby, directed
to furnish for the use and the information of the House of Representatives copies of all
letters received, reports, and documents from his agents in charge of the seal islands of
Alaska, together with copies of all instructions given to those officials aforesiad since
January first, nineteen hundred and four, up to date, which relate to the condition and
management of the fur-seal herd, the conduct of the officers of the Government in
charge of it, and the conduct of the work of the lessees on the seal islands aforesaid,
since January first, nineteen hundred and four, up to date.

Complying with the terms of the resolution, the Secretary of Com-
merce and Labor, on June 24, 1911, transmitted to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives copies of all the letters, instructions,
reports, and documents in the files of the department and responsive
to the resolution.

These letters, instructions, reports, and documents, having been
referred on July 19, 1911, to the Committee on Expenditures in the
Department of Commerce and Labor, were printed as House Docu-
ment No. 93, Sixty-second Congress, first session, with the title:
“Seal Islands of Alaska: Letter from the Secretary of Commerce and
Labor transmitting, in response to House resolution 73, informa-
tion relating to the Seal Islands of Alaska.’”’ The title of this docu-
ment was subsequently changed to ‘“Appendix A to hearings before
the Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Ccmmerce and
Labor, House of Reprecentatives, on House resolution 73, to
investigate the fur-seal industry of Alaska.”’

This document consists of 1,232 closely printed pages.

The committee began its hearmgs May 31, 1911, and concluded
them July 31, 1912. More than 35 sittings were had and about 20
witnesses were heard.

The fullest latitude was allowed each witness in the presentation
of his data and the expression of his views.

The testimony taken at all the hearings up to and including that
of July 31, 1912, has been printed in 14 separate pamphlets totaling
1,013 pages.

The chairman of the committee received a letter dated May 15,
1911, signed by Henry W. Elhott, in which certain general charges
were made regarding the management of the fur-seal service by the
Department of Commerce and Labor.

This letter may be found on pages 22 to 33 of the printed report ot
the hearings before the Committee on Conservation of National
Resources, United States Senate, on the bill (S. 9959) to amend an act
entitled ‘‘An act to protect the seal fisheries of Alaska, and for other
purposes,” approved April 21, 1910, which hearings were held Febru-
ary amor.

The general charges as set forth in that letter are as follows:

CHARGE I. I charge that the conduct of the officialism of the Department of Com-
merce and Labor having the specific control of all details of administration of the
public business on the seal islands of Alaska since January 1, 1905, has been guilty of
violating the law and regulations which it is and was the sworn duty of that officialism
aforesaid to properly and strictly obey.

CHARGE II. I charge that this malfeasance of that officialism above cited has caused

an immense loss of public property on the seal islands of Alaska, and that unless your
honorable committee take prompt action to check and abolish it this same officialism

12 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA.

will in a short period of continuance of its methods be able to and will succeed in com-
pletely destroying the commercial value forever of the fur-seal herd of Alaska.

These charges are general and vague in®character. During the
progress of the hearings, however, they were put in somewhat more
specific form, or more specific charges were made, the most important
of which may be stated as follows:

1. That large numbers of yearling male fur seals have been killed
on the islands contrary to law and the regulations.

2. That large numbers of female fur seals have been killed on the
islands in violation of law.

3. That the killing of male seals on the islands has been so close
that a sufficient number of males for breeding purposes has not been
reserved.

4. That the males have been killed off so closely that there has not
been that struggle for supremacy which is necessary to weed out the
weak and develop an adequate supply of strong, virile bulls for
breeding purposes, and, as a consequence, the Alaska fur seals are
inferior to their ancestors of a few generations ago.

5. That the great decrease in the size of the fur-seal herd since 1890
has been caused by land killing, as practiced by the North American
Commercial Co. and under Government supervision.

A great many minor charges were made which, on account of their
irrelevancy or lack of definiteness, have not been considered by the
committee in this report.

Before entering upon a consideration of the evidence taken by the
committee bearing upon these charges a brief general statement of the
more important facts in the life history and the political history of the
fur seal may be given.

There are in the North Pacific Ocean three closely related species
of fur seals. One of these, known as Callorhinus kurilensis, has its
breeding grounds chiefly on Robben Island, in the Sea of Okhotsk,
a short distance south of Cape Patience, Sakhalin Island. This con-
stitutes the Japanese fur-seal herd, which is the smallest of these
herds. In 1911 it was said that this herd contained only 6,557 seals.
The second species is the Russian fur seal, Callorhinus ursinus, whose
breeding grounds are on Bering and Copper Islands of the Commander
Islands, in Bering Sea, about 150 miles east of Kamchatka, or nearly
1,000 miles west from the Pribilof Islands. This species constitutes
the Russian fur-seal herd, which in 1911 contained between 18,000
and 30,000 seals. The third species is the Alaska fur seal, Callorhinus
alascensis, whose breeding grounds are on St. Paul and St. George,
the two principal islands of the Pribilof group, situated in Bering Sea,
in longitude 170° west, latitude 57° north, and about 200 miles from
the nearest land. This species constitutes the Alaska fur-seal herd,
which is much the largest and most important of the three North
Pacific herds. The census for 1912 gives 215,638 seals as present in
the herd in the past season.

With the transfer of Alaska by Russia to the United States, October
18, 1867, this country came into possession of the Pribilof Islands
and the fur-seal herd inhabiting them.

The first law passed by the United States for the protection of the
fur seal was approved July 1, 1870. It was entitled “An act to pre-
vent the extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska,” and pro-
vided that the Secretary of the Treasury shall lease for a period of 20
years from the 1st day of May, 1870, the right to engage in the busi-
ness of taking fur seals on the islands of St. Paul and St. George,

[ota]

THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 1

under certain specified conditions. In accordance with the require-
ments of this law, the Secretary of the Treasury, on September 3,
1870, leased the islands to the Alaska Commercial Co. That com-
pany carried on the sealing industry under the terms of this lease
during the full period of 20 years. On March 12, 1890, the lease of
the Alaska Commercial Co., being about to expire, the Secretary of
the Treasury leased the islands to another company known as the
North American Commercial Co., for a period of 20 years from the
Ist day of May, 1890. This company carried on the sealing industry
under the terms of its lease for the full period of 20 years.

Upon the formation of the Department of Commerce and Labor
the fur-seal service and all matters relating thereto were, on July 1,
1903, transferred from the Treasury Department to that department
where they were administered directly by the chief clerk, the Solicitor,
or the Assistant Secretary until December 28, 1908, when, by order
of the Secretary, the fur-seal service was transferred to the Bureau
of Fisheries, where it has since remained.

It thus appears that the Department of Commerce and Labor has
had charge of fur-seal matters since July 1, 1903, and that the Bureau
of Fisheries of that department has been in immediate charge since
December 28, 1908. Understanding that the lease of the North
American Commercial Co. would terminate May 1, 1910, and realiz-
ing that under existing law the Secretary of Commerce and Labor
would have to release the islands, the Congress on April 21, 1910,
passed a law which provided that no new lease shall be given, but that
the Government shall take entire charge of all matters on the seal
islands. In conformity with the requirements of that law, the tak-
ing and marketing of the sealskins has been done by the representa-
tives of the Department of Commerce and Labor.

So long as killing of seals was confined to the land it was easy to
regulate the killmg in such a manner as to permit an annual take of
60,000 to 100,000 skins and at the same time maintain the herd at a
high degree of productivity. This was done by saving all the females
and an ample supply of the best males for breeding purposes and
killing the surplus 2-year-old and 3-year-old males. But in the last
years of the lease of the Alaska Commercial Co. certain persons,
chiefly Canadians of Victoria, British Columbia, discovered that the
hunting of seals in the open ocean could be carried on with profit.
It was found that by falling in with the herd in the late winter and
spring months off the coast of Washington, British Columbia, and
southeast Alaska during the spring migration back to the Pribilof
Islands, and again in Bering Sea in summer and fall, when the mother
seals visit their feeding grounds, large numbers of seals could be killed
and the business of pelagic sealing, as it was called, made very
profitable.

Following this discovery, the development of pelagic sealing was
very rapid and the herd diminished correspondingly. Various inter-
national complications followed, which finally resulted in the Paris
tribunal regulations, the important provisions of which prohibited
citizens and subjects of the United States and of Great Britain
(1) from hunting seals at any time within a zone of 60 miles around
the Pribilof Islands, and (2) from hunting seals from May 1 to July 31
in that part of the Pacific Ocean, inclusive of Bering Sea, north of
35° north latitude and east of 180° of longitude. These regulations

14 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA.

went into effect in 1893. On December 29, 1897, an act of Congress
was approved which made it unlawful for any citizen of the United
States to hunt seals anywhere in the north Pacific Ocean, including
Bering Sea, north of the thirty-fifth degree of north latitude.

The Paris tribunal regulations proved very ineffective, in that
they did not prohibit sealing in those portions of Bering Sea fre-
quented by the female seals when they make their periodical trips
from the seal islands to their feeding grounds. Furthermore,
although the law of December 29, 1897, eliminated citizens of the
United States from the ranks of the pelagic sealers, and although the
Paris tribunal regulations placed some restrictions on the pelagic
sealers of British Columbia, there was nothing to prevent citizens of
other nations from engaging in pelagic sealmg. It was not long
until the Japanese became aware of this fact and alive to their oppor-
tunities, and there was soon developed a large Japanese sealing fleet.
As the Japanese were not bound by the Paris tribunal regulations it
was perfectly lawful for them to kill seals anywhere on the high seas
outside of the 3-mile limit. ‘They therefore carried their sealing
operations right up to the territorial, waters of the Pribilof Islands.
There the sealing schooners would form a cordon around and as close
to the islands as possible, covering particularly the routes followed
by the female Hons when going to or returning from their feeding
grounds. ‘lhe result was inevitable; the herd became so reduced
that its commercial extinction was threatened.

Fortunately, in the summer of 1911, negotiations were entered
into by the United States, Great Britain, Japan, and Russia, which
resulted in the convention of July 7, 1911, which it is hoped and
believed will put an entire stop to pelagic sealing.

The foregoing summary is made a part of this report in order that
a clear understanding may be had of the conditions obtaining at
the time when House resolution 73 was introduced.

Under the terms of the resolution it was proper for the committee
to carry its inquiries back to January 1, 1904. The charges all relate
to the administration of the fur-seal service by the Department of
Commerce and Labor and by the Bureau of Fisheries of that depart-
ment. The records show that the fur-seal service was administered
directly by the Department of Commerce and Labor from July 1,
1903, to December 28, 1908, and that it has been handled by the
Bureau of Fisheries, under the general supervision of the Secretary
of Commerce and Labor, since December 28, 1908. This statement
regarding dates is given in order that responsibility may be definitely
fixed.

The charges may now be considered.

First: The charge that large numbers of yearling male seals have
been killed on the islands contrary to law and the regulations:

An examination of the law shows that the act approved July 1,
1870, made it unlawful to kill any seal less than 1 year old, except
such young seals as may be necessary for natives’ food. This pro-
viz:ion remained in the law until superseded by the act approved
April 21, 1910.

The instructions issued to the agent in charge from 1904 to 1911,
both inclusive, in so far as they bear upon this question, were as
follows: In 1904, no seal that had reached the age of 4 years (1. e.,
had attained its fifth summer) nor any seal under 2 years of age (i. e.,

THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 15

that had not attamed its third summer) nor any seal whose skin
weighed less than 53 pounds should be killed; and the kilhng of
pups (. e., seals that have not attained their second.summer), even
for food or any other purpose, was prohibited.

In 1905 the instructions were identical witi: those of 1904.

In 1906 the instructions were identical with these of 1904 and
1905, except that the skin-weight limits were fixed at 5 pounds
minimum and 84} pounds maximum.

In 1907, 1908, and 1909 the instructions were identical with those
of 1906.

In 1910 and 1911 the instructions were the same as in the pre-
ceding four years, except that no age limits were specified, the thought
being that the weight limits of 5 and 84 pounds sufficiently defined
the killable seals and fully restricted the killing to 2-year-old and
3-year-old males.

.It thus appears that although the law permitted the killing of
yearling les (i. e., males that have attained their second summer),
the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, in each year after the fur-
seal service was placed in that department, issued instructions
intended to prevent the killing of yearling seals; and although it
was perfectly lawful to kill pups for food G. e., seals that have not
attained their second summer), nevertheless the Secretary uni-
formly issued directions that such young seals should not be killed
under any circumstances.

Therefore, if at any time in the years 1904 to 1911, both inclusive
the agents knowingly killed or permitted to be killed any male seal
under 2 years of age (i. e., which had not attained its third summer),
they were guilty of violating the law or the instructions of the depart-
ment, which, of course, had the effect of law.

In support of the charge that underaged seals have been killed ref-
erence was made to the London sales sheets of C. M. Lampson & Co.
It was claimed that these sheets presented classifications as to ages,
weights, and measurements of sealskins which would show that large
numbers of skins were undersize and underweight and must have been
taken from seals 1 year old or under. Specific reference was made to
the sales sheets for December 16, 1904, December 15, 1905, and
December 14, 1906. These sheets as presented to the committee show
(1) the lots into which the skins are assorted; (2) the price; (3) the
number of skins in each lot; (4) the category in which the skins of
each lot are placed, as ‘‘middlings,’’ “smalls,” ‘‘middlings and
smalls,’ etc.; (5) the age; and (6) the weight. (See pp. 45 to 63 of
hearings before the Committee on Conservation of National Resources,
United States Senate, on the bill S. 9959, to amend an act entitled
“An act to protect the seal fisheries of Alaska, and for other pur-
poses,” approved Apr. 21, 1910.) An inspection of original copies of
the sales sheets for those years discloses the fact that the copies as
presented to the committee and as printed in the Dizon hearings are
not true copies, but differ materially from the official sales sheets.
True copies of the sales sheets for the years 1904 to 1906 may be found
on pages 385-397 of the hearings of this committee.

An examination of these original sheets shows that they make no
reference either to ages or weights. The data regarding ages and
weights contained in the tables as submitted by the person making
the charges are therefore additions to the original tables and merely

16 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA.

represent interpretations of those tables. Whether those interpreta-
tions and deductions are justified may well be questioned; but there
can be no question as to the impropriety of their being included and
submitted to the committee as a part of the original sales sheets.

The evidence obtained by the committee shows that it is not the
custom of C. M. Lampson & Co. to weigh or measure the sealskins;
they classify them only in a general way as to size, and they some-
times weigh them in lots of 50 or more skins each; but they never
make any statements on their sales sheets as to the ages or weights
of the skins.

The evidence submitted to the committee shows that it has been
the practice of the seal agents to weigh each skin, while green or
unsalted, just as taken from the seal. The printed reports of the
agent, together with his swcrn testimony, show that the weights of
the skins each year fell within the limits fixed by the regulations,
hamely, a minimum cf 53 pounds in 1904 and 1905, and a minimum
of 5 pounds and a maximum of 84 pounds thereafter. We may con-
sider, for illustration, the take of skins in 1910, about which there
has been dispute: The agent weighed a total of 13,583 skins, of
which 90 weighed less than the Ie gal weight of 5 pounds. C. M.
Lampson & Co. we eighed the same Ict of skins, after they had been in
salt several weeks, and found among them 92 skins that weighed
slightly less than the legal weight of 5 pounds each. (See hearings,
pp. 130 and 131.) The salt w eights as certified by C. M. Lampson
& Co. are in almost perfect agreement with the island green weights
as certified by the Government agents.

But the claim was made that although the London weights on
their face agree with the island weights, they do so because the salt
weights are considerably heavier than the green weights, that the
salting process adds from one-half pound to 2 pounds to the green
weight; in other words, the salted skins which weighed 6 pounds and
under (of which there were 7,744, or 8,004, according to the charges
(see these hearings, pp. 131 and 132), could not have weighed as much
as 5 pounds green, and therefore the island green weights were in
reality considerably less than the weights reported by the agent.

This matter seems, therefore, to hinge upon the question as to the
effect which salting has upon the weight of the skin. Does the salt-
ing increase or decrease the weight of a skin ?

Fortunately, several experiments have been made for the purpose
of determining the fact in this matter. The results of each and all
of these experiments are the same, namely, the salting process
slightly decreases the weight of the skin. (See these hearings, pp.
416, 546-563, 564, 974— 97. ) The amount of decrease seems to vary
with the amount of blubber left on the skin, the greater the amount
of blubber the greater the decrease as a result of salting. (See these
hearings, p. 557.) It should be stated that the testimony of taxi-
dermists and others accustomed to handling skins of animals is in
agreement with the results obtained by the experiments presented
to the committee. (See these hearings, p. 560.)

We are, therefore, of the opinion that no trustworthy evidence has
been submitted to substantiate the charge that undersized or under-
aged seals have been killed in any considerable numbers. The fact
that in a total of 13,583 skins taken in 1910, only 90 were under the
legal weight speaks well for the care of the ‘agent and the excellent

THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA, A
judgment of the native killers in estimating the weights of skins
while yet on the animals’ backs.

Second. The charge that large numbers of females have been killed
on the islands: The law of July 1, 1870, expressly prohibits the killing
of female seals, and that provision of law was in force during the entire
period of the lease of the North American Commercial Co. (1890-
1910). Itisa provision of the law of April 21, 1910, and the instruc-
tions issued annually to the agent in immediate charge of the seal
islands have always expressly stated that only male seals are to be
killed. Therefore, if female seals have been intentionally killed on
the islands, such killing was plainly in violation both of the law and
the regulations.

The evidence presented in support of the charge that female seals
have been killed is as follows:

(a) On August 4, 1908, a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on
Territories visited St. Paul Island, and while witnessing a killing one
of the Senators found three female seals among those which had been
knocked down by the clubbers. The agent’s explanation of this
occurrence is that the drive was made August 4, four days after the
close of the killing season and after the harems had broken up and
the female seals had mixed up, as is their habit at that season, with
the bachelor seals; that-the clubbers were more or less excited on
account of the presence of so large a number (some 25 or 30) of
strangers on the island; and that the knocking down of two or three
females was an accident due entirely to the unusual conditions then
obtaining.

We accept this view. We do not believe that the killing of these
females was intentional or that it would have occurred if the drive
had been made in the regular killing season. (See these hearings,
p. See.)

(b) It is claimed that if many thousands of seals under 1 year old
have been killed, as has been charged, and as it is difficult to dis-
tinguish the sexes of the younger classes of seals, it necessarily follows
that a large proportion of the young seals killed must have been
females.

The truth of this charge is contingent upon the truth of the first
charge, namely, that large numbers of young seals, 1 year old or
younger, have been killed.

The evidence submitted is entirely inadequate to establish the
truth of the first charge. The evidence in support of the second
charge is equally imadequate, and we are of the opinion that female
seals have never been intentionally killed on the islands since the fur-
seal service was transferred to the Department of Commerce and
Labor.

Third. The charge that a sufficient number of male seals for breed-
ing purposes has not been reserved may now be considered.

No evidence of the truth of this charge was submitted to the com-
mittee. The charge appears to be nothing more than an unsup-
ported expression of opinion. On the other hand, it is admitted by
all that the fur seal is a polygamous species in which one male is able
to serve 30 to 50 or even 100 females. According to the agent’s
annual reports it is seen that special attention was given each year
to this question. The observations showed that so far as could be

H. Rept. 1425, 62-32

18 THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA,

definitely determined every adult cow had received proper service
and that there has been each year a considerable number of idle bulls.
The average harems have not been too large.

Fourth. The charge that the male seals have been killed off so
closely that there has not been that struggle for supremacy which is
necessary to weed out the unfit, and that as a consequence the breed-
ing male seals of recent years have been lacking in virility.

Like the preceding charge this has not been supported by any
evidence; no data, facts, or figures were submitted to the committee
as proof of the assertion. This charge is therefore merely an expres-
sion of opinion or theory.

Tn answer to this charge attention was called to the fact that from
October or November to May or June the seals are in the ocean per-
forming a long journey of many thousands of miles; that the rigors,
vicissitudes, and dangers of this winter migration are many and so
great that the weak and unfit are weeded out and only the physically
strong and fit survive these hardships for the six or seven years
necessary to bring them to the breeding age. It is also claimed by
all who have seen the fur-seal herd in recent years that there is no
evidence of deterioration, and it is in evidence that there has been no
complaint from London that the skins are not up to the standard.

Fifth. The last charge is that the great decrease in the size of the
herd has been brought about by land killing rather than by pelagic
killing.

The following facts bearing on this question appear to have been
fully established by the evidence presented to the committee:

1. In land: killing it has been the uniform practice of the Govern-
ment to reserve all the females and a sufficient number of males for
breeding purposes, and to kill only such males as are not needed as
breeders. Females are never intentionally killed under any circum-
stances.

2. The statistics show that the total number of seals killed on the
Pribilof, Commander, and Robben Islands in the years 1890 to 1897
was 357,503 males and no females; and that the number secured
during the same period by the pelagic sealers was 635,739, of both
sexes.

3. Mr. George Rice, a dyer and dresser of sealskins in London, has
stated under oath that at least 80 per cent of the pelagic sealskins are
skins of female seals. This means that the number of females secured
by the pelagic sealers in the years 1890 to 1897 was 508,591, which
exceeds the total number killed on the islands in the same period by
more than 151,000. In other words, for every 6 males killed on land
2 males and 9 females were killed in the water.

4. It is also in evidence that all are agreed that of the seals mor-
tally wounded by the pelagic sealers not all are recovered; many
sink or escape before they can be reached, and are lost. The loss
has been estimated as high as four out of five, and by some even
much higher. The lowest estimate is that at least half of those killed
are not recovered. Accepting this very conservative estimate, it is
safe to say that the number of females killed at sea by the pelagic
sealers in 1890 to 1897 was not fewer than 1,017,182.

5. It is also admitted by all that practically every female that is
killed at sea is heavy with young or leaves a pup to starve miserably
on the land. This means the death in those eight years of at least

THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 19

1,017,182 more seals of which 508,591 would be females. Thus the
total loss of female seals in the eight years must have been not fewer
than 1,525,773, to say nothing of the 763,087 males that were killed
or died as a result of pelagic sealing.

» 6. The growth of the herd is directly dependent upon the number
of breeding females in the herd. The total increase in any year can
not exceed the number of breeding females.

Tn view of this essential fact, and in the light of the figures showing
the enormous destruction of female seals by pelagic sealing, which it
is believed are conservative and trustworthy, we are convinced that
the sole important cause of the decrease of the fur-seal herd during
the last decade has been pelagic sealing, and that land killing as
practiced on the Pribilof Islands during that time has had nothing
to do with the diminution of the herd.

After a careful examination and consideration of all the evidence,
we find that the administration of the fur-seal service by the Depart-
ment of Commerce and Labor and by the Bureau of Fisheries of that
department has been in accordance with the law; that the regula-
tions issued from time to time by the department and the instructions
issued to the agents have been properly observed; that the fur-seal
herd has been handled intelligently; and that the charges have not
been sustained.

Birp McGuire.
Martin B. Mappen.
Cuas. E. Patron.

mt | WNW NT
\\| (\\| 1]
| HN |||

Hl, ti AW
1)