eals of Alaska. _ SEPARA ROR a oT aaah HT % | / a S43 lqo4 Cornell AMniversity Library Onasid 9. Boheme re 7 oe) : vdidetaie recess: periods’ “more “alt books not i in ‘se. “ for instruction ° or ‘re- ete search. are limited to |, four, weeks to all bor- we “rowers. Periodicals of aa en- eral character should be returned ds soon as possible ; when needed ; ./ beyond “two weeks’ a. ° special request’ should - be made. Limited borrowers’ ate allowed five vol- umes for two weeks, ‘with « renewal , privi leges,:when a. book: ds not needed by ‘others. Books not needed: | should be- returned ‘tor. , _ the library, orarrange-_ ments ‘made for their. ; return during borrow- 3 _ ers absence, if wanted. an one person : a needed by... are placed on. the rev" ‘ - serve list. ae Cornell cpryversity Likresy HJ9.A5 S43 19 ‘inition Uv . f : j Apr, a off ey aan ol CAio Abe - Jed asco ofr e dan, Ark, pp ub, ug. oh 49 FUR SEALS OF "ALASKA. \ SE Oa ee ae AAA tes gig. Oe HHARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, os HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, ~~ 88th CONGRESS, 2d SESSION. CONSISTING OF Sereno E. Paynes, of New York, Chairman. Jonn Dauzet, of Pennsylvania. James E. Watson, of Indiana. Cuartes H. Grosvenor, of Ohio. Cuar.zs Curtis, of Kansas. James A. Tawney, of Minnesota. Joun 8. Wixiiams, of Mississippi. SamugeL W. McCatt, of Massachusetts. Samvuset M. Rozsertson, of Louisiana. JoserH W. Bascock, of Wisconsin. CiaupE A. Swanson, of Virginia. Vicror H. Mercatr, of California. Sam Bronson Coopsr, of Texas. Esenezer J. Hiuu, of Connecticut. Cuamp Crark, of Missouri. Hewry 8. Bourett, of Illinois. *Ww. Bourke Cockran, of New York. HULL GREENFIELD, Clerk. * Mr. COCKRAN appointed to committee March 10, 1904. MARCH 9 and 10, 1904. ml ts shih WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. Cogs oan ru HI AS S43 /G04 A179 286 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page. Resolution under consideration.........-.----------------2 22 - eee ee eee eee 57 Members present at hearings.........----..------------2 22 eee eee eee eee 1, 19, 39 Statements of: Mr. Elliott— Main statements wc saccceh esate ehitas coe cee hee oats 1-10, 41-52 Incidental remarks........--------- 11, 18, 16, 21, 22, 24, 27, 28, 29, 36, 54, 55 Exhibits, tables, etc., filed with committee. Mr. Faulkner— Main statements occ). ccc cece cca c eke ee Deck cceeee an, 10-18, 19-33 Incidental remarks cco. ce locis sees isers seis wisedceine ee bacon nisie 5, 46, 51 References to Jordan’s Report, 1898 ....-.-.-----------++---1------ 33 Mr. Hitchcock— Main statements... idcees 652 ae teescaececcteue es cid hdesas 384-89, 52-56 Incidental. remarkee< 222226522 Cho nbssoses oe eedie oes aeeaasecces 42, 50 Tables Submitted a2 scares ete. we isieieieteieea reac eas Meamiael dees as 57-59 Mr Ivey esc seciasdee ce thatch tig. pie dadtoceseeknecce's Sooesatieee 39-41 APPENDIX. Resolution under consideration....-...---.---------------- eee eee ee eee eee 57 Tables submitted by Mr. Hitchcock .--.......-.-.--------------+2-----+--- 57-59 Exhibits, etc., submitted by Mr. Elliott --....-...--.----------+----------- 59-76 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. ComMMITTEE on Ways anp M&rans, Wednesday,' March 9, 1904. The committee this day met at 10.30 o’clock a. m., Hon. Sereno E. Payne in the chair. Members present: The chairman, Messrs. Dalzell, Grosvenor, Tawney, McCall, Metcalf, Hill, Boutell, Watson, Curtis, Williams, Robertson, Swanson, Cooper, and Clark. The Cuairman. This meeting was called this morning at the request of Mr. Williams, of Mississippi, and it is a hearing on the resolution (H. J. Res. 124) introduced March 2, 1904, by Mr. Robinson, of Indiana. (See p. 57.) Mr. Williams, whom do you desire to hear first? Mr. Wruuiams. I do not care, but I think Mr. Elliott vould like to be heard first. : Mr. Tawney. How much time do you want? Mr. Exxiorr. I can hardly tell you. If I can print these tables and facts, 1 will not desire very much time. The CuarrMan. Well, how much time? Mr. Extiottr. Not over thirty minutes. The CuarrMan. We will give you thirty minutes, and you can print all you want to. Mr. Exxiotr. Then I will try to quit when my thirty minutes have expired. STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY W. ELLIOTT. (See also p. 41.) Mr. Exxiotr. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I stood here before you two years ago, and I believe I told you that we ‘would find trouble if we did not check up our people and the Canadian hunters inside of two years. I told you that before the Canadian hunters had finished that life our people would accomplish it them- selves under existing rules and regulations. We have now come face to face with the realization of my prophecy. We have the evidence here in black and white. We have the evidence here that during the last four years the killing on the islands has run down to the very dregs of the young male life which the law allows them to kill. We have that evidence in indisputable, incontestable figures furnished by the agents of the contractors themselves. We have that evidence fur nished by the agents of the Government, although it is clouded, doc- tored, and concealed, in the reports of the Secretary of the Treasury. I would not be here, Mr. Chairman, if the report of the Secretary of the Treasury told you all of the truth. It would not be necessary for me to come down here and make an argument of the kind I am 1 2 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. about to make. But when we are face to face, as a recent Senatorial investigating committee declares, with a condition of affairs on the Pribilof Islands which demands our immediate action in holding up the hands of our own butchers on the islands and paying no attention to the men in the sea who are killing seals there I think I am justified in coming before you again. Mr. Chairman, the Secretary of the Treasury, in his last annual report to Congress, and just before he turned it over to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor last summer, July 1, devotes two short para- graphs to this question only. There is not a line in those paragraphs which speaks of the slightest danger to this life up there; not a hint in it that he intends. or thinks it is proper to stop any killing that is now allowed by law up there; not a word about the Loe hunters who have taken 27,000 skins there; there is in its text not the slightest sug- gestion that anything is wrong, and it passes from him and goes to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor on the Ist of July last. Mr. Dauzeu. I have just read this resolution for the first time. Is there any contract in existence? Mr. Exuiotr. I am coming to that. Oh, yes; 1 will explain that ‘fully; I know about that. J aided Mr. Windom in drawing that up. He consulted with me over it, having at the time an idea that he might be obliged to suspend the work of the lessees wholly or in part very soon. The Cuarrman. I would suggest that you spend more time on that matter than the other. Of course every member knows more or less about the seal fisheries. I presume you have gotten all this in those printed documents? Mr. Exxiorr. Yes. The CuarrmMan. I would suggest that you address yourself more particularly to this point—whether this isa remedy and whether there are any difficulties in the way or contracts in the way. Mr. Exxiotr. I simply wanted to show the warrant for my being here, on account of the deficiency of knowledge in these departmental reports. Mr. Cortelyou on the Ist of July takes this up. He inherits these agents of the Treasury Department and he inherits all the machinery of the business without any knowledge of it himself; and, in one sense of the word, of course, he is in no way responsible for anything that has taken place. He takes it up, and in his first annual report he gives you an itemized account of what they have taken on those islands, but he does not allude to the work of the pelagic sealers; he does not give you a hint of a desire to stop the killing; but he goes further than Secretary Shaw-—he does declare that the breeding bulls on these rookeries in the last three years have diminished nearly 50 per cent. But he says in the same breath that the cows have increased 9 per cent. This seems to have given Mr. Cortelyou an idea that there was something wrong about the charge that the pelagic hunter was doing all the harm. Fifty per cent of our breeding bulls have been killed off, and yet at and in the same time there is an increase of 9 per cent in the cows! That fact evidently strikes Mr. Cortelyou as something remarkable, but he does not say anything more. He also refers to the fact that these Canadian pelagic seal hunters have appeared as “Japanese” hunters. He says the presence of sealing schooners in sight of the islands this summer, before the beginning of the pelagic season in FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 3 Bering Sea, ‘‘indicated a pursuit of the American herd of seals during the closed season. .It was impossible to determine the nationality of the schooners. There is reason to believe, however, that foreigners are not the only offenders.” Mr. Cortelyou thinks there is something wrong but he can not say what, and, naturally, he can not. There is no way of finding out. The result in short is this: Our people under existing laws and regu- lations, Mr. Chairman, have killed the young male seal so close that during the last four years no young male that has passed the killing ground as a 2-year-old ever got through the next year as a 38-year-old that he was not killed in the third year as a 4-year-old. He has no more chance to run that gauntlet under existing conditions than you would have of walking down Pennsylvania avenue with men on each side of the street shooting at you from the Capitol to the Treasury, and escaping. Intwo years more, unless we let these young male seals grow up undisturbed, there will not be a propagator of the species on the breeding grounds. It becomes necessary at once to step in here and stop this work on the islands for a period of some years; it may be four; it may be five; it may be seven years; we can not tell how long. Mr. Tawney. Did Russia at one time stop the killing of seals on the Pribilof Islands? Mr. Exsiorr. Yes; it stopped the land killing. Mr. Tawney. I mean land killing. Mr. Exvtiorr. Yes; the land killing on the Russian side—— Mr. Tawney. In what year? Mr. Exriorr. From 1817 to 1834 they ran out. Then they stopped it entirely in 1834; there was no such industry as pelagic sealing in sight or even known of then. They were killing as our people are, and allowing no choice young inales to grow up and get on the breed- ing grounds. Mr. Tawney. How long did they prohibit the killing? Mr. Exxtrotr. They held it up about twelve years. Mr. Tawney. And in that time to what extent did the herd increase? Mr. Extiorr. In twelve years they were killing from 30,000 to 40,000. In fifteen years they raised it to 50,000, and when we took the islands from Russia—there were 4,500,000 seals there—they were then killing between 45,000 and 60,000 young male seals annually. Mr. Hitx. What is the use of suspending the killing of these males if you are going to allow pelagic sealing to continue? . Mr. Extiott. We want to save the fur-seal species itself. If wedo not stop this close slaughter of young male seals we can not save the species. We want to save the life itself; we must save these young males from our own hands or lose the life itself, long before the female life goes out. ; ; Mr. Tawney. Did not the last Congress, or the House at least, pass a bill intending to give to the President of the United States authority to reopen negotiations with Great Britain for the purpose of adopting new regulations in regard to pelagic. sealing? I know that bill did not pass the Senate in the form it passed the House, but is it not a fact that the sundry civil bill gave to the President of the United States authority to open these negotiations for that purpose 4 Mr. Extrott. The President has authority under the Paris treaty to open it every five years. This gave him the power. But the minute the Secretary of State attempted to use that power the chairman of the 4 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Anglo-American Joint High Commission went to him and said, ‘* No; we have got charge of that; we are going to meet soon, and we have got it all settled.” Bn oat ; Mr. Tawney. What I want to get at is, if this bill is passed there is authority. In fact, Congress has directed the President of the United States to reopen these negotiations for the purpose of adopting new regulations. Mr. Exuiorr. The Senate has passed a simple resolution to that effect. a My. Tawney. The sundry civil appropriation bill gave the provision to that effect. Mr. Exziorr. That is it; that is very true; but it does not carry this clause. Mr. Tawney. But if this was adopted, then it would lead to the-—— Mr. Etriorr. Oh, yes. Mr. Tawney. It would lead to the negotiations that the President is authorized to open in the sundry civil bill? ' Mr. Exxrotr. It would put a stop to killing on land. Mr. Tawney. And then the State Department would be authorized to go ahead and negotiate with foreign governments. The Cuatrman. How about Great Britain? They kill more by the pelagic sealing, and, as I understand it, we are willing to have it stopped. It is Great Britain we want to act upon. In regard to one of these questions that Mr. Tawney has asked you in regard to Russia having stopped it, at that time was there pelagic sealing going on to any extent? - Mr. Exvziorr. No, sir; there was none. The CHarrMan. So the effect it produced upon the seal life then can not be compared with the effect it might produce now with pelagic sealing ¢ Mr. Exziorr. Not as rapid or disastrous; but it would amount to the same thing. It shows without pelagic sealing, with the same law we are applying to-day, we can ourselves destroy that life. That is beyond alr argument. The CuarrmMan. You were going on to speak about the effect of this bill in regard to bringing about negotiations with Great Britain. Mr. Extiottr. The resolution has this simple effect in my opinion. It has a good effect for the Secretary of State, because it eliminates all commercialism from his negotiations. Now, we are constantly being met by the British side of the case: ‘‘ You want to save seals for your butchers, and my butchers are as good as yours, and if you don’t get rid of your butchers I am not going to meddle with mine.” That is the long and short of it. If westop our butchers from killing these seals, which we must do—and the deadly parallel of the Russian record shows it has been done by land killing—we will be able to save the species; if we do not do that, we shall destroy the species itself, and the sin and shame of it will then be on our own hands and not on the bands of the Canadian butchers. Mr. Tawney. Under the contract of this lessee, at what age are they permitted to kill young seals? Mr. Extrorr. They are not permitted to kill young seals under 1 year of age. But I have the records here that show that since 1899 thousands and tens of thousands of yearlings have been killed, and FUR SEALS OF ALASKA, 5 they don’t know whether they are under a year old or not—-whether they are 11 months old or 12 months old or 13 months old. Mr. Metcatr. Where do you get the records? Mr. Exxiorr. From the London sales, where the skins are tagged and weighed and prepared. 1 have my figures from the agents of the _ lessees themselves, and there is no disputing them. Therefore, I want to say if we can stop this killing—which this resolution will stop, and. stop it beyond the pee of anybody to continue—we will be able to save the species. J have every confidence in Mr. Cortleyou, but we do not know whom we may have as Secretary of Commerce and Labor in the future, and if we do not hold this up and make these people, if they want to kill, come here and give the reason, they will get in there again too soon and undo all the good we are doing. Mr. Tawnry. Isthere any evidence, except the report of the London sales, tending to show that the lessees are killing male seals under a year old? Mr. Extiotr. Yes; I have the evidence of the Treasury agent on the islands. Mr. Tawney. Do you know whether or not the Senate committee that visited the Pribilof Islands last year discovered whether the lessees were violating their contracts ? Mr. Extiotr. Yes; I am authorized by Senator Nelson to tell you all about it, if you want to know. Mr. Favtxner. I would like to state, if the committee will permit me, that the Senate committee, to which reference has been made, stated before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that they had no criticism whatever to make of the lessee; that they had obeyed the law implicitly. Mr. Mercatr. I suggest that the witness be allowed to go ahead and make his statement and not be interrupted. The CHarrman. Yes; that is the best way. Mr. Extiott. I am willing to be interrupted. The Cuarrman. The committee is unwilling to have you. Mr. Tawnuy. Please answer those questions, and then go ahead. Mr. Wittiams, of Mississippi. The first one was whether you had any evidence about these seals being killed? Mr. Exuiotr. Yes; I have here the official reports of the Treasury agents. oor. Tawney. What do they show? Mr. Ex.uiort. I will read from the report of Special Treasury Agent Lembkey, in charge of the seal islands, made in August, 1901, to the . Secretary of the Treasury: The lessees during the season (1901) took skins ranging from a maximum of 10 pounds to a minimum of 5 pounds. Previous to 1900 the lowest limit of weight was 6 pounds, but a 5-pound limit was established that year, and during the past season (1901) as many 5-pound skins as could be found were taken. This official knew what he was saying in 1901, because the following classification was published in 1872 and 1874, and has been accepted as the standard unit of weight and age by all parties concerned, Govern- ment officers, lessees, and natives, and it has been the rule ever since. A 43- pound skin is the hide of an average yearling. A 5-pound skin is the hide of a well- “grown yearling. These skins are known as ‘‘eye plasters.” A 6-pound skin is the hide of an average 2-year-old. 6 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. f A 64-pound skin is the hide of a well-grown 2-year-old. These skins are known as ‘‘short” skins. All 7 to 8 pound skins are the hides of 3-year-olds. All 9 to 11 pound skins are the hides of 4-year-olds. These skins are known as ‘‘ prime,” ‘‘ fine,” and ‘‘extra fine” skins. Here we have the official proof in 1901 of the fact that the lessees dropped their limit from a 2-year-old skin to a yearling skin, and since then they have taken everything they could find. Who disputes it? Ido not. I did not make that statement, and that is brought out by these records to the dot. It is borne out by the London echoes. There is no disputing the fact that they have done this thing. I want to say right here that 1 am not here to find fault with these men. I have a good deal of sympathy for them. They see these butchers at sea taking everything they can lay their hands on and they say, ‘‘ We pay $10 a skin for these, and we bad better have them rather than those fellows;” but, unfortunately, the butcher wants everything, whether he is on the water or on the land, and it is hard to stop him. We have reached the point where we must stop him, because they will get all the males and stop the life before those butch- ers in the water get all the females. Now, 1 will come to the contract. Mr. Wiuuiams, of Mississippi. You forgot that other question of Mr. Tawney’s. ~ Mr. Exxiorr. Mr. Tawney, vour question was about Senator Nel- son’s visit? Mr. Tawney. Yes; I wanted to know whether you had any evi- dence Mr. Extiottr. The evidence is the evidence he told me I could pre- sent here. Mr. Tawney. Did he make a statement? Mr. Extiotr. He made a statement before the Foreign Relations Committee, but it was not taken down; it was not printed. Mr. Wittiams, of Mississippi. We had better have Senator Nelson’s own statement about that. Mr. Exxiotr. Shall I take up the contract? - The Cuarrman. Yes. Your time is nearly up already. Mr. Exxiotr. Mr. Windom, a lawyer skilled in the law, drew a lease which binds these lessees, May 1, 1890, for a period of twenty years to abide faithfully by any restrictions or limitations that he might see fit to put upon their right to kill seals, that he might see fit for the preservation of the seal fisheries of those islands under the law. The law of July 1, 1870, section 3, reserved to the Government the right to make any killing there that it may see fit. The lawof July 1, 1870, reserved the right of the Government to kill seals for food for the natives. The law of July 1, 1870, section 4, gives the lessees their lease—authorizes them in distinct terms, nowhere conflicting with sec- tions 3 and 1. Now, this question was brought here and argued at great length by the attorney of the lessee in the presence of the subcommittee of this House when the first seal bill was pending, February 20, 1895. Messrs. Thomas B. Reed, W. L. Wilson, Henry G. Turner, and Benton MeMil- lin were the subcommittee, and they listened to the attorney for the lessee, Gen. N. L. Jeffries, who argued at length against the right to suspend the operations of his company which the Dingley bill pro- FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 7 vided for. What was the opinion of these lawyers of this committee? [Reading from memorandum:] The question being raised pending the consideration of the House bill (No. 8633) introduced by Governor Nelson Dingley, jr., the attorney for the lessees, Gen. N. L. Jeffries, argued at length against the right of the Government to completely suspend the work of the lessees, as the terms of the pending bill ordered. Thereupon the subcommittee held: 1. That the clause in the lease which binds the lessees to ‘‘ obey and abide by any restrictions upon the right to kill seals that the Secretary of the Treasury shall judge necessary, under the law, for the preservation of the seal fisheries of the United States’’ enables the Government (the Secretary of the Treasury being the agent only of Congress) at any time to completely restrict or suspend the work of the lessees. This authority for this restriction 1s found in section 3 of the act approved July 1, 1870. 2. That the right to kill seals for natives’ food is expressly reserved by section 1 of the act approved July 1, 1870, for the Government, and is not covered or merged into the terms of the lease which are authorized by section 4 of the act approved July 1, 1870. This report was unanimous. It was’ unanimously adopted by the full committee. They were good lawyers, gentlemen, and the bill was reported by Chairman Wilson. (Report No. 1849, 53d Cong., 3d sess.) That is all thrashed over pretty thoroughly. Now, gentlemen, I want to come right back to the other obligations of this contract. The lessees claim that they have a benevolent arrangement under their lease, and they will be put to great expense if they are suddenly suspended. Idenyit. The Government has borne the entire expense of caring for these people since 1890. The Treasury rules and regu- lations, which I have here, are so framed that the company to-day does not expend one dollar under the terms of their contract for the support of those natives. It takes it out of them by the fox-skin con- tract, and it takes it out of them from 10 to 20 per cent on the store goods which it sells to them. The whole cost of their benevolent con- tract with these natives is not five or six thousand dollars a year— coal, doctors, and schools. That is all that comes under the benevolent contract. Their widows and orphans’ clause costs about $150 a year. They take from four to five thousand dollars away from the natives under the fox-skin regula- tion which might go to the natives just as well as not. They take from 10 to 20 per cent on the store goods easily, which brings it up to seven or eight thousand dollars. This amount they get, in short, directly back from the natives. So they are even, so far as the benevo- lent contract is concerned, and if it was suspended the Government has got nothing to do but go on just.as it has been doing—paying the whole thing. There will be no hitch, no crook in lifting them at once from that work of killing, and so saving this life. There is no legal difficulty, and there is no moral trouble about it, and if we do not do it we have lost this life. I have all these items here, and I am ready to answer any ques- tion and close. ; Mr. Hiri. What is the difference between you and Doctor Jordan in regard to the policy to be followed? Mr. Ex.iotr. Professor Jordan has assumed that there is no such thing as excessive land killing of male seals. He has assumed that in defiance of the official Russian reports and records, which show that the land killing did destroy this herd from millions of seals in 1800 down to less than 26,000 seals on St. Paul’s Island in 1824 by doing 8 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. the same work that is going on to-day. There is no difference in the matter. They are taking every fine young male, and that will go on until all the best breeders are gone. Mr. Mercaur. What is the length of life of these animals? Mr. Exuiotr. The male reaches his maturity at 5 or 6 years, and the female in 3 years. The male can propagate first when he is 6 years old. The female receives the male when she is 2 years old, but they come outas yearlings exactly alike in weight, size, color, and skin, and every other outward resemblance, and you can not tell them apart unless you turn them over and examine them sub ano. Mr. Mzrcaty. What is the length of life if they are left alone? Mr. Exxiotr. A bull seal will serve sixteen or eighteen years if he is left. alone, I think. It is difficult to speak with authority on the subject. I advanced that proposition in 1872-1874, and no man has disputed it since; also no man can positively affirm it. The female reaches her maturity at 3 years old, and I think she lives ten or eleven years. I goon the general analogy that runs through life, taking three times the age of puberty. It takes a male six years to reach puberty. Therefore I argue, as I would with a dog, ora cat, ora horse, that he would be eighteen years in service and then drop out. Mr. Mercautr. Where do they die? Mr. Exnrorr. At sea. When they feel the rigor of death coming on they go out to sea; it is more comfortable in the water. Mr. Hitt. Is it Professor Jordan’s opinion that no action -is neces- sary ¢ Mr. Extrorr. Yes; he thinks everything has reached a point of equi- librium. He claimed six years ago that they would not increase or diminish very much; that the pelagic hunters were going out of business. Mr. Tawney. What is the size of the herd now? Mr. Extiotr. The Treasury agent, in the presence of his chief and in my presence, December 17, last year, told me there were 150,000 of all classes, which I think is about right. The Treasury agent also told me afterwards that he did not think there were any more. He could not count on any more. That was the Ist of August. Since then 20,000 seals were killed in Bearing Sea. I do not think there will be 120,000 alive there next summer. Mr. Wiuitams. And there were 450,000 when Doctor Jordan said that he thought it would remain in equilibrium ? Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, there were 450,000 left, There is no use in Doctor Jordan or any other man arising here and saying he can improve on a law of nature for the breeding of wild animals. It is not scien- tific, and real scientific men will never indorse such a doctrine. I could name naturalists who would come here and scout at it, but there is no use in this—-that is not necessary—the life is gone. We have the dregs here, and yet these butchers come in and want to drain it. We have spent fourteen years trying to save it, and now if we let it go out with a bad smell it is too bad. 1 do not believe you will let it go in that scandalous manner. Mr. Mrrtoatr. In this bill (H. R. 138553, 57th Congress) there is this recital: ‘‘ Whereas the Government of the United States is reduced, by the failure of these official negotiations aforesaid, to the painful position of having been and being obliged to breed and protect annually some ¥UR SEALS OF ALASKA. gy 50,000 female seals on the seal islands of Alaska,” etc. Are there that many female seals? Mr. Extiorr. There are 50,000 there to-day, yes; that is what there are there to-day; that is right. But they will not last much longer when the male life drops away from them. Mr. Mercaur. Then follows: “‘ Whereas the killing of thousands of mother seals at sea every year,” ete. Mr. Exurotr. Yes, sir. 1 want to tell you right there, Mr. Metcalf, it is impossible for us to tell the exact proportion of female seals these butchers get in the water. We can only get it in a general way. You can depend upon one thing and that is the great bulk taken off the rookeries are nursing mothers, because we see the young pups starv- ing there. Some of our agents have seen the milk and blood com- mingled on the decks of the sealers’ vessels. There is no question but what the great bulk of their catch is nursing mother females while ‘hunting in Bering Sea during August and September, annually. Mr. Wittt1ams. I would like for you to give the stenographer a brief account of your connection personally with this. Mr. Extiorr. Jam glad you asked me to do that. That is frequently asked. Mr. Wiu1ams, of Mississippi. How you were officially employed. Mr. Ex.iotrr. In 1872 I was asked by Joseph Henry and Spencer F. Baird, the Director and the Assistant Director of the Smithsonian Insti- tution, to make a biological study of the islands, and [ did so. ; In 1874 I was again sent to those islands under a special act of Con- gress, with a revenne-marine cutter put under my service. Mr. Wittiams. Were you in the Navy then? Mr. Exxrorr. No; I was the artist of the Smithsonian Institution and the private secretary of Joseph Henry when I went up there. In 1890 I was asked by Mr. Windom to go up again under authority of a special act of Congress which was drafted in this committee and passed _ by Congress for the express purpose of sending me up there; 1 made that report to Secretary Windom, which is here and which was sup- pressed in 1891 by the one who succeeded Mr. Windom as an accident of death. He did so because I insisted that land killing at that time depleted the herd as much as sea killing. Then our own incompetent agents went over to Paris with that untruth in their mouths, and there got beaten out of it, as they ought to have been. I would not allow myself to step down one peg from this truth; not for anybody—not for Mr. Blaine, or even for the President himself; they could not com- pel me todoit; sol parted company with them there, January 19, 1891. Mr. Tawney. Are you in any way connected with this subject now? Mr. Extiott. Not officially. I have only that interest which any naan would have who knew it as I know it. I don’t want to see a life wiped out as I have seen it, the most wonderful Mr. Wiitams, of Mississippi. You were selected by the Smithson- ian Institution to make a special biological study of this question, and you made it? Mr. Exxiorr. J was selected by the Smithsonian Institution to make a special biological study of the question, yes; and I made it. I was the first artist that ever Jived among those islands. I made the first study and surveys of this work that were ever made by a trained observer. And this work of mine has stood—not a line added to it or 10 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. taken from it by these jealous naturalists that have been over my trail since, and they do not attempt to do it. They only differ with me on the land question, and they have come to judgment now in these figures and facts that are piled up against them. STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES J. FAULKNER. (See also p. 19.) Mr. Fauutxner. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I appreciate very highly the courtesy which you have extended to me ~ as the representative of the North American Commercial Company, the lessees of the Government, to express the views which it has in reference to the approval by you of this joint resolution. I shall not follow Mr. Elliott im his attacks on the officials of the Government. I do not feel it is necessary for me to justify the action of the Secretary of the Treasury in his regulations and control of this subject. He is sufficiently known to the members of this committee to assure them that if he had deemed it proper or necessary to make any special recommendations as to this matter, by reason of the official facts in the possession of the Department, that he would not have hesitated to do so in his report. There is no reason that I can conceive of why he should not. Per- mit me to briefly recall some facts to your memory that you gentle- men are more familiar with than I can possibly be. I will ask you, therefore, to pardon me if my statement simply recalls to your recol- lection facts which it is important to consider in passing on this subject. There has been an unrest in Congress for a number of years in ref- erence to pelagic sealing. The Government has realized, from the beginning of the negotiations with Great Britain in 1891, that this great industry, bringing us, as it has, revenue every year to the Treas- | ury, isa question that demands its most serious consideration. I think there has been some unjust criticism as to the interest and actions of this Government and of the Government of Great Britain, when the facts are properly known and understood, as to the efforts made by the two Governments to reach a satisfactory conclusion in the preser- vation of the seal herd. For example, gentlemen, as you well know, in 1891 the two Governments entered into an agreement which ulti- mately brought into existence the Paris tribunal of arbitration. The award was made in 1893, and although the Government of the United States by that decision lost all the questions of law presented to that tribunal of arbitration involving the right of the Government to con- trol the seal herd in its migrations or its right to control the waters of Bering Sea (the arbitrators deciding unanimously against us), but there was a provision in the treaty which seemed to anticipate this decision, and under which the arbitrators were authorized to provide such regulations as they deemed proper with the view to preserving the seal herd. This was as much in the interest of England as of the United States. This Government receives a revenue by reason of the annual killing of the male seals, and England receives the entire reve- nue which results in the preparing the raw skins as a manufactured article, which profit perhaps is greater than that received by the United States, even under its first lease, and greater than it is receiv- FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 11 ing even under the very high compensation which is now paid by the North American Commercial Company. Therefore England is as deeply interested in this matter as the United States. The award determined the regulations; the two Governments imme- diately passed statutes carrying out every recommendation of the arbi- trators. There was a clause in the award which provided that there should be a revision of the regulations provided in the award every five years. What do we next find the two Governments doing? In 1896, anticipating the necessity for revision at the end of the five years in 1898, the two Governments appointed commissioners to investigate this entire subject, that the facts ascertained might be laid before their respective Governments. On that commission Great Britain appointed a gentleman to represent Canada and one to represent Great Britain. The United States appointed two to represent the Government. They studied this question upon the islands and in the Bering Sea for two seasons, and in 1898 macle their report to their respective Governments. Every view taken by Mr. Elliott is controverted by their unanimous report, especially this idea of the effect of the killings on land. It is the first time in the history of the United States in these long negotia- tions with Great Britain that Canada’s and Great Britain’s commis- sioners have ever admitted the correctness of the view of the United States that pelagic sealing alone was the cause of the destruction of the herd, and that the killing of male seals on the land was a benefit ~ rather than an injury to the herd where there was proper regulation and supervision by Government agents. That was a unanimous report, and for the first time Canada and Great Baitain admitted the entire contention of the United States. Mr. Exxiort. I know the gentleman does not mean to misrepresent. The Canadians have not agreed that pelagic sealing The Cuatrman. I think it would be more orderly if you would allow Senator Faulkner to conclude. . Mr. Datzetu. It is in print, I suppose? Mr. Wiiuiams, of Mississippi. Do you mean to say that the land killing does not decrease the herd? Mr. Faurxner. Not to its permanent injury, but is essential in the protection of its growth. - Mr. Wituiams, of Mississippi. And does not tend to extinguish the Species? Mr. Fautxyer. Not atall, sir. I will suspend my discussion to say to Mr. Williams that he can readily see that if there is an equal divi- sion in the sexes in the birth of the pups, that if many of the male seals are not killed annually they will accumulate so rapidly (there is no use for them whatever) that in their bitter fighting in their efforts trying to take the rookeries, they not only kill many of the female seals but many of the younger pups, both male and female. All the ‘scientists agree as to this; there is no dispute about it. Ihave author- ity upon authority to sustain the proposition. Every scientist that has discussed this subject, except Mr. Elliott, agrees on this question. Mr. Wittams, of Mississippi. Are not cow seals killed on land? Mr. Fautxner. No, sir; not at all; that is prohibited. There are no cow seals killed. Mr. Cuarx. Do these bulls practice polygamy or monogamy ? Mr. Fautnner. Polyamy, far beyond anything we know of in this country. 12 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Next comes the Joint High Commission appointed under the treaty with Great Britain. This question was one of the numerous ones sub- mitted. Mr. Chairman, you were a member of that Commission. I do not think that Iam going beyond the bounds of propriety in say- ing ‘Mr. Tawney. You were also a member of that Commission? Mr. Fautxner. Yes, sir; Iwasa member of the Commission. [To the committee. |—-That this question was adjusted by that Commission with the exception of a few details, when the Commission, by reason of their disagreement upon the Alaskan boundary, was compelled to cease its work, the representatives of Canada and Great Britain refusing to pass upon any matter unless all the questions submitted were agreed. If it had not been for the position taken by their representatives, pelagic sealing would have been settled and disposed of in 1898, satis- factorily, I am satisfied, to both countries. Again, gentlemen, the next efforts to adjust this matter was during 1902-3. Iam credibly informed—but I give you this upon informa- tion—that prior to the death of the British ambassador this subject had been under very active negotiations between him and the Depart- ment of State, and it had virtually been concluded when Embassador Herbert died. Mr. Grosvenor. Who was the representative of this Government? Mr. Fautxner. In that recent negotiation? Mr. Grosvenor. Yes—Mr. Hay, himself? Mr. Fautxner. Yes; I understand it was Mr. Hay, himself. The next movement was the action of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which passed a resolution in the early Mark of the present session requesting the State Department to proceed at once with these negotiations. I understand that even prior to the passage of that res- olution the State Department had taken this question up, and J am informed that it is the purpose of the Executive Department to pro- ceed with the negotiations with the new British ambassador. This is the history of the negotiations relating to this subject by the two Governments. I admit that unforeseen misfortune has followed these efforts. The failure to agree on the boundary line between Canada and Alaska broke up the negotiations in 1898. The hope of the set- tlement of this question in 1903 was defeated by the death of Ambas- sador Herbert, leaving the question again open. That is its condition. When you examine the facts I do not think that the Governments in interest are subject to criticism for their failure to adjust this contro- versy. The Executive branch has fully appreciated the sentiment in the Congress. It realized that our lessees were only getting 17,000 and 20,000 and 19,000 seals on the islands annually; that the pelagic sealers during those years were getting as high as 63,000 seals from this herd. _ Mr. Wrtx1ams. Do you know whether any negotiations are going on now between our State Department and Great Britain, or whether they have stopped those? Mr. Faurxner. I am informed they are in progress. Mr. Wruir1ams. Do you know whether the Joint High Commission claims that that falls within their scope of duty? Mr. Fautkner. The Joint High Commission have nothing to do with it unless again convened. Like the treaty as to the Alaskan boundary, which was submitted to the Joint High Commission, it does FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 13 not prevent the State Department from renewing negotiations inde- pendent of that submission. Mr. Wituiams. That is your understanding of the view point taken by the State Department? My. Fautxyerr. That is my understanding of the view point of the State Department. Mr. Watson. Are you at liberty to state what the Joint High Com- mission proposes to do with the seal question 4 Mr. Fsutxyer. I would hardly feel at liberty todo so. Itisa con- fidential matter until the State Department should give it out. Mr. Tawnny. Under the contract how many seals is the company allowed to kill? Mr. Favixner. That is regulated by the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, annually. Mr. Tawney. How many in fact have been killed? Mr. Fautxyer. During the modus vivendi 7,500. The convention between Great Britain and the United States limiting the killing to that number—pending this award a sufficient number for food for the natives. Subsequently to the award it ran from 16,031, in 1894, to about 30,000, in 1896, which was the highest ever taken. Last year, it is my recollection there were about 19,000 taken. For twelve years, from 1890 to 1901, the average annual taking was 17,506. Mr. Mercatr. On the islands? Mr. Fautxner. Yes, sir. Mr. Hinz. And what was the number taken by pelagic sealing last year ¢ Mr. Fautxner. I think the estimate is about 27,000 last year. It is falling off. Mr. Hix. Because of the falling off of the herd? Mr. Faurxner. I think that is the reason. They are gradually giving it up, many of the boats are on the retired list. Mr. Hizu. Then, perhaps, in five years more, the fisheries will not be worth pursuing on that basis, will they ¢ Mr. Fautxner. I do not think it is possible to exterminate the herd under the regulations of the Department. Mr. Hit. But you can exterminate it commercially, can you not? Mr. Favixyer. I think commercially it can be. © If destroy ed com- mercially it would be unfortunate. When you force the people to discontinue the use of sealskins as a commercial article you lose the market for years, and it will be difficult to again build up the trade. That was demonstrated by the experience of the Alaska Commercial Company, of which, I think, Mr. Elliott was an employee. Were you not an employee of ‘that company, Mr. Elliott? Mr. Exrrorr. No, sir; I never was an employee of the Alaska Com- mercial Company. Mr. Fautxner. I beg your pardon. Mr. Extiorr. I know it is a common under tant: You do not want to misrepresent me; I am sure of that. Mr. Fautxner. This company had to spend thousands of dollars to build up the seal-fur trade. They did not dispose of their annual catch for several years because of a want of demand. If the killing was entirely suspended it would result in something else being substi- tuted for the Alaskan furs. That is the belief of those familiar with the trade. F s—04——2 14 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Mr. Hitz. That is rather contrary to the experience of mankind— the scarcer you makea product ordinarily the more valuable it becomes. Mr. Fautxner. No; it is a question of fashion that controls all questions of this character. If it is the fashion then the article is in demand. Mr. Wiiiams, of Mississippi. The more expensive a seal skin becomes the more it would be the fashion to wear it. ‘That is my experience. Mr. Fautxner. I could not say. Fashion in this as in all other similar articles determines the demand. Mr. Swanson. I understand you insist that the killing of the male seals, which would be prohibited by this bill, instead of being a benetit to the herd would be a detriment? Mr. Favitenmr. Yes. Mr. Swanson. As I understand it this bill prohibits your company from killing male seals on the islands? Mr. Fautxner. We never have killed anything but males. Mr. Swanson. I understand; but your position is that the killing of male seals, under the provisions of the Secretary of the Treasury, is a benefit and not a detriment? ; Mr. Fautxner. Yes. . Mr. Tawney. What have you to say to this statement (5S. Rept. 982, p. 23, 58th Cong., 2d sess.) of the committee that visited the Pribulof Islands: We are thus brought face to face with the fact that the killing of young seals on the islands since 1896 has been so close that no young male life has been permitted to. pass over the slaughter fields on to the breeding grounds. This occasions the rapid falling off in numbers—42 per cent in the last two years—of the breeding males from old age, their places not being filled by the accession of fresh male life. In order to prevent a total collapse of the birth rate in the next two or three years, it is imperative that all killing of all seal life on the islands be stopped next season. This will enable the choicest of the young males to grow up and reach the breeding grounds in the next four years and there take their places, which must be taken by them or the seal life will be extinguished. The committee therefore recommend that a suspension of all killing by the lessees of the seal islands be made at once and indefinitely, and that the Government of the United States shall attempt to reopen and conclude negotiations with the Govern- ment of Great Britain looking to a revision of existing rules and regulations which govern the taking of seals in the open waters of the North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea, and to enter upn negotiations with the Governments of Russia and Japan to the end that all pelagic sealing may be stopped, and if, after a reasonable length of time, the Government fails to secure a proper revision and enforcement of such rules and to conclude such negotiations, then the Secretary of Commerce may, with the approval of the President, reduce the surplus female life of the herd on the Pribilof Islands to 10,000. With the herd so reduced in numbers pelagic sealing will not be profitable as an industry, and the herd will be permitted to increase an! multiply slowly at first, alterwards more rapidly, until again proper regulations may be adopted for killing. Mr. Fautxner. That was a subcommittee of the Committee on Territories that visited Alaska. They were four hours on that island. Mr. Elliott has had the ear of that committee. You ean see from the language used that either he has copied their language or else they have copied his language, for the language you have read is identical with the language he has used before the committee. Mr. Tawney. You have served in the Senate. Which is the rule in such cases—that the Senate committee adopts the language of some one who makes a statement, or that the language of the committee is adopted by the other man? FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 15 Mr. Fauuxyer. The rule is to look on both sides of any question broadly and not allow one who has continually advocated a particular view, rejected by the scientists of the country, to secure the ear of a committee or of those who have to pass upon the measure. That has been the rule. Mr. Tawney. What have you to state as to the fact? Mr. Fautxner. I can not say as to the fact. Mr. Writiiams. The question I wanted to ask you was this Mr. Fautxner. This question will be decided to-day, I suppose, in the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. The Cuatrman. I wish the committee would allow the Senator to complete his statement. Mr. Swanson. Just this one question. I understand this bill pro- hibits the killing of males? Mr. Fautxyer. Yes. Mr. Swanson. What is the proportion of males and females in the present herd? Have they got enough males for breeding purposes? Mr. Fautkner. Yes; I will come to that in a moment. The CHatrmMan. Now, let us let the Senator proceed and complete his statement. Mr. Fauuxner. There are rookeries adjacent to. the island where breeding seals are found, as is known to Mr. Elliott, he having mar- ried on the islands. On these breeding rookeries the seal is never dis- turbed, nor are they ever driven. They are thoroughly protected, and there are on them, of all ages and sexes, to-day 15,000 seals. Four thousand five hundred males are ample to impregnate all the female seals on both of the islands. This is the opinion of the experts. Gentlemen, I have given a brief general review of the negotiations between the two countries. There are three propositions presented by this joint resolution. The first is, What consideration should be shown to the lessee, who, as a contractor with the Government, has rights and property interest which the abrogating of its contract, made in good faith with the United States, would subject to irreparable injury ¢ In 1890 the North American Commercial Company, after advertise- ment by the Government, entered into a contract with it for the exclusive right to kill seals for the period of twenty years. Mr. Wrtiiams, of Mississippi. What year was the beginning of the contract ? Mr. Fautxyer. May, 1890, or April; I do not remember, but it was in the spring of 1890. That contract gave the Government the right to protect fully the seal herd. If this is true, why this agitation, ask? Why are you compelled to attend this meeting session after session, to hear this question discussed, when by the terms of this contract it is in the power of the Department, after a full investigation, to limit and con- trol the killing of male seals in the preservation of the herd, as in its judgment it may determine to be to the interest of the United States, having at the same time proper regard to the interest of the lessee ? Further than that, that power is now vested in your agent, who will exercise it and has exercised it annually. He fixes before the season opens the number of male seals that can be taken, after first, consider- ing all the facts officially within his knowledge, and especially the fact of the depletion of the herd. The reports of the Treasury agents give him all the information necessary for his decision. They are present on the islands, and not a seal can be killed by the agents of this com- 16 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. pany but in the presence of these officials. This contract was entered into by express authority of an act of Congress. Under that act it is provided that the Secretary of the Treasury in making a new lease should have due regard to the interest of the former lessee.’ What was the action of the Secretary under that’ provision? He held that under it the North American Commercial Company must purchase the entire plant of the former lessee, the Alaska Commercial Company. This company was compelled to buy from the former lessee every house on that island erected for the protection and the comfort of its inhabitants that had been built by the Alaska Commercial Company. It had to buy its stores, its plant, its boats, its tackle, and, in fact, everything owned by it on the islands. It paid over a full value for all this property. Mr. Exriorr. Sixty-three thousand dollars was all it paid. Mr. Fautxyer. In the opinion of those who know, the amount paid was above its value. My understanding is it reached far in excess of $63,000, although 1 have not the information upon which I can make a positive statement. What do we next find? The company entered into this contract with the understanding that after the first year they would be permitted to take 100,000 seals. It was limited to 60,000 the first year, but in fact only took about 28,000. The modus vivendi followed for two years, during which period the company was limited to 7,500 each; since then they have never gone over 30,000, but generally far below that number. Mr. Wixuiams, of Mississippi. In the meantime the price of seal- skins has gone up? Mr. Fautxyer. I will explain to you the profits of the company. Iam coming to that question. I want to show the relative hardship encountered by this company during this lease. The Alaska Com- mercial Company was taking 100,000 seals for twenty years. What has the North American Commercial Company taken during its lease? If you will refer to page 20 of the report of the subcommittee of the Committee on Territories you will find the figures. During the twelve years given of this company’s lease the average killing of seals has been 17,506 annually. An examination will show that under the origi- nal lease the Alaska Commercial Company paid 63 cents a skin asa bonus, whereas this company pays $7.624 per skin. You will find the aggregate payment under the Alaska Commercial Company’s lease was $3.17, and that under the Jease of the North American Commercial Company the Government receives for every sealskin 810.22, more than three times the amount paid by its predecessor, and yet: the catch has been reduced to an average of 17,506 skins instead of 100,000 skins, the cost of the plant and the cost of running the business being about the same in both cases. On the same page of this report, Mr. Williams, you will find the price of the skins given in London. The cost of these skins for twelve years, as given by that committee, will show an average price of $22.31. Deduct from that the $10.29 they have to pay the Govern- ment and you have $12 as the gross profit. From that vou must take , the cost of chartering and sending to the island a ship every fall and winter. You also have to deduct 50 cents for every skin taken, which, under the contract, is paid to the natives. Ona catch of 17,506 this would amount to $8,753. In addition to this you must deduct for the support of schools, supplying the teachers, the furnishing of medicine, FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 17 and the employment of agents that the company has to have to transact its business. Further, you must reduce this gross profit by deducting the cost of the support of the indigent and the orphans, which burden, under the contract, falls upon the company. In addition to these liabilities assumed under the contract or incident to the business, the company found it necessary to establish at Dutch Harbor a basis of supplies for coal, water, and supplies. You will yemember there are no harbors or docks at the islands. At a cost of $200,000 this plant was established. Its location and supplies have been of great convenience to the United States. It has furnished coal, water, and supplies to Government ships and to the merchant marine of the United States since the company has been the lessee under this contract. With these facts in your possession I desire to direct your attention to the provisions of this joint resolution. The measure abro- gates this contract. No fault is alleged for this action by reason of any act done or left undone by the company. I ask, Is it fair and just to annul this contract by the exercise of the power of the sover- eign? Is it just and right that this company should be left without any remedy for the loss of the plant it has on the island, for the stores it has taken there in the belief of the permanency of its contract? Would such action between man and man be just and right? If you determine to abrogate this contract, has not the company the right to say to its representative, ‘“‘In your action be fair, be Just, be equita- ble?” Ifa national necessity or public policy requir es the abrogation of this contract and compels you to disregard the rights of a citizen under a contract which you have freely and voluntarily entered into, should you not provide in the same measure a remedy the pr ovisions of which will protect and guard the interests and preserve the rights of this company 4 This suggestion rests upon a fundamental principle that Congress will os ignore. Let us take up this joint resolution. I assert you Mr. Vents, of Mis epek Do you deny that the company has been killing any seals under 1 year old? Mr. Fautxner. 1 do deny it most emphatically. The evidence to disprove it was furnished by Mr. Elliott when he gave you the weight of the skins taken, showing that they were of seals over 1 year of age. The paper he read showed that they were yearlings. The 5- -pound sealskins are yearlings. You can appreciate that fact when the com- pany is paying $10.22 per skin to the Government out of a gross reve- nue of $22.31 per skin, that after you deduct the incidental expenses, the cost of curing the skins, the transportation to London, all of which can not aggregate less than $6 per skin, it could not afford to take infe- rior or small pup skins. You must remember when you say a yearling you mean every seal that is 1 year and less than 2 years old. When it becomes 2 year's old it is called a 2-year old. The company takes only the larger seals over 1 year and under 5. It is in the power of the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, under the contract, to fix by his regulations, if it is deemed wise, that the age limit shall be 2 years or 3 years, if necessary to the preservation of the herd, and this com- pany would be estopped to complain; as it has agreed to abide by the regulations that the Department may promulgate. Gentlemen, I desire to suggest for your consideration the unwisdom 18 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. of such legislation if we intend to enter into further negotiations with England, Japan, and Russia. The CuarrmMan. The committee will have to adjourn in about seven minutes. My. Fautxner. This is an important question. Gentlemen, as representatives of this great Government, will you, by the passage of this measure, repudiate the position the Government has taken as to the cause of the decrease of the seal herd in every international dispute? Mr. Grosvenor. Your remarks up to this time will be printed. Now, could you not dictate to a stenographer further and let it appear in the printed hearing? Would that not be as well as for us to have another meeting at some other time? Mr. Fautxver. Yes; I will do anything that the committee desire. I am subject to their orders and their convenience and wishes in every respect. : the Cuatrman. We want to leave that with you. Mr. Fautxner. I have no desire one way or the other. I want to suit myself entirely to the convenience of the committee. Mr. Wiiuiams, of Mississippi. Speaking for myself individually, I would like you to make a full statement. I would like the Senator to make a statement to the stenographer. I would like to give permis- sion to both sides to extend in print. Mr. Fautxner. Every scientist, with the exception of Mr. Elliott, opposes his entire views in reference to the killing on the land. I want to explain the Russian situation in 1834 that has been referrd to. Mr. Witztams, of Mississippi. It seems to me that when you do not leave the question of natural selection and propagation to the strong- est males and to nature to determine by this fighting-out business that you will leave it to males that may be inferior and will not produce as healthy progeny. Mr. Fauixner. I will refer the committee to the pages of the authorities where every view advanced by Mr. Elliott has been overthrown. Mr. Hrux. The herd is falling off 4 My. Faurxner. Of course, and it will fall off so long as pelagic sealing continues. How could it be otherwise when they are fre- quently killing three seals whenever they kill a female? Mr. Wixiams, of Mississippi. Prior to pelagic sealing it was said that a decrease had taken place in the Russian islands by land killing alone. I would like that point to be brought out. The Cuatrman. Will it suit your convenience to come here to-morrow morning ¢ Mr. Fautxner. Yes; Iam subject to your wishes. Mr. Wririams, of Mississippi. Before we adjourn I would like to have permission granted to let the speakers extend their remarks. The Cuarrman. That can be done to-morrow morning. __ Thereupon, at 12 o’clock, the committee adjourned until to-morrow, Thursday, March 10, 1904, at 10 o’clock, a. mm. FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 19 Tuurspar, March 10, 1904. The committee met (pursuant to adjournment yesterday) at 10.30 o’clock a. m., Hon. Sereno I. Payne in the chair. eases Members present: The chairman, Messrs. Dalzell, McCall, Hill, Boutell, Watson, Williams, Cooper, and Clark. STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES J. FAULKNER—Continued. (See p. 10.) : Mr. Fautxner. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I noticed in the report of the proceedings as published in the Star yesterday evening a statement, alleged to have been made by myself, which, if it con- veved that impression to the members of the committee that it does in the paper, I desire to correct it this morning, for I certainly had no intention of making such a statement. That statement was that during the four hours the Senators were on the islands Mr. Elliott had the ear of those Senators. I have no knowledge whatever of whether Mr. Elliott was on that island or not, and my statement was intended to be—and if it did not convey that impression I desire to convey it now—that he had had the ear of those Senators, but the time when it is impossible for me to state. There is avother statement here, Mr. Chairman, that I feel it my duty to comment upon. If it was made to this committee in the form it is given in this extract, L certainly did not understand Mr. Elliott’s remarks. I understood him to say that his report, made in 1890, was suppressed, but I did not understand him to say that an officer of this Government so high as the Secretary of the Treasury, or any other official occupying a high position in the Government, had sought and endeavored to force him to make astatementof facts which, in his judgment, he did not feel to be true. If I had understood that to have been his statement—and it so appears in the report of the proceedings as published in the Star— I certainly would have made this comment upon that subject: The report of Mr. Elliott of 1890 was made to the Secretary of the Treas- ury. The reason that it was not received and acted upon as an official report, or an official document, was because of the opinion of the Sec- retary of the Treasury that it was filled with inaccuracies, the reasons for his action being of record in the Treasury Department, which facts were in my possession yesterday at the hearing. It is perhaps not proper for me to say what those reasons were, but I say to this com- mittee that those reasons are upon the records of the Treasury, and that any member of this committee or the committee has a right to ask for those reasons, and when they shall be received the committee will be thoroughly satisfied of the correctness of the position taken by the Secretary of the Treasury in suppressing the report. Mr. Watson. What report is that? Mr. Fautxner. The report of Mr. Elliott of 1890. I desire further to say that the controversy over this report of 1890 did not stop in the Department; that when the United States repre- sentatives met before the tribunal of arbitration in Paris they were confronted by a demand of the British counsel to present that report to the tribunal—either a certified copy or the original, and the tribunal of arbitration concurred with the representatives of Great Britain. 20 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. The motion was based on a newspaper statement of a letter addressed by Mr. Elliott to the Secretary of the Treasury, in which he conveyed that report to him, and in which he gave a brief outline of the sub- stance of the report, and was published in a paper of Cleveland, Ohio. The position taken by the counsel of Great Britain was resisted by the attorneys of the United States, but the tribunal of arbitration decided that it was a proper paper under the second clause of the treaty to be demanded by Great Britain from the United States, and it was subsequently placed before the tribunal. I think, in justice to this Government, that these facts should be stated, all of which can be verified by a reference to the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration. Mr. Chairman, it strikes me as rather surprising, when we come to look at the character of this bill or joint resolution, that it is proposed by its author under the idea that it is necessary to preserve the seal herd, and all killing by the company must cease, and yet, with that as the ostensible purpose of this resolution (and I have no doubt it is the real reason of the gentleman who introduced it), we find that this Gov- ernment is authorized to continue the killing on those islands. Although the joint resolution says we will stop the killing and abrogate, rescind, and annul the contract made between the Government, at its invita- tion, and the North American Commercial Company, yet in the judg- ment of Congress we should proceed to have 5,506 seals killed annu- ally; that those skins should be taken by the Government, sold by the Government, and the money covered into the Treasury. Now, if it preserve the seal herd by reducing the number 5,500 annually, what is the reason or necessity for abrogation or rescinding the contract by this act? If Congress has the power to annul or rescind the contract, then it has the power to state to the Secretary having charge of this subject that under the provisions of the terms of that contract without annul- ling its provisions, but in accordance with its expressed terms you are directed to limit the number of seals killed on the islands annually, or for the number of years you may desire, to 5,500 skins. That direction would accomplish the object and purpose of this reso- lution without a breach of faith on the part of the Government in an attempt to annul the contract. It would act then in accordance with a construction the Department had placed on the contract and the mouth of the lessee would be closed. Now, it can not be said that the taking of seals is different under the authority of the lessees from the taking under the Government by its agents, for there is not a single seal killed under the regulations of the Department as they exist to-day, not one, that is not killed in the pres- ence of an agent of the Government put there for the purpose of see- ing that every regulation is carried out. I repeat, if that is not a cor- rect position, I can not understand the object of this legislation. If you are going to take the position that by reason of a national question which is involyed, that because of a national policy that must be carried out in reference to this industry, you deem it wiser to abro- gate the contract which you have invited a citizen to make, then, 1 say, the exercise of the same principles of sovereignty which you appeal to as authorizing you to annul this contract for the benetit of the gen- eral public, should be appplied that controls in the exercise of the sov- ereign right of eminent domain, and that all the property upon these FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 3 21 islands that has been put there under the faith of this contract should be condemned, its value paid for by the United States, the public bear- ing in the interest of national necessity and public policy which you deem wise to inaugurate, the burden, and not place that burden alone upon the shoulders of a single corporation. lt strikes me that isa sound doctrine. Every lawyer at this table must recognize itas such. If you are willing to step beyond the bounds of this contract (which you assume to control absolutely by a direction to your Secretary or by the direct act of Congress), then you should condemn this property if the public necessity of the country requires it, and let all bear the burden, and not impose it upon a single corporation. Mr. Chairman, there is one question here that I regard as of vital importance, and to me it is the most serious question involved in this controversy. Whatis it? It is adeclaration (if this joint resolution should pass) by Congress that in order to preserve the seal herd the killing must be stopped upon the islands. What does that declaration mean, when you take the history of this subject during the last twenty years into consideration? It means simply this, Mr. Chairman, that such a solemn declaration by Congress is a distinct denial of the cor- rectness of the position taken by the Government of the United States in the international controversies relative to this subject with Great Britain during the last twenty years. We have stood upon the proposition sustained by every report (except Great Britain’s experts at that time, and Professor Elliott), upon the firm foundation that the killing of seals under proper regulations by the Government upon land did not deplete the herd or injure the industry. Mr. Hrwi. Senator, was not that accompanied by the concurrent action of other nations in regard to killing at sea at the same time? Mr. Fautxner. The position was firm and unquestionable, so far as we were concerned, in all our negotiations, that the killing on land poles proper regulations did not in any way affect the increase of the erd, ; The Cuarrman. Right there, Senator Faulkner. I have always understood in the argument of Mr. Elliott before this committee that the great cause of the destruction of the seal herd was this pelagic sealing. Mr. Faurtxyner. He takes the other view. The Coatrman. No; I have heard him argue time after time of the inhumanity of killing the mothers while they are on the way to the feeding ground, and he has shown pictures of the young seals dying of starvation by reason of the killing of the mothers. He has made. that argument before this committee time and time again. Mr. Faurxner. That was his view, there is no question about it, up to 1890. The Cuarrman. I have heard him express that view time and time again since 1890, and you will find Mr. Fauixner. He puts it in the report of 1890 on both grounds. As he stated yesterday, it 1s useless to stop pelagic sealing, he says, unless you stop the killing on the land. Mr. Exriorr. That is right. Mr. Fautxyer. Our position has been the reverse. It has been taken after the most mature consideration and examination of this subject by the most competent experts and scientists appointed by the 29 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. United States Government. Their conclusion has been opposed to suspending the killing on land and in favor of stopping pelagic seal- ing. They have maintained that the killing on land was a necessity in order to preserve the herd in good condition, and that the destruction was the result of pelagic sealing, and pelagic sealing alone. That is the distinction, that is the difference, between the position of the Gov- ernment in all of its international controversies with Great Britain and in all of its negotiations with that country on this subject, and the position taken by Mr. Elliott since 1890. The tribunal of arbitration sustained the contention of the United States. I repeat, if you pass this act you not only repudiate the foundation upon which our negotiations have always rested with Great Britain, but you also deny the correctness of the decision of the tri- bunal of arbitration, which rests upon the evidence introduced by our own Government. Mr. Exuiorr. Mr. Chairman, I do not think the gentleman wants to misrepresent me. Mr. Fautxner. Not at all. The Crareman. I think you had better wait, Mr. Elliott. Mr. Fautkner. 1 am perfectly willing : The Cuairman. Iam not. There is no objection to any member of the committee asking questions, but I think any one outside had better wait until Senator Faulkner closes his statement. Mr. Watson. Do you mean in the seal business the law of natural selection is set aside and that nature has made a mistake in apportion- ing the number of males and females, so that man must intervene to perpetuate the species? Mr. Fautkner. I mean that with the exception of Mr. Elliott there is not a scientist that I have been able to hear of or who I have been able to talk to who does not maintain that in order to preserve the herd in the best possible condition it is essential that the surplus male life shall annually be killed, and I will refer to the authorities I rely upon inafew moments. Anyone who will study the work of Professor Jor- dan (he can in one night almost read the condensed first volume of that report) and see the authorities he relies upon will be convinced on this question. I am not surprised that the professor (Professor Elliott) laughs at that. He says his (Elliott’s) report to the Smithsonian Insti- tution has stood without question. Gentlemen, if you will just take the report of Jordan and read five or six pages on Elliott’s method of estimating the number of seals on the islands, you will he convinced that in his estimate he exceeded the number of seals there by at least 1,400,000. Take up the report of Captain Mosher, of the United States Navy, who examines carefully Elliott’s method of estimating numbers, that by surveying the rookeries ascertain the number of square feet in each and then estimate the number of square feet that would be oceupied by each seal, you can determine this number. Mr. Elliott gives in his report the estimate that 2 square feet is suf- ficient. The lowest estimate by any other expert, and that is reached by compromise, is 22 or 23 feet. Captain Mosher says: I can not even fit his coast line, let alone his rookery lines, with his maps. They are absolutely a misfit. They are of no value, they are not measurements, they are simply sketches. That is his value of Elliott’s method of calculation in ascertaining the number of seals. His entire FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 23 theory is contradicted by all the subsequent investigations by scien- tists. Itis true Elliott did not have the advantage that these gentlemen had in later investigations nor the information that they possess, but when he states to this committee that his report stands uncontradicted and is the recognized authority by this Government, I think I am at liberty to criticise sucha claim and refer to the subsequent reports, which overthrow his views. Again in his report he says the driving destroys the virility of the males that escape from the killing grounds or are rejected. You are aware, gentlemen, that many are rejected in every drive as either too old or too young. This novel theory is also overthrown. He assumes that the testicles of the seals, dragged on the ground in making his peculiar forward movement, would be injured in coming in contact with rough substances over which the seal was driven. He did not seem to know the characteristics of the seal. When an examination was made it was shown that when they move over the ground that por- tion of the body is drawn up in the body and no injury can possibly result from it. He is again in error as to the feed of the pups. He declares that they can be supported on certain roots that are found around or float- ing about the islands. An examination of the pups demonstrated that they are supported alone upon the milk of the mother. Time and again have all these different questions been discussed and decided adverse to the views of Mr. Elliott. The committee will find in the authorities I shall refer to the deci- sions of competent experts sustaining all these views I have main- tained. Further, they will see that for the first time, in 1898, the British and Canadian commissioners sustained the propositions that I have laid down, and that they contradict Mr. Elliott on most, if notall, of these controverted questions. ; The Cuarrman. Senator Faulkner, is there anything to show what proportion of female seals bear young annually ? Mr. Fauixner. It is about an even division. The CHatrMANn. It is about what? Mr. FavLxyer. Statistics show that the birth rate of male and female is about the same. The CHatrman. No; you do not understand me. What proportion of female seals bear young? ; Mr. Fautxyer. You mean at what age? The Cuarrman. No; after they get to the bearing age, what propor- tion bear young? Mr. Fautxner. Almost every one. The Cuarrman. Then there must be some virility around there. Mr. Fautkner. You could almost say every one bears a pup annually. Mr. Hinz. You are opposed to this bill? Mr. FauLkyer. Yes. ne nah Mr. Hitz. What is your position—is it to let things alone and let the herd die out? Mr. Fautxner. I am not afraid of the herd dying out. Mr. Hitt. Youstated yesterday that it showed a very rapid decrease. Mr. Fautxyner. Of course; and it will until we stop pelagic sealing. Until pelagic sealing is stopped it will decrease to a certain point. You can see how far it will decrease. It will continue to decrease to 24 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. that. point when the reduction in the number of the herd will render it unprofitable to continue pelagic sealing. Mr. Hitt. You propose to let it be decreased to that point’ Mr. Fautxner. No, sir. Mr. Hint. What action do you propose to prevent it? Mr. Fautxner. I propose that the Government proceed with its negotiations as rapidly as possible with the hope that it will, by proper conventions with England, Japan, and Russia, stop pelagic sealing and, in the mean time, the Secretary of Commerce and Labor having the power to regulate the number of seals killed annually, the herd can be protected and improved on land and at the same time a fair revenue from this industry will be brought into the Treasury. Mr. Hiru. What do you mean—to reduce the number that are killed on land? Mr. Fautxner. Yes; he has the power under this lease to reduce it to any number that he may deem proper. Mr. Hiri. I thought your position was that it did not affect the case to kill on land. Why is the necessity for reducing the killing on land ? Mr. Fautxyer. As the herd decreases of course you are bound to reduce the number killed on land, for the reason that there is not that number of killable seals. Mr. Coopsr. Is there any way for this Government to prevent the killing at sea? Mr. Fautxwer. No, sir; none at all except by international agree- ment. ; Mr. Wiiutrams, of Mississippi. I understood you yesterday—and, thinking about it afterwards, I thought perhaps I misunderstood you to say that the number of seals killed last year was only about 50 per cent of what they were the year previous to that. Mr. Fautxner. No, sir; that was with reference to pelagic sealing. No; the number was about 19,000, I think. Mr. Exxriorr. Twenty-two thousand in the last three years. Mr. Fautxner. I did not make that statement. Mr. Wittrams, of Mississippi. That was it, then; you referred to the pelagic sealing? Mr. Fautxner. Yes; the number of killed by this report, and it only goes to 1891. In 1903 it was 19,000, I think. Mr. Exxiorr. Twenty-two thousand for the last three years. Mr. Wituiams, of Mississippi. If the killing by pelagic sealing decreased 50 per cent, the reason of the decrease was that they could not find the seals, was it not? Mr. Fautxyer. I am satisfied that the closed season and the reduc- tion in the number of seals together had that effect. In other words, the reports show that there were only about 50 per cent of the number of vessels engaged in pelagic sealing last year that had previously been engaged in it, and the supposition of all parties in interest is that the result of that reduction in the number of vessels engaged in the catch was for the reason that it was not so paying an industry as formerly. Mr. Wiuurams, of Mississippi. Carrying that fact, if that is true, it must have been because the heard had decreased so much that there was not enough business for over 50 per cent of the ships that were in it before? , Mr. Fautxner. Of course, do not let the committee misunderstand me—— FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 25 Mr. Witutams, of Mississippi. I do not think Iam misunderstand- ing you. The point lam getting at is this. If the seals are decreas- ing at that rate, if our negotiations do not hurry up and come to some- thing very shortly, there will not be anything to negotiate about. Mr. Fauixner. Oh, yes; you gentlemen are mistaken about that. You will find that these scientists maintain without any question at all in their minds—and I will give you the authorities—that there is no question that you could not destroy the herd by killing in the sea . entirely. You could not, in other words, exterminate the species, as Mr. Elliott expressed it yesterday; that as soon as the herd was reduced to that condition that it would not pay pelagic sealers to fit out their boats the decrease would stop, and when that point was reached the increase in the herd would begin. You will see by all the authorities that it is an admitted fact that the killing of .the sur- plus idle bulls is a benefit to the herd. It prevents the bulls from reaching an age when their fighting propensities are such that they not only kill the cows but the young pups. Excessive male life is an injury to the herd. The seal is polygamous in his habits. It takes but one bull for a great many cows. There are recorded instances on the Russian islands where two bulls supplied over four hundred cows, and those cows had pups the succeeding years. The Cuarrman. I suppose there has never been any question but what the making of so many steers or geldings has not had the effect of extinguishing either cattle or horses ¢ Mr. Witi1ams, of Mississippi. That is a different proposition. Mr. Crarx. I understand they drive these bull seals up there through some kind of a chute and pick out the best ones and kill them. Now, that is precisely the opposite operation which we employ to get good horses and cows and sheep, and if they keep that up long enough would not that kill the herd off by the deterioration of the herd? Mr. Fautkner. No; you are mistaken in the view you take, I think. Mr. Crarx. That is what I understood—that they drive them up there and take the best ones. Mr. Faurxner. No; in the drives they take the seals of a particular age. Their trade demands seals of a certain age to obtain marketable skins, and those younger or older are rejected. For instance, a bull 5 years old has passed the age when his skin is marketable. Mr. CrarK. What is the matter with him? Mr. Fautxner. It is the condition of the skin; they do not want it; it is not marketable. Then the Government fixes the limit of the age as to the young ones. The young rejected seals are virile, just as good as the ones that have been taken; the same with the bulls that are too old to be taken for their skins; they are just as virile and good animals in every other way as the accepted seals except as to the quality of their skins. Mr. Crark. But the young ones that escape this year they drive up te next year the same way, and tap the best ones on.the head and get them ? Mr. Facrxner. It is not the best ones; it is simply those of a par- ticular age. It is not a question of a better seal skin that determines the ones to be killed, but it is the age of the seal under the regulations of the Department. Mr. Watson. And you say that is necessary to preserve the herd? Mr. FauLkKner. Yes, sir. Mr. Watson. Then if none were killed and the herd were left alone 26 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. your argument would be that the herd would be exterminated in time by its own process? Mr. Fautxner. No; when they killed down to that point when there would only be a sufficient number of bulls for the cows the fighting would cease. These fights do not occur until the sexual desire causes the fighting propensities of the bulls to be aroused and the female is in heat. , My. Cuark. In these fights they have it is a survival of the fittest? Mr. Fautxnger. Yes; when it comes to the fighting it is a survival of the fittest. Mr. Winuiams, of Mississippi. That is the point exactly. Mr. Hiri. And it is the killing of the best seals. Mr. Fautxner. No, sir; it is the killing of the inferior in age and strength. Mr. Hitz. But the best of that age. Mr. Fautxner. No; they will take all of that age within the quota they can get. It must be remembered that at no one time are all the seals of killable age on the islands; large numbers of the seals are in the sea. The 2-year-olds do not reach the driving grounds until perhaps in the middle of July. Under the conditions that are now imposed upon the lessees they do not allow a drive after the 20th of July. That is the recent limitation. It was formerly the 10th of August. Gentlemen, I will not detain you by reading my authorities, but I will refer you to the books and pages relied on, so that you may read it if you desire. Iam going to give you the conclusions of some of the authorities. Part 1, The Fur Seals and Fur Seal Islands, by David 8. Jordan, page 185. Hesays: , Land killing is not now a factor in the decline of the herd, and has not been since the islands came into the possession of the United States. It has not caused injury to the breeding of the herd, either by undue reduction in the number of males or impairing their virility, or in any other way. Land killing has tended to increase the size of the breeding herd by the reduction of the number of adult bulls, and their consequent fighting, which results in the destruction of females and pups. This is the conclusion reached by Mr. Jordan after discussing the questions elaborately in his report. Here isa very important matter, gentlemen. Itis worthy of your at- tention. Lheconference of fur-seal experts, representing Great Britain, Canada, and the United States, which convened in the city of Wash- ington November 10,1897. The delegates were D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson, on the part of Great Britain; and on the part of Canada, Mr. James Melville Macoun; on the port of the United States, Hon. Charles Sumner Hamlin and David Starr Jordan. That was the com- mission representing Canada, Great Britain, and the United States, that made its report in 1898. They found certain facts to exist and principles controlling this subject that bear with great force upon the question before the committee. I desire to read several conclusions they reached. They decided that you can not count the seals by taking the number of feet they occupy upon the ground, but by counting the pups. In the seventh paragraph of the ‘‘ Joint statement” they say (p. 242): meX se The count of pups is the most trustworthy measure of numerical variation in the herd. The counts of harems, and especially of cows present, are much inferior in value. The latter counts, however, point in the same direction. The harems on all the rookeries were counted in both seasons. FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 27 Mr. Hirt. How many young do they have? Mr. FautKner. One. Mr. Crarx. One a year? Mr. Faurxner. Yes; oneayear. This joint conference passed upon the regulations of the Department and the contract of the lessees. This was in 1897, seven years after the report of Mr. Elliott. It is the admission of Canada and Great Britain. It is the first time they have agreed to the proposition which they announce in the extracts. I shall read page 243. 9. The methods of driving and killing practiced on the islands, as they have come under our observation during the past two years, offer no criticism or objection. An adequate supply of bulls is present on the rookeries. The number of older bache- lors rejected in the, drives during the period in question is such as to safeguard in the immediate future a similarly adequate supply; the breeding bulls, females, and pups on the breeding rookeries are not disturbed; there is no evidence or sign of impair- ment by driving of the virility of males; the operations of driving and killing are conducted skillfully and without inhumanity. That is the decision of the experts of Canada, Great Britain, and America. Mr. Cooper. At whose instance was that report made? Mr. Fautxwer. This was made at the instance of the two Govern- ments, under the authority of a clause in the award of the tribunal of Paris, which provided that the United States and England should revise the regulations formulated by the tribunal at the end of five years. Looking forward to that revision, in 1896 the two countries appointed this commission, that at the end of the five years they would have additional information upon which to base their new regulations. Mr. Coover. Did this Alaska company have anything to do with it? Mr. FaviKner. Oh, no, sir; it was a governmental commission entirely. Mr. Crarx. How did the’ Bering Sea come to be considered an open sea, by treaty or by international law? Mr. Favixner. Russia claimed to some extent the right to regard it as an inland sea over which it could exercise jurisdiction, and the United States insisted that it had acquired by the treaty all the rights of Russia. That matter was submitted to the tribunal of arbitration of Paris and they decided against the claim of the United States. Mr. Wuitams, of Mississippi. Unanimously, did they not? Mr. Facugner. Yes. Well, Senator Morgan did not vote on the question, but Justice Harlan voted with the other arbitrators. Mr. Dauzewu. Is that a governmental publication? Mr. Fautxner. Yes, sir; it isa publication called ‘‘The Fur Seal Islands in the North Pacific Ocean,” by David Starr Jordan. Mr. Datzett. Is it a Senate or House document? Mr. Facurxner. It does not mention whether it is a House or Sen- ate document. It says: ‘‘Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.” (Note.—Treasury Dept. Doc. 2017, div. special agents.) Mr. Extiorr. [ think it is a Treasury document. Mr. Fautkyer. I suppose it is a Treasury document for the reason that the commission, I think, was appointed by the Department look- ing forward to the revision of the rules under a provision of the award of arbitration. The report of the conference proceeds (p. 243), in the thirteenth clause: 13. The polygamous habits of the animal, coupled with an equal birth rate of the two sexes, permits a large number of males to be removed with impunity from the 28 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. herd, while, as with other animals, any similar abstraction of females checks or lessens the herd’s increase, or, when carried further, brings about a natural diminu- tion of the herd. It is equally plain that a certain number of females may be killed without involving the actual diminution of the herd if the number killed does not exceed the annual increment of the breeding herd, taking into consideration the annual losses by death through old age and through incidents at sea. Mr. Warson. What is the name of that book? Mr. Fautxner. The Fur Seals and Fur Seal Islands of the North Pacific Ocean, by David Starr Jordan, with the following official asso- ciates: Leonard Stejneger and Frederick A. Lucas, of the United States National Museum; Jefferson F. Moser, lieutenant-commander, U.S. Navy, in command of the United States Fish Commission steamer Albatross; Charles H. Townsend, of the United States Fish Commis- sion; George A. Clark, secretary and stenographer; Joseph Murray, special agent, with special papers by other contributors. This joint statement of the conference (p. 243) further says: 14. Whether from a consideration of the birth rate or from an inspection of the invisible effects, it is manifest that the take of females in recent years has been so far in excess of the natural increment as to lead to a reduction of the herd. The commission now admit our whole contention in regard to pelagic sealing, because there is not a female killed on the islands under the regulations of the Department. Mr. Exriott. Read the rest of it. Mr. Fautxxer. [am going to. Mr. Hitt. Is it easy to distinguish the male from the female? Mr. Faurxyer. I understand from these writers—because you gen- tlemen understand that I am not an expert—that it is after they reach the age of 2 years. Mr. Hiix. I thought you killed at 1 year of age. Mr. Fautxyer. I do not remember whether they have reduced the age to 1 year or not, but if they have done so, they only kill a very few of that age, because they are not marketable skins. Mr. Wittiams, of Mississippi. Yes; they kill them between 1 and 2 years. Mr. Fautxner (reading): Yet the ratio of the pelagic catch of one year to that of the following has fallen off more rapidly than the ratio of the breeding herd of one year to the breeding herd of the next. Mr. Exnrorr. Therefore we admit that pelagic sealing does not burt. Mr. Fautxwer. No. It says Mr. Crarx. There is no way to suppress this pelagic sealing except by a treaty with England, is there? Mr. Faurxner. A treaty with England, which will be followed by a treaty with Japan and Russia, but the stoppage of the Canadian sealers would virtually stop the preying upon the Pribilof Island herd. They are the ones that do the chief injury. The United States has shown its good faith in this matter by pro- hibiting American citizens from pelagic sealing or from fitting out vessels for that purpose, and we stand now, in the opinion of the experts, upon firm ground. We permit the killing only of the surplus males that are an injury to the increase of the herd. Mr. Chairman, I desire to read the conclusions of one of the most competent experts on this subject; that is, an extract from the report of Mr. Stejneger. He has made an elaborate study of our islands and 2 i FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 29 of those of Russia and Japan. I regard this report as the clearest and perhaps the most satisfactory discussion on the subject. He rests his conclusions on convincing reasoning, fortified by the fullest statistics. This is part 3 of the report of Professor Jordan. On page 227 of Leonard Stejneger’s report he says (he was speak- ing of the Russians—and see how it fits the case exactly): The propriety of prohibiting the killing of fur seals on land fora period of five years, as a means of building up the seal herd, has of late been discussed by the Russian authorities. When at sea they would be subject to the same danger from the pelagic hunters as the females. It shows that they have utterly failed to grasp the two essential points of the seal question as it stands to-day, viz, that the decline of the seal herd is solely due to pelagic sealing, and that the increase and consequent rehabilitation of the herd depends solely upon the preservation of the female seals. If pelagic sealing is stopped, no suspension— Luse the English instead of the Russian word— is necessary, or, as I shall show, it will be directly hurtful. If pelagic sealing be continued, a suspension will not only not protect the herd on shore, but it will directly result in increased catches for the pelagic sealers as long as the suspension lasts, since they will have the additional males to prey upon which will have been spared on land. = Now the future prosperity of the seal herd depends upon the number of females it contains; the number of bachelors is irrelevant in this connection. : Why? Because there are so many surplus bachelors that they are in the way. Mr. CiarK. What do you mean by bachelors, old fellows that have been ruled out of the business? : Mr. Fautxner. No, maleseals. The bachelors are generally spoken of as those seals that have not acquired a harem or place on the rooker- ies. [Reading from the report of Mr. Stejneger:] Suppose pelagic sealing be suppressed and a five years’ suspension instituted on the Commander Islands; what would result? At the end of the five years there would be exactly as many females as if no suspension had been, not one more (possibly some less), because no female seals would have been killed even if the suspension had not been kept. But there certainly would bea great. many morekillable seals at the beginning of the sixth year than during any one of the preceding years. A little reflection, however, will show that their total number must be less than the total sum of killed during these preceding years, inasmuch as the 2 to 4 years old bachelors of these years would have escaped the killing and become sikatchi, that is, available rookery bulls, and consequently unfit for killing during the suspension. And how would it look on the rookeries? * * * To sum up, a suspension as contemplated would result in (1) no addition of a single female to the herd; (2) loss in total number of killables; (3) highly injurious over- stocking of the rookeries with fighting males, and (4) a consequent heavy loss of young pups killed shortly after birth. This is the conclusion and summing up of this question, after four investigations of the islands by one of the most competent experts. Mr. Exxiorr. He does not know anything about our islands. Mr. Favutxner. I beg your pardon, he is absolutely familiar with our islands—more so than Mr. Elliott is. Mr. Exxuiorr. He was only two days on the American islands. Mr. Favixner. I question that; I have read the report. Mr. Wirtiams, of Mississippi. Who is that? Mr. Fautxner. Leonard Stejneger. He is a gentleman whom Sen- ator Nelson told me he had known from boyhood, and a man of the highest character; a man whose statement he would credit and for whom he had every respect. Mr. Wituiams, of Mississippi. Of course what you have read there is simply an opinion? F s—04——38 3U FUR SEALS OF ALASKA, Mr. Fauixner. No; this is a conclusion of the report of 400 pages, a conclusion drawn from the facts which he has discussed in 400 pages. Mr. Witit14Ms, of Mississippi. Of course every opinion is based upon some fact. Mr. Fautkner. It is based on his reasoning, his experience, and observation in four distinct investigations ordered by this Government as its representative. Mr. Wixu1ams, of Mississippi. In that connection it may be science that God Almighty made a mistake to leave the cows and bulls to work out the problem in connection with natural selection. If so, it is the only mistake I have heard of him making, but it is certainly not com- mon sense to say that you must have man interfere with a wild animal and kill some of them in order to propagate the species to the best = advantage. Mr. Fautxner. We have had these scientists working on this ques- tion twenty years. We have sent these men time and time again, in fact, almost yearly. The Government sends experts to the islands to get new light and more information on the peculiar habits and charac- teristics of this animal. Their conclusions have been reached by the process of observation, experiment, and study. They are now giving to you their scientific conclusions and information acquired through those investigations. I can not give it to you. You could not give it tome. We must rely upon the Government officials, accredited to us as competent, capable, and honest men who are sent to make a study of these subjects. Mr. Witiams, of Mississippi. Yes; for facts, but not for conclu- sions and opinions. Mr. Fautxner. For facts. I can not read you their arguments, their reasoning, their statistics, by which they reach these conclusions; I can not consume the valuable moments which your generous courtesy has allowed me to read these volumes; I can only give to you their conclusions and refer you in my brief to the pages of these reports, where you can read the reasoning and facts that justify their conclu- sions; that is as far as I can go. It would be asking too much to bur- den youfurther. [Reading from report of Leonard Stejneger, p. 228:] A suspension without total stoppage of pelagic sealing would be even more sense- less, as the females would continue to decrease at a much greater rate than the males, more females than males being killed at sea, and the resultant overstocking of the rookeries with bulls would be even more disproportionate and the more disastrous. Mr. Watson. That is not on account of the natural law at all, but they are reasoning that by pelagic sealing females will be killed and the males will not be killed on the land. But suppose you leave them all alone and do not kill any. Mr. Fautxyer. If you believe this fact—that 80 per cent of females are killed at sea—that the proportion of the sexes at birth is equal; that the habits of the animal is polygamous, when 50 to 150 cows are served by one bull, you will see that the full male life of the herd is not necessary to preserve and perpetuate the herd: I mean to the extent of the birth of the male. Mr. Wi11aMs, of Mississippi. But on the contrary they are pur- posely placed that way so they can fight it out and the strongest may procreate the species, and it is by the struggle, the fighting, that the strongest and best fittest survive and serve the females. FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 31 Mr. Fautxner. The older the bull and the more vigorous the bull of course the more able is he to get a position on a particular rookery, and he can contest successfully against the younger bulls and keep them away from his harem. It is ‘the age of the bull that enables him to hold the rookery against the young bull that is tr ying to capture it, it is not that when of the same age he was a stronger or superior bull, but that age has given him ereater strength and weight. Mr. Crark. The one that is holding the rookery will be bowled out a some other fellow gets big enough? . Fautxner. Of course he will. That is the reason why it is oe sane in any manner to preserve the entire male life, the birth rate being equal. ‘The increase and growth of the herd are controlled by the number of females preserved for the harems in which one bull can serve from 15 to 150 females, and therefore the male full life is not essential to affect this object. Mr. Ciarx. There is no such thing as segregating a bull with his harem from the rest of them? Mr. Fautxner. They segregate themselves. *Mr. Crarx. Suppose man undertook to interfere and breed these seals like we breed cattle. There is no machinery that could be devised to segregate Mr. Bull with his harem from the rest of them, is there? Mr. Fautxner. I would not like to go near them when they are on these rookeries from what I have read as to their habits and disposition. [Reading from report of Leonard Stejneger, p. 228:] That these considerations are not mere fanciful theories is plainly shown by our experience on the Pribilof Islands. As soon as the falling off in the catch of the bach- elors called attention to the decrease of the seal herd a halt was called; the killing on land was reduced toa minimum. The temporary officials were then under the same erroneous impression as the Russian authorities now, viz, that the calamity consisted in the decrease of bachelors, and they overlooked that it was the females, and they only, that needed being looked after. For several years only a fraction of the killable seals were allowed to be taken. What was the result? A single additional female on the rookeries? No; loss to the lessees and the Government of the bachelors spared; a corresponding gain to the pelagic sealers; a deplorable superabundance of bulls on the Pribilof rookeries, and numerous pups trampled to death soon after their birth. America has thus paid very dearly for her blunder. Are the Russians going to repeat it? It can now be asserted with certainty that a suspension of five years, or of one year, will retard the rehabilitation of the rookeries not only for so.many years as the suspension lasts but until the blunder be corrected by a wholesale killing off of the superfluous bulls resulting at the end of the suspension. He says there that the injury will be a continuous one after such a suspension until the Government shall go to work and kill off the sur- plus bulls which cause injury to the herd. Gentlemen, I have a number of references to authorities relating to the question which I have discussed, killing on land, the effect of the suspension of killing, which I do not feel that it is fair to the com- mittee that I should ask to read. The Cuarrman. You might hand those to the stenographer. an FauLxner. I will hand the references to the reporter. (See p. 33. Gentlemen, there are several scientists who are equal to any of the scientists or experts whose opinions we have discussed who have inves- tigated carefully, earnestly, and with the desire of obtaining all the information possible with a view to reform the regulations “provided for by the Paris award that are within reach of this committee, and I 82 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. do think that as this is an important and vital matter to the Govern- ment that all the light that can possibly be thrown upon it should be obtained from these gentlemen. I will be glad to give to the com- mittee their names and addresses. Mr. Hix. Do you know anything about the general sentiment of either the natives or what few whites there are up there in regard to this question ? Mr. Favuixner. I do not, sir, not the slightest. I do not suppose they feel any interest in it, providing you give them the support they are now getting. Mr. Hitx. I mean as to the best course to pursue in the treatment of one of their native products there, whether they concur with the scientists on that question. Mr. Fautxner. I have never ascertained their views and therefore can give you no information upon it. Mr. Hitz. Is it not a fact that there is something of a prejudice against the opinions propounded by Professor Jordan? Mr. Faurxner. I have never heard any except from Mr. Elliott. Mr. Cooper. What is the net revenue this Government derivés from the lease that it had made to this company ? Mr. Fautxyer. It has derived a revenue of between $7,000,000 and $8,000,000 since the original lease was made. Mr. Coorrr. What has it been in the last few years? My. Faurxyer. It has been small- You may multiply nineteen thousand and something by $10.27 and that would give you what it is. Mr. WiuiiaMs, of Mississippi. About $200,000 in round numbers. Mr. Cooprr. That is the gross revenue. What is the net revenue? Mr. Fautxyer. I can not tell you what the net revenue to the Gov- ernment is. Of course, the Government has had to keep certain ves- sels up there, as England does in the Bering Sea, to guard and protect the zone of 60 miles around the islands and other points, but this expense would continue under the terms of this award whether the lease was abrogated or continued. Mr. Coorgr. Does the Secretary of the Treasury make a statement of what net revenue is derived from that lease? Mr. Faurxner. I have not seen it; it may be in his report. The Cuarrman. Ido not know whether you care to express your opinion, but suppose this resolution was passed and the Government should kill 5,000 or 6,000 seals a year and appropriate the skins, would your company have any claim for damages against the Government of the United States under this contract? Mr. Fautxner. I think if you would abrogate and rescind the con- tract it would. The Cuarrman. Suppose we should siinply do what this resolution requires 4 Mr. Fautxner. That abrogates the contract, annuls it. I say, if you abrogate the contract I can not understand why the Government, under the decision of the Supreme Court, after entering into a contract in reference to a property matter, is not bound by the terms of that contract equally with the other contracting party. Mr. Watson. But does not the contract itself provide for a suspension 4 Mr. Faurxner. It provides for a regulation, not a suspension of the contract. FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 33 Mr. Watson. Then, what is the difference whether it is a suspension by the Treasury or the agent of the Treasury, or by Congress? Mr. Faurtxyner. No, sir; there is no provision for suspension. There is a provision Mr. Wrutiams, of Mississippi. There is a provision that they shall be taken under limitations and restrictions to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. Fautxner. Yes; it isin substance. Yes; I will read it. It is a very short clause of this contract. The Cuatrman. We give your company the exclusive right to kill, do we not? Mr. Fautxner. Yes; but here is a limitation of the rights of the company and a provision that protects the Government, in my judg- ment, in the limitation of the annual catch. It has acted under this clause and prescribed yearly the number of seals that shall be taken by the company: The said company also agrees faithfully to obey and abide by all rules and regula- tions that the Secretary of the Treasury has heretofore or may hereafter establish or make in pursuance of law concerning the taking of seals of said islands, and concern- ing the comfort, morals, and other interests of said inhabitants, and all matters per- taining to said islands and the taking of seals within the possession of the United ates I think there is no question of the right of the Secretary under that clause of the contract to limit and provide by regulations what shall be the annual catch. What I can not understand, and I have never understood, is why if a limitation is necessary in the judgment of Con- gress, and that it should be limited to 5,500 a year, why is it that you want to abrogate the contract instead of allowing the lessees to take the 5,500. There can be given no satisfactory reason for it. You invited the entering into this contract in good faith, We obtained the contract under a bid in which we offered three times more than our competitors were paying. We have lost by it. From 100,000 a year we have been reduced to 7,500 two years, and the aver- age for twelve years has been only 17,506 a year. We have therefore made no great profit, as you can see, in this matter. ,What can be the object in abrogating a contract when you have the power through your Secretary to control the number of every annual catch and still preserve the good faith of the Government with the lessee ? The CHarrman. I think you stated your position on that very well yesterday. Mr. Hitchcock is here from the Department of Commerce and Labor. He came here upon a letter from me written at the sug- gestion of one of the members of the committee, and we will now hear Mr. Hitchcock. REFERENCES TO JORDAN’S REPORT, 1898 (PRESENTED BY SENATOR FAULKNER). As authorized by the committee, I append to my remarks the fol- lowing references to the pages where the subject mentioned will be found in part 1 of the Report of David Starr Jordan on the Fur Seal and Fur Seal Islands, 1898. 1. The causes which led to the depletion of the herd on the Pribilof Islands in 1834, page 25. 384 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 9. Elliott’s method of estimating number of seals on the island over- thrown, pages 77, 78, 79, 81, 88, 84, 89, 95, Elliott’s theory of overdriving overthrown, pages 126, 127, 128. Elliott’s theory of nourishment of pups controverted, pages 163 and 164. 3. The only possible method of approximating the number of seals is by count of pups, pages 92, 98, 94, 96, 240. 4. Seals of all classes on islands in 1897, page 100. 5. In 1897 rookeries were overstocked with male life, page 111. 6. Land killing under proper regulations does not injure, but bene- fits the growth of the herd, pages 106, 119, 120, 150, 185, 210 (Note), 243; overkilling has not occurred, page 121; killing bachelors not a factor in decline, page 123; premature killing wasteful, but not injuri- ous, page 124; hypothetical case of killing injurious, page 120, but such killing not practical, page 121. 7. Conclusions of report of experts, page 189. 8. Table showing killing on land and sea, page 211. Y. Number of bulls necessary on islands, page 194. 10. Idle bulls, page 47; number of idle bulls, pages 97 and 98. 11. Islands where seals are not disturbed adjacent to the Pribilof Islands, pages 32, 94, 98, 121, 138. 12. Percentage of females killed by pelagic sealing, pages 154, 156, 158, 244, and 245. 13. Destructive effect of pelagic sealing, pages 170, 171, 172, 185, 186, 189, 243, and 244. STATEMENT OF MR. FRANK H. HITCHCOCK, CHIEF CLERK OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR. (See also p. 52.) Mr. Hircucocx. Mr. Chairman, the Secretary received your letter requesting that the Department be represented at this hearing, and he has accordingly directed me to be present and to answer, as well as I am able, any questions your committee may wish to ask regarding the attitude of the Department toward this resolution. The Cuarrman. 1 wrote the letter at the suggestion of Mr. Williams, of Mississippi. If he has any questions to ask he may proceed. Mr. Wittrams, of Mississippi. The letter was written to Mr. Hitch- cock at my suggestion. The Cuarrman. The gentleman from Mississippi requested that the Department be notified to appear, and in response to that I wrote to Secretary Cortelyou, and Mr. Hitchcock appears for the Secretary. Mr. Wiu1ams of Mississippi. There is nothing particular that I wanted. I just wanted a statement of the opinion of the Department about this matter and wanted that to go before the House, so the House would have the benefit of it. My. Hrrencocx. I will say, Mr. Chairman, that our Department has not been indifferent to this matter of the fur seals. From the time the service was transferred to us on the Ist of July it has received careful attention. We have taken measures to ascertain the condition of affairs on the islands and the condition of the herd. We have taken advantage of every available source of information. We have obtained the opinion of practically every expert in the United States, including that of Mr. Eliott. As a result of our inquiries, and in view of the opinions FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 35 obtained, we have reached a conclusion as to the proper course for the Department to follow if the matter is left in our hands. It is the opinion of the Department that the time has come to adopt some positive measures for the further restriction of the killing on the islands. The Department, however, does not think it would be wise at the present time to suspend the killing entirely, and for that reason we are not in favor of the resolution as it now stands. I take it that the purpose of the resolution is to preserve enough male life on the islands to guarantee the perpetuation of the herd. The Department is confident that the desired end can be accomplished | by applying less drastic measures. If the herd can be saved without a complete suspension of the killing it would certainly be a serious mis- take to take suchaction at thistime. Why? Because the result would be alarger surplus of male seals on the islands, and these seals would go into the sea to become the prey of the pelagic sealers. Just at this time when we have reason to believe that the pelagic hunt- ers are becoming somewhat discouraged, and when we desire them to become still more discouraged it would seem most unwise to provide for them an additional stock of seals, and thus add to the profits of their business. The great object to be obtained, everybody seems to agree, is the cessation of pelagic sealing. We want the Government to negotiate with Great Britain fora revision of the sealing regula- tions. In order that we may be successful in these negotiations it is highly important that no impetus be given at this stage to the pelagic sealing industry, because that industry continues to be the chief obstacle to such negotiations. It is the influence the Canadian sealers bring to bear upon the British Government that stands in the way of a revision of the regulations. Furthermore, if we take this action of suspending immediately ali killing on the islands, it deprives us of a measure that can be offered to the British as an inducement for similar action on their part regard- ing pelagic sealing. Pending the adoption of new regulations for the - better protection of the seals, we want to ask Great Britain to stop all killing at sea. In return for such action we can offer on our part to stop the killing on land. For these reasons it seems to the Department that it would be very unwise, in advance of any understanding with the British, to suspend all killing on the islands. Such action would impede the Government in its efforts to secure an international agreement for the preservation of the seals. Mr. Wiuuiams, of Mississippi. But what number do you propose to > restrict it to? Mr. Hircucocg. I shall be very glad to explain to the committee in detail the plan we have tentatively fixed upon. While we may decide to modify it somewhat as to the details, it will represent in its main features the policy the Department is ready to carry out. First of all, we propose to limit still further the ages at which seals can be taken; we will prohibit altogether the killing of seals under 2 years of age; we will also prohibit the killing of seals above 4 years of age. Killing will thus be restricted to seals between 2 and 4 years old. Furthermore, a regulation will be issued requiring the com- pany, under the direction of our agents, to cull out from the drives and release a certain number of 3-year-old males, and likewise a certain number of 2-year-old males, say about 1,000 of each. The 36 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA, enforcement of these measures, according to the opinion of experts well qualified to judge, will undoubtedly provide a supply of male seals amply sufficient to insure the perpetuation of the herd, which I understand to be the object of the resolution your committee is now considering. ; The Cuatrman. Will these be selected seals; these 1,000? Mr. Hircucocx. They will be required to cull out the best ones. The Cuoarrman. They will get the best? Mr. Hrrcucock. As the pods come up in the drives they will pick out from each pod the best seals and release them. Mr. Crarx. For breeding purposes? Do you limit, then, these selected to a certain number or kill all over that age limit? Mr. Hircucocx. In addition to the restrictions outlined, we propose . to cut down the quota—the number of seals the company is allowed to take. Mr. Extiotr. How many are they allowed to take? ; Myr. Hrrcucocx. At present their quota is 30,000. We propose to cut it down to one-half of that number—to 15,000. I do not mean to say that under these regulations the company will be able to get 15,000. That remains to be seen. Mr. Wiuuiams, of Mississippi. You propose to forbid the killing of seals under 2 years old? Mr. Hrrcucock. Yes. ; Mr. Wiiuiams, of Mississippi. At 2 years of age that is the very time you can tell the difference between the bull and thecow. In other words, if you kill nothing under 2 years old there should be no reason- able excuse for a mistake in that respect ? Mr. Hrrewcocx. You are quite right; that is the point. The great objection to killing these small seals, and 1 take it the only objection, is the difficulty in distinguishing the males from the females. Mr. Coorrr. Has Canada or Great Britain placed any limitation on the sea killing of seals? Mr. Hircncock. As to number; no. Mr. Fautxner. Nor as to sex, either? Myr. Hrrcucocx. Nor as to sex. Mr. Warson. Then you would limit them to 15,000? Mr. Hrrcucock. Yes; in addition to culling out these male seals, it is our purpose to limit the catch to 15,000. Mr. Warson. After they are culled out you will not permit, under any circumstances, the killing of more than 15,000? Mr. Hrrencocx. No, sir; that is our proposition. Mr. Ciarx. How many is that supposed to be? Mr. Hrrcncocx. I can give you the exact figures. They are from the latest reports of the agents and have not been hitherto published, exceptin part. I think some of you gentlemen will be surprised when you hear the figures read. A census taken by the agents last season showed the presence on the two islands (St. Paul and St. George) of 97,296 breeding cows. Taken in connection with the records of the years immediately preceding these figures are surprisingly large. They seem to indicate that the number of cows has been increasing instead of declining. In 1899, five years ago, there were 89,261 cows on the islands, while in 1908, according to the figures I have just quoted, there were over 97,000. FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 37 an CiarK. Now, they have one calf or pup or whatever you call them? Mr. Hrreucock. Practically every cow gives birth to a “pup,” the young seal is called. Mr. Crarx. It would be a liberal estimate to say that 60 per cent would have young? Mr. Hircucocx. That would be an underestimate. Mr. Datzeti. Nearly all of them have, according to Senator Faulkner. Mr. Crarx. Cattle will not do that well. Mr. Hircucock. It is a well-established fact as regards the seals. Mr. Cuarx. What per cent do you say have pups? Mr. Hrrcucock. I do not care to commit myself as to the exact per cent, for I «m not positive. Mr. Crarx. I am not trying to get you to commit yourself posi- tively, but you ought to have some idea about it. Mr Hrrcucoc. Nearly every cow hasa pup. Scientists all agree to that. The Cuarrman. Senator Faulkner said practically all of them. Mr. Hrrcacocx. Mr. Chairman, that fact is generally assented to. I think Mr. Elliott will agree to that. Mr. Crarx. Has the Department any information as to how many seals of all sorts these pelagic fellows get hold of? Mr. Hircucock. Most assuredly. Mr. Crarx. How many of those? Mr. Hrrcncock. I shall be glad to give you the figures in a moment, if you will pardon me for an instant—— Mr. Crarg. Certainly. Mr. Hitcncock. Last year the number of active bulls on the islands— that is, bulls having harems—according to an actual count made by the agents, was 2,343. Five years before there were 4,573, or nearly double the number for last season. Mr. Crarx. What do you mean by active bulls? Mr. Hircucocr. The bulls that have cows. Mr. Crark. How many are there that do not have cows? Mr. Hrtcucock. There were close to 500 idle bulls, or bulls without cows, on the islands last summer. Our agents wereinstructed to count the idle bulls last season, and as a result of their count they state posi- tively that there were nearly 500 on the two islands. The number on St. Paul was 418, while on St. George there were about 75. It would seem from these figures that there is still a considerable supply of sur- plus bulls in the herd, Mr. Hirx. Does the Department keep account of the expense of supervising and watching this, as compared with the revenue received from it? Mr. Hrrcncock. Yes, a complete account. Mr. Hii. Can you give the net profit or loss on the whole transac- tion annually # Mr. Hrrencock. I can not give it to you at present, because I have not the figures with me; but I can send them to the committee, if desired. I have the records at my office. Mr. Hitz. Does that account include the cost of the revenue-patrol service? 38 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Mr. Hircucock. Everything in connection with the fur-seal service. Mr. Crarx. I want to get the figures. You say 97,000 cows? Mr. Hircucockx. Ninety-seven thousand two hundred and ninety-six. Mr. Cuarx. And how many active bulls? Mr. Hircucock. Two thousand, three hundred and forty-three. Mr. Crark. And how many inactive bulls? Mr. Hircucock. About 500 on both islands. Mr. Ciark. Is that all the bulls there are up there? Mr. Hircucock. That is all of the bulls. That does not mean all the male seals, however. : Mr. Criarx. There isn’t any sort of a male seal except a bull, is there? Mr. Hirencocx. You understand that before the male seals reach maturity they are not called bulls. Mr. Crarx. What are they called? Mr. Hrrcncock. The term usually employed is ‘‘ bachelors.” Mr. Ciark. They are of no earthly account, are they? Mr. Hrrcucocx. The company would not say that; it is the bach- elors they take for their skins. My. Crarx. What I want to get at is the total number. You say there are 97,000 cows, 2,300 heads of families, and 500 that are not doing anything? Mr. Hircucock. There were probably over 200,000 seals of all kinds, including pups, on and about the Pribilof Islands last summer. Mr. Crarx. Senator Faulkner says this company averages 17,000 that they kill. How many do the English and the Japanese get? Mr. Hircucocs. I am coming to that. Mr. Crarx. Are those figures in such shape that you can hand them to the reporter? Mr. Hircncock. Yes; I have them in tabular form. Mr. Crarx. What I want is to get at the facts, so we can form some rational conclusion as to whether this seal herd is decreasing or increas- ing, or what it is doing. Tbe Cuatrman. Do your figures show a comparative statement? Mr. Urrencock. They do. The Cuarrman. You may insert them in the records. (See p. 57.) Mr. Hrrescock. I will do so. But if you will permit me, I should like to present at this time the statistics that were requested a moment ago regarding pelagic sealing. The number of skins taken last season off the northwest coast and in Bering Sea by the Canadian sealing fleet, as officially reported by our consul at Victoria, was 12,026, to which should be added 765 skins taken along the coast by Indians in canoes, making a total of 12,791. These figures relate exclusively to the American herd. They do not inelude the skins taken by the Canadian fleet in Asiatic waters, amounting last season to 1,910; nor do these figures include skins taken from the American herd by vessels sailing under flags other than the Canadian, and there is reason to believe that during the past season a considerable catch was made by such vessels. There can be little doubt, however, that the entire pelagic catch, including skins taken by Japanese vessels as well as Canadian, has been much smaller during the past few seasons than it was several years ago. In 1899, and also again in 1900, the Canadian fleet. took over 33,000 skins from the American herd. Since then the catch at sea has undoubtedly been much reduced, and consequently the pelagic FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 39 sealing industry has ceased to be as profitable as formerly. Through the United States consul at Victoria I have obtained the annual state- ment of the Victoria Sealing Company (Limited), which shows that the total net profits of the past season were only $19,852 on a capitaliza- tion of $500,000, or not quite 4 per cent. Mr. Coorrr. What company is that? Mr. Hrreneock. It is the Victoria Sealing Company, of Victoria, British Columbia. Mr. Cooper. Where do they operate? Mr. Hrrewcocx. They operate practically all the vessels that are engaged in pelagic sealing under the Canadian flag. The CuarrmMan. We will have to suspend. You can give those fig- uresto the reporter. (See p. 57.) [understand that one of the members of the House died since the adjournment yesterday and I do not know whether there will be an adjournment of the House immediately or not. If the House adjourns we might meet this afternoon. (Informal discussion followed, and thereupon, at 11.55 o’clock a. m., the committee took a recess until 2 o’clock p. m.) AFTER RECESS. The committee reassembled (pursuant to the taking of the recess) at 2 o’clock p. m., Hon. Sereno E. Payne in the chair. Members present: The chairman, Messrs. Dalzell, Grosvenor, Taw- ney, McCall, Hill, Boutell, Watson, Williams, and Clark. STATEMENT OF MR. J. W. IVEY, OF ALASKA. (Lx- Collector of Customs in Alaska.) Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, 1 would prefer that the reporter be instructed not to take down my remarks, as I am here with no set speech. My attention was called to this hearing bya newspaper article to the effect that the seal question was being consid- ered by this committee. Having heard Senator Faulkner’s remarks on this question during the morning session, and being informed that Professor Elliott would be heard this afternoon on the same question, I thought the committee might be pleased to hear from me from the standpoint of an Alaskan resident interested in the preservation of this industry. The CuatrmMan. Have you any objection to the proposition of the Department of Commerce and Labor suggested by Mr. Hitchcock this morning ¢ Mr. Ivey. No, sir. J heard the statement made by Mr. Hitchcock, and while I agree with it in the main, I think it was possibly going a little too far. That is, I do not believe such stringent regulations are necessary in order to preserve the seal herd. The people of Alaska have well-defined ideas on all their industries, but on account of the seal herd being away from the mainland of Alaska we have not taken as much interest in this question possibly as is the case with many other industries. I have been a resident of Alaska for about seven years; have trav- eled extensively over that country; have visited the seal islands, and have made quite a study of the seal question. Tagree with Senator Faulkner that the killing of seal by the seal com- pany is not what is causing the diminution of the seal herd. I believe 40 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. the whole trouble is caused by the killing of the female seal by Cana dian and other seal poachers. If this could be stopped I am satisfied the herd would increase instead of diminish. On my visit to the seal islands I was informed by the agent of the Treasury Department that they had that year counted 16,000 dead seal pups in the rookeries that had starved to death on account of the mothers being killed while away in search of food for their young. The killing of the mother seal causes deatb by starvation to all their young, so that during that one year not less than 32,000 seal were lost to our Government through pelagic sealing. There is a feeling in Alaska that our Government has not put forth its best efforts to pro- tect this industry. It is my judgment that 75 or 80 per cent of the seal are killed within the 60-mile zone around the seal islands and within the 3-mile limit of the Aleutian Islands. Within the past two years I have seen Canadians engaged in sealing within our Jurisdic- tional waters, and that, too, within 40 miles of where two or three of our revenue cutters were anchored with apparently nothing to do. And this brings me to the question upon which I wish to speak par- ticularly. The question is, How can we stop pelagic sealing? Mr. Chairman, our Government sends from five to eight revenue cutters to Alaska each year with apparently very little todo. Now, would it not be a good idea, as long as this expense is incurred, to send these revenue cutters there with instructions to proceed to Bering Sea and cause the arrest of all those engaged in sealing within our jurisdictional waters? Iam not hereto criticise the Government for not having done this before, nor will I censure those in charge of the revenue cutters, but I am satisfied that if this is done and vigilant action is taken by our officers that 75 or 80 per cent of this killing will be prevented. In fact, it is my opinion that if our Government enters upon this work in dead earnest, affording full protection to the seal within our own waters, that all poaching on the part of Canadians and others engaged in this illegal practice will cease entirely, as it would not pay them to continue in the business. The officers of these cutters should be instructed to protect the seal in the spring and fall as they pass between the Aleutian Islands, as they go to and fro between the Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea, where thousands of our seals are slaughtered annually. They should also be _ instructed to patrol the 60-mile zone around the seal islands and put fear of God in the hearts of all those who are engaged in destroying our property. On the seal question we have had altogether too much so-called sci- entific and expert nonsense and not enough good, hard horse sense. Let us put in motion the machinery we have, which costs us a large sum of money annually, and see what can be done toward protecting this valuable industry. I positively know that these foreigners year after year engage in destroying our property within our jurisdiction with impunity, while itis made a crime for our own people to kill seal anywhere on the high seas from 300 miles south of San Francisco to the Arctic Ocean. The Cuatrman. Have you called the attention of the Department of Commerce and Labor to this matter? Mr. Ivny. No, sir. . The matter has only recently been placed in that Department, being formerly in the Treasury Department. While I was collector of customs in Alaska the special agent of the FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 41 Treasury Department and myself wrote a letter to the Treasury De- partment to the effect that if our Government would use machinery it has at hand, such as I have suggested, the seal herd would be saved from destruction. Mr. DatzeLy. What proportion of pelagic sealing do you say is done within our jurisdictional limits, and not on the high seas? Mr. Ivey. I say from 75 to 80 per cent of it. If this pelagic seal- ing is stopped I am satisfied seal poaching will all stop, as it would not pay them to continue in the business. I wish to repeat that I do not think that trouble is on account of the land killing by the seal company. As long as a sufficient number of male seal are retained for breeding purposes the land killing works no injury to the seal herd. The bachelors or young male seal are those killed for the fur, and these are never allowed by the older males to approach the rookeries or breeding grounds. To kill these, leaving enough for breeding purposes, does not injure the herd. It is the same as in raising cattle, the females are retained while only a sufficient number of males are kept for breeding purposes. Mr. Joseph Murray, a former Treasury agent on the seal islands, told me some years ago that the land killing was no injury to the herd, but that the whole trouble grew out of pelagic sealing, which destroyed both the mothers as well as the pups. J believe the suggestion made by Mr. Hitchcock to the Department of Commerce and Labor to be a good one, that no seal be killed under two years of age by the seal company. The whole question resolves itself into the prevention of pelagic sealing by Canadians and others engaged in that business, and if the committee will let this question alone, except to have the Department of Commerce and Labor make an order that no seal be killed under 2 years of age and order the revenue cutters to go up there and do their duty for the protection of this industry, you will have no further trouble with this question. The CHarrman. I hope you will go to the Department of Commerce _and Labor and make this statement to them. Mr. Ivey. I will be pleased to do so. The CHarrman. It is a new statement to this committee and we are very glad to get the information. Is there any gentleman here who wishes to be heard in opposition to this? If not, we will hear anyone in favor of it. I suppose Mr. Elliott would be glad to be heard. ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF MR. H. W. ELLIOTT. (See p. 1.) Mr. Exrrotr. Mr. Chairman, I want to speak in brief reply to cer- tain criticisms of Senator Faulkner, who, in behalf of the lessees, has just made assertions touching the character of my work on the seal islands in 1872-1874 and in 1890; also to ask some questions of the representative of the Department of Commerce and Labor. The Cuarrman. You may ask him some questions if you desire. Mr. Exxiorr. I have heard to-day, here, for the first time, from the Department of Commerce and Labor on the point of what it will do to restrict the land killing. Ihave enjoyed the confidence of the gentleman who has just spoken here, for the Department, and we have always interchanged views without hesitation. 42 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. The Cuarrman. We all have. What questions have you to ask? Mr. Extiorr. Let Mr. Hitchcock tell the committee how many seals under 2 years old are up there to-day which he proposes to save. Mr. Hrrcncock. Kindly repeat that question. Mr. Exxiorr. How many seals on those islands next summer under 9 years of age will you be able to save, and will they kill 15,000, as you say you will allow? Mr. Hrrcscock. Mr. Elliott, I think you are as competent as I am to make an estimate of that number. The Cuarrman. If you want to ask any questions for information, ask them. We do not propose to allow a cross-examination. Mr. Exxiorr. I would like to have the gentleman answer the ques- tions in your presence. How many seals! Mr. Warson. I do not understand that they were to have the privi- lege of killing 15,000. He said that they were to save all under 2 years old. Mr. Hircstcock. Yes, sir; that is correct. Mr. Grosvenor. And if the 15,000 did not materialize, that would be their bad luck? Mr. Hitcucocn. Yes, sir. Mr. Extiotr. How would you draw that distinction, ‘‘long” two ‘years or “‘short” two years? The Cuarrman. What do you mean by ‘“‘long” years or ‘‘ short” ears ‘ My. Exiorr. They have ‘‘long” two years old or ‘‘ short” two years old. The Cuarrman. We take the ordinary sense of two years which means twenty-four months. Mr. Cuark. A yearling is a yearling from the time that it is a year old until it is 2 years old. _ The Cuarrman. He said no seals under 2 years old. A man of ordinary sense understands that, and I do not think we will quibble on that. Mr. Hrrencock. The agents on the island understand perfectly the distinction, and they will be able to carry out the instructions, with the information they have. Mr. Exuiotr. He says these agents will carry out these instructions. How have they carried them out heretofore? The law says they shall not kill any seal under a year old up there. I state here, weighing my ue carefully, that they have killed thousands of seals under a year old. The Cuarrman. That statement has been made and it has been con- tradicted. Have you any evidence as to that? Mr. Evtiotr. I have it here, and I want to present it. If these agents are going to make this selection in 1904, we want to know what they have cone in the past year. Last summer they were allowed to kill 25,000 seals if they could get them. They only killed 19,000. I have an analysis of a sale made in London on the 17th of December, 19038. Fifteen thousand one hundred and eighty of those 19,000 skins were sold at this sale, on the 17th of oo and I have an analysis of the sale of every skin that was sold. The Cuairman. You suggested yesterday that you should judge from the weight of the skins- FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 43 Mr. Extiorr. Yes; from the London classification. The Cuarrman. Is a seal anything like a baby? We hear of differ- ent weights in babies. Mr. Exxrorr. Yes; they have well-grown babies and underdone babies, and all that sort of thing. The analysis of those 15,180 skins a that there were 13,034 44-pound skins sold. Those were year- ings. Mr. Warson. What is a yearling; does it mean a seal from 1 to 2 years old? Mr. Extiorr. A yearling is a seal after he is 12 months old. He then begins as a yearling. The Cuarrman. We understand that. Mr. Warson. The point is how many under 1 year old were killed? Mr.. Exuiorr. ‘‘Short” yearlings, 2,302. Then there were 312 34-pound skins; these were ‘‘ yearlings,” certainly. Mr. Warson. That doesn’t mean anything to us. Mr. Ex.iotr. That means under a year. Mr. Warson. What does? Mr. Exxiotr. That light-weight skin. No man has got the sense, when those yearlings come up, if he kills them, say, on the 4th of July, to know that he is not killing a pup that was born on the 25th of July, the year before. Mr. Grosvenor. How are you going to tell? Mv. Exxiorr. You can not tell, and therefore I say the burden of proof rests on the Treasury agent not to have them killed. ‘ The Cuarrman. If it is extended to 2 years old it will help a good eal? : ae Exuiorr. It will. But will they extend it if they have not done so here? The Cuatrman. Mr. Hitchcock appears to bea reputable gentleman. Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, I agree with you perfectly. I want to make this point on the matter: [ want to help Mr. Hitchcock in this busi- ness. I want to put this entirely in his control. That is the point and the sense of this resolution, that all the killing up there, until the rookeries are in shape to kill again, should be entirely in his control. The Cuarrman. It already is, is it not? Mr. Exriotr. Not if he allows the lessees to make the selection after giving them a permit to kill so many seals. If he can so handle his agents as to make the selection and reservation he has announced as the order of the Department, then he can. The Cuarrman. He can stop it altogether. Mr. Exzrotr. Not if he gives them a permit to kill 15,000 before they start up next May. The Cuarrman. I gay he can stop it altogether. Mr. Exriott. Yes, sir; if he does not let them have the permit to kill, then at the start they are checked. The CHatrman. Then it is entirely under his control? Mr. Extiorr. When the permit is given it is under his complete control only so far as preventing the lessees from taking more than 15,000 seals; then the shade of nalection is done up there far from his immediate reach or control, unless his agents are like himself. Mr. Warson. If you want to discuss the regulations you ought to discuss them with him and not with us. Mr. Exurorr. That is very true, but I go further here. I want him 44 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. bound by a distinct statement to this committee that he will restrict this killing of young male seals beyond all question, so as to really - save them. The Cuarrman. What we want to hear is whether we shall pass this resolution. Mr. Exxiorr. This resolution will put the matter of excessive land killing on the islands beyond any power of interference with the Department for at least three or four years. It will rest and save the few choice young male seals now alive and permit them to grow up, so as to reach the breeding grounds by 1907 or 1908, where they must appear then or we will lose the life itself. The resolution permits him to kill ‘‘food” seals; he then kills only the poor ones; there is no incentive or stimulus to get the good ones, which would prevail were the lessees to have the selections of the ‘‘ food” skins, after he had given them a permit to kill—this resolution puts him in sole charge, and then the difficulty of the thing is obviated at once. Mr. Crark. This last gentleman seems to indicate that these active bulls, the heads of families, segregate themselves from these bachelor bulls; that the bachelor bulls are driven off to reservations. Is that so? Mr. Exsiorr. These young fellows are not allowed by the old bulls to go where the breeding is going on. A young male must attain a growth of six years before it is physically heavy and strong enough to fight with the breeding bulls for a place on the rookery. To stay there he must be at least as old as that. Mr. Crarg. Now, if there is enough of these active bulls that get together with the cows, and these other fellows are entirely separated from them, what harm would it do to kill that whole gang? Mr. Exuiotr. They must grow up so as to fill those places on the breeding grounds which become vacant by reason of old age and excessive service. Mr. Crarx. Just the young ones, I mean. Mr. Evtiotr. They are all young ones. Mr. Crarx. What becomes of the surplus old ones? Mr. Extiotr. They lie right on the rookeries, and do nothing; they are the superaged and impotent-old bulls, which can neither attract, nor control, nor serve as breeders; they lie around, somnolent for a season or two, then disappear by death. . ie CrarK. But they are not mixed up with these active, breeding ULLS ¢ Mr. Exxiorr. No; for the best of reasons. They are impotent; and the prepotent bulls pay no attention to them; nor do the cows; the rookery grounds are so scant in life now that there is plenty of room for these old and worthless bulls to lie in there, undisturbed, with harems all around. Mr. Crarkx. Why not knock them in the head and get the skins? Mr. Evuiotr. The skins are not valuable. - The Cuairman. Don’t you think the idea carried out by My. Hitch- cock allowing them to kill 15,000 would leave a sufficient supply of bulls for all purposes of propagation ? Mr. Exniorr. If I thought Mr. Hitchcock would be there to enforce the grades of selection which he says he will order spared, and which ne announced to you this morning, year after year, I would not esitate. FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 45 Mr. Crarx. If you thought that would be carried out you would be in favor of it? Mr. Exxiotr. Yes; if I thought he would be there, but I have found that these officers are constantly changing, and men come and go; good men are supplanted by men who are not so good, and the oppor- tunity comes in Mr. Tawney. Have you any evidence of collusion between these Treasury agents and the company that has this lease, for the purpose of getting any special privileges up those? Mr. Ecxiorr. I do not know exactly what you mean by collusion. Mr. Tawney. Are they under the influence of or in the employ or connected with this company in any way? Mr. Warson. Do they get a rake off? Mr. Exxiorr. The Government agent in charge to-day on St. Pauls Island left the employ of the company two or three years ago and walked over into the Treasury agent’s office. Heisthere to-day. He is giving information to the Department of Commerce and Labor. I do not mean to say that he would not discriminate against his company for the Government—well, what would he do? Mr. Tawney. Is he still an employee of the company ? Mr. Extiotrr. No. What I mean to say is this: Unless there is some man like Mr. Hitchcock here, it is more than likely that the lessees, through such means, will get back again and make their own selections as usual, and not his selections, if he should leave the office. That is the point I make in this thing. If we had this business for a few years so fastened down that they could not get in there, and would be obliged to kill exactly as the Department of Commerce and Labor prescribes, even if the man who succeeds Mr. Hitchcock is not as straight as he is The CHarrman. You heard the statement of Mr. Ivy that 75 per cent of the pelagic sealing is done within our jurisdictional waters. What do you say about that? Mr. Extiorr. That is news to me; I do not believe it. 7 The Cuarrman. How long has it been since you have been up there? Mr. Extiort. Not since 1890. But why should they come there? Their favorite feeding grounds are from 80 to 90 miles from the seal- ing islands, and that is where these hunters get them. The Cuatrman. Mr. Ivy seems to say that that is not where they get them. Mr. Exxriotr. Yes; I have heard that. I have formed a very high opinion of the revenue-marine service in Alaskan waters. I know that the seal patrol does not amount to much; but that is not in the slightest degree the fault of the revenue-marine service; the fault lies elsewhere. The Cuarrman. You know nothing tothe contrary, but itis against your judgment? My. Extiott. It is against all the knowledge and judgment I have had on that. I know that since 1901 the Canadians have masqueraded as ‘‘ Japanese” fur-seal hunters, and in ‘‘ Japanese” vessels have been able to practically nullify what little restraint the Bering Sea Tribunal rules and regulations impress. Mr. Crarx. How old do male seals live to be? Mr. Extiorr. Sixteen or 18 years old, on an average. F s—04——4 46 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Mr. CrarK. What is the reason these 5 and 6 year bachelor seals are not good for commercial purposes? Mr. Exuiorr. Because the fur on their withers becomes patchy and harsh. Mr. McCaxru. Would it not be good to make a man’s overcoat out of? Mr. Exxiorr. No, not even good for door mats. The male skins are not good after the fifth year of the seal’s life. My. CuarK. The period for the bulls is from three years to seven? Mr. Exxiorr. No; from the sixth year to the sixteenth or eight- eenth year, as breeders, they must get flesh and strength enough to fight and stay on the breeding ground from 4th of May to 1st of August annually, without leaving their posts for an hour in that time, either to eat or drink. Now, I want to take up another point that might as well be clearly understood. Mr. CuarK. Does it relate to this resolution? Mr. Exxiort. It relates to the record of land killing under the Rus- sian administration. I have the official records here, and I want to lay them before the committee. They show that when there was not even the thought of a pelagic hunter in the mind of anybody, much less the industry itself, that the Russian herd under a systematic principle of killing off all the choice young males every year passed from an immense aggregate of life in 1808 down to the point of almost total extermination in 1834 in these Pribilof Islands. Mr. Fautxner. Allow me to state that up to that period the Rus- sians killed both female and male, and I was not able to bring that out. I had the authorities and all that for it, but I shall put it in my brief. Mr. Extiotr. J am glad he stated that. I do not object to the interruption. The Cuarrman. That is a fact? Mr. Extiottr. No; it is not a fact. Ido not like to say that, but I have the official records here of the work. In 1819—now, this is a point that ought not to be lost on the committee, because it is not my assertion; it is a record of fact here; it isa record of excessive land killing, to the ruin of the herd, when there was no pelagic sealing even known; it is authentic and worthy of your respect; it denies what Doctor Jordan and his associates have said beyond all successful con- tradiction or sensible disputation. Let me read what the official examiner, sent out by the board of directors of the old Russian- American Company, and who reviewed the whole season’s work of 1819 on the killing grounds of St. Paul Island, reports back to his company. Under date of March 15, 18291, the secretary of the Russian- American Company writes from St. Petersburg to Governor Muraivev, at Sitka, who is in charge of the entire Alaskan district, and in control of the seal islands, to wit: In his report, No. 41, of the 25th of February, 1820, Mr. Yanovsky, in giving an account of his inspection of the operations on the islands of St. Paul and St. George, observed that every year the young bachelor seals are killed and that only the cows, “‘sekatch,” and half ‘‘sekatch”’ are left to propagate the species. It follows that only the old seals are left, while if any of the bachelors remain alive in the autumn they are sure to be killed the next spring. The consequence is that the number of seals obtained diminishes every year, and it is certain that the species will in time become extinct. The Cuarrman. That would seem to indicate that the Russians killed all the young male seals? FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 47 Mr. Exxiorr. Yes, they did; from 1 year old to 4 years old; just as we have been doing since 1896 down to date, and as some ‘ experts” are proposing to continue, even now. And these ‘ “experts” are now being quoted to you as “authorities” to prove that no excessive kill- ing of young male seals ever harmed this herd—that pelagic sealing alone injures it. The Cuarrman. No; we reserve enough now for the propagation of the species ¢ Mr. Extiotr. Yes; we do intend to; but the argument made this morning by the counsel for the lessees is that you can not kill so as to hurt the herd. He quotes Doctor Jordan and Doctor Stejneger at length to prove this and to deny the fact of the Russian record. This attempt on their part is foolish; it is dogmatic nonsense. The Cuarrman. No man would say that if you killed all the males every year that finally you would not destroy the herd. It would only be a question of time. Mr. Exuiorr. Doctor Jordan has said it. He says that land killing would not and never hurt this herd; he says that no killing by the lessees can be severe enough to hurt the life of this herd, and Stejneger is quoted to. show that two bulls are enough for the service of 500 cows. Stejneger does not know that those bulls and all those cows have disappeared from the south rookery, Bering Island, three years ago. They are extinct. That is the kind of an object lesson these gentlemen present to you. The Cuairman. That is a different Proposition. Mr. Extiott. This is land killing. The Cuatrman. In 1819? Mr. Extrorr. Yes, sir. The Cuatrman. Doctor Jordan did not go back as far as that. Mr. Extiotr. But he blindly denies these authentic records. We have this official record of the past to guide us for the present. I ask that it go in as a part of my remarks. The Cuarrman. All right, put it in. The matter referred to is as follows: “The official Russian record of the decline of the Pribilof fur-seal herd from exces- sive land killing.”’ Notr.—The full details of this record of the Russian period of diminution from 1817 to 1834 and its gradual restoration to fine form and number in 1857-1860 will be found on pages 1599, 1601, 1602, 1603, 1614, 1615 of the Congressional Record, February 2, 1903, Fifty- seventh Congress, second session. The full details of Jordan’s and Moser’s blunders in criticism of my rookery sur- veys will be found on pages 1599, 1600, 1601 et seq. of Congressional Record, Febru- ary 2, 1903. The full text of Jordan’s branding blunders will be found on pages 1603, 1604, 1614, Congressional Record, February 2, 1903. The full text of Jordan’s ‘Joint agreement’’ with my annotations will be found on pages 1604, 1605, and 1606, and 1611, Congressional Record, February 2, 1903. The original surveys of the breeding rookeries which I made in 1872-1874, have never been published, duplicated, or seen by either Jordan or Moser; they have seen nothing but the small census sketch maps of 1882, or my own sketches of 1890, which were enlarged by photography in 1891, and distorted even as sketch maps, hence their criticisms are puerile and are fully answered as above cited. The attorney for the lessees has been unfortunate in referring to them this morning.—(H. W. E., March 10, 1904.) Mr. Extiorr. Now I havea further remark to make. Doctor Jordan was introduced to you by Mr. Faulkner as a scientist, with four asso- 48 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. ciates, Stejneger, Lucas, Clark, and Moser, who completely deny the sense and intelligence of my work. [Stejneger, least of all, should be heard. He has had just nine days’ experience and knowledge of the Pribilof herd on the seal islands of Alaska.] Doctor Jordan came down in 1896, after spending forty-three days on the islands for the first time in his life (never having seen a fur seal heretofore or having known anything about one), with three propositions which he called ‘*discoveries:” First. That the fur seal bulls naturally trampled their young to death, and that that was the chief cause of the check upon their life, so that it would not increase above a certain figure in a state of nature. Sécond. That he had got a complete and successful scheme to put the pelagic sealer out of business by branding the female seals. Third. That he had secured a perfect agreement with the Canadians to suppress pelagic sealing; that he had this understanding with his British associates. [See letter to Senator Perkins, U.S. Senate, Cong. Record, Feb. 28, 1897, p. 2619. ] Next year Doctor Jordan ‘‘ discovered” that the pups were not tram- pled by their parents to death, because a certain scientist in the Depart- mentof Agriculture found, after examining the specimens of ‘‘ trampled pups” which had been brought down to Washington from the islands, that it was due to the ravages of an intestinal worm! and now, after he had modified this ‘‘ scientific” blunder of himself and associates in 1897, by charging this ‘‘ chief check upon the increase of seal life in a state of nature,” to the sand worm (uncwarda), which Doctor Stiles had found as the real cause of death. Now, this sand worm itself has disappeared from the islands and has not been noticed there since 1900, so the ‘‘scientifie” checks of Doctor Jordan and his associates “discovered” in 1896 and 1897 have evaporated into thin air—a sporadic worm, and that, too, only found on the sandy areas, less than ‘one twenty-fifth of the breeding ground area. In 1896, in November, I remonstrated with Doctor Jordan and urged him not to make this unfortunate blunder go into cold type, and cited my personal knowledge (in 1872, 1873, 1874) of the utter nonsense of his claim; but he persisted, and it appears in extenso in his prelimi- nary oo of November 7, 1896. (Treasury Doc. No. 1918, pp. 45, 46, 47. Not satisfied, however, with this publication, he insisted on having his scientific associates announce the ‘‘ trampled pup” discovery to the scientific world by means of a paper read before the Biological Society of Washington, January 4, 1897. It was duly done and publicly indorsed by all of these gentlemen then. I alone, that evening, when it was read, entered my denial of its truth; that denial was heard by oo Stiles, and he proceeded to investigate with the result as I have stated. I therefore object stoutly to the charge made this morning by the lessees’ attorney that Doctor Jordan’s scientitic acumen is so over- powering in the premises that I am to be regarded as not being pos- sessed of good sense when I differ from him. Why, indeed, should he be any better judge of what the effect of land killing is than he has been of the cause which killed these pups in 1896? Also, what about this branding of seals, which he publishes in this same preliminary report (p. 62) as a swift, feasible, and certain means of putting the pelagic hunters out of business. He spread the FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 49 ‘‘ discovery ” by syndicated letters all over the country, and his asso- ciates, Stejneger, Lucas, Moser, Clark, Murray, and Townsend, all joined in the chorus. This was ‘‘ science,” with a ‘‘ weight of evi- dence” which was awful in its import for me to deny. I did, and did so with all plainness of speech. Doctor Jordan now knows that the branding of seals is abject tomfoolery. He knows that it accom- plishes no sensible purpose whatever. Has he admitted the fact? Is . it ‘‘ scientific” to be dogmatic in error? That mistake, like the ‘‘trampled pups,” is another ‘scientific ” blunder, which I never made; but at the same time you will remem- ber I told this committee, in this room two years ago, that [ was one of those men who did not claim to be above making mistakes—that I bad made them and I had self-confessed them. Then he signed up an agreement with the Canadians in 1897, whereby he surrendered every indictment we had made against pelagic sealing. There is not a hint in that ‘‘ joint agreement,” with its 16 articles, not a hint that pelagic sealing is barmful or should be suppressed. How did they get him to surrender that? By agreeing to the showing in article 9 that ‘‘ during the past two years” there had not been any harm in driving the Canadians succeeded in getting him to drop any reference to the harm, or suppression, of their work in the sea. They ‘would not stand, however, for, anything more than the ‘‘ past two years” as to the record of harmless land killing, nor for any future but the ‘* immediate.” So, if he has thus signally failed in those points, how can he claim to be an authority in all these matters as against me? The CuatrmMan. Mr. Jordan has never surrendered the main con tention that the main difficulty has been in pelagic sealing. Mr. Exx1otr. No; he has not, to us, but he has to the Canadians, as I have just pointed out; he has estopped us from making any com- plaint, officially, to Great Britain on that score. The CuarrMan. So that is about all he has left now? Mr. Extiotr, That is all he has left. The Cuatrman. Had we not better keep it? Mr. Extiotr. The pelagic sealing? The Cuarrman. No; our contention that that is the main difficulty and the main instrumentality in the destruction of the herd. Mr. Exziorr. If that would save that life I would say keep it; but we must step in now to stop the elimination of that young male fur- seal life by our own butchers. If [ thought that young man [Mr. Hitchcock] would stay there, up in his present office, and be in charge of this thing as he has outlined the work of killing for next: year, and knowing him as I have. known him in the last six weeks, I would not object to any modification of this resolution; but is he cer- tain to be there? He may be sent somewhere else next year, or death may strike him down; so perhaps we ought. to close this out from any chance of anybody getting in there and getting around the next man who may have charge. The next man may not be so gooda man; and it might be broken up. The CuarrmMan. Congress might change its mind next year and repeal it. Mr. Exxiorr. I think the chances are infinitely less that that will be done by Congress than that he will leave. 50 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Mr. CrarK. Did not the House pass a resolution once to kill off all the seals? Mr. Exxiott. I believe they did, except enough to save the species. The Cuairman. That was your original idea, was it not? : Mr. Exuiotr. Yes; but I planned to save enough for the preserva- tion of the species. I think if we had done that in 1895 we would have saved ourselves a good deal of mortification and shame up there; and I think it would have been an act of great mercy to those animals if it had been done. - Mr. Crarx. How many years will a seal cow breed? Mr. Extiorr. A female will breed, in my opinion, from the second year up to the ninth or tenth year. No man knows exactly. Mr. Crarx. Is her hide any good after death 4 Mr. Extiorr. As long asshe lives the female hide is good. Itis like a 2-year-old male, almost weight for weight, and the same quality and of the same value. It is as fine a skin as the 2-year-old male skin, and it is almost impossible to distinguish them apart as individuals if they are ‘scraped up” on to the killing grounds. They look, act, and are outwardly precisely alike when side by side, 2-year-old males and adult females. The Cuatrman. Is there anything further you desire to say? Mr. Exxiorr. No, sir. : The Cuatrman. Mr. Hitchcock wants a moment or two. - Mr. Extiorr. I would like to ask him one question further in the presence of the committee. He stated that the total pelagic catch this year was 12,000. Mr. Hrrcwcock. Practically that, by the Canadian fleet. Mr. Exxiorr. Then how do you reconcile the fact that the Lamp- sons sale was 13,000, the Hudson Bay 7,000, and the Lampsons held over 7,000 for the market sales, making a total of 27,000, as shown by these figures I have here? Mr. Hircucocn. Are all those ‘‘northwest” skins? Mr. Exniorr. Yes; here they are [exhibiting a statement]; you can look at them. I do not doubt. the sincerity of your statement; but how do you reconcile this? You see here 13,406 ‘‘northwest” skins in this Lampson sale cata- logue of December 17, 1903. r. Hrrcncock. As I stated, my returns were procured through the consul at Victoria, showing the catch of the Canadian fleet. Those figures gave a total of something over 12,000 skins. Now, I have no doubt that the difference can he accounted for by the sealing under other flags, and particularly under the Japanese flag. Mr. Exxrorr. But, Mr. Hitchcock, the Hudson Bay Company sold 7,000 odd on the same day (December 17, 1903). , Mr. Hrrencocx., Where is the record of it? Mr. Exxrorr. In the Fur Trade Review. I have not that here. Not only that, but 7,000 of the Lampson’s Company was held over to the March sales. Mr. Hrreucocx. I should like to see the records proving the source of those skins. Mr. Extiorr. Itisin the Fur Trade Review. [New York, January 1, 1904.] Now, gentlemen, you see how easy it is for an honest young man to be imposed upon by these fellows up in Victoria. It just’shows" the trouble where a perfectly honest Government official comes before FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 5] you and states something as a fact which is not true. He tells you that the pelagic people are going practically out of business, when in truth they have done a big business last year. Instead of only getting 12,000 skins, [ have the proof that they got 27,000. How was he deceived? I will tell you. Mr. Fautxner. Will you present the proof to the committee? Mr. Extiorr. Yes; I have shown here more than his statement. He has gone of course, on official orders, to the United States consul at Victoria. Our consul goes to the Canadian collector of customs; the collector of customs is in with this Victoria Sealing Company. He wants to make as poor a showing of the work of his hunters for our people as possible, so we will have less opposition to them. They have been doing that for years; they have been hiding their returns from the Secretary of the Treasury. They only allowed 7,296 skins through our consul in 1902, when they took 29.812, and had Mr. Shaw tell you so. Mr. Shaw put certain clerks in his office on the carpet when I opened his eyes, December 4, 1902, to the error of his report to Congress of December 3, and thev had a great clerical circus and a bad half hour with the Secretary. I don’t know what became of it, but that didn’t make any. difference; the high official mischief was done—with all respect to this young man. He is in a position where he will be ter- ribly tried and tempted; but lam perfectly willing to trust him. Heis fully equal to the task if he is not interfered with. The Cuatrman. I don’t think we will go into that. We are not going to assume that everybody connected with the sealing business is dishonest or likely to be except yourself, and I think you are going away off from the question. The question is whether you will regulate the killing on the island and not how many thousands of seals these pelagic sealers kill. Mr. Exxiorr. I think we should restrict the land killing to a mini- mum of small male seals annually; indeed, it is imperative that we do so. Why, 42 per cent of the breeding bulls have disappeared since 1901. Fifty per cent will go of what is left in the next two years, and then all go, unless young bulls are spared now. I think Congress ought to restrict it to-day, so it will stay shut down that way for afew years at least. The killing of food seals is especially provided for in the law. It does not interfere with the contract; it gives the Department of Commerce a chance to get nothing but the inferior male seals and lets the surplus bull seals fight it out ina state of nature. If you do not. you will never get young, virile breeding bulls to take the place of those old fellows now rapidily passing away. Mr. Hitz. You do not think it would be right for the Department of Commerce to take 15,000 seals and sell them themselves in the face of a binding contract? Mr. Extiotr. Under this contract the Department of Commerce can take them and turn them right over for the tax. There is nothing to prevent that. Mr. Fauitxyer. It directs them to be sold by the Department and turn into the Treasury the amount of money. Mr. Exxiotr. They can be sold without your tax. Mr. Fautxner. We do not buy skins. Mr. Exriorr. You can have them for vour tax. Mr. Wiiurams, of Mississippi. The resolution could be amended to meet that. 52 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Mr. Extiorr. Yes; I think that isright. I would give the prefer- ence to ‘‘ food skin” killing over everything, for the main thing now is to have only the inferior seals killed. The ‘‘food skin” seals are antiscorbutics in the late fall, winter, and in the early spring. That | is the time they need them most. I thinkif you did that you would do exactly right. If that is the trouble between the company and the Government, that can be easily fixed; but the point is to fix it so that they can not get beyond, for a number of years, 5,500 skins annually, and give all of the best young bullsa chance to grow up and fight. Why, gentlemen, just think of the mistake of so killing these young bulls off as to prevent their being in sufficient number to fight among themselves for places on the breeding grounds. You in doing that thing. actually nullify the very fundamental law of their life, and you prevent any elimination of feeble and inferior bulls from the breeding grounds; you defy a law of nature, and the moment you do so you destroy this life. You make no selection of the best young bulls; you kill them all under existing rules, and then call in ‘‘ scien- tists” who, as naturalists, approve the work and deny nature. Save all of these young bulls from this hour on for at least six or seven years and then we will do what is sane. The Cuairman. That would increase the herd? Mr. Exxiorr. That would allow the bulls to increase, to fight, and thus permit only the best of their race to go onto the breeding grounds as sires for the herd. We can not do this work of selection for them. The.Cuarrman, Do you think that would increase it? Mr. Exuiorr. Yes, it would; it has done so before, in 1834-1847, as I have explained; history will repeat itself. The Cuarrman. And make more seals for those pelagic sealers to operate on? Mr. Exxrorr. I hope we will do something on that line. I think we ought to do it; I think it would be a good thing to amend this resolu- tion by inserting the fur-seal bill you adopted last winter immediately after the enacting clause. The Senate is wrestling with the subject now; so let it rest here. Mr. Crarx. Are those bachelor bulls good food for the natives? Mr. Extiorr. Oh, yes. Mr. CrarK. But those old surplus bulls Mr. Exxiorr. Those are not ‘‘bachelors.” The idle bulls are not good for any purpose; they are practically dead bulls. Do you want me to bring in these figures about the pelagic catch? The Cuarrman. Bring in anything, as you like. Nors.—For exhibits, etc., submitted by Mr. Elliott, see Appendix, page 59. ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF MR. FRANK H. HITCHCOCK. (See p. 34.) Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I should like to say to the committee that some years ago I was engaged professionally in biological work. In 1801 I was one of the assistants of Doctor Merriam, the Biologist of the Agricultural Department, at the time he was serving on the Alaskan Fur Seal Commission. From that time to this I haye maintained a deep interest in the seals. Ihave studied them from what I consid- FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 53 ered to be a scientific as well as a practical standpoint. Iam familiar with the literature on the subject. I have read Professor Elliott’s work and I appreciate very fully the ability he has shown asa naturalist. I give him all credit for the interest he has taken in this problem and the efforts he has made to accomplish what he considers the best solution of it. But at the same time I do not think that Mr. Elliott intends to claim any monopoly of expert knowledge on the subject. There tre other gentlemen in the country who have given equal time to it and who are equally qualified to speak, and they seem to take a different view of the present situa- tion. Ifeel that the Department is bound to follow the weight of opinion in this matter, and to accept the practically unanimous judg- ment of these other scientists. We have described to these experts the conditions that exist to-day. They have had a chance to study them from the latest available facts. We have their responses in writing, and they are unanimous in the opinion that it would be both unnecessary and unwise to require a total suspension of the killing in the manner called for by the resolution. I want to say to the committee that the restrictions I proposed this morning would be considered extreme by these gentlemen. There is not one of these scientists who has suggested measures that are nearly as radical as those I have proposed. I have purposely made the regu- lations somewhat extreme, in the view of these gentlemen, with the idea of being on the sate side, particularly during this first year of the Department’s administration of the seal service. So much in a general way. There is only one other point I want to take up, and that is the analysis Mr. Elliott has made of the London sales. Mr. Warson. After you have determined on the method of pro- cedure and fixed the limit, do you think there will be any trouble in having your orders executed, absolutely ? Mr. Hirencoos. Ido not. Itis my opinion that those orders can be executed. As I said, the orders are so stringent that even if they are somewhat imperfectly executed there will be little danger of any serious injury to the herd. Mr. Wituiams. Is there anybody up there to watch and see if the orders are executed? Mr. Hrreucocr. During the sealing season there are four of our agents on the islands—two on each island. There is an agent on each island the year round; and during the period of active operations there are two additional men there to help supervise the work. I have no reason to believe, from what I have seen of the records, that they do not do their work faithfully. Mr. Watson. Do they change very often, or are the same fellows there nearly all the time? Mr. Hircncock. No change has been made now for some years, and I should like to say in regard to the agent Mr. Elliott referred to as having been a former employee of the company that he has never been in charge of the islands. He is merely a subordinate. It is true, however, that this agent was previously in the employ of the company. Mr. Hitz. He is an honest man ? Mr. Hrroncock. Yes; as far as I can judge. Mr. Hirt. If he is honest it does not make any difference. 54 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Mr. Hrrcucocx. I have no reason to think otherwise. He came in through a civil-service examination. Mr. Hit. Now, with your regulations all in force and honestly car- ried out, will it not cost the Government more than it will get from the whole transaction 4 Mr. Hrrcucockx. Do you mean in enforcing the regulations? Mr. Hitt. Is not the net result of Government interference in the matter a pecuniary loss, or will there be any net revenue to the Govy- ernment with your regulations carried out? Mr. Hircucock. I will say in reply that of course the revenue depends on the size of the catch. Mr. Hrw. But I say, as you propose to make it, with the 15,000 limitation. Mr. Hrrcscock. With the 15,000 limitation of course the revenue will be cut down. Mr. Exziort. How many will they get? Mr. Hiri. Never mind; let him answer my question. The Cuatrman. Suppose you let Mr. Hitchcock answer the question. Mr. Hircxcock. | will say frankly it depends largely on the expense of the patrol. Aside from that ; Mr. Hii. I mean with the faithful carrying out of these regulations and the present size of the herd, is there any money in Government control of the matter at all? Mr. Hircucocks. I doubt if there is very much if we charge against the seal service the entire cost of the patrol of the Revenue-Cutter Service along the Alaskan coast as well as in Bering Sea. Mr. Hin. If a business man was going into it —- Mr. Hrrencock. Aside from the expense of maintaining the revenue- cutter patrol, the cost to the Government of the fur-seal service is com- paratively small, amotinting to only about $30,000a year. Of this sum about $12,000 covers the salaries and expenses of the agents employed, and the remainder is appropriated to furnish supplies to the natives of the islands. The expenses of revenue cutters in Alaskan waters last year, I understand, aggregated about $160,000, but only a portion of this sum can be properly charged to the seal service; just how much I do not know. On the other hand, the amount of revenue derived froin the seals has averaged above $200,000 a year. Mr. Tawney. Is this patrol within the 60-mile zone; are the revenue cutters limited ? Mr. Hrrencocx. The main purpose of the patrol is to keep the pelagic sealers outside of the 60-mile zone. To accomplish this I pre- sume they patrol chiefly along the borders of the zone, but so far as I am aware they are not limited to any area. Mr. Tawney. How many cutters are there? Mr. Hircncockx. My impression is that recently the Treasury De- partment has not been sending more than one revenue cutter into Bering Sea each season to maintain the patrol. Four or five other cutters are sent along the Alaskan coast, but they are engaged principally in work not connected with the seal service. : Mr. Warson. The revenue-cutter service is not under your Depart- ment, is ib; it is under the Treasury Department? Mr. Hrrcucock. It remains under the Treasury Department, but so far as its duties pertain to the protection of the Alaskan seal heard, it must be governed by the regulations of our Department, just as it FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 55 must be governed by our regulations in the enforcement of the navi- gation laws. The Cuairman. Are not we obliged to have this revenue-cutter ser- vice there under the provisions of the treaty to some extent, by inter- national obligation ? Mr. Hircucocs. Yes; each government is expected under the agree- ment to mantain a patrol. Mr. Tawney. So that the cost of maintaining that service should not be charged to the account of the revenue derived from the lease of this company ? Mr. Hircucocr. It depends on how you regard it. When once this pelagic sealing question is settled that expense will be largely done away with. Mr. Tawney. Is there any hope of that being done? Mr. Hircucock. There is hope. Our Department most earnestly hopes that something will be done. We propose to push the matter as much as we can. We are acting upon the supposition that some- thing will be done. Mr. Tawney. Have you any reason to believe that the patrol was unsuccessful or of no consequence or inefficient in protecting the seal life within the 60-mile zone? Mr. Hitcacock. .I have no positive evidence as to that. Mr. Tawnuy. Have you any positive evidence of pelagic sealing going on within the 60-mile zone. Mr. Hrrcncoox. Yes, sir; there is positive evidence that pelagic sealers have been within the zone. They approached within a few miles of the islands last season, as you will see stated in the Secretary’s annual report in the chapter with reference to the Alaska seal service. Mr. Exriorr. They were Japanese boats. . Mr. Hrrcucock. The agents were unable to tell the nationality of the vessels. Mr. Exxiorr. If they are Japanese, you can not interfere with them. Mr. Hircucock. Now, if you will permit me, Mr. Chairman, I should like to refer again to Mr. Elliott’s analysis of the London sales of last December as showing the average weights of the skins, and therefore the ages of the seals that were taken during the past season. Mr. Elliott in his statement places the number of what he terms ‘‘ prime” skins—that is, 8 to 9 pound skins, or skins of seals from 3 to 4 years old—at only 646. He places the number of ‘‘short” skins, or 54 to 6 pound skins, or skins of seals 2 years old, at 1,500; and he places the number of ‘‘eye plasters,” as he terms them, or 44 to 5 pound skins, the skins of yearling seals, at 13,034. On the showing made by these figures he claims that a large portion of the 15,295 skins sold in December came from yearling seals, which if true would go to prove a most of the seals taken by the company last season were of that class. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have gone to considerable trouble to make an analysis of these sales, and before doing so I took the precaution to obtain from the New York representatives of Messrs. C. M. Lamp- son & Co., the London auctioneers, a statement of the average weights for the past season of the various classes upon which Mr. Elliott bases his computations. I find that the class termed ‘“‘large pups”—and, by the way, it is understood, of course, that in the trade classification of seal skins the term “‘ pup” does not have the usual significance; it 56 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. does not mean a pup in the sense in which the term is used on the islands. In trade usage it means a much older seal. I find that the class of skins termed ‘‘large pups,” of which there are 1,500, averaged in weight 7 pounds 5 ounces. Now, if that average weight is cor- rect—and I have no reason to doubt it since it is a matter of trade information—the 1,500 seals which Mr. Elliott placed in the 2-year- old class should be transferred over to the ‘‘ prime” column and added to the 646 skins of 38-year-old and 4-year-old seals. In other words, these records show a total of 2,146 seals above the age of 2 years, which you will immediately see controverts Mr. Elli- ott’s contention that last season the company did not get any seals to speak of over the age of 2 years. Furthermore, I find that the average weight of the class known as ‘middling pups,” of which there were 4,631, was 6 pounds 4 ounces, while the average weight of the class known as ‘small pups,” of which there were 6,128, was 5 pounds 6 ounces. According to Mr. Elliott’s classification, therefore, these two classes should be trans- ferred from his column designated ‘‘eye plasters or yearling seals” to the column of ‘‘short” skins, or skins of seals that were, according to his own statement, 2 years old. By combining these two classes we have a total of 10,759 skins of seals that had reached the age of 2 years. Now, that leaves for the smallest class skins of 44 to 5 pounds only 9,340, and consequently an entirely different aspect is given to the compilation he has made. of : some 4,000 skins, held over to December 17, 1904. ( pee CEES FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 71 Observe the eloquent and impressive significance of the contrast made in the above table between the catches of 1894 and 1903: In 1894, out of a total of 16,031 skins, 12,000 were ‘‘prime;’’ in 1903, out of a total of 15,180 skins, only 646 were ‘‘prime!”’ Thus these figures, which are correct beyond the shadow of error, show beyond contradiction or argument that is sensible or honest that the lessees have left nothing of the young male life on the seal islands alive worthy of notice at the close of their work, August 1, 1903, except the pups born that season in Juneand July, and which they will kill, if permitted, as eyeplasters in 1904. 1f they arepermitted they will get everyone that hauls out. What better warrant can be desired by the committee for suspension of the lessees’ work ‘‘at once and indefinitely’? than the testimony of these figures as given above? Henry W. Exuiort. Marca 9, 1904. Exursir G. [Memorandum (D) for Ways and Means Committee.] In re sizes of seals taken, catch of 1903, showing that females were killed. The number of fur seals taken by the lessees on the seal islands of Alaska, season of 1903, was 19,212. They were permitted to get 30,000 if they could find them, but, with every effort, they could not. Of these, 15,180 were sold in London December 17, 1903. The catalogue of this sale shows the following sizes and ages of those skins, each skin being so assorted and stamped by anexpert. The balance of the catch was held over for the next December sales. Catch of Pribilof Islands, season of 1903. Skins 4-year-old skins, 9 to 11 pounds each, or ‘“‘prime”’....--...---------------- 72 38-year-old skins, 7 to 8 pounds each, or ‘‘prime”’..-..----...-------------- 574 2-year-old skins, 6-pound skins, or ‘‘short”’ ...-..-...--------------------- 1, 500 1-year-old skins, 34 to 5 pounds each, or ‘‘eyeplasters” .........-.---..---. 18, 034. MO talc e lie CC eye peared rt te Rae yee Le td ARs od 15, 180 Thus, the committee observe that out of 15,180 skins taken on the islands last sum- mer, ue of them were yearlings, or the pups born in 1902—nothing else left alive to kill. : : Male and female yearlings are exactly alike in size, color of coats, and weight. They can not be distinguished apart as to sex when driven up together on to the killing grounds, unless each seal is separately seized, turned over, and examined. There- fore, any killing of yearling seals is against the law. They can not be killed without killing females unless each and every seal is handled prior to clubbing it. This handling never has been done by our people; it is impracticable. Seal pups are born equal in number as to sex. They grow up as yearlings and as 2-year olds are exactly alike as to outward shape and markings, color of coats, etc. The skin of a normal 2-year-old male seal is about one-half pound heavier than that of a 2-year-old female, i. e., 6 pounds for the male and 53 pounds for the female. There is no difference otherwise as to quality. Therefore this ‘‘killing’’ which is here thus witnessed in the London sales on St. Paul Island, June and July, 1903, must have included female seals; it could not have been otherwise; but the law declares that a female seal shall not be killed there under fine of not more than $1,000 for each animal so killed, or imprisonment of not less than six months, ete. ; ' That this work on the seal islands of Alaska of taking yearling seals has been steadily increased since 1899, these London sale catalogues declare most authoritatively. It becomes imperative therefore to prevent it. ; ‘ Henry W. Exuiorr. Marca 9, 1904. Norse, SUPPLEMENTAL-—The driving annually after the lessees have salted and shipped their skins from the islands is called ‘‘food skin’’ driving; but just the same rules and order of killing is followed as in the work of killing which begins the sea- sson’s work. ‘‘Food drives’’ are steadily made until the last seals depart in December. In this way the lessees get every seal that hauls out that they want to get; they want them all. H. W. E. 72 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Exursir H. [Memorandum for Ways and Means Committee.] SECRETARY SHAW’S REPORT ON THE CONDITION OF THE ALASKAN FUR-SEAL HERD FOR 1902, SENT TO CONGRESS DECEMBER 3. No one questions the personal integrity and ability of Secretary Shaw; but that he can be imposed upon and made to present the following travesty upon the condition of the fur-seal herd of Alaska is indisputable. In his first annual report to Con- gress, on page 30, he says: ‘(ds 22,470 seal skins were taken from the islands in 1900 and 22,672 in 1901, the catch of 22,804 skins in the current year is very gratifying, and tends to show that the seal herd is not decreasing in number as rapidly as heretofore. “The consul at Victoria, British Columbia, reports, through the Department of State, that a British sealing fleet comprising 23 vessels in the spring of 1902 took 1,611 male and 1,562 female seals—in all 3,173—-which number is less than one-half of the catch of the same fleet, comprising 28 vessels, in the spring of 1901 and less than one- fifth of the number taken by 33 vessels in the spring of 1900. A preliminary report from the consul at Victoria of the summer catch of the British sealing fleet shows that 11 vessels have returned to that port with 4,456 seal skins. Four other vessels lately arrived, and 9 yet to arrive are not included in these figures. The average catch for each vessel for the current year, so far as reported, is 224 skins per vessel. The official report of the catch of the British sealing fleet in 1901, received in March last, shows that 39 vessels took 24,422 seals on the coast of British Columbia and Japan in the vicinity of Copper Island and in Bering Sea—an average of 626 skins for each vessel. The greatly diminished catch of the British sealing fleet in the last two seasons undoubledly accounts in great measure for the more stable condition of the Pribilof herd as indicated by the number of seals taken by the lessees of those islands since 1899.”’ Is this the truth, even faintly expressed, as to the condition of this herd, which Congress has in these words received from him? ; No; itis not. That ‘‘very gratifying statement”’ as to the catches in 1900, 1901, and the current year 1902, ‘‘which tends to show that the seal herd is not decreas- ing in number as rapidly as heretofore,” isasad error. Observe the following analy- sis of these catches: Out of 22,470 skins taken in 1900, 2,200 were ‘‘prime’’ skins and 14,000 were ‘“‘eye plasters.’’ Out of 22,672 sking taken in 1901, 1,826 were “‘prime”’ skins and 16,000 were ‘‘eye plasters.”” Out of 22,304 skins taken in 1902, 1,311 were ‘‘ prime”’ skins and 16,878 were ‘‘eye plasters.’’? But out of 16,031 skins taken in 1894, 12,000 were ‘“‘prime”’ skins and no ‘‘eye plasters. ”’ Note the significance of that contrast, 1894-1902, and it is a dull mind that can not grasp the fact that it declares that in 1900, 1901, and 1902 the lessees are draining the very dregs of the young male life—hurrying it into complete extermination. “Very gratifying,’’ indeed! This is quite unfortunate, but what follows is even more so: Mr. Shaw tells us that only 7,219 skins have been taken this season (1902) by the pelagic hunting fleet, when in truth 22,812 skins were taken by these hunters. This Sane an average of over 800 skins to the vessel, instead of only ‘‘244 skins per vessel. This official failure to inform Congress that the season of 1902 was the most profit- able one ever known to the pelagic hunter per vessel employed is fairly improper. It is also still more improper because on September 16, 1902, the Department had official information that a new force of pelagic destruction to the herd had appeared on the scene, and yet it does not appear to be deemed worthy of My. Shaw’s notice. I allude to the ‘‘Japanese’’ fleet. Then, too, he is officially informed on August 25, 1902, that the breeding bulls on the seal islands rookeries ‘‘have fallen off 25 per cent in number” from what they were in 1901; yet he tells Congress that this herd is in a ‘more stable condition” than heretofore. Mr. Shaw was warned a, few days after he entered the office of Secretary of the Treasury, February 21, 1902, that he was being imposed upon by his subordinates who had charge of the fur-seal business in the Department; he had documentary evidence of the fact submitted to him, but he seems to have forgotten the lesson or FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 73 he ignored it. Now, these facts rise up to plague him, because there is no question of the sincerity and honesty of the man, at least in my opinion there is none. On the 20th of August, 1902, the Treasury Department gave out the following statement to the Associated Press: FOUND A NEW SEAL ROOKERY—REVENUE CUTTER MAKES AN INTERESTING DISCOVERY IN THE ALEUTIAN ISLANDS. Captain Shoemaker, of the Revenue-Cutter Service, has received a report from Capt. Charles H. McLelan, commanding the cutter Manning, recording the discovery of a new fur-seal rookery in the Aleutian Islands. The Manning went to the Aleutian Islands in accordance with instructions from Captain Shoemaker, who had received information through the natives of the exist- ence of a seal herd near the western end of the long chain of islands. While cruis- | ing among the islands early in July, as the executive officer of the Manning, Lieutenant Berthoff went ashore with a boat’s crew on the island of Bouldyer. There he found a rookery of fur seals similar to those found on the Pribilof Islands. Lieutenant Berthoff approached the herd closely enough to observe that none of the seals had been branded, and that there was no sign that white men in search of fur seal had ever been near the island. The Manning will continue searching to discover if there are other rookeries in that locality. The suggestion is made that these islands may be one of the rendez- vous of the fur seals during their absence from the Pribilof Islands. The discovery is considered important by the officials here in view of the gradual decline of the fur seal on the Pribilof Islands. I at once saw the error and the mischief of this official statement, and under date of August 20, 1902, I addressed a letter to Secretary Hay, State Department, pointing out the blunder, a copy of which I mailed to Secretary Shaw, of the Treasury, even date, from Cleveland. The State Department looked into the matter, and soon gave out the following statement: ALLEGED SEAL ROOKERY—THE DISCOVERY BY CAPTAIN M’LELAN DISCREDITED. The recent reported discovery by the captain of the revenue cutter Manning of a new seal rookery near Aleutian Islands has been brought to the attention of the State Department, where it has been immediately investigated. The report, if accurate, would be of the greatest importance, for it will go far toward sustaining the conten- tion of the Canadian seal fishers that there has not really been any diminution of fur seal in Alaskan waters; that there are as many fur seal as ever in the open sea, and that what has happened has simply been an abandonment by the fur seals of their old rookeries—the Pribilof Islands. The investigations of Henry W. Elliott, the fur-seal expert of the Government for many years, has lead the officials of the State Department to the conclusion that the report of the captain of the Manning is erroneous. The place where these seals were reported to have been found was on Buldir Island, more than 600 miles distant from the Pribilof Islands. Mr. Elliott’s conclusion is that what Captain McLellan of the Manning actually saw was a number of young sea lions, which he had already known to frequent Buldir Island and vicinity, and are easily mistaken for seals. But if fur seals were actually seen by the Manning’s people, then Mr. Elliott reports they must surely be stragglers, not trom the distant Pribilof Islands, but from the Russian herd, most likely from Copper Island of the Commander group, which is about only 200 miles distant, and is approached as close as 80 to 100 miles by the Russian herd on their leaving and entering the Bering Sea. Mr. Elliott further finds that, whereas, straggling bands of young male fur seal have been found as far dis- tant from Alaska as San Francisco, and on Middleton Island in the north Pacific ’ Ocean, 200 miles west of Copper River mouth, these seal, the Pribilof seals, were attracted to those places by the sea lions which were breeding there at the time, and, no sign of a breeding rookery of Alaskan fur seals away from the Pribilof Islands has ever been discovered.—(Star, Washington, August 28, 1902.) But what did the Treasury Department do? It acknowledged the receipt of my letter, under date of August 23, 1902, saying my ‘‘communication of the 20tb instant, * * * will receive immediate attention and a full reply will be sent you at the earliest possible moment.’’ What was that reply? Nothing until I read in the report of the Secretary of the 74 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Treasury, December 3, 1902, under head of ‘‘ Alaska: Seal herd,’’ on page 30, the fol- lowing reaffirmation of the nonsense and mischief, to wit: “Capt. C. H. McLellan, commander of the revenue steamer Manning, reported in _ July last the finding of a seal rookery on Buldir Island, in the Aleutian group. The skin of a pup seal was taken from this rookery, and experts have pronounced it to be that of the fur seal. Jf is reasonuble to suppose that there are fur seals on other islands of the Aleutian chain. This fact will be determined by investigation during the next season. In the meantime it is suggested that a sufficient appropriation be made to protect the Buldir Island rookery, and any other that may be discovered hereafter, from the unlawful depredations of the seal hunters. If the herd can be left to develop, it may prove valuable; and it will be utterly destroyed by theseal hunters unless protected.’ — [Italics mine. ] This last season of 1903, Captain McLellan goes again to Buldir Island; he makes an energetic search for the new ‘‘seal rookery on Buldir Island.’”’ Does he find it? No. Does the Secretary of the Treasury in his report for 1903, submitted to Congress last December, say anything about it? No. Why? Because Captain McLellan reported to the Department on October 7, 1903, that he ‘‘ did not find a trace of fur- seal life on Buldir Island,’ this year, where he ‘‘discovered’’ last year a new fur- seal rookery in July, as stated above by the Department in December, 1902. Nota word about this confirmation by McLellan himself, of the sense and truth of my denial, a year before, of the ‘‘ discovery.’’ It is this sort of information about the fur seals that has been filtered into the Treasury Department, without break, since 1890; and this shows clearly to the com- mittee why the condition of affairs on the seal islands has never been truly or adequately described in the reports of the Treasury Department since 1890. Henry W. Exwiorr. Marca 9, 1904. Exurisir I. [Memorandum for Ways and Means Committee.] AN EPITOME OF THE REPORT OF 1903, SUBMITTED BY SECRETARY SHAW, TREASURY DEPARTMENT, DECEMBER 8, TO CONGRESS (Pp. 43) ON THE STATUS OF THE ALASKAN FUR-SEAL HERD. In this report Mr. Shaw makes only a brief mention of the subject. He itemizes the season’s catch on the islands, but he fails to give a single figure as to the pelagic catch for the season. This was big enough for him to notice. It was 27,000 skins against the land catch, which he cites as 19,292. He makes no recommendation that the land killing be checked, but repeats the pe untruth that the loss of life, which he notes this year, is due solely to pelagic sealing. He says that ‘‘only the surplus males are taken on the islands.’’ He should have said, and then said truly, that ‘‘ad/ the surplus males were taken on the islands’’ to get the catch which he reports. He makes no reference to the failure of hig agents to locate that ‘‘new fur-seal rookery’’ on Buldir. Island, which he asked Congress to protect with an appropria- tion last year. On the 1st of July the fur-seal business passed from the Treasury Department to the Department of Commerce and Labor. AN EPITOME OF SECRETARY CORTELYOU’S FIRST REPORT TO CONGRESS, ON DECEMBER 9, 1903, WHICH RELATES TO THE FUR-SEAL HERD. (p. 43.) Mr. Cortelyou takes up the subject July 1, 1903, and has no opportunity to get any information officially, except as it is turned over to him by the old Treasury onal which has fogged this question up successfully in that Department since Therefore he makes no recommendation that the killing by the lessees be stopped on the islands; but he should have brought out the fact that the pelagic hunters have taken 27,000 skins from our herd in the season just ended. He brings out the agent’s report that the ‘‘breeding bulls have decreased 42 per cent, while the breeding cows have increased 9 per cent, in the last three years.”’ FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. 75 This seems to have given Mr. Cortelyou a warning which so impressed him that he omits the regular stale official untruth in his report about ‘‘pelagic sealing as being the sole cause of loss of life in the fur-seal herd.”’ These cows have not increased; but they have not decreased, in proportion, half, or a three-quarter rate even, as fast as the old males have. There is where the danger lies at this hour. ; Henry W. Exuiorr. Exurisir J. The following tabulations are from the report of the Ways and Means Committee of June 2, 1902. The first table shows the close similarity of— CONTRAST BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN AND AMERICAN RECORDS OF DECLINE IN THE LIFE OF THE PRIBILOF FUR-SEAL HERD. The Canadian hunter will never voluntarily give up an industry that is paying him over 100 per cent profit, no matter what the ultimate consequence to mankind or seal life may be of his continuing in the business of pelagic sealing. Long before he ceases to find female seals at sea the young male life will have been destroyed on the islands. In proof of this statement your committee submit the following statis- tics covering the period of Russian diminution, 1817-1834, with that of the American period, beginning in 1889: The Russian period of diminution, : The American period of diminution, 1889-1907. 1817-1834. : Remarks. Year. cee, Year. foe (‘‘Prime”’ skin, 8 to 9 pounds; ‘‘short”’ skin, 6 pounds; “ eye plasters,’’ 4 to 44 pounds.) 100,000 | 3 ‘‘prime’’ skins, } ‘‘short”’ skins, } ‘‘eye plasters,” 28,000 | 4 ‘‘prime”’ skins, 4 ‘‘short’’ skins. 14,000 | All oo skins. Modus vivendi. 0. 7,500 Do. 16,084 | All ‘‘ prime” skins. 15,000 | ¢ ‘‘prime” skins, } ‘short.’ “prime” skins, 3 “short,” 3 ‘‘eye plasters.” ‘‘prime”’ skins, # ‘‘short.” 18, 032 Do. 16, 812 Do. 3 “‘prime’’ skins, § ‘‘short,”’ + ‘‘eye plasters.” 22,672 | #5 ‘‘prime’’ skins, 7; ‘‘short,”’ 7 ‘‘eye plasters.” + ‘‘short’’ skins, ¢ ‘eye plasters;’’ can or will be taken, 16,000 | All aoe plasters;’’ can or will be taken. 0, 8, 000 Do. 1,000 Do. None. | The end of the young male life on the islands. o S ° S S eben “Prime” seals are 3 and 4 year olds; ‘‘short”’ are 2-year-olds; ‘‘eye plasters” are 1-year-olds.] n 1834 only 8,118 young seals, males and females, were left alive to breed on St. Paul Island. In 1835 the Russians sropped. the killing, and so saved the herd from immediate extermination. NoTE.—Since 1890 the male life above the age of pups has been reduced by land and sea killing from the proportion of nearly one-half of the total number in 1874 to less than one-fifth in 1890, and it is doubtful if it amounts to more than one-eighth of the total for this year. The 224,000 seals of all classes as estimated on the islands for 1962 will consist of about 4,000 old bulls, 100,000 females, 80,000 pups, and 40,000 yearlings. Half of these yearlings are males. When they return this summer as yearlings they will all be taken as they haul out on the islands between May and November. If any of them escape, they are sure to be taken as 2-year-olds in 1903. Their skins are too valuable to be left for the Canadians, who will get them if our people do not kill them, so the candle is burning at both ends, and furiously. It is easy to understand the end of it by the sudden elimination of this male life not later than 1906, under existing laws, regulations, and trade conditions. The Russian figures in the foregoing table are taken from Veniaminov, Zapieskie, and those relating to our own work, 1889-1901, are from the trade catalogues of the London sales, where the Alaskan skins have all been sold at public auction since 1871. The significant classification of sizes annually taken on the islands, which declares that in 1901 we were draining the dregs of the male life, is found in these records of the London sales, and there is no appeal from the perfect truth of the figures. (Report No. 2303, Ways and Means Committee, June 2, 1902, 57th Cong., Ist sess., pp. 4-5.) 76 FUR SEALS OF ALASKA. Exurerr C.—Annual seal island and pelagic fur-seal catch and average prices per skin from 1871 to 19038, inclusive. Bering Sea and ||" ibilof Islands: Bering Sea and ; Northern Pacific: Poon esta, Monier’ Hache: Pelagic catch. elagic catch. Pribilof Islands: Island catch. Year. Aver- Aver- » Year. Aver- Aver- aa ee Number | ,98°, | Number | 18°. Number ° Number 2 umber . i : y ‘ rice |} aie rice | . price of skins. | PICS | of skins. | Pa of skins. | P er of skins. er skin. skin. skin. skin. 102, 960 | $10. 50 16,911 | $2.40 108,819 | 11.20 5, 336 2.40 109,107 | 13.00 110,585 | 13.10 106,460 | 12.75 103, 301 | $19.50 36, 389 $7.80 102,617 | 17.00 29, 858 9.75 28, 859 12/040 | 30.00} 59,568) 15.75 94, 657 8.75 7,396 | 27.00 30, 812 12.50 84, 310 9.75 16,270 | 20.50 61, 838 8.75 109, 323 9. 80 14,846 | 20,25 56, 291 10. 25 110,411 | 21.20 30,654 | 17.00 43,917 8.00 105,514 | 22.25 19,200 | 16.50 24, 332 6. 50 105,630 | 19.75 18,047 | 16.00 28, 552 6.50 99,812 | 13.60 16,812 | 26.00 34,168 10, 25 29,509 | 20.20 22,470 | 32.00 35,191 16. 00 105,584 | 12.75 22,672 | 34.00 24, 050 15, 25 105,024 | 14.20 22,190 | 32.50 22,812 19,25 104,581 | 17.10 19,212 | 29.50 27, 000 18. 50 Notre.—These prices are the averages of the catches which the London annual sale catalogues record, and are taken from them. ; The Alaskan seals have all been sold in London since 1871, at the public auction sales of Messrs. C. M. Lampson Sons, the Hudson’s Bay Company, and Culverwell, Brookes & Co. (Rept. No. 2308, Ways and Means Committee, June 2, 1902, p. 7.) Exuisit K. [Memorandum for Ways and Means Committee, by Henry W. Elliott, March 9, 1904.] AS TO THE LEASE OF THE LESSEES OF THE SEAL ISLANDS OF ALASKA, DATED MAY 1 1890. ’ Opinions of Thomas B. Reed, W. L. Wilson, Henry.G. Turner, Benton McMillan, February 18-20, 1895, as a subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, on the question of whether the Government had the legal right to completely suspend the lessees of the seal islands from killing fur seals, under the terms of the Windom lease, dated May 1, 1890: The question being raised pending the consideration of the House bill 8633, intro- duced by Governor Nelson Dingley, jr., the attorney for the lessees, Gen. N. L. Jef- fries, argued at length against the right of the Government to completely suspend the work of the lessees, as the terms of the pending bill ordered. Thereupon the subcommittee held: ““(1) That the clause in the lease which binds the lessees to ‘obey and abide by any restrictions or limitations upon the right to kill seals that the Secretary of the Treasury shall judge necessary, under the law, for the preservation of the seal fish- eries of the United States,’ enables the Government (the Secretary of the Treasury being the agent only of Congress) at any time to completely restrict or suspend the work of the lessees. This authority for this restriction is found in section 3 of the act approved July 1, 1870. ‘*(2) That the right to kill seals for natives’ food is expressly reserved by section I, act approved July 1, 1870, for the Government, and is not covered or merged into the terms of the lease which are authorized by section 4 of act approved July I, 1870.” This report of the subcommittee was unanimous. It was unanimously adopted by the full committee, and the bill reported favorably to the House by Chairman Wil- son. (Report No. 1849, 53d Cong., 3d sess. )