COUNTER-CASE OP GREAT BRITAIN. 239 



does not hesitate to complain that the agents of the Com- 

 pany undermine his own power at its source, writing: 



Its paid agents aud lobbyists are kept at the uatioual capital to n)id. 

 oppose any and every etiort that may be made to promote the welfare 

 of Alaska tbrouoh siach legislation as will encourage immigration and 

 the enlistment of capital in the development of the natural wealth 

 bidden away in ber forests, streams, and mountains ; its every aim and 

 effort is in the direction of prolonging its existence and strengthening 

 its tyrannical hold by a blocking of the wheels of progress. 



HIS CHARACTERIZATION OF THE CORPORATION. 



While on another page he characterizes the same Cor- 

 poration in the following terms: 



Conceived (as there is abundant evidence to show) in corruption, Ujld., p.34. 

 born in iniquity, and nurtured and grown strong and insolent on ill- 

 gotten gains wrung from a haplesss and helpless people, this giant 

 monopoly, which rests like a blighting curse upon the progress and 

 welfare of this great territory, should be shorn of its corruiitly-secured, 

 much-abused franchise with no more delay than may be absolutely 

 necessary. 



In the Appendix to this Eei3ort, Governor Swineford i^i^mPP- 43-45. 

 prints at length certain specific com^ilaints hy the United 

 States Deputy Marshal at Unalaska resjoectiug the con- 

 duct there of the agents of tlie Company. 



CHARGES REITERATED IN 1888. 



It is proper to remark that the same gentleman, in his 

 Eeport for the following year (1888), in the face of a "reply" 

 made to his former statements by the President of the 

 Company, repeats these statements. He writes: 



I now and here reiterate every one of those charges, though I know Ibid., 1888, p. 

 full well that an investigation made by a Committee of Congress,^-. Compare 

 holding its sessions in Washington, and calling as witnesses q^^^p®^ j3g'^*®® 

 280 only those who had been recipients of the Company's favours, 

 is not likely to arrive at any just conclusion as to their truth or 

 falsity. 



HIS OBJECTION TO THE MONOPOLY. 



In the same Eeport, Governor Swineford remarks, in close 

 agreement it will be observed with the earlier conclusions 

 of General Howard, as follows: 



I can see no good reason why the present monopoly of the [fur-seal] " Report of the 

 business may not be abolished, not only without loss to the Govern- Governor of 

 ment, but to its very great advantage so far as the amount of revenue ^'■''^''^•" ^^^^< P' 

 to be derived is concerned. The present system of farming out the " 

 rookeries is not only obnoxious to every sense of right and justice, 

 but, as I think I have shown, is in a very great degree inimical to the 

 best interests of the territory. 



DUTY OF THE GOVERNOR OE ALASKA TO INQUIRE AN- 

 NUALLY INTO OPERATIONS OF THE COMPANY. 



Among the duties of the Governor of Alaska, as defined 

 in section 5 of the Act of the 17th May, 1884, entitled 

 "An Act to create a Civil Government for Alaska," is that 

 of inquiring into the operation of the lease of the Pribyloff 

 Islands. The Act i3rovides : 



The Governor appointed under the provisions of this Act shall from 

 time to time inq^uire into the operations of the Alaska Seal and Fur 



