180 FUE-SEAL FISHERIES OF ALASKA. 



Q. Will you state the location and condition of the fur-seal rookeries 

 on that island and so far as they came under your observation on both 

 of those islands ?— A. The location, you mean ? 



Q. Yes, sir. You may state as near as you can when yeu went there 

 and how long you were there. — A. I landed there May 30, 1887, and 

 left there August 9, 1888. 



Q. You were there continually during that time ? — A. Y^es, sir. 



Q. You can now go and state the location and condition of the rook- 

 eries there and your administration of public affairs there and your ob- 

 servation upon such affairs. — A. In just my own language ? 



Q. Certainly, sir; in your own language. — A. Well, the rookeries were 

 near the building. As far as concerned comparison with other years as 

 to the seal increase or decrease, I know nothing, because I was only 

 there the time mentioned. They commenced the killing on the 1st of 

 June and finished about the 1st of August. They take 15,000 seals on 

 St. George annually. The company have a store, school, and furnish 

 1*0 tons of coal to the natives, and during the winter I was there they 

 had five men there. 



Q. Well, did they conform to the requirements of the law and the 

 contract ; did they perform that contract — the Alaska Commercial 

 Company, I mean ? — A. The company used every endeavor to perform 

 their part of the contract. I had a difference with a man on the island 

 in reference to the school which I would call, in justice to the company, 

 a local difference — a conflict of authority. 



Q. By whom do you mean a man on the island? — A. The local agent, 

 Mr. Webster. 



Q. The company's agent? — A. Yes; the company's agent. He closed 

 the school in spite of a written protest from the Government ofiScer, 

 which I did not like and which I did not think was right. I do not con- 

 sider that the company was any party to that, because I do not think the 

 company would ever have approved of it. It is merely a case of obsti- 

 nacy on the part of that agent. The company's intentions, 1 consider, 

 were honest and upright, and they were endeavoring to fulfill their con- 

 tract with the Government. The company's intentions, I believe, are 

 honest and upright, but in regard to their men employed on the island I 

 can not use severe language sufficient to cover their case. The men 

 with whom I have dealt, that is, myself and my wife, did not respect the 

 laws of God or man or my wife's presence or my position. I am referring 

 to Mr. Webster, ])r. Lutz, John Kirk, and a man named John Hall. This 

 administration expected a Government officer to take his wife there, and 

 I took my wife from the altar to the St. George Island, and I have re- 

 gretted it ever sinoe. I wish a distinction to be understood between the 

 lionest intention of the gentlemen in San Francisco and that crowd of 

 men that they have intrusted with their business on that island. I wish 

 for that to be distinctly understood. I believe that the company itself is 

 honest and upright in its intentions. 



Q. Do you refer to those men in the execution of their duties un- 

 der the operation of the law ' or simply their moral deportment as 

 men and citizens ? — A. I refer to their powers to antagonize a sworn offi- 

 cer of the law and to make him miserable and crucify him. 



Q. What particular case do you refer to, Mr. Gavitt? Can you spec- 

 ify acts on their part and name the indivi<luals and how it affected the 

 l)ublic interest "? — A. Mr. Chairman, I went there without instructions — 

 that seems to be an opening that a Government officer does not know 

 Uis duty — I went there without instructions whatever, with the excep- 



