28 INVESTIGATION" OP THE EUK-SEAL INDUSTEY OE ALASKA. 



(a) This work discloses the fact that in this official journal (p. 14) 

 under date of June 17, 1896, is a certified copy of the order of the 

 Secretary of the Treasury, dated "May 14, 1896," which prohibits 

 ' ' the killing of yearlings, and seals having skins weighing less than 6 

 pounds." This order which was published then to the agents of the 

 government and the lessees, was actually violated and ignored that 

 very season of 1896; and also carefully suppressed from the notice 

 of the House • Committee on Expenditures in the Department of 

 Commerce and Labor by the officials of the Bureau of Fisheries when 

 interrogated May 31-July 30, 1911, and February 29-July 31, 1912, 

 as to what rules and regulations had been ordered by the depart- 

 ments in charge of the seal herd prior to and since 1890. 1 It also 

 appears from a careful examination of this official journal above 

 cited, that no order of change to those "Carlisle rules" of May 14, 

 1896, has ever been made by any Secretary of the Treasury or Com- 

 merce and Labor, until Secretary Metcalf, in 1906, was persuaded to 

 make a "5-pound" minimum limit, and thus make it easier for the 

 lessees to nullify the "Hitchcock rules" of May 1, 1904, which pre- 

 scribed a "5^-pound" minimum limit. 



(For full details and proof of this violation by the lessees of the 

 regulations of 1896, up to date of 1906, see Exhibit B, postea.) 



(b) It also further discloses the fact that the sealing schooner 

 Kate and Anna, which C. H. Townsend, of, and "expert" of, the 

 United States Bureau of Fisheries, and H. H. D. Pierce, as the Third 

 Assistant Secretary of State, vouched for as a proper claimant for 

 damages against Russia, in 1902, at the Hague, was, in fact, a pirate, 

 and busy in raiding our Pribilof herd during the summer of 1890. 

 (For full details see Exhibit C, postea.) 



III. July 22. — A careful survey was made of the natives' houses 

 on St. Paul and St. George and the condition of the same, as well 

 as other inquiries touching the same. They were found to be in 

 fairly good condition, requiring minor repairs only, many of them 

 without any need of attention. The natives, 302 of them, all told, 

 are fairly well provided for. (For full details see Exhibit D, postea.) 



IV. July 23 to 25. — A careful examination was made of the Seal 

 Island natives who have killed the seals for the lessees during the 

 last 20 years under orders of the United States agents — the 

 drives, how made, the ages or classes of seals killed, etc. Their 

 answers were taken down, then translated to them as taken down, 

 and approved by them in writing after they had been read by the 

 interpreter to them in Aleut, which is their own language and used 

 by them among themselves. (For full details see Exhibit E, postea.) 



V. July 29, 1913. — The salt-cured skins of 400 seals killed under 

 direction of United States Special Agent Lembkey, July 7, 1913, 

 were all carefully measured and then weighed by us July 29 follow- 

 ing, as they were salted and bundled for shipment to London. These 

 skins were all tagged and numbered by Mr. Lembkey on July 7, 1913, 



1 The following sworn statement of untruth is made by the Bureau of Fisheries, to wit: 



Dr. E verm ann". * * * In answer to this charge it should be sufficient to say that the law has never 

 made it illegal to kill yearling male seals; nor has it ever been contrary to the regulations to kill yearling 

 male seals, except in the seasons of 1904 and 1905, as is shown by the regulations for the various years to 

 which I have called your attention. Therefore, even if 128,478 yearling male seals have been killed since 

 1899 (which is not admitted.) they could not have been killed illegally, because there was no law against 

 killinu yearling male seals, and there has been no regulations against killing yearling male seals, except 

 in 1904 to 1909. (Hearing Xo. 10, p. 493, Apr. 19, 1912, House Committee on Expenditures in the Depart- 

 ment of Commerce and Labor.) 



