INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 275 



Finding that they could not get any change in the rules of May 1, 

 1904, ordered, so that they might be easier to nullify on the islands 

 {for nullify them the lessees at once did), they sets to work and 

 Lembkey got busy with Liebes in planning a change in the rules of the 

 Hitchcock Order of May 1, 1904, which prevented them from talcing year- 

 lings, without a good deal of trouble. 



They succeeded in 1906, after Hitchcock left the Department of Com- 

 merce and Labor, and not until then. 



After Mr. Hitchcock went into the Postmaster General's office, 

 March, 1905, Lembkey succeeded in lowering the minimum 5^-pound 

 standard weight set by "Hitchcock rules/' to 5 pounds by March 9, 

 1906, and so took the "yearlings" for the lessees, easier, as "2-year- 

 old male seals," and falsely certified them as such! The lessees not 

 only objected to the 5\-pound limit which shut out the yearlings, but 

 they claimed the right to kill all the 4-year-olds as well! as shown by the 

 following testimony in Heating No. 9, p. 4-54, April 13, 1912, to wit: 



Mr. Elliott. When these Hitchcock rules were published in 1904, and you went out to 

 San Francisco, was any protest made to you by the lessees? 



Mr. Lembkey. You know perfectly well that there was, Mr. Elliott. 



Mr. Elliott. What did you tell them, Mr. Lembkey? 



Mr. Lembkey. Perhaps since you have in mind my report for 1904 which makes 

 mention of those protests from the company, I had better refer to those so that the com- 

 mittee may know just exactly what was done. On page 81 of Appendix A of these 

 hearings in which is published my annual report as agent in charge of the seal fisheries 

 for the year 1904 I discuss the following under the subheading "protests from the 

 company": 



"While the North American Commercial Co. complied in every particular this sum- 

 mer with the regulations of the department, I received from its officers several protests 

 against the department's action in restricting the catch of the company." 



This report is addressed to Mr. Hitchcock: 



"Upon receipt of your letter of May 12 last prescribing a 5^-pound limit on 2-year-old 

 skins, I notified Mr. Taylor, the president of the company, of the contents of the letter. 

 He at once entered a vigorous protest. Upon my informing him that I had no option 

 in the matter, he appealed directly to the department, and held the company's vessel 

 in Sausalito for hah a day until the receipt of the department's reply. With that mat- 

 ter, however, you are familiar. 



"Upon arrival at the islands, while discussing the coming season's work with Mr. 

 Redpath, the company's general agent, I mentioned the prohibition against the killing 

 of 4-year-olds, and stated that, to give effect to this prohibition, I would place a limit 

 on large skins of from 84 to 9 pounds. Mr. Redpath at once expressed surprise at the 

 existence of this prohibition and entered a vigorous protest against any interference 

 with the killing of 4-year-olds. He produced a copy of the department's instructions 

 to me and quoted from the clause relating to the restriction of killing in support of his 

 argument." 



Then finding that there was an easy way to nullify these "reserva- 

 tions" of the Hitchcock Rules, the lessees quickly used a pair of 

 sheep shears and "branded" the "spared" seals as follows: All this 

 done with the servile collusion of the agents of the Government: 



To provide a definite reserve of male life for breeding purposes the agents tell me 

 they drove up in the early part of the season, and before killing was begun by the 

 company, 2,000 bachelor seals of 2 and 3 years of age and shaved their heads with sheep 

 shears, thus marking them so that they can be identified by the clubbers and exempted 

 on the killing field. These shaved heads constitute a large part of the animals turned 

 back at each killing. It is to be noted that among those turned back without brand 

 there are none which show evidence of the clipping of last season. It may be inferred, 

 therefore, that the fur and water hair is replaced during the winter. The identification 

 mark is not a permanent thing, but one designed to serve for the current killing season. 

 To insure these animals exemption for breeding purposes next year they must be again 

 shaved next June. 



