518 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUE-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 



time to explain, and you will remember that I asked for permission to 

 take up this question and develop it, as I did this morning. If you 

 give me an opportunity to show that I had changed my impression 



Mr. McGuire (interposing). You will remember, Mr. Chairman, 

 that you told him he could return to that. 



> The Chairmen. Yes; and then I told you that Lembkey, under 

 oath, stated that in 1910, 1,528 small pups were taken, and he had 

 admitted that they were yearlings. Did I not ask you that ? 



Mr. Clark. I also protested 



The Chairman (interposing) . Now, did I ask you that ? 



Mr. Clark. I could not say positively whether that is the wording 

 of the question you asked me. 



The Chairman. Is it not a fact that since 1904 over 10,000 extra 

 small pups have been taken by this sealing company while they were 

 under the supervision of the Government agents ? 



Mr. Clark. I do not know about that at all. 



The Chairman. Now, let us get back to this proposition. Here the 

 extra small pups, according to the London sales in 1910, brought 

 $28.50 a skin, and the others $54 a skin. Why did not the Govern- 

 ment collect $54 for all of the skins if they were of one size ? 



Mr. Clark. That should be asked of the Bureau of Fisheries. I am 

 not an expert on the London sales. I had nothing to do with them. 



The Chairman. But this being the case and that being the record, 

 do you still want to say that the small pups and extra small pups were 

 2-year-olds ? 



Mr. Clark. I want to say now positivel} 7 that as a result of the 

 experiments in salting the skins I believe that not one of the animals 

 in the category of extra small pups, as brought out in the London 

 schedule of 1893 and of 1910, were yearlings, and I want to add one 

 point right here, that in the year 1913 it was demonstrated to me for 

 the first time that yearlings did not come on the hauling grounds, and 

 therefore it does not make any difference about the London weights; 

 they could not have been killed in the numbers you mention. 



The Chairman. If hearing No. 10 is there I wish you would take it 

 and turn to page 553. 



Mr. Clark. What paragraph is that ? 



The Chairman. Dr. Evermann was on the stand and was discussing 

 and exhibiting certain sealskins which he had brought before the com- 

 mittee. You will find it in Xos. 7, 8, and 9. 



Mr. Clark. Nos. 7, 8, and 9 ? What does that refer to? 



The Chairman. The numbers are on the page. 



Mr. Clark. I have page 553. 



Mr. Elliott [indicating]. It commences right there. 



The Chairman. Now, let me read a few paragraphs. This is by 

 Dr. Evermann while the skins were before the committee. (Reading:) 



No. 7. The sealskin measures 35 J inches long. The seal itself was 41 inches long. 

 The skin weighed 4 pounds 9£ ounces. That was called a yearling. 



No. 8. The seal itself measured 39J inches. The skin measures 33 inches and weighs 

 4 pounds 3£ ounces. That seal was found dead and was regarded by agents and natives 

 as a runt yearling. 



No. 9. The skin is 34 inches long. The seal measured 39 \ inches. The skin weighs 

 3 pounds 15 ounces. That also was regarded as a yearling. 



Do you dispute this statement \ 



Mr. Clark. This is not my statement, you know. 



