INVESTIGATION" OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 703 



London measurement of his skins, as above stated, was entirely 

 correct, (See p. 441, Hearing No. 9, 1912.) 



On April 13, 1912, Chief Special Agent Lembkey admitted under 

 oath that 7,733 seal skins which he took in 1910, and salted were none 

 of them larger than the typical specimens of yearling seal skins 

 which he took August 18, 1911, and which were duly exhibited as 

 yearling's seal skins beyond doubt or question. Mr. Lembkey's 

 sworn admission is as follows, to wit (pp. 434, 441, Hearing No. 9, 

 H. Com. Exp. Dept. Commerce and Labor, April 13, 1912) : 



The Chairman. You ■will produce the information. 



Mr. Lembkey. A summary of the classification of the 12,920 salted fur-seal skins 

 of the catch of 1910, sold by Lampson & Co., is as follows: Smalls, 132; large pups, 

 995: middling pups. 4.011; small pups, 6,205; extra small pups, 1,528; extra small 

 pups. 11; faulty. 38. 



Mr. Elliott. Now you are prepared to state that 8,004 of them were "small pups" 

 and ''extra small pups," are you not? 



Mr. Lembkey. 7,733 of them, according to this summary, are the skins of small 

 pups and extra small pups. 



Mr. Elliott. I am getting at the analysis of your catch which you have given here 

 already. You have given in a statement here that 8,000 of them were "small" and 

 "extra small." 



Mr. Lembkey. 7,700. 



Mr. Elliott. 7,700? 



Mr. Lembkey. 7,733 were small and extra small pups. 



Mr. Elliott. Mr. Fraser tell us that those seals, none of them measured more than 

 34 inches nor less than 30 inches. 



Mr. Lembkey. The committee can see what Mr. Fraser states. Mr. Fraser states 

 that small pups measured 33f inches in length. 



Mr. Elliott. From there [indicating] to there [indicating] on that diagram 



Mr. Lembkey. 33f inches in length, and extra small pups measured 30 inches in 

 length. 



Mr. Elliott. Then you have some extra small pups there which makes it 8,000? 



Mr. Lembkey. Only 11 of those. 



Mr. Elliott. It does not amount to anything. 



Mr. Lembkey. It just makes your 8,000 about 300 more than the actual number. 



Mr. Elliott. That is the reason I used those round numbers. It does not amount 

 to anvthing one way or the other. 



Mr. Lembkey. The actual number is 300 short of 8,000, Mr. Elliott, 



Lembkey admits that the measurements, not weights of the skins, 

 determine their real size (see pp. 446, 447, Hearing No. 9, 1912), to 

 wit: 



Mr. Elliott. Is it not true that a native can skin a 4^-pound skin off and add 

 blubber to it so as to make it weigh 5 pounds? 



Mr. Lembkey. It certainly is. 



Mr. Elliott. Would it destroy the value of that skin if he did? 



Mr. Lembkey. Not in the least, except that it would require longer to salt, 



Mr. Elliott. And it wordd absorb more salt, would it not? 



Mr. Lembkey. I think so, yes. 



Mr. Elliott. And that would add very much to the weight of the 4J-pound skin? 



Mr. Lembkey. Yes; the blubber would. 



Mr. Elliott. All that can be done, can it not? 



Mr. Lembkey. I might state here, while you are on that point, that it would not 

 alter except in perhaps a very slight degree, the classification of that skin when it was 

 received m London by the factors. 



Mr. Elliott. Certainly. 



Mr. Lembkey. You might make a yearling skin weigh 9 pounds by the adding of 

 blubber, yet when it got to London it would be only so long and so wide. 



Mr. Elliott. That is it. 



Mr. Lembkey. And of course it would develop in the classification when the skins 

 would be exposed for sale. 



Three standard salted yearling fur-seal skins were exhibited April 

 24, 1912, to House Committee on Expenditures of the Department of 



