INVESTIGATION OP THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OP ALASKA. 845 



V. "Some of the Characteristic Charges." 



Under this caption Mr. Nagel runs along with a series of absolutely idle statements 

 not one beginning or ending anywhere. Take for instance his explanation of the 

 "suppression" of the Clark report. After saying that he doubts "whether" he "per- 

 sonally ever read it, " he has this statement to make, anent it. 



" Furthermore, Dr. H. M. Smith of the Bureau of Fisheries (now its chief) did bring 

 this report to my attention, on August 31, 1909, and that report was soon after trans- 

 mitted to the State Department for its use in connection with the negotiations for a 

 treaty. " 



That this statement as above quoted is absolutely untrue — is a studied untruth to 

 deceive — let me tell you that Mr. Clark's report was not finished until "September 30, 

 1909, and did not reach Mr. Nagel's hand until October 8, 1909. (See p. 829, Appen- 

 dix A.) 



He again attempts to break the force of his suppression of Clark's report by saying, 

 "If, on the other hand, it is meant that the Clark report was suppressed because it was 

 not printed, I must call attention to the fact that any attempt by the department to 

 print all similar reports would have resulted in an early exhaustion of its annual 

 appropriation." 



If Mr. Nagel was sincere in that statement, then why did he print Lembkey's report 

 for 1909 and put Clark's for 1909 into cold storage? Why did he print and distribute 

 Lembkey's report for 1909 when Clark's report of 1909 declared it to be false. 



He attempts to convey the idea that because he never heard of the "Carlisle rules" 

 of 1896, they "probably had never been transmitted to my department." 



That this is a puerile suggestion need not be set forth, when it is known that the law 

 which placed all of the fur-seal records and all of the details of the fur-seal officialism 

 and business, carried them from the Treasury Department to the Commerce and 

 Labor Department July 1, 1903, and there they were all of this time up to the hour he 

 attempts to deny them as above. 



VI. "The Contention That no Male Seal Should Have Been Killed." 



Under this head Mr. Nagel attempts to tell you that nothing but "an honest differ- 

 ence of opinion" exists. He says, "I have named the men of authority and experi- 

 ence who counseled me, a disregard of whose advice by me might well have given 

 ground for complaint. They were supported by Mr. Henry F. Osborn, president of 

 the New York Zoological Society," etc. 



I have just exposed the ignorance of each and every one of his "men of experience 

 who counseled" him; let me throw some light on the experience of "Mr. Henry F. 

 Osborn," as above quoted. 



On May 16, 1912, Dr. F. A. Lucas, one of Mr. Nagel's "men of experience who coun- 

 seled me," under oath had this to say of the sense and truth of Mr. Henry F. Osborn's 

 writing, to wit: 



"Mr. Elliott. Did Ogden Mills ever confer with you in regard to leasing the seal 

 islands? 



"Dr. Lucas. No; I do not know Ogden Mills. I never met him. 



"Mr. Elliott. That is right. The other gentleman, Mr. Townsend, does. Did 

 you inspire the letter which Henry Fairfield Osborn, president of the American 

 Museum of Natural History, wrote to Chairman William Sulzer? 



"Dr. Lucas. I did not. Kindly note, Mr. Elliott asked if I inspired that letter. 



"The Chairman. Do you know anything about it? 



"Dr. Lucas.' Only after it was written. 



"The Chairman. Were you in consultation about it with anyone? 



"Dr. Lucas. No; my advice was not asked. 



"Mr. Elliott. Did you volunteer any? 



"Dr. Lucas. We had discussed, President Osborn and myself had discussed, the 

 seal question, but he never asked me in regard to this particular letter. 



"Mr. Elliott. This letter is dated 'New York, January 22, 1912,' and is signed 

 by 'Henry Fairfield Osborn,' and addressed to 'Hon. William Sulzer, House Com- 

 mittee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives.' You have seen the letter on 

 page 19 of the report? 



"Dr. Lucas. Yes; I read it shortly after it appeared. 



"Mr. Elliott. Do you agree with Mr. Osborn in this statement: 



"New York Zoological Society, 



"New York, January 22, 1912. 



"My Dear Mr. Sulzer: I understand there is a proposal to add to the fur-seal 

 bill drafted by the State Department an amendment for a 15-year closed season on 

 male seals. 



