IDITAROD PIONEER
PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY MORNING AT 1DITAROD, ALASKA
Y+l 6 Geo. M. Arbuckle. Publisher No.l9
SUBSCRIPTION RATES
One year . $10.00 'One Month . $1.00
Six Months. 5.00 I Single Copy.25
Advertising Rates on Application
KJOTIOE.—Persons sending advertising copy from a distance are particularly re
la t.-rt to be careful in preparing Hie same. The publisher cannot accept the
responsibility for altering copy, especially In the case or forfeiture and other legal
notices. It is. therefore. Imperative that such notices be clearly written, particu
larly as regards names and dates.
MISREADING HISTORY
Among the many so-cailed “reform” writers of the present day there
is a tendency, by means of broad general statements of a critical na
ture, to cause a misreading of bistorv as inimical as it is unjust. This
tendency is in line with the trick of the political orator of demagogic
proclivities who does not hesitate to make a false assumption upon
which to base an argument. E. M. Stanton cf this city, who is a close
observer of current events and a student of governmental problems of
no mean ability, calls .attention to an instance of this kind in the fol
lowing article, written for The Pioneer:
“The Declaration of Independence, sublime preface to a victorious rebellion, brought
a new joy and certainty to the land; and yet when democracy seemed an assured fact,
old chains were riveted anew. With the return of oeace. lories end loyalists* came rmm:p<r
from their hiding places, and aided by reaction, the wealthy classes soon regained their
former power. The men chosen as delegates to the constitutional convention were drawn
from the aristocratic land holding class, and though scarcely eleven years had passed,
only six of the fifty-six men who signed it were members of the convention.” George
Creel, Century Magazine. December. 1014.
The inference reasonably to be drawn from the foregoing is that with the advent of
peace tones, loyalists and the wealthy, “aristocratic landholding class had relearned
political supremacy, and democracy was dead; that the members or delegates to the
constitutional convention had been drawn entirely from the “aristocrats, ana since only
six of the signers of the constitution had signed the Declaration of Independence, those
latter were of character, caliber and class distinct and apart from the signers of the former
instrument. In other words, Mr. Creel, by attacking the signers of the document and
impugning their motives, attempts to lead us to believe that form of government given
by the constitution is undemocratic, and created by a class, or portion of the com
munity. who were not influenced by or were out of touch with the motives of the men
who drew up and signed the Declaration of Independence.
It is true that only six signers of the Declaration signed the Constitution, but more
than six were delegates to the convention, and several of the signers of the Declaration
took active part in securing the adoption of the Constitution by the states.
And in this connection it is interesting to note the professions and antecedents of the
men who signed the Declaration. Among them were two preachers and two doctors of
medicine, and curiously enough, in refutation of the claims of the reformers of the
present day, who tell us again and again that lawyers and judges as a class are opposed
to all true democratic progress, we find that of the fifty-six signers, twenty-six were
lawyers by profession, and that twenty-one sat on the bench in the state and federal
courts.
As the ability to procure at that linn* a college training was indicative of a certain
amount of wealth, we find that Yale. Harvard and Princeton and the University of Cam
bridge hail three graduates each; University of Pennsylvania, one; the College of Phila
delphia. one; that Jefferson was a graduate of William and Mary, then the foremost in
stitution of learning in the country; that Rush studied medicine at the University of
Edinburgh after leaving Princeton; that Wilson studied at the Universities of Glasgow,
St. Andrew and Edinburgh, and that his speeches on the theory of constitutional govern- \
ment carried weight at the convention in 1787.
From the viewpoint of the acquisition of wealth alone, Robert Morris. Clymer, Lewis j
Morris and Francis Lewis were all rich merchants. Hancock inherited a counting house i
and £S0,000. and lived to sell his support of the federal constitution for the governorship 1
of Massachusetts.
As regards no laTge land holders being among the signers, we find that Jefferson had ;
1,900 acres of land, and that Francis Lewis was granted 5.000 acres by the crown as a re- j
ward for his service in military operations against the French in Canada. That Gwinnett :
bought a large tract in Georgia and was an agriculturist on a Irge scale; and that the
estates of Middleton and Hart were destroyed by the British forces.
We are left to infer by Mr. Creel that there were no wealthy “aristocrats” among the
signers of the Declaration, but if there was such a class before or after, and there was |
only eleven years between the two instruments, can it be denied that by birth, wealth. I
associations and training Gerry. Wythe. Stockton, the Lees. Jefferson himself. Rutledge, i
Middleton, Livingstone. Carroll or Braxton were not pre-eminent members of that class? j
Further, in order to be in no doubt of the fact that there could have been no possible
connection between the men who signed the two instruments, it is only necessary to forget
that Edward and John Rutledge were brothers; that Lewis Morris was a half-brother of
Gouverneur; that Philip and William Livingstone were brothers; that William Living
stone. as governor of New Jersey, chose the majority of the delegates from that state to :
the constitutional convention, and though he was a delegate to the congress of 1776. he
did not sign the Declaration of Independence because in June he had taken command of
the New Jersey militia.
Of those signers who did not sign the Constitution it is enough to say that Wythe,
though a delegate to the convention, did not sign, hut urged its adoption by Virginia, and
had the distinction of being probably the fir>t judge to lay down the rule or enunciate
the doctrine that a court had the power to annul an act of the legislature repugnant to the
Constitution. Paca more than any one man overcame the opposition in Maryland to the
Constitution, while Bartlett was perhaps equally active in New Hampshire.
If. as Mr. Creel would have us believe, a land-holding aristocracy at the time of the
constitutional convention controlled the affairs of the States, it is nevertheless true that
the Declaration was signed by one who had been a carpenter's apprentice, by another who
had been apprentice to a shoemaker, and by another who had been a printer’s devil, and
that in 1787 George Walton was chief justice of his state; and Roger Sherman and Ben
jamin Franklin both signed the constitution.
NOVEL VIEW OF THE LIQUOR PROBLEM
A nove! and extremely interesting view of the liquor problem is
taken by a writer named Herman Kuenn in a recent issue of Every
body’s Magazine. Many there are who, while deploring the evil ef
fects of intemperance, cannot reconcile themselves to the curtailment
of personal liberty involved in prohibition legislation, and the espion
age consequent upon the enforcement of sumptuary laws which are
obnoxious to the Anglo-Saxon conception of personal liberty. To these
the intelligent and logical discussion of the liquor problem by Mr.
Kuehn will be of interest, although it is doubtful now whether any
amount of reasoning can stem the tide of the prohibition wave that
is rolling over the country, and indeed the entire world. A portion of
the article is as follows:
Let us see what becomes of the averment that the people of our country <(:pend
some two billions of dollars annually for strong drink. I have no exact data whereupon
to base the computation, but taking the price at which pure whisky could be bought in
a free-trade market and the price that adulterated substitutes command, we shall find
that nine-tenths of the outlay is for licenses, excises, imposts, taxes, and the enormous cost
of espionage and collection, together with various species of graft, tribute, and excessive
profits involved in the traffic.
Whatever the cost, it may be too much. Let the moralists attend to that phase of
the question. Fidelity to fact, however, demands that we charge up nine-tenths of that
two billions annually to the account that absorbs the dollars and not to the drink addic
Seward Gold Seal Pacs
ARE THE BEST ON THE MARKET
H. PQNNELLE Y^ discovery, otter
Thfl (T£ki>n H#l °",d Ci,y
I ISO ^SfegUl j§ S? g "%jj Mrs. Geo. Mutchler, Prop.
Nicely Furnished Rooms Barn for Horses and Dogs Baths in Connection
THE BEST OF EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME
Caribou Cafe
FIRST AVE.
GOOD MEALS
SHORT ORDERS
OPEN DAY AND NIGHT
ROST. SOUTAR
Prop.
tion. Drinkers pay it, doubtless, but not for drink. They pay it in order to overcome
the obstacles that stand between them and gratification of desire.
Strictly speaking (if strictly speaking be not barred), most of these two billions are
blackmail, levied under the guise of benevolence. Hell is paved with the material of just
such benevolence. The intention may be good, but this may also be said of that ani
mating the kindly chap who threw his drowning friend a crowbar.
Where strong drinks are free from adulteration and from the enhancement in price
due to meddlesome restrictions, the effects would not justify the lurid diatribes of the
prohibitionist. One rarely sees a resident of the wine growing regions of France who
drinks to excess.
As for the “treating" habit; it has met with an altogether undeserved measure of de
traction. “Treating" is a fine manifestation of neighborliness, hospitality, generosity and
good-fellowship. That “evils” have grown out of such expressions of good will is not
at all due to the animating motive. Such “evils” are obtruded upon good-fellowship be
cause government ally perverted processes have forced a generous impulse into dangerous
channels. Were there no far more serious indictment against reliance upon Caesar, this
alone were sufficient to condemn our blind idolatry. To turn friendliness from its natural
current into a slough of debauchery and debasement is a natural effect of the supersti
tion that obsesses the mass of contemporaneous mankind. Were whisky as cheap as but
termilk, and were drinking places not fostered by the very processes designed to curb
them, treating would still persist, but would find more wholesome expression.
Prohibitionists profess to find that the drink habit is a cause of poverty. Others that
poverty causes the habit. Only empiricists divide on this phase of the issue. It is a mark
of superficiality to look for various causes for involuntary poverty. There is but one.
It can be found in the primitive deference we pay to land titles. That, of course, is not
within the scope of the present discussion.
Nor shall I consider here the arguments for or against the propriety of including wines
and beers within the general objurgation heaped upon stronger spiritous drinks. For the
sake of brevity I confine myself to saying that where there are no restrictions and no
inducements to adulterate them, they are better if otherwise good, and not so bad if
otherwise blameworthy.
What I have here set forth is sufficient to condemn me, off-hand, in the eyes of any
Prohibitionist as a debauchee, a drunkard, and on “enemy of society." Yet I am free
of the drink habit and have a decided preference for associating with temperate and in
telligent people; especially with such as are free from the intemperance of meddlesomeness.
Governmental activities have done more than all else to produce the deplorable con
ditions under consideration.
What, then, is to be done? Nothing. We must quit doing as we have been doing,
and thus give normality its opportunity. Macaulay tells us that the so-called “evils of
liberty" are merely evidences that there has not been liberty enough. Liberty is the
freedom to do whatsoever he will at his own cost. Nor is “at his own cost" a limitation
upon liberty. Il is of the essence of liberty. For whoso does anything at another's cost
is not exercising liberty, but violating it.
The abstraction we call the state, exercising sovereignty over a subject class (and
this is as true of a democracy as in a monarchy or autocracy), has in all ages sought to
mold, curb or stifle desire. Every page of history teems with instances. Failures all!
Surely in an array so multitudinous we should find a single record of success. We look
for it in vain. Yet always this infatuation persists—that what has always baffled the
interplay of cause and effect is somehow, some time, to be effectuated by act of congress!
Liberty and decency. This is but another way of saying “cause and effect." Des
potism and misery is another paraphrase equally valid. Freedom alone can assure us of
social harmony and individual well-being.
THE DISQUIETING NEWS FROM THE ORIENT
The significant news from the far East that Japan has sent an ulti
matum to China to comply with her demands within forty-eight hours
is calculated to arouse feelings of the gravest concern in this country,
and, m fact, ail over the world. It would indeed be a world calamity
if hostilities between the two Oriental nations should take place at this
time. How far the demands of the United States have been ignored in
the program of Japan are not clear from the brief news available, but
it is not impossible that we may find ourselves in the position of opposi
tion to the ambitious plans of the Japanese.
Ever since the surrender of Kiaochau by the Germans to the Jap
anese there have been murmurings of distrust of the latter nation’s
peaceable intentions on the Asiatic continent. Her assurances that the
captured German stronghold would be ceded back to China at some in
definite time were unsatisfactory alike to China and to the other nations
interested, and especially to the United States. During the course of
the military operations against Kiaochau Japan considered it necessary
to occupy the Shantung railroad. This China held to be a violation of
her neutrality, and seriously exercises the Chinese, as shown by the fol
lowing expression of an influential Chinese newspaper, which is said
to represent the attitude of the majority of the Chinese newspapers,
both vernacular and English:
It is a serious question whether Japan can possess herself of alt German privileges and
undertakings in Shantung at this juncture without straining China's patience to breaking
point. Ever since the Japanese ultimatum expired the Chinese government has shown
itself most reasonable and conciliatory in its attitule toward Japan. It has. indeed, ex
posed itself to a succession of protests, and even threats, from the German legation, in con
sequence of its conduct in connection with the attack on Kiaochou. The central gov
ernment has given Japan indisputable proof of its friendly attitude, and has gone as far
as it could reasonably be expected to go to meet her without actually overstepping the
bounds of neutrality. But there are limits beyond which the government cannot go with
out arousing the indignation of its own people, and if permanent peace is to be main
tained in the far East. Japan must see to it that die insists upon no demands the ful
fillment of which may provoke serious opposition 11 China, and place the Chinese gov
eminent in a false position vis a vis its own citizens.
A singular thing in connection with tie situation is the fact that
England, Japan’s ally, appears to be in the position of at least extending
moral support to China in resisting the demands of Japan.
Minister of Militia Sam Hughes of the Dominion of Canada seems
for the moment to have usurped the functions of Earl Kitchener.
MEANING OF FABIAN TACTICS
When the allies fell back from their first
line in northern France to the Marne a good
deal was said and written of “Fabian tac
tics,” and when the Germans fell back from
the line of the Marne to the Aisne more
was said of “Fabian tactics.” In this coun
try, when Washington and the heroic Con
tinental army fell back before the English
in superior force and of superior equipment,
and perhaps superior discipline, his tactics
were called “Fabian.” In fact, General
George Washington was called, and by his
torical writers is still referred to as “the
American Fabius.” It is probably true that
many Americans long parted from their
school books have forgotten about Fabius,
even though whenever an army makes an
orderly retreat for the purpose of gaining
time or reaching a more favorable ,position
they speak fluently of “Fabian taAics.’ It
is a phrase that comes trippingly off the
tongue.
Fabius, as might easily be guessed from
his name, was a Roman. He commanded
the legions of Rome against the power of
Carthage 200 years before the Christian era.
'Ihe tactics which came to be called after
Fabius were no doubt employed centuries
before Rome was born. Fabian tactics with
out doubt have been used ever since bodies
of men made war, but it may be that Fa
bius so refined those tactics that it is just
and worthy they bear his name.
F’abius, in 217 B. C., stood opposed to the
hosts or hordes of Carthaginians under the
brilliant leadership of Hannibal. In battle
before Fabius Maximum was calledVio the
supreme command of the Roman troops in
the field the Carthaginians had been vic
torious. Fabius, profiting by what had be
fallen his predecessors in command, avoided
a pitched battle in the open and retreated,
fighting as he fell back, holding off the
enemy with what are now described as rear
guard actions. Drawing the enemy further
and further from base or the source of
supplies, wearying their troops more than
he wearied his own, and delaying a battle
until he reached ground where his position
would give him great advantage—a position
which could certainly be defended against
superior numbers—where the loss in men
and morale of the assailants must be great
and where at the proper moment the coun
ter stroke could be delivered with high
promise of success, the tactics of Fabius
won.
In some ways the phrase “Fabian tactics”
has been diverted from its original and
proper significance, and is made to com
prehend any tactics of a particularly shrewd
or “foxj” nature. In this connection it has
been saii that Napoleon employed “Fabian
tactics” with brilliant success at Austerliiz.
The combined Austrian and Russian armies
greatly extended their line in an effort to
turn the right flank of the French army and
cut his communications. It seemed as though
this movi would succeed, for Napoleon per
mitted it to develop without serious resist
ance. Taen he suddenly concentrated his
whole stpngth at the center, with the ex
ception o. a portion of Bernadotte’s corps,
which he left to deal with the Austrian
turning firee, and burst through the line,
destroying one wing of the Austrian army as
it retreatid.
Historims of Rome deal at considerable
length wih a family called the Fabii. It is
narrated that this ancient and renowned
family undertook the duty of defending
Roman territory against incursions by the
Veientinet, and for this purpose established
themselves at a place on the Cremara river.
The Fabi were drawn into ambush and
all were tilled. The date of that event is
given os B. C. 477. A boy of the family
Fabii hat been left in Rome, and he be
came the second founder of the family. Fa
bius Exinus, who won his laurels and his
spurs in the second Punic war, was de
scended flora that boy, and there was an
other famous member of the family whose
name was Fabius Pictor, who wrote a his
tory of Rime and who is often referred to
as the easiest Roman historian.—Washing
ton Star. _
TARIFF THEORIES DISPROVED
(Juneau Empire)
Now cones uk president of the American
Woolen Company (the trust), who, in a
signed report to the stockholders of his
company, says:
“During this period (of the free-wool Un
derwood-Sinmons tariff) the growers of
w'ool in tie United States have received
higher prifcs than when there was a duty
of 11 or 12 cents per pound, and the
manufactuiers have been put on a basis of
equality wth their European competitors
as far as raw material has been concerned.”
PIANO TUNER
George Aaderson, piano expert, on pianos,
player pianos and electric pianos, also fac
tory represaitative for high grade pianos,
will visit Idtarod the coming summer on
his sixth antual trip. Any person in need
of expert piano tuning and repairing, or
wishing to pircahse a piano, communicate
Box 991, Juneau, any time before May,
1915.
ABOLITION OF VODK EVIL
IN THE RUSSIANEMPIRE
The story of how vodka happen utterly
banished from the Russian eijre was re
{lated to an Associated Press (respondent
at Petrograd by Michael Demetvich Tchcl
ischeff, the man directly responle for put
ting an end to Russia’s viccthe vodka
habit.
It should be said in the burning that
the word “prohibition” in Rua must be
taken literally. Its use does it imply a
partially successful attempt tourtail the
consumption of liquor resulting drinking
in secret places, abuse of mead licenses
and general subterfuge. It mns that a
vast population which consuud $1,000,
000.000 worth of vodka a year,hose ordi
nary condition has been descrity by Rus
sians themselves as ranging fr< a slight
degree of stimulation upwardhas been
lifted almost in one day from drunken
inertness to sobriety. The natichas been
compelled, virtually over night, abandon
its enormous daily consumptiorif vodka,
a liquor that is almost pure if hoi. and
become abstemious to the extenpf letting
no liquor pass its lips.
On that day when the mobilizfcn of the
Russian army began special polfnen vis
ited every public place where dka was
sold, locked up the supply cf the^uor and
placed on the shop the imperial al. Since
the manufacture and sale of vka is a
government monopoly in Russia, was not
j a difficult thing. From the dayhis step
was taken drunkenness vanished Russia.
The results are seen at once in le peas
antry. Already they are beginnito look
like a different race. The marks: suffer
ing, the pinched looks of illnesand im
proper nourishment have gone f:n their
faces. There has been also a rt ark able
change in the appearance of theirlothing.
Their clothes are cleaner and bothien and
women appear more neatly ai better
dressed. The destitute characte of the
homes of the poor has been repled with
something like order and thrift, i Petro
grad and Moscow the effect of ese im
proved conditions is fairly startli..
On holidays in these two citi inebri
ates always tilled the police stains, and
often they lay about on the si (leaks and
even in the streets. Things are sdifferent
today that unattended women hv now
pass at night through portions of ic cities
where it was formerly dangerousven for
men. Minor crimes and misdemears have
almost vanished.
This near miracle has been accaplished
virtually by one man. Michael I. Tcheli
scheff. a peasant by birth, originally house
painter by profession, then mayo of the
city of Samara, and now a millicaire.
Speaking of what he had accaplished
for the cause of sobriety in Rina, Mr.
Tschelischeff said:
“I was reared in a small Russiaivillage.
There were no schools or hospitalor any
of the improvements we are accusmed to
in civilized communities. I picke up an
education from old newspapers al stray
books. One day I chanced upon a>ook in
the hands of a moujik which treateon the
harmfulness of alcohol. I was so iipressed
with this, knowing that everybod drank
vodka, that I asked the first ph\cian I
met if the statements were true, le said
yes. Men drink it, he explained. »ecause
momentarily it gave them a sens;ion of
pleasant dizziness. From that tin I de
cided to take every opportunity to scover I
more about the use of vodka.
“At the end of the ’SO? there can fam
ine in Russia, followed by agrarian toubles.
I saw a crowd of peasants demand rom a
heal landlord ail the grain and foistuffs
in his granary. This puzzled me; could
not understand how honest men vre in
! dulging in what seemed 1o be highwy rob
bery. But I noted at the time tha every
! man who was taking part in this indent
I was a drinking man. while their fellow
villagers who were abstemious hac sufii
1 cient provisions in their owe homes. Thu?
it was that I observed the industial ef
i fects of vodka drinking.
“At Samara I decided to more tha pas
sively disapprove of vodka. At thi time
I was an alderman, and many of th ten
ants living in my houses were workiemen.
! One night a drunken father in one f my
houses killed his wife. This inc-identxnade
such a terrible impression on me that I de
cided to fight vodka with all my strngth.
“On the supposition that the goverment
was selling vodka for the revenue. I alcu
lated the revenue received from its con
sumption in Samara. I then introdued a
bill in the city council providing tht the
city give this sum of money to the inoerial
treasury, requesting at the same tiim that
the sale of vodka be prohibited. The bill
passed and the money was approptated.
ft was offered to the government, bit the
government promptly refused it.
“It then dawned upon me that Rtssian
bureaucracy did not want the people t> be
come sober for the reason that it was easier
to rule autocratically a drunken mob than
a sober people.
“This was seven years ago. Later t was
elected mayor of Samara, capital ol the
Volga district, a district with more than a
quarter of a million inhabitants. S-tbse
quently to holding this office I was etcted
to the duma on my anti-vodka platform In
the duma I proposed a bill permitting the
inhabitants of any town to close the local
vodka shops and providing also that every
bottle of vodka should bear a label wifi the
word ‘poison.’ At my request the wording
of this label, in which the evils of rodka
were set forth, was done by the late Count
Leo Tolstoy. This bill passed the duma
and went to the imperial council, where it
was amended and finally tabled.
“I then begged an audience of Emperor
Nicholas. He received me with great kind
ness in his castle in the Crimea, not far
from the scene of the recent bombardment.
He listened to me patiently. He was im
pressed with my recital that most of the
revolutionary and socialist excesses were
committed by drunkards, and that the Svea
borg, Kronstadt and Sebastopol navy revolts
and the Petrograd and other mutinous mili
tary movements were caused by inebriates.
Having heard me out, his majesty promised
at once to speak to his minister of finance
concerning the prohibition of vodka.
* “Disappointed at not having been able to
get through a government bill regulating
this evil, I had abandoned my seat in the
duma. It was evident that the bureau
cracy had been able to obstruct the measure.
“Minister of Finance Kokovsoff regarded
it as a dangerous innovation, depriving the
government of 1,000.000,000 roubles (3500,
000,000) yearly without any method of re
placing this revenue.
“While I lobbied in Petrograd, the em
peror visited the country around Moscow
and saw the havoc of vodka. He then dis
missed Kokovsoff and appointed the present
minister of finance, Bark.
“Mobilization precipitated the vodka
measure. The grand duke, remembering
the disorganization due to drunkenness dur
ing the mobilization in 1904, ordered
prohibition of all drinks, except in ch
and first-class restaurants. This order
forced for one month showed th( Russ:
authorities the value of abstention
“111 spite of the general depressitn cau:
by the war—the paralysis of busiiess, i
closing of factories and the interriotion
railroad traffic—the people felt n- prii'
tions. Savings banks showed an ncre:
in deposits over the preceding moth a
over the corresponding month of ie p ,
ceding year. At the same time the* was
boom in the sale of meats, grocerie: clot
ing, dry goods and house furnishing
The 30,000,000 roubles a day tht h
been paid for vodka were now bein spe
for the necessaries of life. The vera
working week increased from thr» ai
four days to six, the numerous holUys L
the drinker having been eliminated TJ
w’orking day also became longer al tj
efficiency of the work was perhaps dqbleL
Women and children, who were ddoj
without marks showing the physics vij
lence of the husband and father, «mden|
found themselves in an undreamed of»ar|
dise. There were no blows, no insults ad C
rough treatment. There was bread 01 tfc
table, and milk for the babies and a fi* i
the kitchen.
“I dreaded to seize this occasion ft* \ \
press campaign, so far as this is a posfbj ’
thing in Russia. Instead I organized dr
gations to present petitions to the pro^
| authorities for the prolonging of this nfe
! sobriety for the duration of the war. Tb
step found favor with his imperial majesti
and an order was issued to that effect. A1
other similar campaign to remove t.
licenses from the privileged restaurants ai
clubs was successful, and strong liquor '
no longer available anywhere in Russia, t
“The second month of abstinence mal
the manifold advantages so clear to everJ
body that when we called upon his majes'
to thank him for his recent orders he prmi
>sed that the vodka business of the goveri
ment would be given up forever. Th
promise was promulgated in a telegram t
the Grand Duke Constantine.
“There remains only now to find elsu
where the revenue which, up to the preset!'
time, has been contributed by vodka. Thet
has been introduced in the durria a hi"
offering a solution of this question. Tli
aim of this bill is not the creation of ne{
taxes or an increase in the present taxes, bit
an effort to render the government domain
and possessions more productive.”
YORE ABOUT BELGIAN NEUTRALITY
(Tacoma Ledger i
Dr. John W. Burgess, one of the ables
defenders of Germany in the United States
aware that the invasion of Belgium bv
the German armies has profoundly atfectel
American opinion, undertakes to show that
Germany never signed a treaty guaranteeing
the neutrality of Belgium, and that, more
over, conditions have so changed since the
treaty was made that Belgium no longe(]
has a right to be considered an especially
neutral nation. He maintains that Bel
gium afterward became a world power, the
population of that country increasing to al-j
most 9,000,000, and Belgium corning to con
trol colonies inhabited by 15,000,000 men.
Besides, Belgium organized an army of
200.000 men and constructed great fortifi-'
cations.
So Dr. Burgess is doubtful whether, in.
view of the changed conditions, Belgium =
should, on August 1 of last year, have beens
considered anything but an ordinary neu-.
trai nation not at war.
The quintuple treaty of 1839. guarantee
ing the neutrality of Belgium, was signed
by Great Britain, France, Austria, Prussia
and Russia. Modern Germany was not yet.
in existence. A few days afterward the
German Confederation, of w’hich Prussia
.nd Austria were members, ratified the
treaty. The German Confederation was,
dissolved by the war between Prussia and ;
Austria in 1S66, and then the North Ger- i
man Union was formed. Did these changes j
weaken the treaty of 1839 and render a
new guarantee advisable In 1870, when
wit broke out between France and the
North German Union, Great Britain signed
an agreement with each of those countries
guaranteeing the neutrality of Bc-lsrium dur
ing the war and for twelve months there
after. Great Britain agreed to join with
France if the North German Union at
tacked through Belgium, and agreed cn
the other hand to join with the North
German Union if France invaded Belgium.
Professor Burgess concludes that Great
Britain was doubtful as to the continuing
effect of the treaty of 1839, otherwise she
would not have sought new guarantees at
the outbreak of the war of 1870.
But in the treaties of 1870 on the neu
trality of Belgium, which the North Ger
man Union and France both signed, it was
set forth that the “independence and neu
trality of Belgium, so far as the high con
tracting parties are respectively concerned,
will continue to rest as heretofore on the
first article of the quintuple treaty of 19th
of April, 1839.” Quoting this paragraph of
the treaties of 1870, the New York Times
finds that Prussia, in signing it, acknowl
edged she had been bound and should be
bound in the future by the treaty of 1839,
and that Professor Burgess’ contention that
the guarantees of the 1839 treaty had be
come obsolete is not well founded.
It is plain enough that Great Britain
had fear in 1870 that either France or the
North German Union would violate the
treaty of 1839. By inducing each of them
to make a new agreement and giving them
both notice that, if either violated the neu
trality of Belgium, Great Britain would
fight, Great Britain further sought to pro
tect her own interests, which called for the
neutrality of Belgium.
Germany does not resort to the argu
ment used by Professor Burgess, whicJ
seems rather far-fetched. The German chai
cellor, addressing the reichstag August ;
of last year, said: “We are now in a st*?
of necessity, and necessity knows no !'•
Our troops have occupied Luxemburg d
perhaps are already on Belgian soil. (nf
tlemen, that is contrary to the dictatf°j
international law.” Further along heud I i
! that France stood ready to invade Belrn- j
| and Germany was compelled to movfrs* j
j in order to protect the right llank a115!
3rofessional
lkan, 1881 Alaska, 1910
Kentucky, 189!
drge Woodruff Albrecht
:ouNsrioR and lawyer
IDITAROD, ALASKA
The Pioneer Attorney of iditarod
E. M. STANTON,
ttorney at Law
e: Corner Willow and Second Sts.
Iditarod Pioneer Building
CHAS. E. TAYLOR,
Horsiey at Law
BANK BLOCK
t Aveni,s Iditarod
DR. SVJOOftS,
vsician and Surgeon
/ o
St., Opposite Postoffice, Flat City
5lass Fitting Telephone
R. \:. E. AUR5NGER,
I'sidan and Surgeon
co: G ,ld St. Fiat City, Alaska
litatioi. Hours in Forenoons and by
Appointment
d;?. h. behla,
DENTIST
arriv from Chicago on one of the
>oat this spring and will be at hw
in Kat City for about two months.
si of Everything
A EL THE TIME AT THE
FLAT CITY
Open Dav and Night
MRS. N. P. GILMORE
LACE HEAT
REASONABLE RATE5
Second and Willow Streets
ci Horse and Dog Barns
)?EN FOR BUSINESS
i'tarod Dog Ranch
’lies $5.00 Per Month
L. LEONARD & CO.
t:n day and night
CAFE
CITY HOHBACK & DURAND
the Grand and Bagoy's Bars
BEST ALL THE TIME
rVE ARE HERE TO STAY
EZR CREEK AGENCIES
TY.Mrs. C. C. Chittiek
jiRY OTTER ... Harry Donnelley
nerai Express and Deliver*
)f Wood in the City
e Orders at Iditarod Hotel
DAN HARTNET_
d French attack. Later, Germany
d what she considered evidence
ace had already violated Belgian
■ before Germany invaded,
or Burgess scoffs at the notion
at Britain was actuated by un
jerests in standing up for the neu
Belgium. She was not thinking
| of protecting Belgium as of Bel
itecting her, he maintains, until
tain could prepare to attack Ger
concert with France and Russia,
ly Great Britain was actuated by
1st, yet there is no denying that,
gium. Great Britain stands before
f as the upholder of international
I
NOTICE
nove my drugs and office into the
Pbilding ' I want to serve the camp
tost of my ability. If you are or
dgigs from the Outside, don't do it
ui reason with me. I will sell you
an I have and order anything you
wi DR. H. R. MOORE,
jty, Alaska.
aent Work Blanks at Pioneer
Fresl ileats
eef, R
Second St. IDITA^D f AT CO. Phon* IB J