promised for three years without fulfillment.
'I housands of children are growing up in dire
ignorance, and still these teachers will resolute
on the political phase of the subject, but say
nothing of the real problem, to-wit, that every
child is entitled to a chance at the public schools.
Second: Teachers Deplore Attempt to Make
Mr. Hcndei son’s Job Elective
The announced purpose of this resolution is to
l oop that office out of politics.’' The facts of
itie matter are that this resolution keeps that
of fice in politics.
Politics in Alaska are sharply divided, on the
one hand a highly concentrated and active little
gang desire to rule or ruin, on the other hand
is the attempt of the people of Alaska to re
gain control of their own government. Mr. Hen
derson was put into office by the former bunch.
At that time he was a Democrat, but the name
of the machine has changed and he is now a
Republican. His support comes from Governor
Scott C. Rone, Bert Faulkner, R. E. Robertson,
Rev. George Bruce and that small coterie of
“friends.” These men are well aware of the
fact that were that office to be made elective,
Mr. Henderson would have hard digging to keep
his $4,000 job.
On the other hand, the real Alaskans, citizens
who are not actuated by personal friendship
for Mr. Henderson, but who are considering the
matter of responsible government, are asking
that all public offices in Alaska be made elec
tive.
What argument can anybody bring against al
lowing the people to choose their own rulers or
servants? Why must we continue this govern
ment and allow a gentleman from New York
to place his favorites? It may easily happen
that Mr. Henderson might be elected to his of
1 ice, but in that case, we maintain that such an
event would l;e all right and proper. If the
>eople want him, they should have him by doing
the appointing themselves.
Most of our Alaskan school teachers are mi
gratory birds anyhow, and their resoluting on
political matters is highly improper. Thirty
four out of the eighty have never been in Alas
ka before, and perhaps fifty of the eighty will
leaveforever next Spring. They come to Alaska
for a sort of excursion at public expense.
Third; Their Income Tax
These teachers are primarily interested in
themselves. They come to Alaska for two rea
sons, either they cannot get a suitable job in
the States, or else, they can get “more money”
by coming to Alaska.
The problem of promoting 100% literacy by
providing schools was entirely overlooked by
them. It never occurred to them that they
might resolute and get the Territorial Officials
to provide schools for all her citizens. But they
did not overlook the fact that they have to pay
an income tax. Very few of them are paid more
than $2000 a year, and fewer of them are mar
ried. If they were married, they would be ex
empt from an income tax. If they are single,
then they would have to pay a small tax of
$40 on the second $1000, providing the teacher
has no dependents.
Are Legislators Ever Justified in
Passing Bills That Are Un
constitutional?
ill a lecent issue of the Seward Gateway, in
treating of the literacy bill which they say will
undoubtedly be introduced again, it says that
theie eii e two ways in which the literacy test
could be made into law, the first is by an Act of
Congress; the second is by a Law of this Terri
tory.
1 he Seward editor despairs of securing a law
thru congressional enactment and therefore says
that “our only hope” is thru the territorial leg
islatuie, and further “It has been questioned
whether the Territory has the right to pass such
a law in view of the Enabling Act which has
been construed by eminent lawyers as prohibit
ing the Legislature from assuming such powers
or passing on such enactments. * * * But
oven though such litercy test was held to be in
\alid, its pasage by the Territorial Legislature
would undoubtedly call the attention of Congress
to the necessity of such a law.’
Oui position has always been that laws must
be passed in gcod faith, not for the purpose
of filling our courts with law cases, or irritating
any group of citizens, but in honest conformity
with sincere puipose to pass laws that are con
stitutional.
The District Court of the First division has
ruled cn the point raised by the Seward Gate
way in the case of United States versus Charlie
Jones, last hall. 1 hope the Seward editor will
read it, providing literacy really means some
thing to him.
‘Some testimony was introduced on the point
that the defendant had been refused a certifi
cate of citizenship, authorized by an act of the
Territorial legislature of 1915 * * * and
therefore Jones should have known that he was
not a citizen. I instruct you that the fact
that a certificate under the territorial law, was
refused the defendant is not even prima facie
evidence that he was not a citizen under the
act of Congress of Feb. 8, 1887. The Congress
of the United States, on that date, specified
what Indians should be citizens of the United
States and no state, territory or authority has
any power or authority to modify or add to that
statute which piovides that an Indian who is
bom in the United States and residing within
the judisdiction thereof, who has voluntarily
taken up his residence separately and apart
from any tribe and adopted the habits of civil
ized life, is a citizen of the United States and
entitled to all the rights, privileges and immuni
ties thereof.”
We almost despair of proving to certain liter
ates that the issue of the Literacy Bill is not
raised in good faith because the legislature is
without power to enact a law on that subject.
This issue is raised for an entirely different pur
pose; towit, to appeal to race prejudice and to
get the minds of the people off the real issues
which are, first, passage of the Controller Bill;
second, abolishment of the fish trap; third, the
enactment of a decent workmen’s compensation
insurance law.