POLITICAL PROMISES TO SAWMILLS *
-X
At the last legislature a bill was introduced to
tax fibre boxes imported for use in the cannery
trade. To defeat the bill, the packers promised Mr.
Daly of the Ketchikan Mills and Mr. Rutherford
of the Juneau Mills, contracts for 750,000 box
snooks. Mr. Rutherford is now in Seattle and re
ports coming from Seattle indicate that he is any
thing but successful in getting the canners to
live up to their promises. Oh, well, another legisla
ture will put the tax on the shooks. In the mean
while, Mr. Rutherford is hopeful—but not many
industries in Alaska can live on hopes.
Is A Special Session Of The Alaska Legislature
Required
-x-•
It is to be expected that the
Territorial officials of Alaska do
not desire to give unpleasant
publicity to the situation which
has developed with reference to
the school funds of Alaska.
Recent communications from
the Auditor’s office directed to
Treasurers of the respective
school districts and apparently
based upon an opinion of the
Attorney General would seem to
directly raise the question as to
whether the Legislature of the
Territory or the appointed and
elected officials thereof should
do the “calling off.’’
The Legislature makes a
school year from July 1 to June
30 a fiscal, and does direct, by
duly enacted Legislation, the
payment, within that period, of
certain sums in support of the
schools, payment of teachers and
ether incidental expenses con
nected with the operation of the
schools.
The Wickersham organic act
of August 24, 1912, which gave
to the Territory a Legislative
organization withheld the right
from such Legislative body of
school legislation. The first ses
sion of the Legislature in a me -
morial asked the removal of
such Wickcrsham-like restric
tion and presented to Congress
with a memorial in this regard
proposing a form of a law which
would result in the establish
ment of a definite and systema
tic administration of such im
portant matter. Congress subse
quently conceded to tire Terri
tory such right as to school le
gislation, and our present sys
tem came directly from the laws
enacted by duly elected, by the
voters of Alaska, representatives
of the people.
Th<? president of the first
Alaska Senate, during its ses
sions and ever since, has con
sistently maintained that no
Federal appointive Territorial
officer should have anything to
do or say with reference to
strictly Territorial finances. In
ether words. Senator Ray has
asserted a first principle of
“home rule” government that
Federal appointees should keen
their fingers out of Territorial
money; that the o'ceded Repre
sentatives in Legislative assem
bly should handle the money of
the Territory by making appro
priations for its expenditures.
It is asserted many appropria -
tions for constructive improve
ments in the Territory have boon
effectually vetoed by some indi -
rect and hidden action on the
part of appointive and on the
part of some of the elected offi
cials.
Would it not have been more
fair to have courageously ex
ercised the right of veto which
is vested in the “colonial ap
pointee” Governor than to af
terward achieve the same result,
when there was no longer a Le
gislature in session, which or
panization might and could
over-ride such veto.
Quoting from the Auditor’s
letter, “The Legislature has by
lew defined the school year as
from July to June 30. The appro
priations passed by the last le
gislature exceeded the estimated
revenues by approximately a
quarter of a million dollars, so
it can readily be concluded that
the schools and the pioneer
pensions are going to be with
out funds if Mr. Rustgard’s
opinions were to be followed by
this office. The Governor and the
Treasurer have signified that
they are going to follow the ad
vice which the Attorney General
has given, but this office is go
ing to be guided by the wording
of the appropriation bill.”
The ruling of the Attorney
General seems to be that there
is not cash enough in the Ter
ritorial Treasury at this time to
meet the school obligations. As
we understand the law, it is not
how much money have we coi
1 *
lected, but the question is, are '
the expenditures for which ap- •
propriations have been made,
within the actual income which
may be reasonably expected to
accrue, from all sources, “for
the year.”
Every municipality in Alaska,
more than once, has in making
expenditures, relied upon the
prospective amount to be receiv
ed from taxes and license
moneys. In the Third Division