says. The season was over, Mr.
Lamont, at that time. His ar
gument is like seeking a reprieve
for a man already hung.
“I was in Ketchikan again on
August 5th and 6th,” he says.
Mr. O’Malley knows that there
were no fishermen in town on
those days. They had scatter
ed to their fishing districts. If
he had appeared on August 4th
(Sunday) we might have met
with him.
Mr. O’Malley’s memory is very
poor on what he said to our se
cretary on July 3rd. That is to
be expected because his reply
was such that you would censure
him if you could establish what
he did say and naturally he
won’t confess,
confess.
He tola our representative,
‘ If you are going to talk to me
about the hook-off, it is no use
because I wont change that
rule.” or words to that effect.
Not only did he refuse to at
tend our meeting, but he told
c ur secretary that he had closed
his mind to any and all argu
ments we might make against
his prohibition of the hook-off.
For many years we have been
appealing to the Bureau of Fish
eries in vain The custom seems
to be that when a complaint ar
rives in Washington, the com
plaint is turned over to the per
son charged. The person ex
plains and that ends the story.
If the same practice obtained
in a court of law, courts would
soon be abolished for the analo
gy would be this—the district
attorney would make out his
complaint against the burglar.
The burglar would be arrested
but would be requested to write
v, letter and explain himself.
The burglar would do so, and
of course, would clear him
self since no further investiga
tion would be made. The Judge
would write to the District At
torney and tell him “You have
which time would have been
i tilized by the boat’s travelling
at night to Anan Creek while Mr.
O’Malley slept.
“I was again in Ketchikan on
August 22, 23, a d 1. eaving on
the morning cf the he
made a great mistake. The
burglar denies the charges and
has made a fine explanation.”
Mr. Henry O’Malley has never
given us any consideration
whatever. We have never been
heard by him. He has never
cured the things we complain
about. Why don’t you make
him explain the case against
Maxfield Dalton of August 27,
1927?
I repeated to a prominent
canneryman a few minutes ago,
your statement that “the meth
ods of the Department there (in
Alaska) are now generally ap
proved.” He told me that he
understood the sentiment (real
sentiment, not the sentiment
expressed in the presence of a
man who has the power of life
and death) of the cannerymen
und that this sentiment was that
Mr. O’Malley was wrong in vir
tually all his regulations because
on wrong principles, but that
they felt that he was honest and
sincere.
I have a wide acquaintance
with cannerymen and fisher
men, and I am convinced that
Mr. O’Mai ey’s policies are
roundly condemned, and that
the ultimate result will be that
we wont have either population
or fish.
I would like to talk with you
and him both for I am right.
Yours Respectfully,
William L. Paul,
Grand President,
Alaska Native Brotherhood.
He has not learned the lesson
of life who does not each day
surmount a fear.—Emerson.
Eugene Wacker
Republican Candidate in Pri
mary election, For House of Re
presentatives, For the First Di
vision.
Will work for HOME RULE in
its FULLEST SENSE.
Protection Residents of Alas
ka.
PAID ADVERTISEMENT