THEY COME WITHOUT AN IDEA AND LEAVE
WITH THE LOVE OF THE JUNEAU EMPIRE
The twenty-four individuals who
came to the capital in March to
make laws for the Territory were
quite similar in general appearance
to those who came to former ses
sions. Like former assemblies they
were almost evenly divided between
progress and reaction. About one
half the members came to serve
their constituents and, the other
half came to serve the special in
terests. We will not say that when
these men left their homes it was
their intention to devote their
time to serving special interests.
They were drawn into that position
in some cases unwittingly. They
were in some cases overcome uy
what Mr. Sutherland apply termed
“the blandishments of Juneau so
ciety.” Fear of the press influenc
ed some. Fear of the powers of ap
pointed federal officials influenced
others while some subservient to
financial power were influenced by
the hope of personal gain.
There were a few very good
minds in this legislative sessions
and there were also some very
small minds. Small minds can nev
er comprehend the fact that secur
ing appropriations is not the su
preme thing in legislative effort.
Small minds do not take note of
the fact that the age old struggle
between human rights and special
privilege te dramatized in legisla
tive halls, nor are these small minds
aware of the fact that they are
playing parts in the great drama
themselves. The gallery audiences,
even in Juneau, are present to be
entertained by human strength and
weakness portrayed on House and
Senate floor, the same as on a
theatre stage. These audiences are
thrilled by exhibitions of strength of
character and also by exhibitions
of weakness and cowardice. A
courageous fight for a losing cause
commands even more admiration
than a victorious fight, a fact well
known to the playright and theatri
cal director.
The real interesting contest of
the session just closed, the one that
aligned progressives and reaction
aries in their respective groups was
over the bill to reorganize the ad
ministration of the Territorial gov
ernment, called the Controller Bill.
There were several men in both
houses who do not yet comprehend
just what was involved in this meas
ure and it is doubtful if they can
be educated to an understanding of
its meaning. There were several
speeches made against this bill by
members of both branches who dis
played absolute ignorance of the
American ideal of self-government.
Several of these men could not tell
you just why autonomy is granted
to territories of the United States.
One Senator was certainly under the
impression that the Alaska Legis
lature was instituted by Congress to
act as an adjunct to the federal bu
reaus operating in the Territory.
T his Senator was not by any means
uneducated but he has in the course
of his life failed to learn that civil
government is a subject for study
and that it constitutes a great
science.
A little study of our own history
in government would would teach
him that the object of Congress
was the relief of the people from
bureaucratic control Judge Wick
ersham made a most clear and lu
cid explanation of the purposes of
territorial government. So clear
that children could easily compre
hend it but the local press of Ju
neau convinced unthinking legisla
lators that what it termed the
“short ballot” is the stock argument
of American autocrats to prevent
free expression by the electors. And
so the Juneau press has always
made use of It to disuade the legis
lature from placing power with the
Alaska people. Ever since the first
Alaska legislature and to the pre
sent day the press has harped on
this short ballot phrase. The Le
gislature should probe into a ques
tion of this nature and endeavor
to learn just why all past legisla
tures have rejected every proposal
to make the territorial officials elect
ive and thus responsible to the peo
ple direct. Why this fear that “the
neople cannot be trusted.”
The fate of the Controller Bill
was decided by that fear of popu
lar rule. Weak-kneed legislators
did not realize that fear of popular
government was back of the senti
ment carried in the columns of the
subsidized press against the passage
of the bill. Their votes were cast
in fear of the press itself more than
through fear of giving the people
control over their officials. Why
have Alaskan Legislatures since
1913 failed to submit the selection
of administrative officials to the
same people who select the legis
lature? The answer is that those
autocrats who control the Alaska
press are against it. Legislatures
in turn fear the influence of the
press. It is not an edifying spectacle
to see men elected to represent the
people of this territory cringing be
fore a corrupt and subsidized press
and afraid to put into effect those
principles of government that are
supposedly dear to the American
people. One can scarcely believe
that eleven men out of the twenty
four selected to represent us were
actually afraid to have the voters
who elected them to office also se
lect their Treasurer and Secretary.
They were afraid however, in fact
too cowardly to take the selective
powers away from officials who are