Douglas Island news., 1902-04-09
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 1902.
A Communication.

Editor Douglas Island News, DouSlaS ISlahu'
 Alaska.
 DEAR SRI deem it proper to call your attention to a movement that has been started, and has gained considera- ble headway, having for its object the securing from the present Congress of a law giving to Alaska territorial form of government. From advices from Washington, 1 am inclined to believe that if Congress thinks such measure desired by the people of Alaska, it will probably be enacted. There are many reasons why Alaska should not be bur- dened with a territorial form of gov ernment at the present time, and why those who have business interests at stake should take steps to have the true situation made known to Congress and their opposition thereto formulat- ed. In the first place, the situation in Alaska and the conditions here are very different from what have existed in any territory heretofore owned by the United States. In other territories, at the time a territorial form of govern, ment was given them, there was set tied population, engaged in diversified productive industries, which made the burdens of local government bear equally upon all the people. This is very far from the condition of things in Alaska. We have but two produc- tive ndustries-mining and fishing. Outside of few insignificant garden plats, there is not in all Alaska at pres ent a single source of productive wealth outside these two callings. Up on them primarily there must fall the burden of local government, should Congress give us such. We do not lose sight of the shipping interests, but these merely serve the other calllngs, aud are not themselves producers of wealth, and necessary burdens already borne by the wealth producing indus tries. Let us see then how the burdens of local government would bear on the mines and fisheries. Take mining first:
 Leaving out for the present the placers at Nome and on the Yukon, which are at best short t-lived, and the values only in a few instances demon strated, we have in Alaska only six mines that are being worked at prof it, viz: The Alaska Treadwell, Alaska Mexican, Alaska United, Alaska Ju- neau, the Ebner mine, and the Apollo, on Unga Island. There are many other mines that PROMISE to become protita ble in time, but at present the six nam ed are the only ones that are actually making any returns to the owners. All the others are yet in the condition where they are absorbing capital in- stead of paying dividends. Outside of these six then, tax upon mines would be tax upon property the value of which is wholly problematical and un- productive. A tax upon such mines would only increase the burdens of those who are putting in their time and money in the effort to uncover and develop the hidden treasures of the country. These burdens, owing to the natural difficulties of the country, are already sufficiently onerous and cer- tainIy should not be increased.
 How is it with the fisheries. With few exceptions, they are owned by non residents, who bring up their labor in the spring, spend the summer season at the canneries, and return in the fall. They have no interests in Alaska except as a summer fishing ground. Their whole interest in local govern ment would be to escape its burdens as far as possible.
 There is considerable mercantile bus mess in Alaska, of course. But it is dependent wholly upon the producing mines named, and upon the trade of those engaged in prospecting. Their burdens, in the form of tax, would be simply shifted on to the former, the same as any increased burden upon the shipping and carrying business of the country would be.
 Again, the population is not suffic- iently settled to take the proper inter- est in carrying on local government As rule few people as yet have come to Alaska to make it their permanent home. The great bulk of the popula- tion is temporary and shifting. Even in Juneau, one of the oldest and the most stable settlement in the District,