The Minneapolis journal., 1903-11-11
Government Of Alaska.

Government Of Alaska.
Representative Jones of washington
has introduced bill to create a terri
torial form of government for Alaska,
and providing for the election of three
delegates.
The report Of the subcommittee of
the senate committee on territories,
which visited Alaska last summer, has
mittee will recommend with regard to
a, territorial form of government can
not certainly be predicted. One Of the
committee has repeatedly expressed
himself as in favor Of territorial
form of government and an elective
delegate. The other members have
not so clearly defined their views. If
they do not recommend territorial
form of government it will be due
partly to the fact that public sentiment
in the district is divided. Among the
considerations which will influence
them is the apprehension of many SUBJ
stantial citizens of the district that a
territorial organization would not only
impose heavier burdens of taxation
but have a tendency to check devel-
opment; and, more weighty than all,
are the practical difficulties in the way
Of successful administration on ac-
count of the lack of means of trans
portation and communication between
the different parts of the district.
Southeastern Alaska, which comprises
that part between Portland channel
and Yakutat bay including the inn
portant points of Juneau, Skaguay.
Sitka and Ketchikan, is SO remote
from and has SO little in common,
either with the settlements along the
Yukon or with Nome and the Seward
peninsula, that a territorial govern
ment embracing them all would en-
counter difficulties Of administration
which might materially affect its eff
ficiency. g ..z
At the same time theresis undoubt-
edly a pred dominating sentiment among
the people of the district in favor Of
a territorial form of government and
home rule. They feel that they are
quite as able to make laws affecting
of the United States four or FIVE thou
sand miles away. The sentiment for
home rule is perfectly natural and is
entitled to great respect.
But whether territorial form of
government be provided or not, cer-
tainly Alaska is entitled to at least one
delegate in congress. It is unfair and
absurd that this immense district, with
its important interests, should have
no recognized representative in Wash
ington when other territories and even
the Hawaiian islands are SO repre-
sented. If territorial form of gov
ernment be authorized then unques-
tionably the delegate should be elected.
If no territorial form Of government
be provided the delegate will probably
be appointed by the president, or pos
sibly selected by the three judges and
the territorial appointed officers. It
would be inconsistent to authorize the
election Of a delegate and deny a ter
ritorial form Of government on the
ground that the population was too
scattered to admit Of fair election of
territorial officers.
But Mr.. Jones is not far wrong in
providing three delegates in place of
one; for, whether elected or appointed,
such a distribution of representation is
the only method by which the
three districts, the southeastern, the
central and the northwestern, can each
expect to have a representative fully
identified with and devoted to it's own
interests.