The Alaska citizen., 1910-05-28

within about month, urging haste and placing on final investigation definite but impossible time limit. At about the same juncture ques- ton came up as to the intepreta- ton Of the law.
 A man named Dennctt was then land commissioner. Dennett was seized with a bright idea Accord ing to his notion the existing law might be interpreted in such man. ner as to permit the Cunningham claims to be free-listed. From this view Glavis dissented strongly. Ballinger thereupon authorized letter requesting the attorncygen eral to decide on the point. This is right and proper and the usual course in such doubtful matters. But this letter was never sent; and a few days later Ballinger announc- ed that he did not wish to have anything more to do with the cases on account of his employment as attorney by the Cunninghams.
 This point has been made much Of since, until we have been persu- aded 10 look on it as a virtue Is it soo Leaving aside the fact that this delicacy of feeling of the secre- tary had good deal of hang-fre to it, here is a secretary called upon to deal with one of the biggest questions ever brought up before the department of the interior, question involving billions of dol lars worth of public property. That was what he was Put or the job for. That way he is servant of the public, occupying a high po- sltion in the nations counsels. Yet he claims himself incompetent to deal with it. and turns over an affair of thousand millions to the minor officials, as though it were mere matter of a settlers home stead. This, of course, indicates dehcacy of feeling and an implicit confidence in said minor officials. If he had had less confidence in these undeTlings, he would have said to the president something ill this vein:
 This is a decision that will af- feet our people for many genera tions; that will decide monopoly; that will have to do with the di- rect alienation of enormous wealth. l feel my connection with the Gun ninghams Warps my judgment. Therefore, i'll order that man fully competent to deal with the situation may be in position to do so, l hereby resign"
 But since MT. Ballinger had ab- solute confidence in his assistant, MT. Pierce. he turned the matter over to him.
 But ill that trusting act MT. Bal finger found himself cruelty abused Pierce did not submit the disputed point of law to the attorney -gener- al, as had been promised to Glayis. tte decided 1t himseltl On that de ~,sicn the Cunningham claims could be forthwith patented, Was 1t not a. shame 10 deceive one s trusting chief? For Mr. Ballinger, having been overcome with deli cacv, knew nothing more of the Cunningham claims. His especial assistant did, though, as is evidenc- ed by his initials on the Pierce de cision.
 So here for the third time, quite without MT Ballinger's knowledge, are the Cunningham claims in a fair way for patent. If MT. Bal finger had been on the job, as he should have been. we must believe this would not have happened. But let us at least arrogate to ourselves the privilege of lining up another recruit to the thickening ranks of coincidence.
 At this point Glavis committed his unpardonable rudeness. Before the patenting could be completed. |. he himself submitted the matter to the attorney-general. That legal light promptly reversed Pierce's in depreciation of the law on every point. Once again, Glavis uIter-