The daily Alaskan., 1910-02-28

No one who is familiar with the seuimen, throughout Alaska will at tempt to deny that an overwhelming majority of the people of the territory are strongly opposed to the passage of the Beycridge bill which provides tor the creation of an appOIutive leg islativc council for Alaska. This sentiment is clearly shown by the at utude of the Alaskan press. for when alI is said and done it must be con cedcd chat newspapers. particularly in small communities, accurately reg tster the opinions of their readers. Only three papers in Alaska favor the Beveridge bill One of these Journals is an obscure weekly and the two dailies. the Juneau Record and Che Cordoya Alaskan are notor- iously known as controlled organs. And as matter of fact, when the Beverldge bin was first introduced, the Juneau Record characterized it as "a crazy and cumbersome piece of legislation and not likely to pass Congress. The reason for the Re cords change of front can easily be surmised.
 It a vote were taken tomorrow it is safe to assert that at least go per cent of the voters of Alaska would put themselves on record as being unalterably opposed to the Beyeridge bill The reasons for this opposition are not difficult to discover
 For years the people of Alaska have been demanding home rule. Other territories have it, it has been given the Fuipiuoes. the Hawaiians and the Porto Ricans. and our sis ter colony over the line. the Yukon. has an elective council which oper. ayes with the greatest success. Al, askans feel they are entitled to home rule from every standpoint of fair play and justice. Not only is it guar anteed under the constitution as a founda. on stone of our American in- suutious. but under the present sys- lem of long range legislative action 1t IS impossible for Congress to pro- pery attend to the local needs of Alaska or to give the time and at tentiou so necessary in framing laws for peculiar conditions. The Bever- idge bill would not remedy matters
 It would lodge the government of Alaska in the hands of eight com missioners. none of them responsible Co the people. but only answerable to the President for their actions, and We are not pessimistic in predict  ing that under the present conditions when Alaska is the battlefield for Che fight for commercial supremacy between several giant syndicates, each striving for advantages that mean millions, the council would in- cvitabIy fail to legislate for the best interests of the territory as a whole, and that Alaska and Alaskans would materially suffer through such a re- gime.
 This belief is strengthened by a knowledge of the interests back of the Beyeridge bill. It is usLess to deny that Hoggatt and Richardson have not openly lobbied in behalf of the bill and Hoggatts close affilia- uons with certain Alaskan corpora. tions is too well known to admit of doubt or argument The fact that certain two Alaskan newspapers favor the bill is also a strong argu- ment against it, in the minds of those who are thoroughly conversant with the interests these two papers repre- sent
 Alaska needs legislation framed by men who know the country and its needs. It needs a helping hand in many development plans. It needs better roads and more roads. It