The Alaska citizen., 1911-09-18

POI lance 10 the government
Mr.. Joslin goes N to say that any
one who would advocate royalties on
Alaska coal should also advocate
royalties on wood. salt. potatoes,
flour and bacon, and ends by asking
why confine the tax to coal Right
here is where the able gentleman
shows that he is hard driven to
sustain his argument by logic or
common sense. so he attempts to
employ the powerful weapon satire
TO make the arguments of his OPP
4 pOnents look ridiculous Satire is
most powerful weapon when il
reaches home, but woe to the user
# the weapon when it fails. for it
makes him ridiculous to even the
most dense minded person. and that
is Mr.. Joslins position here. Anyone
knows that the disposition of the
wood that grows in Alaska is not
parallel To a disposition of coal In
the first place there can not be a
monopoly of the wood business as
long as the government owns the
ground on which it grows. and per
mitS all whD wish to cut and mar
ket the wood. even though il does
require the payment of royalties un.
der the name of Stumpage. No one
has ever claimed that there has
been much of a corner on wood in
Alaska. and such a thing would be
impossible under the present system
But with coal ii is different The
man who is able financially to &c
into the wood business NAV not
no h1a To h,,. ~
coal mining and railroadng. and We
Will venture the remark that if the
Joslin railroad We're extended into
the Nenana coal fields. with a com
plete right to mine coal. that Mr.
Joslin would deliver coal to the con
SumerS here at a very small pei
Centage less than the wood chop
per and teamSter could furnish wood
and that the price would be held
there regardless of the great profit
to Mr.. Joslin. until competition would
spring UP in the coal business. And
If the coal barons entered the field
here they would permit no individual
to mine coal, for the same reason
that they do not permit the indi
vidual to mine coal in Pennsylvania
The trust has the money and il
will supply coal TO the customers OF
the independent operator at half the
cost of mining until the independent
is broke. then it puts the price bach
To where the trust wants it. So il
would be here If the Cover nment
would part with the title 10 the
coal here in Alaska the coal bar0ns
with their hundreds Of millions OF
wealth, would come in and buy III
what coal they wanted and supply
the trade. 90 per cent. OF which is
outside OF Alaska. and if an indepen
dent should presume to compete Will
them. they would crush him by thai
same old method and the trusts
would control the coal and its maj.
ket just as it does in PensS lvania
and for the same reason. The govern
ment owns this coal now, and il
must keep il from the trusts for the
people.
Now as to taxing salt. potatoes
flour and bacon, we will refer Mr.
JOslin 10 the Payne-Aldrich tariff law
for reference as to whether or moi
the government is taxing any OF
these articles His reference tC
NllOSt iiiit tel = Is llOi argument, Dl1
evasion. This question should be
seriously and honestly argued tC
Alaskans to the end that they may
understand the question as il is
Any attempt to cloud the argument
by reference to wood. salt. potat es
etc. tends only to confuse
Mr. Joslin's next proposition il
that it is absurd to even think OF
the mining OF our cCal in Alaska by
the government. He says that The
government could not do it. He says
why not agitate for the mining anC
selling OF the coal by the govern
ment for 81 per ton.
We are sure that if the govern
ment ever mines coal in Alaska
that it will sell the coal at tn,
mine for much less than 81 pei
ton. We are satisfied that it woulC
build a short line of railroad to tide
water and sell the coal there at 8
good profit for 81 per ton. 1t must
be remembered that the cost eff min
ing coal from large ledge or weir
is very small. and the cost of deliv
erinS it about 20 miles by rail
where all things are arranged solely
for that purpose. will be very small
The loading and unloading of d
car II that road would be about
the same thing as hosting anc
dumping a bucket of dirt from one
of our mines. 1t would certainl,
take no longer to do il, and the COS,
of pulling a train CT 30 cars from the
mine to the dock. each car con
tanning not less than 80 tons, il
easily calculated.
But Mr.. Joslin says that il wOulC
cost the government $3.50 per day
for its men. Well. in reply to tina,
we have only this to say. that we
are il favor CT the government pay
ing high wages to its men, anG
that is one very great argument in
favor OF government ownership
and operation of railroads, but
in Alaska the government is so ig
nOrant of the conditions, that it pays
its men less than men get for sim
liar services from private individu-
ais. The clerks in the postoffice
for example.
Mr.. Joslin here again brings in
the wood and potato question, which
of course is no argument There is
no occasion for the government go
ing into the wood or potato business
for there is not. and never can be
a monopoly by the producers OF
either, and if there were, then ii
would be time to agitate that ques
iton. 1t can be readily seen that the
government does not now own po-
tatCeS that private individuals are
trying to get title to. If it did own
potatoes. and potato barOns We're
| irving 10 get them from the pnyarn.