The Cordova daily times., 1920-12-15


 and England were contemplating rec ognition of the Confederacy, the whole world was thrilled by the ap- pearance in San Francisco of a great fleet of Russian war vessels, and at nearly the same time, whether by ac- cident or design, second Russian fleet appeared in the harbor of New York. Who knew how many more there were on the voyage here. From England on the other receded, and the American government regained it's position and it's power"
 Alaska, the possession of Russia by right Of discovery by Boring, the Dane voyaging in her service, had proved a liability rather an an asset to the czar's government A remote province, not easily defensible, it was regarded as unlikely to be worth to St. Petersburg the cost of maintaining a government there. In the hands of friendly power it might become a Russian safeguard lost to foe, it would be a perpetual menace to her Asiatic territories. Russia was the initiator in the matter, and MT. Blaine says, desired to sell much more earnestly than the United States de- sired to buy. Yet there is little doubt that like offer from any other European government would have been rejected" Russia desired to choose her customer and for reasons of state, as well as of finance, chose the United States
 The old debate makes strange read ing now. Caldwalader c Washburn, who led opposition to the appropria- tion, urged that when the treaty was negotiated not a soul in the United States had asked for it. It was se- cretly arriver at, he contended, and the country it was proposed to ac- quire was Absolutely without value" The right of the house to inquire into the merits of the question, irrespec- tive of obligation already entailed by exchange of notifications of the treaty, was also insisted on. Ben Butler de- clared that if the appropriation were made as an act of friendship it would be better to "give Russia the $7,200,- 900 and let her ,keep Alaska" For, said that statesman, 'I think it may be small sum to pay for the friend ship if we could only get rid of the land, or rather the ice, that we are to get with it." Mr Peters of Maine said the territory, must be intrinsical- ly valueless, offering Russia's willing ness to sell as "conclusive proof" and adding:
 ''If treaty-making power can buy, they can sell; if they can buy land with money they can buy money with land; if they can buy part of coun- try they can buy the whole of coun- tr; if they can sell part of our coun- try they can sell the whole of it.
 General Schenck regarded the pur- chase as objectionable, but voted for it because the treaty had been made with friendly power. "If we do not acquire Alaska" said Leonard Myers, Great Britain will" MT Price of Iowa thought the money would be bet ter spent for improvement of the Mis- sissippi river There were many up holders of the treaty and advocates of the purchase, but few who regarded Alaska as worth buying Answer to the correspondents second question seems to be contained in this phase of the attitude of the supporters of the purchase in the house, and as to the senate, which already had ratified the treaty, in MT Stewards convincing argument that acquisition was war ranted by strategical needs and by Russias timely aid to the Union. The IotlSI uutS HOl, HOWtN6I, dly " lGIe appear as an official consideration in the bargain.
 There followed a wrangle between senate and house over the power to make treaties and to carry into ef- feet their stipulattons. The house pre- faced the appropriation bill with a preamble that conspicuously omit ted mention of the senate's ratifica- tion of the treaty, but declaring that "the subjects embraced are among those which by the constitution are submitted to the power of congress" The senate, unwilling to admit the pretentions of the house, rejected the preamble. Compromise was effected which is still regarded as a moral victory for the house, but the appro- priatiOn won. MT. Blaine'S view of