The Daily Alaska empire., 1947-01-28

fairs He is also a member of the newer Special Con- mittee on Postwar Military Policy
 His associations as a member of the Naval Af- fairs Committee, obviously with Navy officers And is natural that he should gain from at least some of them the conviction that to fulfill it's role in national defense the Navy should have control of the land Territories in what might be described the outlying areas of the United States
 But the plan of the Cole bill is against the whole of development of selfgovernment for American communities.
 It is directly counter to the statehood proposals before Congress for both Hawaii and Alaska.
 It represents a type of thinking which regards outlying areas not as communities with membership in the rights and privileges of the American democ racy: but as colonies to be administered by official fiat from above and subject the military command instead of to the obligation of citizenship
 There is nothing in the history of any of the Ter rtories or insuar areas to justify the Cole bill,
 Tn war as in peace the people of these areas have manifested no less regard for their obligations and duties the United States than the people Of MT. Coles home State and home district
 Indeed, the immediate response of the people Of Hawaii and of Alaska to the stern call to arms on December '. 1s41, exceeded in no State in the Union And we say with pride, State in the Union had a better war record than had Hawaii
 This record founded not alone on the inn
 
 not solely the response of fear for our own safety in these islands or on the Alaskan peninsula.
 It was founded also certain knowledge that should the defenses of Hawaii and Alaska break down the whcle West Coast of the United States and the Panama Canal Zone, would be laid open to enemy attack
 The people of Hawaii and Alaska knew that on them as well as on the Navy and Army, and on that gallant outnumbered, nequpped little force in the Inc Pacific line until the immense American war machine could get rolling.
 Yes, the record of Hawaii and Alaska in wartime is secure for history.
 It offers no excuse for taking from either Territory the seif-govcrnment it already has and deprivng it of the deeply, proudly cherished ambition to march on to full statehood
 Nor do we believe that from the standpoint of long-range strategy the Navy justify taking control of the territorial and nsular areas.
 Tn Hawaii and in Alaska the Navy has great bases. No reasonable plan for the establishment of such bases has been refused
 In the areas farther west and southwest in the Pacific there similar bases Most of these areas are already under Navy control.
 There never has been presented to Congress or the people valid for permanent naval occupancy and naval of the Territories and insular areas
  emphatcally than those the New York member intro duced m 1945
 The protests will come from the earlier sources of opposition. and from
 Since the first legislation in, President Tru man has declared himself strongly in favor Of i'm mediate action statehood for Hawaii.
 A subcommittee of Congress has made report to the main house committee cordially fayoring state hood for Hawaii
 The Secretary of the Interior, J. A. Krug has reiterated the previous hearty support Of statehood as voiced by his predecessor, Harold L. Ickes.
 In the country at large, statehood for Hawaii is much better understood than 1t was two years ago The support for statehood is correspcndngly wide spread
 But it be foolish to permit the Cole bill to ride without protest. The chances are greatly against it's passage favorable report from house committee. But so long Hawaii remains 8 Territory to such attacks political status and citizenship rights.
 me way to end those attacks, the way to assure forever that the oWly status of colony is not imposed us, is to get statehood
 Not till then will the menaces to local self govern ment be removed.