The Daily Alaska empire. [volume] (Juneau, Alaska) 1926-1964, 1950-05-11


time it seems to us that the cost statehood is
hibitive.
And it is the question of cost that everyone
including the President, completely skips.
One of the best statements opposing statehood
now that has come to our attention is that OF Allen
Shattuck Juneau businessman and former Territorial
legislator His statement prepared for presen-
tation to the Senate Interior Departments hearing
on statehood for Alaska.
About former Delegate Anthony J. Dimond's state
ment that statehood will make Alaska We have
the potentalities of supporting millions and not just
hundreds of thousands" Mr.. Shattuck says:
1--WE have been hearing such statements for many
years. 1t has been repeated SO often by people de-
string to make the headlines that the people OF the
States can hardly be blamed for believing it. Yet
except for our timber resources and for our fishing
resources which latter are maximum develop
ment there is the slightest justification for such
statements. Nor does anyone making the statements
offer any Justification for making them Such state
ments are ridiculous and anyone making them should
on moments reflection, realize it. I am not saying
we do not have undeveloped resources. / am only
saying that if we do have them, they have not been
discovered and people should not be deceived regard
ing them by those who to speak with author
ty. Nor will they stimulate settlement or produce
tax revenue unless someone finds and develops them
About gold mining, Mr.. Shattuck says, Gold
mining dropped to less than half what it was pre-
war Formerly it of chief sources of terri
torial tax revenue 1t is impossible to say how long
time will be required to reopen mining full scale
to attain the stage of production which had been
attained prior 1912 This require several years
and it may never result it is impossible to say at
the present just what the future OF gold Will be IN
relation to its purchasing power"
AS for statehood status increasing population, Mr..
Shattuck says, here also have been advanced many
spurious contentious Permanent population increase
will place when there industry to support 1t ana
not until then unable to visualize what we would
do with ten fifteen thousand additional people right
now. The flow of people to the Western and Pacific
Coast States has no relation, in my opinion to the
political status of those States"
Regarding Aaska's population and the population
of other territories at the time they were admitted
as states Mr.. Shattuck says Another statement
repeated by many which has but little bearing the
question is that Alaska has population OF 100000
(estimate) while many of territories upon being
admitted States did not have that number: Colo
RADIO and Montana among others. To complete the
comparison so that. it makes sense you must bring
the comparative costs into the picture
While cannot do this in each instance, can point
to few instances to support this contention.
1--WE in Alaska now require s1o0ooooO per year for
running the territory.
According to the Year Book and Register 1859
Colorado's income was $23765 and Montanas $5662o
1t costs Alaska hundred times much to operate
her government as it did the one and one hundred
and seyenty-seven times much as the other" Colo
radios Organic Act passed in 1861 Montanas in
1864 They became states in 1876 and 1882
There are other arguments in Mr. Shattuck's state
ment that sound as the general statements IN
and true
most of the pro-statehood statements are untrue.
We hope Mr.. Shattucks statement reaches Mr..
Truman We think if the President gives it the
attention he deserves, he will find it of interest
unless he is taken in by the glib tongues and careless
statements of lot of newcomers to Alaska, instead
of the fortnight statement of a man who has lived
here for more than fifty years.