TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

"Strike, but hear me!"

A portion of the American people—the residents of southeastern Alaska—who hold the obligation of the United States, present it for honor. It is long overdue, and their protest has been made in every possible way. Still, they do not ask full performance, but only what is absolutely necessary to their enjoyment of essential rights. As plain as is their claim, it is strenuously resisted.

Finding that *misrepresentation* was the chief obstacle to its recognition; being entirely without any forms of civil law, or the officials to ordain them; Congress having failed to provide the machinery by which they might possess legal representation—the privilege primarily essential, as the means to the end of the attainment of all other needed rights—they have sought its acquisition by the exercise of their original, fundamental, and paramount authority, to which the choice must have been referred, in any means that might have been adopted for its assertion.

They now claim an equitable title to the ratification of their will, thus fairly and authoritatively expressed.

They show that they possess a section of country of 40,000 square miles area; segregated, distant 700 miles from any other part of our domain inhabited by whites; with no community of interest with any other section, but with important commercial connections with others; with valuable resources, for the development of which and the needed legislation therefor, capital is now waiting; with 1,500 American-citizen residents, and their number rapidly increasing, and 7,000 industrious, enterprising, fast-civilizing Indians—to which, in short, population and investment are eagerly tending, and where the history of all our westward growth bids fair to be repeated.

These facts are proven before your committees by seven witnesses of undoubted credit, in no manner interested in any proposed legislation, being with one exception officers of the Navy and Coast Survey, and who have been in the country within the last few months, and thoroughly know its condition.

Entrusted with this people's cause, I now ask for them the simple justice that is not denied even to criminals.

The right I claim, in their name, was asserted in our *Declaration of Independence*, and was the germ of our National liberty; it is of the essence of the *Constitution*; it has been sanctioned in the *practice* of our legislation, universal except in this case; it is expressly within the terms of our *statute law*; it is an *absolute necessity* to them, as the key to other essential rights *guaranteed by treaty*. Their remoteness, and the unreasonable prejudice that can be shown to have always obstructed any efforts for legislation in their behalf, render their claim in this respect peculiarly strong. In fact, this principle is the spirit that pervades and animates the whole body of our liberty. And it is *expendient*, not only in the maintenance of faith and duty, but for the material advantage of the Government, that it be recognized.

The authority of the House is unquestioned; precedent and practice all assert it, and if the above statements are sustained, its obligation will be equally clear.

Yet it is said I should have no "privilege" to assert them, because I show no technically legal title. But I insist that the *equitable* jurisdiction of the House is as clear as its legal authority, and it is that which I invoke, to supply the defects of the law, in order that justice shall be done.

It is charged, too, that this movement was instigated by me, for my own ends solely. The original papers show its whole character, and the most prominent actors in it are well-known in this Congress. Their sincerity and good faith cannot be aspersed. Petition, remonstrance, every other means, had been tried in vain for fourteen years, and this last act was committed in the honest conviction, which the facts sustain, that all their hopes for justice lay in securing ACCREDITED REPRESENTATION!

Again, their claim is opposed because of the smallness of their population. Yet Dakota was admitted, with a full form of organization, with only 1,000 more whites, and *but half* the entire population. The result there, as in all other cases, shows what a boon that "admission" is. Representatives of States also have held their seats in the House on a majority in a total vote very little larger than that cast at my election—in one case the total being only 360—and where the candidate returned received fewer votes than I did. Our principle of government does not estimate right by number.

The expense of recognizing this right is also seriously urged as a reason against it. Think of it. The United States *too poor* to do justice and keep faith! And at such a time, too! But this, as well as all other objections, is magnified, for all the legislation asked, including a delegate's pay and "mileage," (which last item so frightens some gentlemen), will not cost $20,000 per annum. What member would hesitate at that sum, where the material interests of his own constituents were concerned?

In honesty I appeal, and in honor I would be answered. The more detraction slurs, the more is representation necessary. And no one can "represent," but one to whom the authority has been "delegated." If I do not sustain all I assert, then deny my claim. If I have attempted to deceive or mislead the House, dismiss me in dishonor. But do not prejudice my cause, or determine it without a hearing. Surely this House, in the debates of which the theory of our system of representation has received such clear exposition, and the rights of citizenship, and the sanctity of treaties such eloquent advocacy, from all parties, during the present session, will not refuse to hear the voice of a people who, for fifteen years, have pleaded in vain for all these principles. Surely this Government, in this hour of its wealth and prosperity, when the grievous wants of these people are brought to its attention, will not plead its own indifference to its voluntarily assumed obligations, as a bar to their rights. Surely it will not take advantage of its own neglect, to continue the denial of remedy, to those to whom it has solemnly guaranteed "all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States" by refusing that one of them which the Great Charter of our liberties declares to be a privilege "inestimable" and "incapable of annihilation," and which, it further declares, when withheld through the fault of the Sovereign Authority, "returns to the people, for their exercise," as in this case.

If you insist that these people shall have no "privilege" of your floor till you pass an enabling act, you but perpetuate your denial. For the history of their efforts shows that they will never get an enabling act till they get representation. Sundry gentlemen have taken interest in their cause, and twenty-five bills, for various forms of relief in the way of civil government, have been introduced. Three of them struggled to the Calendar, and died there. The others perished in the committee rooms. Why? Because they were unchampioned by their own representative. So it will continue, if you deny this claim, for another half-generation. Already it is foreshadowed. Not only my recognition, but the pittance of civil organization we ask, meets determined and vigilant opposition, and misrepresentation. The difficulties and perplexities of my task are thus made extreme. There is no member of the House whose district has more justly the claim of necessity for representation than this. I ask for the enforcement of "the Golden Rule."

Very respectfully,

BOSTON, December 27—29, 1883.

M. D. BALL.

EDUCATION IN ALASKA.

ENDORSEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL SOCIETIES.

Jan. 1. 1884.

IS IT A PRIVILEGE?

To the Hon.

House of Representatives:

SIR: Please consider the following propositions in my case:

If a final vote of the House shall sustain the view of many members, 1, That the voluntarily assumed, express stipulation of the Government, guaranteeing "all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States," (now of fifteen years' standing, but unperfected in the least particular,) taken with that provision of the statute-law, (section 1862,) which confers on each Territory the "right to send a delegate" to Congress, has created a title to representation in the people of Alaska, and to its present benefit and enjoyment; and, 2, That this obligation should now be met by legalizing the action whereby they have signified, through a fair expression of the popular will, their desire that this privilege should now be perfected in my admission as their delegate, as has often been done in similar cases—then, unquestionably, such judgment will establish the fact that my equitable title to a seat as such delegate *now* exists, precedent of the action of the House, which is invoked not to confer, but to recognize it, and that it constitutes a "privilege" of such qualified membership as delegates have.

Hence it is certainly a possible privilege, determinable, as to such character, only by the final action of the House on the merits of the claim, under which condition equity requires that it should at least have the benefit of a hearing. To assume that it is not, and cannot be shown to be an equitable privilege, because it is not technically so, is to forestall a just judgment upon the very point on which a hearing is asked, as necessary to determine the right.

This people now ask you to grant them, in order to assert an essential and inestimable privilege, due under the policy and compact of the Government, and without possible detriment to other interests—one hour in fifteen years! In their name, and as a constitutional principle, I ask a "trial,"—not condemnation unheard. I invoke the spirit of *habeas corpus*, that the body of their cause may be brought to your bar, for inquiry why the discrimination should exist against them alone, of all your citizens, by which they are kept in the duress of deprivation of *every* privilege of citizenship, though promised *all*, and why they should now be denied the one qualified as "inestimable" by our revolutionary fathers, recognized in uniform practice since, and claimed by them, and shown to be of "primary" necessity here.

WASHINGTON, D. C., May 15, 1882.

EDUCATION IN ALASKA.

ENDORSEMENT OF CHURCHES.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN SESSION AT
SARATOGA SPRINGS, MAY 1883, TOOK THE FOLLOWING
ACTION:

In view of the pressing needs of Alaska, where our missions have been singularly successful, we recommend that the General Assembly appoint a committee of five persons, who shall wait upon the President of the United States and the Secretary of the Interior, asking of the Government through them the establishment of civil government among these people of Alaska, and pressing upon them the necessity of establishing industrial schools in that Territory.

FIFTY-FIRST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN BAPTIST
HOME MISSION SOCIETY, SARATOGA SPRINGS, MAY 25th
1883.

The committee on work among the Indians reported. * * From the country of Alaska comes a cry for help as pitiful and as hopeless as any that ever startled Christian ears from the lands beyond the sea. What answer will our great denomination make to this repeated appeal? We repeat the recommendation made to the Society a year ago that missionaries be sent as soon as practicable to the Indians of Alaska. Report adopted.

The following was ordered sent to the President of the United States and the Secretary of the Interior. *Resolved*, that as Alaska is the only section of the United States where governmental or local aid has not been furnished for the education of the people;

And as the establishment of schools will assist in civilizing the native popu-
lation, prevent Indian wars and prepare them for citizenship;

Therefore the American Baptist Home Missionary Society in session at
Saratoga Springs, May, 1883, would respectfully petition you to renew your
recommendation to Congress for an educational appropriation for Alaska.

MISSION ROOMS OF THE
METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH,
805 BROADWAY,

New York, January 21, 1880.

REV. DR. JACKSON.

My Dear Brother: At the meeting of our Board yesterday, the subject of the Missions at Alaska was taken up, and after a full discussion as to the various points, a preference was shown for, and that our work be commenced at Unalaska. * * *

Truly yours,

J. M. REID,

Corresponding Secretary.

MORAVIAN CHURCH, AMERICAN PROVINCE.

Bethlehem, Pa., September 25, 1883.

DR. SHELDON JACKSON.

Rev. and Dear Sir: * * * We have resolved to send, if possible, one
of our ministers to Alaska to examine the ground and report. * *

Very fraternally yours,

EDMUND DE SCHWEINITZ,

Bishop.

PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

From a pamphlet published by the Domestic Committee of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States of America we clip. "If a Bishop and
four Clergymen, with at least $12,000 per annum, could be secured for Alaska,
and these men could get into the field and take possession before whisky set-
tles there and the people are demoralized by it, there might be a work done
among these Indians equal to that in the Fiji Islands, and in as short a time.
Here is a chance to show the people of America that the Church does know
how to deal with the Indian question. There will be a clear field and no favor
for several years to come. Prospectors after everything valuable will overrun
the country as soon as it is safe and profitable to do so. Let the House of
Bishops, the General Convention and the whole Church look into this matter,
and for once determine to be first in the field with proper equipment. There
will be no trouble about the men or the money, and even though the new
Bishop should have 'no Cathedral, no staff of clergy and no endowment, '
he could have a good support, a steam yacht and a dozen dog teams, and with
these, if he were the right man in body, as well as in spirit, he could convert
that world."