and the President that they come from a small number of people with nothing else to do and are simply good-naturedly mistaken about what to do. They are generally good citizens, but their theories are a long ways ahead of the needs of the country.

Mr. CALE. Whom does this man represent; anyone except himself? Governor HOGGATT. He is giving his own individual views, based, I presume, on knowledge of conditions gained by seven or eight years service on the bench in Alaska.

Mr. CALE. As to yourself, do you claim to represent any element except your own views?

Governor HOGGATT. I represent my own personal views and what I conceive to be to the best interests of the country, regardless of any political side whatever.

Mr. CALE. You do not profess to be talking for the people?

Governor HOGGATT. I do not claim to be talking for the people; so far as the people are concerned, I feel that the best element of the people, those who have settled and fixed business in the Territory of Alaska, the merchants, bankers, mine operators, oppose a change of form of government at this time. We are all anxious to have local government, but I know that the business people feel the time has not yet come for a change.

Mr. HIGGINS. Is there an issue between the parties in Alaska as to whether they shall have this form of government or not? Is there an organized opposition to self-government?

Governor HOGGATT. No, sir; there is no organization on that subject in Alaska. The possibility of such a change has been considered so remote that those opposed to a change at present have not thought it worth while to pay much attention to the agitation for a change. Mr. HIGGINS. Was there any declaration in any of the party platforms either for or against a Territorial form of government, except as you have indicated?

Governor HOGGATT. So far as the Republican convention held in Juneau is concerend, there was a plank indorsing the ordinance of 1787, which related to the establishment of the Northwest Territory. This was for a very simple form of government and limited candidates to persons who were freeholders.

Mr. KIMBALL. Were there any political nominations for delegates? Governor HOGGATT. Yes, sir; the Republicans, the Democrats, and the miners had candidates.

Mr. KIMBALL. Whom did Mr. Cale represent?

Governor HOGGATT. He represented the miners. He now claims. to be a Republican.

Mr. CALE. I was indorsed by the Republicans of my district and by the Democrats of the Second district.

Mr. KIMBALL. There was no plank in either the Republican or Democratic platform in regard to the question of Territorial selfgovernment.

Governor HOGGATT. Yes, sir. In all, but put there mainly that there could be no issue raised between candidates on this question. Mr. KIMBALL. What were they?

Governor HOGGATT. In favor of Territorial government.

Mr. SMITH. Under what law are you running now?

Governor HOGGATT. Congress has given us a code of laws, which covers everything that is necessary, except some special things for

which we have to come to Congress for relief. I do not understand that this bill proposed by Mr. Cale makes any provision as to relieving Congress of this work. It does not make any provision in reference to taxation. It does not say whether or not the present system of taxation shall remain nor whether the legislature shall provide additional taxation, nor whether the legislature could repeal this act which now provides for the raising of revenues in Alaska, which I think is working out very well. The legislature would have to provide means for the collection of the taxes. It could not delegate this power to officers created by Congress, who have the power now. The result would be that it would cost practically all of the 1 per cent provided for by this bill to collect the taxes. Outside of the incorporated towns, the entire taxable property of the country is very limited, consisting only of mining machinery and plants, patented claims, and canneries. There are no lands subject to taxation. Congress has been very liberal toward Alaska. Every dollar of taxes collected in Alaska except from fur seals is turned right back to the Territory for its own use. In the municipalities all taxes collected under the present laws are paid over to the municipalities for school and municipal purposes. Taxes outside of towns are paid into the Alaska fund and expended for schools, roads, and the care of the insane.

The CHAIRMAN. How many incorporated towns are there?
Governor HOGGATT. Ten.

Mr. CALE. Do you include Skagway?

Governor HOGGATT. Yes; Skagway is included. I understand that Cordova has made an application.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you state the population of those towns, and if not, can you add them to your remarks?

Governor HOGGATT. Chena has 1,000.

The CHAIRMAN. How far is that from Fairbanks?

Governor HOGGATT. It is about 10 miles. Douglas has about 1,100 population, and Fairbanks has about 3,500.

The CHAIRMAN. They speak of Fairbanks having a population of 9,000.

Governor HOGGATT. That would include the whole tributary country.

The CHAIRMAN. How much of an area would that include, roughly? Governor HOGGATT. It would include about one-fifth of the entire area of Alaska. The population is within a radius of about 35 miles from Fairbanks. The number of people living outside of that radius do not amount to more than 1,000.

The CHAIRMAN. The circle of the diameter would be about 75 miles from Fairbanks.

Governor HOGGATT. Yes, sir. Ketchikan has a population of about 1,100. It had a population of about 1,100 in 1906-7, but now it only has a population of probably 700. The copper mines have been shut down, and the population has fallen off. Nome has a population of about 3,000 people. The country tributary to Nome has a population of about 3,500. Skagway has a population of about 800. Treadwell has about 1,000. Valdez has a very uncertain population. It had about 1,500 and now it has about 800. Four or five hundred

laboring people have left there. Wrangell has a population of about 150. Katalla is a new town; it has a varying population.

If you want to pass any sort of a bill, such as Mr. Cale has suggested and introduced, only a very simple one would be required with a single assembly with its power strictly defined. That would be ample. It would meet with more satisfaction by the people than the proposed

council.

My own opinion is that before taking any action the gentlemen of this committee should send a subcommittee out to Alaska to see the country. They should see the country and see what we are doing. See the conditions, resources, and their development. After that you could have a better idea and could pass a bill as would best serve the interests of the Territory, if you think it advisable and necessary. I do not think that you can do the United States or the Territory any good by recommending such a makeshift of a bill as this.

The CHAIRMAN. State under what laws the Territory of Alaska is now governed.

Governor HOGGATT. Under the laws passed by Congress in 1900, commonly known as the "Carter code," "based largely on the Oregon Code.

The CHAIRMAN. That is now the Alaskan Code?

Governor HOGGATT. That is now the Alaskan Code.

The CHAIRMAN. You have other acts. You have special acts of Congress?

Governor HOGGATT. Yes; and we have customs laws and others. The CHAIRMAN. Before that you were governed by the extension of the Oregon Code to Alaska.

Governor HOGGATT. Yes, sir. The Oregon Code was made to apply practically to Alaska. In order to explain to you how the ordinary form of territorial government would work, I want to call attention to the matter of the cost of the courts for 1907. For that year the of the United States courts were $48,911.50. expenses That does not include the salaries of judges, marshals, nor district attorneys.

Mr. KIMBALL. The Territory would have to pay that.

Governor HOGGATT. By far the greatest portion of it. That represents the cost of litigation, the cost of the prosecution of crime, care of criminals, etc. We had one case where we had to send a man to South Africa, at a very great cost, to bring back a man charged with crime. That crime was forgery and would, under the code, be a crime against the Territory. There was a case of murder tried in Juneau last year which cost $6,000.

In Alaska the distances are very great. The expenses of the detections and prosecutions of crimes are enormous. Congress has seen fit to give us the necessary means of maintaining order and we have maintained a high standard of law and order, due to the fact of the certainty of prosecution, and we look to Congress and the Federal Government to help us to make possible this vigorous prosecution of the law. It seems to me, to add these burdens to Alaska would be the worst thing that could happen. The insane are now largely cared for by the United States. These unfortunates, under the Sulzer bill, would have to be cared for by Alaska.

Mr. CALE. Did not this criminal prosecution arise in a large measure from troubles in Japan?

Governor HOGGATT. No; only in a small proportion. The year before the cost was $587,000. There was a smaller expense in 1907 than there was the previous year, because there was a smaller population. There was a slight falling off in the population, due largely to the labor troubles. We have got the labor troubles now. If we can not get relief for our coal lands, the population will be less next year than it is this year.

All we ask is that the Government will continue to support us in our efforts for good government until our resources are developed and we can get on our feet and be in a position to maintain some sort of good local government. We have got municipalities in a limited way. Everything is satisfactory except the matter of license. do not see any good results to come from this measure.

I

Mr. SMITH. I have only glanced over this bill, but if it were passed would these crimes and cost of prosecutions be still upon the Federal Government? The Government would still pay the Federal officials. Governor HOGGATT. That is true so far as H. R. 17649 is concerned.

Mr. SMITH. So that it would not mean an additional taxation of the people?

Governor HOGGATT. The Cale bill is not very objectionable on its face, but its becoming a law would mean little or no change from present conditions. It needs a better definition in parts. It simply means a step farther. In two years they will be coming here and asking for a little more. They will not be satisfied until they have control of everything in the Territory-all the powers now granted Arizona or New Mexico. It is a question for you to decide as to whether or not it is advisable.

We find now that if, for instance, we want to move government to a new camp, we can do it instanter on application to the Department of Justice. We can have law and order if the Government gives us the means to do it. It will be impossible to do it under a Territorial form of government. The Cale bill would simply give us a form of government without the power to do anything. We could not do anything in the way of clearing titles to land. It would not relieve us from one single thing, not even the agitation for local self-government.

If

For instance, if you consider the question of the issuance of bonds by the city of Valdez, we would have to come here to get that. we wanted to do anything of that kind, we would have to come here to get authority, just as we do now.

Mr. HIGGINS. Who determines the question as to the development of the larger municipalities?

Governor HOGGATT. It is done by the proper local procedure. They make application by petition to the court, and the court after hearing, orders an election, and if two-thirds of the voters assent, town is incorporated.

Mr. HIGGINS. The judge ascertains the population?
Governor HOGGATT. Yes, sir; and orders an election.

the

Mr. HIGGINS. I have heard at times some complaint of the rule of the judges and governor of Alaska. Have you anything to say about that?

Governor HOGGATT. I think that has grown out of the trouble that we have had with gambling in the towns and the dance halls. The government there now is largely a government by the courts. The enforcement of law is in the hands of the court. The whole trouble has arisen from the question of gambling, which has caused more trouble than anything else in the whole country. There has been no settled policy until recently as to these questions. The courts have not regulated uniformly regarding gambling and dance halls. I conceive that it is clearly the duty of the courts to abolish these evils, but some judges have favored and others opposed suppression until the Department of Justice outlined a definite policy for officers to pursue.

(Thereupon the committee adjourned.)