and stock-raising business thoroughly. At the age of 18 I left Germany for the United States and landed at New York. From there I went to Ohio, then to Illinois, and from Illinois I went to Nebraska, in which State I farmed and raised stock for eighteen years, principally in the southern, part of the State. From Nebraska I went to the State of Washington, where I engaged exclusively in the stock business-buying, selling, and shipping stock. In 1897, at the time of the rush to the Klondike, I started for Dawson with 135 steers and 40 horses, but did not reach Dawson until 1898. I have been shipping stock to different parts of Alaska ever since. In 1900 I shipped stock to Nome and also to other parts of Alaska, and have traveled overland with cattle from Valdez to Fairbanks for the past seven years. I have visited the Aleutian Islands and have been on almost every one of the islands of that group, and I find that Alaska is a 'great country for its climate, grasses, and different kinds of small grain, such as oats, barley, and all kinds of vegetables. I contended when I first landed at Haines mission, in 1897, that Alaska would be a farming and stock-raising country, and I am more and more convinced of that fact as I travel through the different parts of the country. Owing to the big fire at Fairbanks, I have not been in and around Fairbanks for four years, and I was very much surprised when I came here last September that the country surrounding Fairbanks had been turned into a farming and gardening community. I came here this last time with cattle and hogs, and found that they raise as fine barley as I ever saw in any of the States where I have farmed heretofore. I bought barley, oats, and hay here from Mr. William Young, which he raised on his farm just north of the town, to feed my cattle, and found it to be well filled with good matured and well-ripened grain. I saw as fine potatoes here this fall as I have ever seen anywhere in the States. Cabbage, ruta-bagas, turnips, and carrots can not be beat in any of the States, and I believe that sweet potatoes will be raised here in the near future. The raising of hay has proven to be a success. I also find a lot of chickens are being raised in and about Fairbanks for the local market. Respectfully, WM. WAECHTER. [Telegram and letters of protest against taking the census of Alaska in December, 1909, in violation of section 20, of the census statute of 1909.] SECRETARY COMMERCE AND LABOR, FAIRBANKS, ALASKA, October 7, 1909. Washington, D. C.: Am informed enumeration population Alaska will be begun January 1. Respectfully request same be deferred under section 20, act July 2, last, because more than one-quarter permanent population Fairbanks and Nome regions outside Seattle-Alaska Exposition and on business and will not return interior until March and Nome in June. January census great damage to Alaska and seems violation section 20, act Thirteenth Census. Please advise me your action. JAMES WICKERSHAM, Hon. WALTER E. CLARK, FAIRBANKS, ALASKA, December 14, 1909. Governor of Alaska, Juneau, Alaska. MY DEAR SIR: The twentieth section of the census act of March 4, 1909, providing for taking the enumeration of the population of the United States, specifically provides that the enumerators shall begin that work on or after April 15, 1910, but in Alaska that law is being violated by the enumeration of the population in some sections, and particularly in the Juneau and Fairbanks sections, in the month of December, 1909. In my conversation with you some days ago at Juneau I called your attention to this violation of the federal statute, and stated to you the reasons why such violation was an injury to the territory and people of Alaska. Without repeating these reasons now, and in compliance with our understanding that I would reduce my objection to writing, I do now respectfully protest against this admitted violation of the act of Congress in thus taking the census of Alaska months in advance of the time fixed by law, and I appeal to you as the gov ernor of Alaska, charged with the interests of the United States Government therein, and to your statutory authority to see that the laws enacted are enforced and that officials appointed to administer the same faithfully discharge that duty, to cause the enumeration of the population of Alaska to be made by these officials at the time provided by law in the twentieth section of the aforesaid act of Congress on or after April 20, 1910, when at least a portion of our absentee population, which is now in the States, shall have returned to the territory. Respectfully, Hon. E. DANA DURAND, JAMES WICKERSHAM. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Director of the Census, Washington, D. C. SIR: Your letter of the 15th instant received. I call your special attention to the figures which you give for the movement of people to and from Alaska in January, February, and March, 1909, as follows: If the census of Alaska had been taken on April 1, 1909, Alaska would have gained in its enumeration over January 1 the difference between the outgoing and incoming figures given by you-3,059 persons. Conceding for the sake of argument-for it is not a fact that the estimated population of white people in Alaska in 1908 numbered only 31,000, it is thus demonstrated that 10 per cent of the white population would have been omitted by an enumeration taken in December, 1908. And the same, only a more serious, result necessarily followed when you took the census in Alaska in December, 1909, instead of April 15, 1910, and for this reason: We have no means of transportation in Alaska except on the rivers in summer and over the snow trails in winter. On the last boats going out in the fall thousands of people go to the States on business, and in January, February, March, and April they go back to the interior over the snow trails. This movement is annual and is the one general business movement of the interior population, carrying in supplies for the next year and the influx of new population. The year 1909 saw a greater volume of travel outside than any other year. The Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition, at Seattle, induced thousands to go who would not otherwise have gone. They went out on the last boats in September and can not return, owing to climatic conditions and the want of transportation facilities, till after January, 1910. After the Government had thus induced them to go and see the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition, suddenly, without notice, and in violation of the federal census statute, you took the census in December, 1909. During the months of November and December a fierce rate war was carried on between certain steamship lines in southeastern Alaska; passenger rates were cut to a small and merely nominal sum, and many hundred people took advantage of these reduced rates to go to Seattle and outside for a few weeks. Just when the greatest number had gone, and before any had returned, and without warning, the enumeration was made in December. A heavy movement went out from Nome on the last boats in September and can not return until June, owing to that port being closed by ice. For these reasons the December, 1909, enumeration in Alaska was a much greater injury to Alaska than could happen at any other season, or in any other year. In your letter you show that during the year 1909 the total movement in Alaska, as shown by the reports of steamship lines, was as follows: Southward bound. Excess southward 27, 436 2, 533 The total movement shown by these figures is very misleading, because it was almost wholly made up of tourists drawn to the coast by the Alaska-YukonPacific Exposition held at Seattle, who took the round trip to southeastern Alaska. They were not a part of the population of Alaska. However, the excess of 2,533 is composed of the annual movement from the interior, which, with the annual new increase of population, will go into Alaska in January to April, 1910, and would thus be counted to our credit and not against us if the census had been taken in April, 1910, when the law requires it, instead of in December, 1909, in violation of the law. If you were to take the census of Alaska in April, 1910, at the time fixed by law, you would, on account of local conditions and the great area of the Territory, not be able to enumerate the total population by at least 10 per cent, but by the enumeration which you caused to be made in December, 1909, in violation of law, we will lose from 20 to 25 per cent in the enumeration of the entire white population. You suggest that the admitted losses by the unauthorized enumeration of December, 1909, be corrected by stationing agents of your bureau at seven of the southern ports in Alaska, and adding to the enumeration those who may return to Alaska before April 15, 1910. The objection to that is that two months have now gone by since the census was taken in the latter part of November and the 1st of December, 1909, and that there is a coast line of 10,000 miles with dozens of other open ports into which this returning portion of our people go, and that such a makeshift correction could, at best, be only approximate, and could not be reasonably accurate. You also kindly suggest that if I wish to discuss the matter with you personally, a conference will be arranged to suit my convenience. In my judgment there is but one thing to do, and that is to take the census of Alaska fairly and legally in accordance with the federal statute approved July 2, 1909. You may not recall the fact, but on June 19 last, in company with Gov. Walter E. Clark, I called on you and protested against taking the census of Alaska through the bureau of education officials in that Territory. In spite of our protests and in violation of law, you did so take this census in December, 1909, and I do now protest, as the Delegate from Alaska, against its illegality and incompetency. Respectfully, JAMES WICKERSHAM, [Extracts from speech of Hon. J. Warren Keifer, of Ohio, in the House of Representatives, the committtee having under consideration the bill (H. R. 12316) to provide for the government of the Canal Zone.] PANAMA CANAL ZONE. Who shall make laws therefor? Shall they be legislative or monarchical? "The Constitution of the United States recognizes no law not of representative origin." I now briefly summarize some of the propositions I have adverted to, and I will make some quotations from decisions of our Supreme Court. I will not occupy time with the rules as to the acquisition of territory by the United States, nor over the ultimate purpose of territorial government. The curious on these matters might examine Shively v. Bowlby (152 U. S., 1; 28 Am. Ency. of Law, p. 57): "The Territories are as much a part of the United States as are the States. (28 Am. and Eng. s. p. 57, III.) "It (United States) is the name given to our great Republic, which is composed of States and Territories. "The District of Columbia or territory west of the Missouri is not less within the United States than Maryland or Pennsylvania. (Soughborough v. Blake, 5 Wheaton, 317. Quoted in Downer v. Bidwell, 188 U. S., 353.) "Settlers in United States Territories not organized 'take with them, as their birthright, the principles of the common law so far as suited to their condition in their new home.' (Shively v. Bowlby, 152 U. S., 52; Van Ness v. Pacard, 2 Peters, 137, 144; 28 Am. and Eng. Ency., pp. 56, 58, N. 3. See also McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheaton, 316, 408.)" So long as any territory of the United States remains unorganized by proper congressional legislation it is solely subject to United States law, with such rights guaranteed to its citizens as free people as inhere in them by the common law and as the Constitution of the United States secures to all citizens of our Republic. The provisions of the Constitution of the United States include the Territories as well as the States. These provisions secure to the Territories and the people resident therein a republican form of government, right to have laws passed by a duly organized legislative body, and to enjoy all the privileges and guaranties the Constitution provides for citizens resident in the several States. The Constitution of the United States recognizes no law not of representative origin. Chief Justice Fuller, in a comparatively recent case, reviews and cites the many cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States holding this doctrine. They are all in harmony. The Government of the United States was born of the Constitution. See Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U. S., 354–386 ; 66 * 66 Congress may govern the Territories, either mediately or immediately, either by the creation of a territorial government, with power to legislate for the Territory, subject to such limitations and restrictions as Congress may impose on it, or by the passage of laws directly operating upon the Territory without the intervention of the subordinate government. (28 Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, p. 594, cases cited N. 3.)" In either case it must be through a representative legislature. When a Territory is organized it becomes, in some sense, a separate entity, and may possess legislative powers based on representative right which belong to its residents as self-governing citizens, not derived from congressionally delegated legislative powers. In a certain sense Congress, by a territorial organic act, provides for or creates and sets in motion a territorial legislature which, subject to constitutional and lawful restrictions and limitations, may make laws for the government of the Territory and its people. Under the Constitution of the United States all laws must be of a representative legislative origin. Laws for a Territory must be made by Congress or by a territorial legislature popularly chosen. An organic territorial act takes the place, under the constitution, of Congress, and, in some sense, the Constitution of the United States, though subject to its fundamental provisions. (28 Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, p. 59 and N. 4; Ferris v. Higley, 20 Wall., 375; Bank v. Yankton, 101 U. S., 129; Bank v. Iowa, 12 How., 1.) A territorial legislature acts on its own, not a delegated, legislative power. Its power is derived from territorial citizenship, and it extends to "all rightful subjects of legislation consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the organic act of the Territory." Its power and action must be consistent with the natural freedom of the citizens of the United States residing within its limits, being such rights as we have seen they take with them to the United States Territories or whithersoever they may go within United States boundaries. (28 Am. and Eng. Ency., p. 6 (2).) If Congress grants territorial government, it must be representative and republican in form-not monarchical. 66 What are rightful subjects of legislation must be determined by an examination of the subjects upon which legislatures are in the practice of acting, with the consent and approval of the people they represent. (29 Am. and Eng. Ency., p. 60 and N. 5; Maynard v. Hill, 125 U. S., 190, 204.) " Citizens of the United States residents of Territories are yet under the protection of the Constitution of the United States and under its shield. They possess the rights secured to them by the tenth amendment to the Constitution, which reads: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people." The basic principle of Magna Charta, wrung from King John on the meadows of Runnymede, June 15, 1215, was the recognition of the individual as well as the collective inherent rights of the people. What their own chosen legislators may do in an organized Territory is in harmony with self-government within their reserved powers. Being citizens of the United States, as we have seen, protected in all their natural rights and those granted to them by the Constitution and incident to our free form of selfgovernment, there can be nowhere found any right, constitutional or other right, to authorize one individual, not even chosen by them, to make laws for their government affecting their peaceable enjoyment of life, liberty, and property. What may be done by a legislative body chosen by the people of a Territory formed under an organic act of Congress, restrained and limited by the Constitution of the United States and in harmony with usual legislative action and confined to rightful subjects of legislation, is in no way a precedent for individual legislation by the President or his appointee. “The territorial legislature is a creature of Congress. Ency., p. 59.) " (28 Am. and Eng. But Congress by a territorial organic act "delegates none of its sovereign authority." Nor does it surrender any of its legislative authority or power. This it can not do in any instance to any authority. (28 Am. and Eng. Ency., p. 59, N. 6.) I quote again from the Supreme Court of the United States: "The theory upon which the various governments for portions of the territory of the United States have been organized have ever been that of leaving to the inhabitants all the powers of self-government consistent with the supremacy and supervision of national authority and with certain fundamental principles established by Congress. (Clinton v. Englebrecht, 13 Wall.; 80 U. S., 434. Syllabus 3, Utah case.) "The legislative power of said Territory (Utah) shall extend to all subjects of legislation consistent with the Constitution of the United States. (80 U. S., 444.)" * * * It will be kept in mind that this bill, section 2, proposes to surrender all the authority of the United States, as well as that of Congress, to the President of the United States, and also to empower him to pass along all the power, without restriction, of both the United States and Congress to such person or persons as he may appoint. The language of the bill granting away the powers of the United States and of Congress is that "All the military, civil, and judicial powers of the United States in the Canal Zone, including the power to make all laws, rules, and regulations necessary for the government of the Canal Zone, and all the rights, powers, and authority granted to the United States by the terms of the treaty shall be vested in the President or such person or persons as the President shall from time to time designate, detail, or appoint." * * To enact this into law will violate all the fundamental principles of government of our Republic and install a piece of monarchical power not even permitted under the limited monarchy of England, and not even assumed to be exercised by the most absolute of autocracies. The Czar of Russia may decree laws, though he is fast submitting to limitations on his decrees, but he has neyer assumed to delegate to another person any such power as is proposed by this bill. Warren Hastings, in his government of India, was not charged with the exercise of any arbitrary power at all approaching in enormity that here proposed to be granted to a single individual. Nothing is reserved in this bill to the people to be exercised in their representative capacity, not even such rights as inhere in them as citizens of the United States and belong to them by nature and as are guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the United States, nor is the individual, I repeat, to be restrained by the Constitution of the United States or by the principles of the common law. Legislative powers of Congress can not be delegated by it. (10 Wall., 50; 10 Wheat., 1, 51; 143 U. S., 649; 1 Ohio Stats., 77.) [Letter to Secretary of War protesting against Major Richardson's activity in Alaskan legislation.] JANUARY 20, 1910. Hon. J. M. DICKINSON, Secretary of War, Washington, D. C. SIR: On March 20 last the President approved an order issued by the Secretary of the Interior that Under the administration of Secretary Ballinger of the affairs relating to Territories the territorial officers will be expected to devote their time èxclu |