ALASKA FORUM

ALASKA FORUM ALASKA FORUM
(OFFICIAL PAPER)
FORUM PUBLISHING COMPANY James B. Wingale. Editor and Manager Subscriptions: The Alaska Forum delivered One year, $10; six months. $5.00. in advance, one month. $1 4 Advertisinr rates bfl application Address all

communications to the Alaska Forum Rampart.

Correspondents are requested to sign their nameto all communications not necessarilly for publication, but as evidence of good faith. No attention paid to anonymous communications. SATURDAY, JANUARY 14, 1905. ALASKA coast papers mention Judge Day’s investigation of Governor Brady as having been carried solely on the line of inquiry as to Brady’s moral turpitude, and entirely ignoring anything pertaining to the-merits or demerits of his administrative executive ability. The excuse is given, by those who accompanied Day on his tour of Alaska, for the "investigator" acting this line, is that the president did not consider the office of governor of sufficient importance to justify a rigid investigation into the present incumbent’s executive ability. That were the governor’s administrative executive powers increased by congress, Brady’s application for re-appointment would receive very little consideration. Such reasons are poor excuses for the endorsement of Brady by Day; a man to govern as intelligent a class of people as Alaskans, the majority of whom were American citizens long before the starting up of the great Brady-Wickersham political mill for the grinding out of citizens and voters. Indications all point clearly to the fact that Day's investigation of Governor Brady, throughout Alaska was about as thorough as it was on the Yukon touching Judge Wickersham. We would like to hear the excuse, as given by Day’s touring companions, for his refusal to investigate the judicial affairs of the Rampart court center. If Judge Day’s- Investigation of Judge Brown and Marshal Richards was as careless and flimsy, in their separate divisions, as it was of the officials on the Yukon, the corruption of those men must have been something awful to cause Day to censure and recommend these officials be turned out, and at the time retain in office such men as Judge Wickersham, Commissioner S. Lindley Green, and Deputy marshal George Dreibelbis of this division who are publicly known to be unreasonably corrupt. It appears that the old saying, "there must be a nigger in the wood-pile," is applicable to this case. It is claimed by some of the Wickersham organs in this division, that Judge Day deserves great credit and praise for the way he conducted the investigation with ref erence to the charges filed against Judge Wickersham. There is no disputing this from a Wickersham standpoint, but there is from a right and justice point of view. It is claimed that "Day earnestly and without fear or favor made the investigation and honestly reported his findings;’ this statement Is not true so far as the ‘‘favor’’ part is concerned, for we personally know that Day favored Judge Wickersham by refusing to receive testimony as to facts detrimental to a recommendation for reappointment, and if he honestly: reported his findings, he must have omitted his duty in refusing to investigate Rampart Court Center. If Judge Wickersham’s record was such that it could bear this close examination and remain unsoiled," why were such methods adopted to prevent and foil an investigation of the illegal and corrupt action of Federal officials at this place? The statement is true that, "a Judge to maintain his dignity and preserve his usefulness as a Judge must banish from his mind all prejudice and personal feelings thus qualifying himself for the faithful performance of his duty.’’ But, Judge Wickersham is not such a man, he fully demonstrated this failing in many ways during the July, 1903, term of court at Rampart. In the case of Hugo Schmidt vs Commissioner J. Lindley Green, action for $2,000 damages for false imprisonment; Judge Wickersham refused to wait one minite for a stenographer to be brought into the court room for the purpose of taking the proceedings, thereby preventing an official record of the action of the court. At the conclusion of the testimony of the witnesses for the plaintiff, Judge Wickersham, without motion from counsel, ordered a member of the jury to step forward from the jury-box and sign, as foreman, a verdict for the defendant which the court had already prepared. The juror complied with the court’s compulsory order, and Judge Wickersham announced judgment for the defendant.

TheHotel Florence THE ONLY FIRST CLASS HOUSE

Fine Wines and Liquors BILLIARDS POOL THE BEST ACCOMODATIONS Furnished Rooms STABLES For A.H. $1.50 . Per Night Horses And MAYO Dogs illegal and unjust action of Judge Wickersham in the criminal proceedings against Jack Mennus for robbing the Eagle Mining Company’s strong-box.

This case was fully set out in the issue of this paper of Dec. 8, and -is on the same lines as his action in the Schmidt vs Green case, and was exactly the illegal methods as used by Judge Cook of the California bench. Cook in January, 1903. instructed a jury in his court to acquit a defendant The supreme court held it at error; that through the judge might "advise" the jury to acquit he had exceeded his authority in instructing them to do so. and ordered that the matter be resubmitted to the same jury. We wonder what the court of appeals would do about Judge Wickersham's actions in the Jack Mennus and Commissioner J. Lindley Green cases.

LAST Wednesday evening at 6:42 o’clock, while the editor was joyously klinking the type, a citizen of Rampart visited the office and kindly volunteered the following: ‘If you ever refer to me in any way in your paper—I WILL KILL you! Do you understand? I WILL KILL you!!" As only the two were present when this blood-thirsty language was hurled, the matter will probably rest. The old adage, ‘a barking dog is worse than his bite,’’ is peculiarly apt in this case.

WHILE we of Alaska are enjoying the mildest winter in the memory of white men—33 years, the people in the states are freezing. The Erie weather observer reports the heaviest snowfall since the office established—33 years. Looks as if the poles were on the change and Alaska the coming winter resort.