On
an autumn day in 1787, the Delegates to the national Constitutional Convention
met to sign the product of their minds and hands. Faces were grave as they approached
the final act of the historic gathering. The document had been hammered out in
the fires of great controversy. There were those who had serious objection to
many portions of it.
The oldest member of the Convention, a printer by trade and a statesman by
avocation, rose to address the meeting in this solemn moment. His body trembled,
for his 82 years were bearing heavily upon him. He had seldom spoken during
the months the group was in session, though his counsel had been evident in
informal conversation. But now Benjamin Franklin felt compelled to offer some
small advice to his colleagues. In a voice quivering with emotion, he urged
that all the Delegates affix their signatures to the document, whether they
approved all its individual features or not. The instrument of government was
not perfect, he said for “when you assemble a number of men to have the
advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all
their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests,
and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected?
It ... astonishes me to find this system approaching so near to perfection as
it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with confidence
to hear that our councils are confounded like those of the Builders of Babel
and that our States are on the point of separation, only to meet hereafter for
the purpose of cutting one another’s throats. Thus I consent to this Constitution
because I expect no better, and because I am not sure that it is not the best.
The opinions I have of its errors I sacrifice to the public good.’ And
so saying the Dean of the American Revolution urged unanimity in support of
the principles of the new government.
The Delegates to the national Constitutional Convention met during a hot summer
in Philadelphia. They came to that city by water, by stage, and by horseback.
Washington broke two axles on his coach traveling to the City of Brotherly Love.
The Delegates to the national convention were meeting to establish a government
for a fledgling nation.
The Delegates to the Alaska Constitutional Convention meet under far different
circumstances. The weather is colder; the means of transportation so different
that the men of Philadelphia could never have envisioned it in the most lofty
flights of their imagination. It is significant too that while the 55 who met
there were men, the democratic process has been extended through the years so
this, the latest and perhaps the last American constitutional gathering of its
kind is made up of 49 men and 6 women. Yet the burning desire of men to be free
and to govern themselves is present at both of these historic meetings so otherwise
separated in time and circumstances. Benjamin Franklin’s eloquent plea
for the democratic process echoes down through the years to the 8th of November
1955. You are men and women determined to meet the challenge of formulating
a Constitution for a new member of the American Federal Union.
As Delegates to the Convention which will write the fundamental law for the
State of Alaska, you have been told and will be told many times of the responsibilities
and problems which face you and which you alone can solve. Many different persons
and groups will be interested in seeing that you incorporate their views and
ideas into the Alaska Constitution. You, as Delegates to this Convention, must
judge the merits of the numerous proposals which are presented for your consideration.
In your individual capacities as Delegates and in your collective capacity
as a Convention you are charged with the writing of a document and the establishment
of a state government, which will, insofar as fallible human beings are capable,
be in the interests of all the people of Alaska. This is the challenge, which
confronts you; this is the challenge you must meet; here you are, each and every
one of you, marked out by destiny not only to confront the judgment of your
peers, your fellow citizens, but to have your names inscribed forever in Alaska
history. I congratulate you upon the honor, which is yours as the ones chosen
to accomplish this difficult task. I know you enter upon it with a deep sense
of humility.
The answer to the many problems and issues which face you will be forged in
the tradition of American democratic government. These answers are seldom of
the type which are obvious, or which are all black or all white. The issues
which face a democratic people are only occasionally susceptible of solutions
satisfactory to each and every one of the citizens of a state. Men of good will
may differ in many substantial respects on any given question of governmental
organization or powers.
The answers which are reached usually represent compromises between extreme
positions. The answers appear in varying shades of gray, rather than in stark
blacks and whites. Here, in this element of compromise, is the very essence
of the democratic process. Men covenant together that they will abide
by the decisions of the majority and support those decisions even though they
may have considerable misgivings about some of them.
You are very much aware of the problems which face you. You know, and you
have already discussed some of them previously with your friends and neighbors.
You, as Delegates, cannot escape the responsibility of establishing the broad
structure and powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of
our proposed government. The issue of the basic composition of local
government is a thorny one which must be met. You must write a charter of fundamental
liberties. These are important and vital issues. You will discuss them at length,
and you will, after mature consideration, reach conclusions regarding them.
At least two of these issues—the structure of the legislature and the
form of local government—may well consume endless hours of time in order
that you may arrive at the best solutions of which you are capable.
There is another problem of consequence to which I desire to direct myself
principally today. It is an issue which has not been much in the public eye.
There was almost no pre-Convention talk in Alaska about it. Yet fifty years
from now, the people of Alaska may very well judge the product of this Convention
not by the decisions taken upon issues like local government, apportionment,
and the structure and powers of the three branches of government, but rather
by the decision taken upon the vital issue of resources policy.
The various bills for statehood enabling legislation which have been introduced
in the Congress in recent years have uniformly called for large grants of land
from the United States public domain to be made to the State of Alaska. The
figure mentioned has been in excess of 100 million acres, an area roughly equal
to the total land area of the State of California. The 100 million acre figure
would appear to be approximately the figure which will finally be adopted.
The State of Alaska would choose almost all this acreage from the lands not
included in present federal reservations and withdrawals, or which is otherwise
unappropriated. The 100 million plus acres represent a veritable empire, a wealth
of land and resources never before conferred on any state, saving only Texas,
which, upon its entry into the Union, was allowed to retain all its public lands.
Alaska will receive also, in addition to the 100 million acre plus grant, an
uncounted but tremendous acreage of submerged lands, land which under decisions
of the Supreme Court of the United States have been held in trust for the future
state. These submerged lands include lands under the beds of navigable rivers,
lakes, and streams; the tidelands proper; and the submerged soils of the marginal
sea out to the three-mile limit.
These grants are to be conferred upon the new state in order that it may be
provided with a sound economic base for its future operations and activities.
The last states to enter the American Union did so in 1912. Government was far
simpler in those relatively uncomplicated times. The services provided by state
governments for the people were not so expensive as they are now and did not
require the large administrative staffs needed today. State governments in 1955
must provide a wide variety and array of services. Today’s citizen expects
and demands that government be not only a policeman but a service agency as
well. One may disagree with this philosophy but its existence and the extent
of its influence is an unarguable fact of modern life. So, extensive land grants
to the State of Alaska will be made in order that this new member of the United
States may start off in a sound fiscal position, capable of meeting the requirements
of service placed upon it by its citizens.
The story of Alaska natural resources has too often been one of exploitation
with very little of the great wealth extracted going to pay for necessary governmental
services and for the permanent development of a sound economy for the
people. The Kennecott Copper operation was typical of a 19th century Robber
Baron philosophy which still has its few advocates today. Copper in the value
of over $200 million was removed from the Chitina District; the area was high-graded
with ores of lesser value disregarded. The operation was shut down in 1938.
The tremendous production and investment left absolutely nothing of enduring
value for the Territory and its citizens except a small ghost town, which has
become a minor tourist attraction.
Alaska’s tradition of “boom and bust” communities is due
in no small measure to the hard, cold fact that mineral development was solely
for the purpose of exploitation with no concern for permanent and legitimate
growth. The decline of Alaska’s once great fisheries industry is traceable
in great degree to this same attitude with its concept of ruthless plundering
of a great natural resource without regard to the welfare of the mass of average
citizens who make their living from the sea.
Practically all of the states which entered the Union after the original Thirteen
have received grants of land from the federal domain. These grants were made
primarily in aid of the support of the common schools of the new states. It
is a sad but true fact of history that time and again these lands have been
disposed of at ridiculously low prices or have been the object of outright fraud
and corruption in government. The history of the land policy of the federal
government, too, is replete with incidents of speculation and peculation.
Alaska has experienced exploitation in the past, exploitation on a grand scale.
But the possibilities of future exploitation in the field of natural resources
are infinitely greater than any in times gone. All Alaskans are aware of the
great natural resource potential of this treasure house of nature. Upon assuming
statehood, Alaska becomes heir to 100 million acres of land and an additional
undetermined acreage of submerged lands. A very high percentage of these lands
will contain mineral resources of one kind and another.
Where such vast resources potential exists one need not be clairvoyant to
foresee an influx of interests wanting to develop these resources. Unfortunately
some of these interests will not be scrupulous in the choice of measures
to achieve their ends. Alaska is not unfamiliar with the activities and importance
of lobbies. But it is important to bear in mind that lobbying activity on a
scale never before seen will take place in the capital when Alaska becomes a
state.
This moment will be a critical one in Alaska’s future history. Development
must not be confused with exploitation at this time. The financial welfare of
the future state and the well being of its present and unborn citizens depend
upon the wise administration and oversight of these developmental activities.
Two very real dangers are present. The first, and most obvious, danger is that
of exploitation under the thin disguise of development. The taking of Alaska’s
mineral resources without leaving some reasonable return for the support of
Alaska governmental services and the use of all the people of Alaska will mean
a betrayal in the administration of the people’s wealth. The second danger
is that outside interests, determined to stifle any development in Alaska which
might compete with their activities elsewhere, will attempt to acquire great
areas of Alaska’s public lands in order NOT to develop them until such
time as, in their omnipotence and the pursuance of their own interests, they
see fit. If large areas of Alaska’s patrimony are turned over to such
corporations the people of Alaska may be even more the losers than if the lands
had been exploited.
There will be a perfectly normal and healthy desire, upon the assumption of
statehood, to get resources development going rapidly at any and all costs.
Reaction against the years of red tape imposed by the federal bureaucracy which
stifled development is quite natural and understandable. But in their eagerness
to get resources development, the people of Alaska should not lose sight of
the absolute necessity for long-range policy in the resources field. A degree
of caution and judgment exercised at the early stages of Alaska statehood, which
includes most basically the deliberations of this Convention, will be
repaid many-fold in true future development—not exploitation or non-use.
If the public domain of Alaska is frittered away without adequate safeguards,
the State of Alaska will wend a precarious way along the road that leads eventually
to financial insolvency.
The question of resources policy is not to be confined, of course, solely
to the issue of mineral policy. Upon statehood, Alaska becomes the master of
her own destiny on controlling the fisheries resources within her waters. Slavish
adherence to old concepts, concepts which have brought only depletion and portents
of ruin, will result only in the complete destruction of a once mighty industry.
While the major future wealth of Alaska may be underground, the fisheries and
marine resources of this area are matters of the highest importance and deserve
the most careful consideration by this Convention and by future state legislatures.
The water power potential of the State of Alaska is almost incalculable.
Cheap electricity is possible and with it broad scale development in industry
and minerals recovery. It is true that the federal government, because of its
authority over navigable waters, exercises a very great influence over policy
in the development of water power. Nevertheless, the new state must take
account of its interest in this important area of natural resources.
We must not forget to include the other resources of the soil. While agriculture
will probably never be as relatively important in the economy of the State of
Alaska as it has been in the economy of many of the states of the United States,
the pioneers of the plow have played a truly significant role in Alaska’s
growth in the past and will do so in the future. An important percentage of
the land, which Alaska will receive upon statehood, will be located in areas
where climate and soil, combined with hardy farmers, will produce agricultural
commodities for consumption in Alaska.
Forests, too, will be a part of Alaska’s patrimony. It is true
that much of the best commercial timberland is presently located in the Tongass
and Chugach National Forests. Such lands will not, with limited exceptions,
be available for choice by the new State of Alaska. Yet there are some
limited areas where the timber could be utilized for pulp wood or even, in some
instances, for saw timber.
Many states have included in their constitutions statements that the natural
resources of the state should be “developed for the benefit of the people”
of the state. Such pious generalities, without further concrete policy statements,
have proved wholly inadequate as effective barriers against dissipation of resources,
fraud, and corruption. Alaskans will not want, and above all else do not need,
a resources policy which will prevent orderly development of the great treasures
which will be theirs. But they will want, and demand, effective safeguards against
the exploitation of the heritage by persons and corporations whose only aim
is to skim the gravy and get out, leaving nothing that is permanent to the new
state except, perhaps, a few scars in the earth which can never be healed.
This Convention is charged, and is chargeable by future generations, with
the establishment of basic policy in the natural resources field. Such a responsibility
does not carry with it the duty of writing a resources code. Far from it. The
Convention would be doing itself’ and the people of Alaska a gross disservice
were it to undertake such a task. But the Convention should be aware that the
wealth of the future state, which is the means of its attaining greatness, is
in the hands of you, the Delegates. A failure to write into fundamental
law basic barriers to minimize fraud, corruption, non-development, and exploitation
may well be viewed fifty years from now as this Convention’s greatest
omission. No perfect system of safeguards can be devised. The ingeniousness
of man in interpreting constitutions and statutes to his own ends can
never be completely limited.
In the drafting of resources policy the Convention should not fear to consider
and adopt bold courses of action. No other state entering the Federal Union
has ever been so dependent upon its water and mineral resources. Never has the
issue of resources policy been so vital. Devising basic policy suitable to the
demand of this and future times may well require that older conceptions of resources
policy be drastically revised or even discarded.
We write on a clean slate in the field of resources policy. Only a minute
fraction of the land area is owned by private persons or corporations. Never
before in the history of the United States has there been so great an opportunity
to establish resources policy geared to the growth of a magnificent economy
and the welfare of a people.
There are those in Alaska and in the United States who have argued that Alaska
is not yet ready for statehood because its people lack “political maturity”.
I have not yet settled in my own mind that it is capable of precise definition.
But I do know that one aspect of maturity is the ability to manage one’s
resources. This Convention can demonstrate to the Congress and the people of
the United States at least this aspect of political maturity by giving notice
that Alaska’s resources will be administered, within the bounds of human
limitations and shortcomings, for the benefit of all of the people.
Difficult though your task may be, you are particularly fortunate in that
you are the inheritors of an accumulated experience and wisdom in the
production of written constitutions not matched by any other nation in history.
Above all, you will have before you always the shining and stellar example
of our Federal Constitution.
They—its authors—resolutely refrained from legislating for the
generations to come; instead, they threw out the guidelines which have served
ever since as such perfect markers.
Noting the perfection of the first American constitution you the delegates
may surely draw inspiring guidance from the greatness of our past.
It was long ago, in 1819, that Chief Justice John Marshall wrote those words
whose common sense is as persuasive now as then: “A constitution, to contain
an accurate detail of all subdivisions of which its great powers will admit,
and all the means by which they may be carried into execution, would partake
of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human
mind. It probably would never be understood by the public. Its nature, therefore,
requires that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects
designated, and the minor ingredients which composed those objects be deduced
from the nature of the objects themselves.”
And as you the delegates seek to establish here in Alaska those great outlines
we the people will hope and pray for your success. We know you assemble here
not as partisans in any cause except that of writing the very best constitution
of which you are capable. It may be—and probably will be -the last American
constitution to be written in the creation of a new state. Let it be informed
by man’s noblest instincts and let it be seen by all the world as a demonstration
of democracy’s intellectual as well as moral superiority over any other
form of government on this earth.
