THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box 61H
$1.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAH
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER.Editor*.
Entered as second class matter October 14. 1943, at the postoffn'*
at Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Wednesday, January 15, 1947
Union Leader Thinks Straight
(Rocky Mountain News)
(FOUND, AT LAST: A union leader who can read the
handwriting on the wall. And who undertakes intelli
gently to do something about it.
Charles J. MacGowan, president of the AFL Brother
hood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders and Helpers,
offers his co-operation in studying and drafting legisla
tion designed to minimize strikes without outlawing
them. Mr. MacGowan thinks it is not smart to stand in
the middle of the road and shout “No” to all suggestions
for change in labor laws.
That’s something Bill Green, Phil Murray and the
other more vocal union leaders haven’t learned. They
oppose any change, even to dotting an “i” or crossing a
“t.” They’re trying to cling to their special privileges,
just as the Wall Street operators, railroad monopolists
and tycoons of industry tried to cling to theirs a few
years ago. And as the Anti-Saloon League crowd tried,
to hold fast to prohibition long after public opinion had
swung against it. If Messrs. Green and Murray persist
in their defiance, the same thing will happen to them
that happened to the others. They’ll get run over by an
oxcart.
Anyone who read the election returns must know
that there is going to be some kind of change in the la
bor laws. If the changes aren’t drafted by those who are
friendly to labor, the job will be done by those who are
unfriendly. To denounce as “anti-labor” even such de
monstrably necessary reforms as balancing the Wagner
Act and breaking up union monopolism can only result
in exhausting the patience of the moderates in Congress,
driving them into the camp of those who would throw
moderations to the winds.
The cause of unionism will be better served if more |
union leaders follow Mr. MacGowan and co-operate
with the inevitable.
Our Russian Policy As Elliott Sees It
(The Denver Post)
IN RUSSIA AND POLAND Elliott Roosevelt appar
ently found an atmosphere congenial to his views. One
got the picture of an expansive vanity, backing in the
warmth of audiences enthusiastic to hear such expres
sions from an American.
It was easy to understand the enthusiasm of his re
ception. As the missionary of a policy even more naive
than that of Henry Wallace in accepting Russian aims,
Elliott was a natural celebrity. All the more so because
Russians may, with equal naivete, have believed there
was something official about his mission. Simple folk
who themselves know of no such right to criticize theirj
own nation are bound to think Elliott represents a pow
erful section of American opinion. Russian propagan
dists certainly will make full use of his pronouncements,
just as they plan to circulate translations of his highly
pro-Russian book, “As He Saw It.”
It is most noteworthy that Elliott, in the weeks since
his amazing speech at a Moscow reception, has never
really repudiated the remarks credited to him. Among
other things, he is reported to have said that Soviet Rus
sia has never broken its word, whereas the United
States and Britain had repeatedly welshed on their
pledges at Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam. The climax, it is
reported, was his challenging question: “Can anyone
here name one instance in which the United States has
acted to further the cause of peace?” He gave his own
answer—that the United States has acted from “purely
PULLING OVER TO THE CURB
__ Ul» Jl .1 ' JJ 1 t 1 '
selfish and imperialistic reasons.”
Elliott’s only apology for these statments was that it
was a “put-up job,” that the questions asked had been
designed to “bait” him and that the account of his
speech in an American magazine was faulty “because it
does not carry the story in full.” He has not denied that
he made the remarks, and it is difficult to see what pos
sible context could make them less offensive.
Elliott Roosevelt has traded heavily on his preten
sions to having been his father’s confidant. One of the
late President’s closest advisers, Adolph A. Berle, Jr.,
however, sharply disputes the interpretations of Roose
velt foreign policy in Elliott’s book. Writing in a maga
zine article, Berle comments:
“ . . . One would suppose, from reading it, that Roose
velt was fighting a war against Great Britain, and that
his main object was to agree with any claim the Soviet
Union might put forward.
“The fact is that Elliott saw little of his father after
Christmas, 1944. He never saw him at all at or after the
Yalta conference, where the President was engaged in
a last, heroic attempt to harmonize the views of the
three great powers.
“It is a passionate perversion of the truth to try to
picture President Roosevelt as leading a Russian party
as against a British party ...”
Perhaps even more pertinent is the carefully restrain
ed comment of Eleanor Roosevelt written in the preface
to her son's book:
“1 am quite sure that many of the people who heard
many of the conversations recorded herein, interpreted
them differently, according to their own thoughts and
beliefs.”
From Elliott’s own mother there is thus the strong
suggestion that he has construed his father’s words ac
cording to his own lights. Eleanor-Roosevelt, who has
earnestly denounced Russian disregard of human rights
obviously does not agree. Nor will the millions of Amer
icans whe revere the memory of Franklin D. Roosevelt
as a champion of democracy.
NWA Breakwater
I
Committee Gives
Recommendations
—
At a regular meeting on Janu
ary 14th, the Northwestern Alaska
Chamber of Commerce accepted
by motion the report with its
recommendations submitted by the
Breakwater Committee, and urged
immediate action on the recom
mendations summarized in the
report.
Report of the Committee on Break
water or Sea Wall for the City of
Nome, Alaska
In a letter from Mr. George
Sundborg of the Alaska Develop
ment Board, dated September 26,
1946, to Mr. A. Polet, their mem
ber from this area, Mr. Sundborg
relates an informal conversation
between himself and Colonel Clark
and Colonel Hewitt of the United
States Army Engineers.
According to this letter, a mat
ter of vital importance to the City
of Nome had been neglected or
overlooked by our City Council.
The letter states in part: “Colonel
Hewitt informed us that no re
quest was made at the hearing”—
the jetty extension hearing—“for
a parallel breakwater on one of
the outer shoals, a project which
you people there had discussed in
advance of the hearing with Col
onel Clark. Colonel Hewitt sug
gests that if the C ty ,j
sires consideration of such a ore.i ;-w
water parallel to the beat- i,
City should address a letter to him
| requesting htat the hearing be re*
I opened.”
1 our Committee has met with
mcmoers of the Council anu u, ged
mem io request a reopening oi „ae
i nearing. Members of the v,uy
| eouncu were working upon our
■ request wnen our latest storm oc
cureu wmch caused tne loss oi two
I iives of two of our prominent
I
ousniess men anu suen severe
I aamage to property that a wire
was u.spalched to various Govern-*
| rnent oificuls, including Colonei
; newitt, requesting aid in either
buiiuing a parallel breakwater or
, moving the City. Due to the fact
mat mere were two separate plans
J uemg sponsored by the Chamber
anu otner groups and individuals,
the City Council of Nome did not
make a specific request for a
parallel breakwater in accord with
tne suggestion of Colonel Hewitt.
Our City Council received re
plies to tneir wired request i'or aid
from the different officials appeal
ed to. In evey instance the City
council was assured that their re
quest was receiving consideration
and that everything possible would
oe none in behalf of the City of
Nome. Especially was Colonel
Iiewitt’s response most encourag
ing. In his reply to the City of
Nome and in his communication
witn the Alaska Development
Board as related by Mr. Sundborg
at a recent meeting of this Cham
ber, he clearly indicated his ex
pert opinion of the cause and the
remedy. In an unofficial statement
made by him sometime ago, which
should have been heeded as a pre
diction and a warning by the City
of Nome, Colonel Hewitt expre.>-y
ed the following opinion ‘‘that he
doubted whethey the jetty exten
sion, which was requested recent
yl at a hearing here, could ever be
| a feasible project for the reason
j that it would hasten the erosion of
' the beach east of the present jetty
j and cause the whole section to be
washed away much earlier than
would be the case if the jetties
[ were left at their present length.”
i Under the direction of Colonel
! Hewitt, aerial photogranhs taken
by the U. S. Engineers show plain
ly that the beach east ol the jetty *
and directly in front of the entire
| business section of the City ia re
| ceding and the sea is moving far
; ther in with each succeeding
storm. By comparing these photo
graphs taken with others of a few
I years ago it can clearly be seen
I tnat tiie beach is eroding from the
east side of the jetty and is being
deposited on the west side. This
erosion is caused, according to
Colonel Hewitt, with whom your
I Committee heartily agrees, by cur
' rents or eddies created by the
Government owned jetties. The
increasing speed of erosion as
shown by our last storm bears out
the soundness of Colonel Hewitt’s
judgment. As the beach recedes
the stationary jetties remain, 4
thereby creating the same condi
tion as would have been had the
jetties been extended. Obviously
unless something is done to pre
vent it, the whole area will be
washed away and Nome, one of
the most famous cities in the
world, for its size, will have been
eliminated.
Colonel Hewitt’s efforts and
concern in behalf of the City of
Nome have not been confined to
merely ascertaining the cause, but
he also has devised and recoitvf
mended a remedy. We of Nome'
are fortunate indeed to have such
an able official interested in our
welfare. His plane is that a break