OCR Text |
Show FIGHTING THE ADMISSION OF STATES In its "Progress of the "World," the Current Review of-Reviews discusses the. admisison of new states and closes with these words: "The mistakes mis-takes of the past in the admisison of crude territories terri-tories render it the more necessary that the future fu-ture creation of states should be well considered, free, from temporary exigencies of partisanship, and, above all, freefrom the scandalous taint of " private interests." If asked to give a lucid idea of what ho means in the foregoing, we suspect the learned editor would have nothing to say except to repeat some worn out and meaningless platitudes and some stale and idiotic provincialisms. What does he mean by "crude territories?" How does he think the men of any territory that has been admitted during the past few years would compare, per capita, cap-ita, in all the attributes that make good citizenship citi-zenship with the gentlemen who recently elected Mr. McClellan Mayor of Greater New York? Again has any state been admitted since the original thirteen, that partisanship did not have a great deal to do with engineering it into the union? As to "private interests" and "scandalous taints," to what does the learned editor refer? That in most of the states recently admitted, the people were ardent advocates of the restoration restora-tion of silver money to the place given it in the Constitution of the United States? If that is the cause of his prejudice, how does he know that they were not right and that he is dead wrong? Again, was it to further the interests of the people or was it the scandalous work of a few private thieves that caused the law of 1873 to be passed by stealth, thus consummating the most gigantic spoliation ever perpetrated by legislation in this Republic? But there is another point of view from which the question of the admission of states should be considered. When a territory possesses the population and the property necessary to carry on a state government; govern-ment; Avhen there is no question of the loyalty, patriotism or intelligence of such a people, by what right under our laws does Congress hold such a people in leading strings? By what theory of a Republican form of Government does Congress Con-gress fill the offices of such a territory with residents resi-dents of other states, often with men utterly unfit un-fit for the positions and sent out for no purpose except tri pay old political debts of Congressmen or to remove troublesome constituents where they can prey upon strangers? By what rjght are H hundreds of thousands of Americans, vastly more- H Intelligent in the aggregate, than the same num- H ber picked at random from any eastern state, de- H hied self-government and all participation, in the M election of Presidents or in helping to shape the , B legislation of the country over regions of which IB the average eastern Congressman knows nothing? iB , Surely the provincial press of the east ought H to find some new arguments to justify their oppo- M sition to the admission of new states. 9 But the Review of Reviews finally attempts to M give some reasons for its opposition. The first M is "the great national protest against the seating B of Mr. Smoot, the Mormon apostle Senator from B Utah." What of that? There were quite as sharp B protests against the seating of Mr. Cannon as a B delegate in the House of Representatives more B than ttventy years ago. Moreover the question be- B hind Mr. Smoot and which arouses the protests, , B is one which should be the direct concernment of B the representatives of every state of the Republic, B for Its goes directly to the most vital principle on B which the Republic rests the principle of the ab- B solute separation of Church and State in the gqv-' B ernment of our country. B "The decline of Nevada" is another reason ad-' H vanced against the admisison of new states. That H is pointless, for the reason that no other such H circumstances can ever again govern as governed B the admission of Nevada. Congress had to have a H two-thirds or three-fourths majority of the states B to carry through the legislation needed to meet ' H the exigencies which were presented by the great H War. Again at that time, Nevada was supplying' H the gold and silver needed to maintain the credit " M of the nation". Moreover, it was cursed by United ' M States Judges, which had been .picked up to pay M political debts and sent west, who had no more H conception of the laws which should govern in M the tremendous cases brought before them than' M so many Chimpanzees, and some of whom were ' M so corrupt that they got to selling their decisions M in advance to both plaintiffs and defendants'.; M Then Nevada is not at present declining; rather, ' !H it is coming rapidly to the front as one of the great H mining states of the Union. Moreover, from the ' B first it has been represented In Congress by as- B able men as any other state. Then Montana is B cited as a place where "copper kings hold sway, B and where popular self-government seems to have B become the merest farce." B Admit that for argument's sake, but does that B compare with the gold kings in New York City? B The operations of tle copper kings are confined to B Montana, but more than once the heavy money in- B terests of New York City, working on the material B of the slums, have decided Presidential elections. B Was it a mistake to include New York with the fl original thirteen states? H The Review of Reviews thinks it would have :H been better to have continued the executive and judicial rule of Montana under a territorial form fl of government. That would have saved the "cop- fl per kings" vast sums of money, for the imported I officers would have sold out vastly cheaper than fl residont officers, whose homes and interests are H all in the state. fl The Review of 'Reviews should keep in mind fl that there is very little difference among American fl ' JB |