Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1882-02-02
ADMISSION,

Brentz till to admit this Territory
is being opposed by A'nsle and other
territorial delegates for the reason that
the proposition to annex the Northern
Idaho counties to Washington is bad
precedent, that will cause q wholesale
grabbing after additional territory
among Territories for the purpose of
admission and thus work injustice to
the weaker, less populous Territories.
This is an unfortunate predicament
for Washington; and if compromise
cannot be made, Mr.. Brentz should
modify his bill, leaving out the dis
puted territory from the boundaries of
the proposed state. He should not
allow any sectional feeling of his own
or of his constituents to stand in the
way of admission, on the ground that
the accession of greater dominion to
Eastern Washington cannot at the
same time be obtained by annexing the
three northern counties of Idaho.
Washington is ready for admission and
should be admitted without those
counties Vancouver Register.
The above is just why We objected
to Brentz introducing an enabling act,
instead of reintroducing his bill for
the admission of the state under the
constitution already adopted, and re-
lying upon a subsequent amendment
to cure any minor defect that it con-
tanned. The sense Of the people of
the eastern portion of Washington
and much the greater part of the
western portion, as we'll as of the con-
vention which framed the constitution
adopted was that the northern coun-
ties Of Idaho should be included.
There was an element in that conven.
ton which was so much in earnest for
the admission of the State early, that
they commended that the constitution
under which the State asked admission
should be so framed and submitted to
the people for their adoption, that in
case objections should be raised to ad-
hitting the northern counties of Ida
ho, that Congress could drop these
northern counties and be admit
ted under it without them, and with.
out resubmission to tho votes of the
people. This the delegate from North
Idaho opposed, as placing it in the
power Of any person in Congress to
raise that objection, and thus defeat
not only the wish of the whole Of
North Idaho, but of most of the pco-
pie Of Washington i'll regard to en-
bracing the counties mentioned, and
the constitution was so framed that
there couldnot lie an admission under.it
leaving out North Idaho, without send
ing it back to vote of the people for
ratification. The convention thought
that under all the circumstances the
Washington delegates should stand by
North Idaho in her wishes. Their
acts were fully ratified by the vote of
the people on the question Of adoption.
As the representative of the people,
Brentz should have stood to the last
by that constitution, and persistently
demanded admission under it, true,
could he succeed in securing the passage
Of his enabling act embracing the
boundaries as introduced, all would be
well, for the people Of both Washing.
ton and North Idaho would over-whelnl-
ingly adopt good constitution framed
under it. But the policy he has pur.
sued under Shsrpstein's legislative bill
has made Ainslie's foolish aud silly OBJ
lection much more formidable than i,
otherwise would have been, and Aims
lie knows this, and has taken advant
age of it, and Brentz, knowing that
the people of Washington are very
anxious to become q State soon, and
be himself may be 30 anxious to &C
complish its admission that no msy, t.
remove Ainslie's objection, suffer 4,
change Of boundaries that will leav,
North Idaho out in the cold. As
matter Of course, we, the people o
North Idaho, have looked to Brentz t,
stand by us to the last, despite an,
objection Aiuslie and South Idah,
might urge, for no man can say tina
Ainslie is representative OF the PEG
pie of North Idaho in any sense upo,
this question. Twelve hundred an,
sixteen votes out Of twelve hundre,
and forty-one votes, the whole numt Q
polled in North Idaho at the last cleo