The Canton advocate. [volume] (Canton, D.T. [S.D.]) 1877-1897, 1884-12-11

partisan consideration or the SUBJECT.
With one accord the newspapers OF the
territory areindustrously engaged in moul
ding and solidifying the sentiment favor
ing division, and there is every reason tc
believe that nothing but division Will be
accepted by the people of the territory.
Coercion may be practiced in semi-Ameri-
canized sections where the era of free.
thought is as yet undeveloped, but the
submissive bump of the average Dakotaian
has been played to an extent admitting Of
no more forced favorableness to an issue,
and if the congress at Washington feels a
mite aggressive at present they may bet,
ter expend their exuberance on some
other section. There are few dude ed
ltors in the east at present engaged IN a
free gratis distribution of opinions, advis-
ing the people of Dakota to accept admis-
sion as whole, advancing the assertion
that Dakota knows not what is best
for her. This is not only rank advance
ment of self assumption but forward
movement toward the absolute subversion
of equality of opinion, dominant attempt
tor the suppression of CO. equality between
man and man. The inhabitants Of Dako-
ia unanimously demand division, and, ask
ing for admission as they are, will not ac-
cept the same without division. Dakota
is aware of just exactly what is necessary
for her future, and the attempt now being
made by the selt-assuming easterners to
admit her as whole is feature decided
ly beyond precedent. The absurdity of
the whole matter is really beyond reason.
Does the north dictate to the south as to
where certain county line should be es-
tablished? Does the state of Maine die
tate to the state of California as to wheth-
er the governors name should begin with
an A or an X? Does the state of Wis
consin dictate to the state of Texas where
the state capitol should be located, or
does one business man dictate the policy
of another? We believe not. Do the
newspapers of the city of New Orleans or
Washington intend to outline the future
Of Dakota, regardless of solidifed senti-
me1t in absolute opposition? 1t is this
sort of governmental administration in the
history of a territory that gives rise to the
question as to our perpetuacy as nation,
question as to whether territorial exist
ence is more acceptable than submission
to acknowledged anarchronism. Placed
ina position where no voice whatever is
allowed halfmillion people, we are COM
PEELED to accept their dictation no matter
how strongl ly we oppose or how disastrous
ly the measure may operate. We are a
part and parcel Of the United States,
amenable to the laws, governed by the
president, dominated over by certain Sec
tions and infested by carpet bag officials.
All this is borne with the usual compla-
cency; taxation without representation is
also remembered as feature undergone
during colonial days and overlooked for a
time, and territorial existence is forgotten
for moment in participating in the hur-
culanean movement for developmental
ascendancy. But the straws that crush
forbearance are the etfusionary restrict
ions attempting to discipline the democrat
ic congress into the idea of Dakota as a
whole, and, further, assuming dominant
dictatorship as to what the people wish.
1t is the decided climax of arrogancy, or a
visible display Of inexcusable ignorance
It is the talk Of a damphool or a dema-
gogue-an gnoramus or hypocrite. 1t
matters but little what the east or the
south may think about this division mat
ter. 1t is the people of Dakota that are
interested, and it is the people of Dakota
who will act. They will not accept ad-
mission without division, and this matter
may as we'll be presented right now as at
any time. The people of Dakota are not
nihilists, neither are they satisfied with
being subjects. They believe in equality,
and if they are refused that boon will
lie low and bodily eject from the territory
any disciple of inequality that shows his
face inside our borders. Mark that.