Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1885-08-07

nor, secretary, and judges, and the gov
ernor who is paid and employed not BY
the territory. but by the general gov.
ernment, appoints our territorial officers.
The territory of Dakota has built and
is maintaining penitentiary IN each
section of the territory, an insane
asylum and university for each Da-
kota, besides other public institutions.
But every ono of these institutions must
be run by officers appointed by your
governor.
Not dollar of the territory's own
money can be disbursed except by your
appointees or sub-appointees.
There is, then, such thing as terri.
torial vassalage, and Dakota presents
to-day the anomalous spectacle of q
a state disfranchjsed.
There is another phase of this ques-
tion to which ask your attention. The
enemies of Dakota claim that when she
is admitted it must be as whole; that
the rapid increase of states in the north.
west is dangerous to the older states.
In other words, they seek to jngraft mp
on our American system maxim of
European politics, to wit, the equilib-
rum OF power.
We are cited to the case of Texas.
Let us compare Texas with Dakota, if
you please.
The facts briefly recited are these {:
The unity of Texas is not constrained
one, and that Texas is the outgrowth of
a different civilization.
We have brought with us to this ter
ritory the ideas of the northern and
middle states.
We have been educated to believe
hat tkNov = =
the safer are the liberties of the people,
and that our republican institutions are
safer while the power is distributed
among fifty medium.slzsd states, instead
OF being concentrated practically in the
hands of few populous and
wealthy empires that have grown up to
q vast estate by virtue Of their inn.
mense area of agricultural land.
would ask YOU. as q citizen of Della.
ware, to view this came question from
another standpoint.
Suppose the theory of large states the
size OF Texas and Dakota should obtain.
1t would require no prophetic eye to
foresee the dangers possible to the small
states in the future.
The possibility of such state of
things was what your fathers and mine
contended against in the formation of
the government.
Possibly the enemies to the division
OF Dakota are in favor of few power.
tul and imperial states rather than the
older and safer plan.
Dakota has now an area OF 150, ,93i
square miles. When divided each Dor.
ton will have about 75,C00 square miles
equal to twenty-four states like Della.
ware, and larger than any one of thirty
of the present states in the union.
There was time, MIR. Bayard, when
not remote ancestor of yours preferred
the welfare of his country to the appar.
ent success of party. There was time
when you rose above caucus tramels
and pronounced in favor OF honest gov.
eminent.
We descended from the same race you
did; we left our eastern homes suppos-
ing We had surrendered none of our con.
stitutional rights and privileges as citi-
zens of the United States. Many of us
still have fathers and brothers in the
states we have left.
1t has been the uniform policy of con-
gress to admit new states when the pop
ulatlon should reach about 100000.
| More territories have been admitted
with less than that population than over
| The proposed state OF Dakota-that
portion of territory south of the divid-
Ing llne--now has population, accord
ing to the last census, OF 250,O0O.
The only territory which had over
1900 population when admitted was
| Wisconsin, and that was caueed not by
any fault OF Congress, the first constitu.
ton having been rejected by the people
| I will not pureue this inonirv fnrthar
hut ask you to reflect that you are now
on trial. The next generation will de.
termlne whether you were stateman OF
mere partisan politician from your
ability and courage to grspple just such
questions as this.
With feelings Of profound respect,
subscribe myself your obedient serv.
ant. A CITIZEN OF DAKOTA.