Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1885-10-16

1
Once more, in the same columns,
March ID, referring to the south Dakota
members of the legislature:
They want separation and statehood for south
Dakota, and we ought to do all in our power to
| help them.
DO these things 60 to prove that
north Dakota had no chance to express
herself on the important question?
have tried to find all the argument
in favor of admission as a whole that
have been put fourth, and the principle
one seems to be that Dakota would
make "a glorious empire state" should
she go into the union as she stands to-
day.
Does mere area constitute an lnfluen-
tial state? Then Texas, with 265, 600
square miles and her eleven members of
congress, ought to outweigh New York
with her $4,000 square miles and thirty
four members OF congress, or Pennsyl-
wants with her 5000 square miles and
her twenty EIGHT members IN the coun-
ellis of the nation. Then California, with
her $4,000 square miles and her six rep
resentatives ought to make little Ohio
with her A, 900 square miles and her
twenty-one representatives kick the
beam. Or Nevada, with her 110,700
square miles and her lone congressman,
ought to knock out little Rhody, with
her 1880 square miles and her two
members of the lower house, IN one
round.
Such comparisons, which might be
continued through the entire list of
states, clearly prove the absurdity OF this
argument.
The area OF the proposed state is about
$4,000 square miles, and its population is
nearly 265. 600. The area of Colorado is
lO3, 600 square miles, but che will never
have the density of settlement that
south Dakota has. Next to her comes
Oregon, with $4,000, Nebraska, Kansas
and Minnesota with 10000, $1,000 and
$4,000 square miles respectively, while
the average Of all the rest, leaving out
the half dozen pocket boroughs in the
east and south, Is below $1,000 square
miles. Does anyone hear of Iowa being
walked over in a national convention, or
Michigan, or Wisconsin, or Indiana?
Again, it may be argued that it is
cheaper to run one large state than two
small ones. This is not fair PROPOSE
ton, for good government and economi-
cal management are not a question of
square miles. Yet I will consider it.
California, with $4,000 area, has state
tax of forty-fiye cents on $l00. Mime
sofa and Iowa, where the conditions are
largely the same as in Dakota, pay l3
cents and rs cents respectively, and
Michigan pays but IL cents. Oregon,
with 81, 600 area, Is taxed 56 cents on the
Sl0C, while New York, more than half as
large, pays but fraction over 20 cents.
Yet do not claim for these figures any
thing except that they utterly upset the
"big state" theory, and leave the field
clear to consider the division question
on its merits. The density of popula-
ton and the future possibility of growth
must be taken into account. At present
south Dakota has in round numbers
l0o,OCO more people than the north,
though the latter has the advantage of a
trans Missouri railroad, and her
available area is not abridged
by numerous Indian reservations,
Sne has had the same opportunities to
secure settlers as the south, and yet her
proportion of unoccupied lands is much
greater. On the other hand, with the
opening OF the reservation opposite
Pierre and Chamberlain, and the extern
sion Of one OF the two lines of road now
waiting at the Missouri river, it will be
only question OF few years when the
waste land in south Dakota will be con-
fined to the locality Immediately north
of the Black Hills. 1t may be urged
that the proportion of increase in popu-
iatlon is mach greater in north than
IN south Dakota as shown by the recent
census. lake out of account the old
4 county OF southeast Dakota and let the
two sections stand on an equal footing.
and 1t will be seen that the dispropor-
tion is the other way.
have not touched upon the political
phases OF this question at all, for it
would be equally humiliating to admit
either that south Dakota, with two
thirds majority in representation, can
not hold her own against the superior
discipline of the northern iorc.s, or
that certain newly-made subdivision
called central Dakota is willing to have
the state 60 in as whole because it
sees the possibility of more profitable
combinations under such condition.
This latter idea, l am satisfied, is be-
ing considered in certain localities, but
when the people take their thinking in
to their own hands, they will soon see
now short-slghted policy it would
evolve. Neither am l one of those who
take it for granted that a demo-
| cratic congress will not listen
Tor moment to any sugges-
ton of division. The admis-
sion OF Dakota has never yet become
party issue. Ihe only objection raised
in 1882 was because Of the Yankton
county railroad bond muddle, though
Senator Vest did insinuate in the same
connection that the population OF l75,-
600 claimed at that time was padded.
| These objections can no longer be
urged. The bond matter has been
amicably adjusted, and democratic
administration by allowing the claim of
the territory for over $4,000, the govern
ments share of the expense of the re-
cent census, has said that it vas correct.
ly taken.
The time has come to meet this issue
fairly and sqnarely. Il is not
new one, nor is it pre-
sented to the public in any but an
honest light. Every section of the ter
ritory has expressed itself through its
representatives in legislatures and con-
ventions and its press in unmistakable
terms, and it is sheerest demagogery to
assert that the people have had no
voice in the matter. Let south Dakota
adopt the constitution and elect her
state officers by such q majority that
congress will know she is In earnest.
Then it the question of division be SUBJ
mltted to the whole territory to vote on
let that majority be rolled up again. and
with the large vote that will go with it
from north Dakota, the present oppos-
ers OF the measure will realize beyond q
question that the people" have spoken.
l