Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1886-03-04
LUUNsBERRY INTERVIEWED,

A Truthful Account OF the Dakota
situation-Ordway to spend the
Balance of his Life in Washington
Fighting our Measures.
Duluth Herald.
Col. Lounsberry, of Dakota, is in the
city devoting some spare tune to pre-.
pairing an illustrated article on Duluth
for "Ihe Northwest the well known
monthly magazine of which e. V.
Smalley is editor. Col. Leunsberry is
well known to the people of Duluth on
account of the prominent part which he
has taken in the public affairs of Da-
kosa where he went after serving with
credit In the union army. He is
graphic writer and an entertaining
talker as may be judged from the fol-
| lowing interview which an Evening
Herald reporter had with him last even
ing relative to Dakota and his impress
sion of Duluth.
| Reporter-Is Dakota likely to be di-
vided at this session of congress, Col?
| ACol. Lounsberry-There is good rea-
son to hope that 1t may be. There are
many democrats in the house, who, If
left to themselves will vote for division.
| Twenty-Five members were pledged to
vote for the Dakota bill three years ago
but they were whipped into line by Sam
Randall and the caucus. Randall pro-
fessed to believe that If the bill was
taken from its place on the calendar
that 1t would be 80 amended as TO admit
the southern portion as state, but ID
the republicans could pass it in any
form they wished, Qf the rules were sus-
pended) the slaughter of the bill was
ordered by the democratic caucus. 1t
was not tho division of Dakota then
that was feared. 1t was the admission
OF the southern portion.
R-Wby do you hope for division
now?
L.-Because by conceding division an
excuse is afforded for refusing admis.
sion of either section, and il admission
Montana and Washington territory
Twenty democratic votes is all we
need. We had them three years ago;
we think we have them now.
! R.-But you do not regard Washing
ton territory as demooratic2
Il Live will not. dispute the claims o.
, the democrats, or even seek to throw
cold water on their hopes-until aftel
admission is secured-either as to Mon
tana or Washington territory, and arr
perfectly wiling for them to claim nortl
Dakota il they can find comfort in 81
: doing.
K-Is there not considerable oppo
sition IN Dakota to divlsion2
L.-No, sir. If an attempt is mad
, to bring Dakota in as state withou
l division it will be voted down. Th'
3 people of the north have no relations o
business nature with the people of tn
south. They do not meet them at 81
Paul, Minneapolis or Duluth becaus
the trade of the south seeks more south
# ern markets by southern lines of trave
9 Wedo rot need them except in tn
Iegi stature or in political cnventiont
and then only to struggle for the Pre-
9 lection of our rights or through combl
b nation to beat them out Of theirs. W
4 would prefer annexation to Minnesot
; to admission without division, ant
they'd stay out in the cold for twent.
: years rather than warm @their shlns b.
: our tireside. Why the southern member
q of the legislature last yea
lalmost to man refused to attend com
plimentary reception and banquet ter
J! dered them by the citizens of Bismarcl
l. Some OF them refused to ride in fire
% busses to the capital and were 30 ma
!. they wouldn't pay their fare, SO the
hoofed it back and forth from the cap
j. tai all winter cursing the north an
70 praying for division.
1t R.-But number of leading Dakot