The DeSmet leader. (DeSmet, Kingsbury Co., Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1891, 1886-05-29
Statehood.
Rcyueld Journal.

people of Dakota. They would not i
they could Il think | am well advised
precipitate action and then rely upon
the people to stand by them and pusl
it through. No danger exists of an,
attempt by Judge Campbell, or tina
large and energetic body of Dakot;
men who sympathize with the forwar,
movement, to commit the people b.
any act Of theirs, but they do deSir,
that the whole people Of Dakota shal
understand their own legal status. tina
! they shall realize the danger to cOnsti
tutional liberty which to-day exists a.
the result of the tendency on the par
of the general government to encroacl
with its irresistible power upon tn,
rights of the citizen, and they desire
that the people shall be induced t
move forward and make an issue upon
! this question Of legal right to self-gov
ernment.
The general government seldom
manifests desire to admit new States
The people Of the proposed State dc
the work; they press upon Congress
Some have sought an enabling act, and
nearly as many have prepared THEN
constitution and, fully equipped as a
State, presented their members of each
house Of Congress at Washington and
respectfully demanded admission to the
Union. Dakota has adopted the latter
course. She, however, in order To pre-
vent all possibility Of misconstructlon
and to disarm enemies, volunteered to
announce the fact tEat she would not
exercise the functions Of a State until
Congress should admit her to the
Union. She had then when the con
stitution was adopted) never presented
herself to Congress as State with the
consent of the entire Territory Of
Dakota, and never before had it ap-
peared by an official census that the
proposed State had population sufi-
House OF Representatives The con-
sent of the territorial legislature and
the governor to establish State south
of the forty-;sixth parallel was granted
in 1885. and the people forthwith
established it. called the attention of
Congress to the facts, presented their
congressman, and respectfully asked
for admission.
The constitutional convention, in
% nf fhn ord N
and the people III ratifying it, made a
very low bow TO Congress, but the
pledge given was also wholly sincere.
Fair men who reverence law, as do the
people Of Dakota, could not, last fall,
believe that the august Congress of the
United States could so disregard its
duty as to ignore 263 1000 people and
deny rights which are without dispute
guaranteed to them by the law Of the
land. Recent events indicate the pos
sibility that the people of Dakota are
the victims of misplaced confidence,
hence the proposition was on May 5.
1856, placed before the constitutional
convention at Sioux Falls that the con
vention should provide for a session
after Congress adjournS, and look the
future in the face. For this every
member of that convention then pres
ent. voted. believe. and among them
were the most extreme conservatives in
Dakota. Thus was the possibility OF
the necessity for further duty on the
part of that convention unanimously
acknowledged.
The committee Of the whole. by q
vote of nearly three to one, placed be-
fore that convention the proposition
that If Congress adjourns without ac-
tion the convention shall then submit
to ihe people'next November the Ques.
tion Of ceasing to occupy the attitude
of supplicants and argue the question
of legal rights by withdrawing oul
agreement made in that restraining
section. 1t seems that less cannot bt
done.
There is widespread dissatisfaction
with that section, and if Congress adj
journs without favorable action thi:
dissatisfaction will become intense
with many men. A vote of the people
seems to be eXpedient. Logically, The
only question between this and July /:
| is, is there a demand for vote? Ii The
convention which meets again on tha
day shall submit the question of repeal
it will he time to debate the question a:
| to how we shall vote.
In fact. We are all rapidly considering
the merits of question still beyond
the question Of putting the State gov
ernment in motion. 1t does not follow
that this will occur if section 81 is re
pealed. Such repeal only places u
where every other State was when i
adopted a constitution. 1t puts u!
where we can demand the rights of ;
State without appearing before Con
gress in the attitude Of q self-chained
supplicatipg prisoner. A repeal re
moves the implication that there j
danger that the men Uf Dakota may d.
some wrong. That section, so far as
can find, has no precedent in any con
stitution. 1t ought now TO be strIckel
out. We may then without fetters ap
proach the question of future duty
The State is for the people: it Is who'll
theirs, and it is they--not a company o
radical or Of conservative ieaders-wh
will determine after the repeal how fa