Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1886-03-04
ANNEXATION BILL PASSED
THE HOUSE.

To Hon. a. Letdnd, LeWiston
Our annexation bill has jus. passed
the House Of Representatives.
Signed john HALEY,
L. 5. WORRIES"
An extra of the Nears was circulated
In town on the eve. Of Friday, stating
that the bill passed on the morning OF
the 18th, but having no signature to the
dispatch, many doubted its authenticity
from that fact, but when the records of
the proceedings in the House on the 23rd
Vas received many thought that the bill
had most likely passed, as both Haley
and Voorhees, had advocated on the floor
Of the House, and no one opposed it but
Hill OF Ohio. On the receipt of our dis
patch all doubts were dispelled and there
was general rejoicing, but few seemed
to be dissatisfied, and all were willing to
lccord to HALEY due credit fer fulfilling
his promise to the people in advocating
the bill! in speech in the House, for
many had predicted that he would evade
the issue when it came to a test, but we
could net see how he could do SO and be
true to his pledges to the people and to
: himself. He had told citizens of North
Idaho that he personally had always
been opposed to dividing Idaho, but the
people had empbaticaly said that they
wanted division by their conventions and
their votes, and thai the legislature Of
Idaho had asked for the annexation to
Washington and he felt bound to obey
their instructions while acting as their
delegate, end his action in the House was
asfnll and fair az his friends had reason
10 expect Of him. In fact he could not
have done otherwise and maintained any
standing as representative in congress.
We know not that the bill was amended
in any particular from the copy We pub
hshed as sent to us by Haley some weeks
ago, although it might have been amend
ed 10 some particulars. We would have
preferred the 45th parallel as the divid-
Ing line, ~ better subscribing the interests
Of few in Idaho county, but several in
the south part Of Idaho county voted
against annexation and we infer this line
= pleasing to them. When Singiscr ran
for delegate in 1882 about 80 residing
south Of Salmon river voted against an
hexatiou BY voting for AinsEe, who had
announced himself opposed to the meas
ure. All the balance Of the county voted.
for Singiser and annexation. This may
have been the reason why congress adopt
cd the Salmon river as the dividing line
to accommodate that thirty votes; this
would be obeying the voice Of the settlers
Of that section. The vote of 1884 was
10 test because both candidates were
pledged to annexation. We hear some
talk that parties in the sodth combining
with few GROWERS in the north propose
TO put in their best efforts to beat the bill
II the senate in defiance Of the heartily
oppressed will Of the people Of both ter
ritories and their legislatures, What
they may Be able to accomplish we can
not tell, but if anything, it will be by
lalsehood and Misrepresentation, for
which the friends Of annexation are 10 no
wise responsible. II seems that they
have been at work as we infer from the
remarks in the House by Representative
Hin Of Ohio when the bill was under dis
QUESTION in the House. 1t seems that
their work did not effect much 10 the
House, and We hope it will have less ef
feet in the Senate. There is class Of
Ieteas spirits who are always active to
Do Or ny anything when they think they
ean distract couusels and defeat the will
ef the people, and do this stealthily and
hot be found out among the people
where they reside aud are well known
North Idaho is not without this class,
and We presume that every community
has counterpart Of this class ; they are
generally suspected, spotted and found
out in due time. The day is too far
gone for men to long play false to priu-
oiple and not be known if they say any.
hing that effects the public veal. The
advocates Of annexation have always been
ppen and bold and courted manly discus
ZION Of the pros aud cons of the question
Their candle has never been hid under
! bushel, but has shone out SO all that ,
would look could see what they claimed
y their principles aud the reasons for
heir opinions. Their principles have
,een we'll discussed in the press OF North ,
IDAHO and some in south Idaho and even ,
. Washiugton Territory. 1t was thor. /
ughly discussed for days in the cousti-
ntional convention held in Walla Walla {
] 1873 by the delegates, and triumphed, I
|lhough some Of the ablest men in that |