Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1888-01-27
1ails gress a,a gakotaiaa
SENATOR pLATI's REPORT.

clusionb OF the SENATE COnnnlsttee.
Washington, Jen. Ex-senator Platt
reported to the senste Monday the sub
stitute for the Henderson bill adopted
by the committee. He reprints entire
Senator Harrison's report on the
bill last session, and IN addition sppepds
a somewhat lengthy advocacy of the
present bill. After recapitulatiDg the
ss set forth by thu committee on fe.rl-
tories OF the forty ninth congress, the
committee say:
SInos the adoption of the report OF
the committee and the passage of the
bill admitting the people OF the south
ern half to the privileges OF statehood,
nothing has taken place IN the opinion
of the committee which justifies the
revereai OF the action of the senate in
respect to the division OF the territory
and the admission into the union of q
new state, with substantially the same
boundaries as those presented by the
senate in the bill which it approved
Indeed, the reasons for the division of the
territory and the formation of two states
rather than the admission of the whole
as @ single state become more
convincing and patent az the
aujGstifiabie delay OF congress in re-
eognizing the rights of Dakota territory
for self government continues. The
people OF north Dakota and south Oak
ota in the lnterval since the former 90
ton of the senate have become, If pos
slble, more completely two political
units, until to-day they are as distinct
in interests, in character, and In associa.
ton sand institutions as are the people
of any two etate. In everything except
the compulsory union i n o territorial
north Dakota and south
Dakota are as seperate political COM
muEitles-as Massachusetts and Conneotl-
cut. 70 insist upon admission as one
state is as repugant to the of JUS
tice and to national propriety as would
be the enforced union of the states named.
That this is absolutely true is shown by
the fact that the institutions usually
found in states have been duplicated in
southern and northern Dakota by the
action of the territorial Legislature.
The report them goes on to recapitu-
late the ysrlods institutions which have
been located by the legislature with an
even division between the two sections /,
the acts for their establishment provid-
ing that If the territory should aver be
divided the portion in which each in.
stisusion lies is to assume the indebted
ness incurred In its erection.
The completeness of the political di
vision is still further shown by the fact
that the nan es of North Dakota and
South Dakota have attached to the diff
ferent portions of the territory as have
the names of South Carolina and NORTH
Carolina to those states. To admit NORTH
Dakota and south Dakota as statel
wonld add to their distinctive character
70 admit them al one state would be tt
attempt to unite two peoples, hetero
genous in interests, in associations. il
charsoterlstics and in aspirations. If th.
welfare, the harmony and the coed o
the people of the territory are to be con
sidered, the argument in favor OF two
ste.ea ins.e.a c! c:c ::s.a sssais o.eF.
wheiming and conclusive. And they are
to be considered. This leads us to
consideration of the question whether il
the present case national interests re.
qnire the compulsory union OF alread,
distinct communities whose materin
interests hs we'll as expressed wishes cal
for separate statehood. To thil
question, in the opinion Of our commit
tee, depends largely upon the furthe
question whether the area of the country
inhabited, the nature OF the soil, its re
sources, the presence of the necessary
elements for future development ant
the character of the population give
premise of two lsrge, prosperous ane
well ordered states.
The report then goes on to compare
the size Of Dakota with other states
mentions the resources, agricultural AND
mineral, and quotes from the last repor
OF the governor upon various subjeotl
connected with her prosperity and de-
~veiopment. The action of the leglHla
ture in submitting the question OF di-
vision TO q vote Of the people is spoken
of, and the result of that vote mention
ed. The report says:
III the resnlt of tie vote in the terri
tory seema to indicate 8 less uDanimon
sentiment IN favor OF division than ha
beensupposed TO exist the reasons TO
it are quite obvious. The name Of Da
kota is as dear to the people OF mort
as south Dakota. The residents OF tn
northern section iuetly claim to hay
given the nsme to q of the principe
productions OF the territory, and to hav
made Dakota wheat famous Throughout
the world. There is merit in the clair
that they are &c much entitled to tb
name OF Dakota as the residents in th
southern part of the territory. The bill
passed by the senate at its last session
gave the name Dakota to that portion o
the territory proposed to be ad
mitted es q state, and organized tn
remainder of the territory under tn,
name of Lincoln. Division, therefore
seemed to north Dakota to be simply
loss of the charished name, and on thi
account many were induced to vot,
against division. Another reason VIII.
many persons, through desiring division
voted against it, was because division
seemed 70 portend indefinite postpone
ment OF the claims of north Dakota t
be admitted into the union. The histor
of the movement for statehood in th,
southern half of the territory was 9,
disconraging that the sentiment OF ctate
hood at any cost and at any moon
venienee is believed TO account for Cd
majority against division in north Dake
ta, and for many if not for most OF til
votes against II in south Dakota.
The report further says:
However that may be, the oontrollin
factor in determining whether Dakut
should be admitted as one state or q
two states must always be the nations
interest aud welfare. And ii seems I
your committee that states OF immens
area, of great wealth and power and wit
population which eDtitle them {
abnormally large representation i
the house of representatives are ell,
ments of national weakness rather tina
national strength, and may in fntul
prove q danger to the republic. Ever