Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1888-12-11
The eLa AND NEW.

Admission of DakGtG Under the Sioux
Falls Constitution Va. Admission
Under Another Constitution.
Sioux Falls Press: The Yenkton Press
and DakotaiaD, in reply to recent
article in this paper, statea. for the pur
pose of making itself more fnlly under-
stood, that it IS not in favor OF new
constitutional convention ii statehood
can be- more speedily secured under the
old constitution. 1t then continues:
The Sioux Falls Prets st, ties farther along in
! its article that the old constitutional conyen-
tion is still in existence, and says
1T can assemble Mt any time and submit to
fed in the eenaae bill for re-submission. The
| point sought to be covered by such bill could
| be thereby provided for, and the constitution
be made ready for immediate congressional
action y
| There win probably be no objection to this
plan. 1t appeara more feasible than the cleo
\ tlon CT n new constitutional convention and
would afford great saving OF time, which Is
| the important element in the case. Our i'm
preston, when our hrst aru lie on the subject
was written, WAS that the old constitutional
convention had expired. If the Presa is COR
rect in its statement that the constitutional
conyention still. exists, then the Legislature
need NOT be called upon to authorize another
constitutional orgar iz4tion. 1t would be bet
ter, however, for that body to submit an entire
| new constitution and not attempt to patch up
| the ola one through amendatery forms. This
could be accomplished aud satisfactory con-
stltution presented for action at the opening of
.he next congress, and ander 1t The state
! m ,chinery set in molten by single act of leg
isiaton. Unless there isa special session of
cons ress this is the best and quickest plan,
| Falls Press2
The present prospects are that an
| extra session of congress will quite Ger.
tainly be held, which would solve alI the
| dlfierenees that there may be between
The Press and lts!eRteemed Yapkton con.
| temporary in regard to the manner OF
| achieving statehood.
But this paper questions the advisa-
| biiity OF o new constitution at this time
and it does this solely because of its
| concern in the chances for staiehood--it
| has no other interest, near or remote, in
the whole matter.
Flrst--The question as presented by
the Platt bill is as to the old constitution
it is g resubmiseion OF the Sioux Falls
document itself with certain ohangea
specified in the bill, as to name and
boundary--onIy tbis, and nothing more
nor less nor other than this. The vote
on tbese--not upon an amendment
| thereof nor upon a substitute thereof
must be IN the affirmative, according to
| the provisions OF the bill otherwise the
| bill is TO be OF no force or effect, and ad-
| rs!shion thereunder is dead, An effir-
| native ans3er on the separate proposi-
| tlons of prohibition and minority repre-
seDtation are not necessary but on the
Sioux Falls constitution ii is.
Seo0nd-WWhila 1t is tree that the
present senate bill would have TO be re-
introduced in the fifty, first congress
unless passed by the tiitieth-it is un-
doubtedly the case that the present
senators who have been made familiar
| with the Platt bill nnd ell the phases OF
| the Dakota question as presented there
| in, end nearly all Of whom will be IN the
next congress, would be much more
| likely to give prompt and ready attep-
| tion to q duplicate OF the present bill
than to one recognizing bran new con-
stitution. And, furthermore-no amount
| of explanation about new constitution
or the necessity for 1t could save us
from reputation for vacillation and un-
certainty throughout the country. In
| matters of this kind, there must be an
appearance OF stability. A duplicate Of
| the Piatt bill, nnlumbered by changes
which would require explanations. and
! which might breed distrust. will go
through the next congress in the shortest
possible time that 1t can be carried from
one stage to another.
Third-If once the idea CT change in
| any respect at this time on the present
constitution be recognized then the door
| is opened to clamor for change in all the
varied end innumerable particulars
which the diverse interests could sug-
| gest-apd the reBnit would inevitably
be wrangls which would do the cause
of South Dakota great harm. OF course,
ell this clamor is entitled to a hearing,
but let il keep silence now when SO
much depends upon having everything
smooth-Rnd then after statehood, let il
bay it lungs out il it wants to--for then,
| as well as now. can necessary changes be
made.'
For the reasons outlined above, and
for many Others which are incident
thereto, the Press hopes that the idea
OF new constitution tefore admission
may not prevail. That Sioux Falls con-
stitution needs mendment--there is no
doubt about that---Rnd new one gen.
erally based upon ii, but changed in
certain particulars, might be very
much better fundamental Iaw--but there
are in this case 80 many risks in the
work OF bstterment that it is wise to
"let we'll enough alone," end NOT culti-
vase opportunity for dissensions and
wrangles.