Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1888-11-28
alERL.Y's SCHEME.
sAe Holds that south Dakota is q state
ana he is Elected Delegate. for NORTH

he Holds that south Dakota fs o state
ana he is Elected Delegate for North
Dakota
Rismarcs Tribune; Willis H. BIeriy,
Abe Grad Norks independent candidate
ior delegate to congress in The Eecent
election, aud who claims g certificate as
the duly elected delegate from North
Dasote (sssnming that South Dakota ia
already q etase1. has filed his briet with
the secsstary of the territory. In the
wey OF introduction he gives o brief his.
tory OF the division and statehood move.
ment as follows:
DAKOTA in 1882 sought admission into
the union. A committee of boards OF
trade of northern Dakota visited Wash
iagson and opposed admission as a
whole, ! n consequence of which as. we'll
as for other reasons. Dakota was moi
then admitted. In 1884 south Dakota's
agitation Of the question obtained from
the political conventions OF both parties
hearty expressions for division OF the
tt rritory. After satisfying themselves
that south Dakota had a lawful right to
p oceed and form q state government
sac Legislature OF 1885 was appealed te
for q law authorizing o constitutional
convention for south Dakota, The 40!
approved March 9th 1885,. session Law
page 5l) was passed almost unanimously
and signed by the governor. Said act
created the. machinery for o state
soath OF the 10th parallel and q
~rssiduary territory north thereof to
be North Dakota. In pursuance
thereof q convention was held at Sioux
Falls, q constitution formed and ratified
by q vote OF the people OF the state
simultaneously. with such ratification
state officers, congressman, judges, and
q legislature were chosen, and huron
selected as the temporary capital. The
Legislature thus ohoaen convened and
elected two United States senators, who
presented their credentials, whioh were
accepted by the United States senate
and the senators,elect granted the cour-
tes1es OF the senate, Immediately there
after q bill passed the senate ratifyingt the
action Of the people of south Dakota,
which bill is now pending in the house
OF representatives and OF right ought to
and will pass prior to March A, 1889. The
congressmen-elect Clifford and Kanouse,
appeared in the house Of Representatives.,
Clifford as delegate, who moved that
Thsodore T.. Ksnouse be admikted 10 the
floor Of the house, which resolution was
referred to the committee on rules where
1T sill lies, but neither presented thsi.
credentials as representatives from the
state.
In the summer OF 1883 party conyen-
lions met in Dakota, nominating res
pectively, George a. Mathews, James
w. Harden and il. I'll. Oranmer, all re.
siding then and now south OF the 18th
parallel, Tor within the state. Another
and bipartisan convention met ct Grand
Forks, north Dskoss, on September 20.
1883, and nominated Willis r.. BierlyI OF
Grand Forks for; delegate for north, Da-
keta, distinctly upon the lssUe snat
south Dakota being in fact o state, north
Dakota was entitled TO the delegate.
Atthe election Nov. 6.,1SS8. o iassa
number of legal voters cast their votes
Tor said North Dakota nominee and prob
ably q large number, fofitwo of the South
Dakota candidates, the returns whereof
are now before you, with the claim OF
the North Dakota candidate for o formal
certificate OF election from North Da-
kota.
Mi. Blerly then quotes NUMEROUS
authorities tending to show shat South
Dakota is O etats de- faeto and argues
|shat acts prior to admission are valid and
will be 80 considered by congress when
final action 10 taken by thas body. In
this Argument Mr. Bieriy Is weak, South
Daksta is hardly state de jnre. The
prerequisite 10 statehood is She cot OF
congress- admitting the state. Congress
has not yet admitted South Dakota and
is note state. Insthe recent election the
y~oters|-with the exception, possibly, Of
Mr.. Bierly himself and q few intimate
friends-cagt their ballots for g delegate
to represent the whole of Dakota until
statehood Is had for both sections. Mr..
Mathews has been elected. He is satis-
factory TO the people and North Dakota
who have given him . plurality of oyar
10000 It would be wise for MIR. Bierly
and his democratic friends to turn In now
and assist the republicans in furthsripg
the ca,lse OF statehood for north as we'll
as aouth Dakota. No good can .comesof
this contest. But Mr.. Bierly's argument
is quite novel. He says "The vote cast
for Mathews, Harden ard Cranmer
should be nanyassed by the properly
constituted authorities ,9of the state OF
south Dakota: where's she vote cast for
delegate il north Dakota should be q b
vasaed separately and distinctly. and all
ballots for. other than q resident OF north
Dakota counted as OF no ~effect.nn
E la conclusion Mr.. Bierly, says:
"South Dskotn being D state, residents,
therein ere disqualified from represent.
ing north Dakota, heresiduary territory.
The person to whom the certificate is TO
be awarded for the territory must be
held 70 be the personal least qualified
by residehue since. that Ia prescribed by
constitution. Hence all voteap cast for
non.residents OF north Dakota are as II
none had been cast fer them 0nd, the
principle laid down in some of The states
where The majority rule s fixed by con-
ststutIon, is not binding here, and q
minority OF legally sast ballots for an
eligible candidate elects. The pre-
sumption is that had the majority known
OF the disqualification their votes would
have NOT been cast for any disqualified
candidate, but for the qualified one.
Congress. under the constitution
possesses tbs right TO pass upon ell these
questions.t 10 raise which in due forn,se
certificate Of election az delegate from
north Dakota should be issued to Willis
3. Bierly.
Affairs. OF the Army. &
~ -. - &e -.as 4 II" q