Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1889-02-16

The conference report on the senate bill
for the admission as state of South Da-
kota, which is total disagreement Was
agreed to and new conference ordered.
Baker, of New York, offered resolutions
giving the house cOnferees the following
ing instructions: First, exclude the ter
rtory OF New Mexico from the bill Sec
ond, amend bill so as to provide for the
admission of South Dakota by proclama-
ton OF the president under the Sioux
Falls constitution third, that the pro-
posed states of North Dakota, Montana
and Washington be admitted on same
basis, either all by proclamation of the
president or all by formal acts Of admis-
sion.
Cox, of New York, offered substitute
differing only from Bakers proposition
in that it provides for the admission Of
North Dakota, Montana and Washington
by proclamation OF the president.
Springer insisted on returning in the
bill the provision for the admission of
New Mexico.
Symmes, OF Colorado, declared no peti-
ton had been presented, and no bill in
troduced to show that the people of New
Mexico desired admission into the union.
He did not see why the people of New
Mexico should be forced into the union
by having the provision tackled on to the
Dakota bill for political purposes.
Breckinridge, of Kentucky, agreed
against the exclusion of New Mexico.
Wilson, of Minnesota, spoke against
the proposition that the house should
yield in regard to New Mexico. If it was
known that the house was firm in its po-
sition the senate would recede from it's
disagreement of the house amendment.
Joseph, of New Mexico, said the oldest
territory in the union came knocking for
the fourth time for admission. He would
rather be a citizen of a Republican state
than of Democratic territory.
Rogers, OF Arkansas, thought the time
had arrived when the whole territorial
system ought to be wiped out. Hewould
adopt Il constitutional amendment pre-
venting Utah, as an impure sister, from
coming into the union of states, and then
admit every other territory as state.
Baker accepted Cox's resolution as a
ubstitute for his own.
Breckenridge, of Kentucky, demanded
division OF the instructions, and vote
was first taken upon that portion of the
resolution lnstructing the conferees to
eliminate New Mexico from the bill. 1t
WAS agreed to, yeas 1856, nays 1906. But at
| the last moment Breckenridge changed
his vote vote from the negative to the
affirmative, for the purpose of moving q
reconsideration OF the motion.
COX's substitute for Bakers motion,
! M a,,4 IS @l,, L. 4
providing for the admission of the other
territories by proclamation of the presi-
dent, was then passed.
WERE THEY TOO LATE.
President pro TEN Ingalls, laid before
the senate two petitions of the citizens of
Albuquerque, n. NJ, denouncing as mis-
leading and false, the allegations con-
tained in a memorial recently presented to
congress protesting against the admission
of the territory as state. A memorial
from the legislative council of New Mexico
was presented to the senate, relating to
the price Of public lands in that territory.
1t recites that great quantity of public
land in the territory, about One-fourth of
the total area, has been granted to rail-
roads and is held at $3.50 an acre, not
withstanding that no railroad has been
built under the grants.
The consequence is that would-be-im-
migrants are driven to other territories.
The prayer Of the memorialists is that all
public agricultural lands in the territory
be opened to settlement at $l.25 per acre,
and that the price of coal lands within
fifteen miles of railroads be be fixed at SIC
an acre, and of coal lands further removed
at So an acre,