St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-01-26

for themselves, and no manner of anger.
contentious. nor opposition on our part
can compel different processes of reaS-
Oning on their part. They believe in
the house that they have done wisely
and we'll by us, All will concede that
the Democrats
HAVE YIELDED MUCH
of their precOnceiVed determination, in
Difference to our wishes. Whether they
ought to have given US more. deem it
idle to discuss at this time"
Then you are cOntented with the
Springer bill?"
at would not be a full nor a fair eX-
preston of my opinion to say that am
wholly c0ntentt d with it. 1t would not
be truthful to say that l did not desire
nor hope for more. But, regard bird
in the hand as worth two in the bush,
and do not intend to give away pros
pective statehood in the near future,
merely because | do not feel that with
statehood will come all that seemed nee
eSSary to me and of absolute right. l
must concede. and think we must all
agree, that great step forward was
taken in our interest, when the Springer
bill passed the house. am not pleased
with the clause which makes South Da-
kota'S statehood depend upon majority
of the vote of North Dakota; yet, | can
not but see that, if were resident of
North Dakota, might feel justly in
dignant if the congress were 10 Sepa-
rate that section from the south half of
the territory without giving me and my
felloW-citiZenS of North Dakota a right
to express the views of our section upon
that important question, at the ballot
boX.''
"Do you fear that North Dakota will
VOTE AGAINST DIVISION?'
''9n the contrary, l feel that the
whole matter is settled by public opin-
ion, in advance of the casting of the bal
give as large majority for division as
will be given by South Dakota. Such
expressions Ct the sentiment of the peo-
pie as are given'ou through the press
plainly indicate that North Dakota is
more anxious for statehood than for the
uniication of the territory into one inn
perial state. | regard that idea as OBJ
solete. Many gentlemen in North Da-
kota will say to you: L prefer state
hood for the whole territory, and am
against division. But, inasmuch as
only by division can we obtain federal
recognition and representation am for
division, and shall vote for it, That is
the way, it appears to me, the Senti-
uIeIlb vi null Ill Ddhdltt ID lii
deed. there are many people in South
Dakota who prefer the admission
OF ONE STATE,
but, knowing that division is a pre-
requisite for statehood, they will vote
for division. Each section wants sta,e-
hood above all things else. Hence | say
that the Springer bin is acceptable to
the people, because it is the best thing
in sight and the first and only Opportu-
nifty we have had. Our people will not
give countenance nor support to any
man or men who stand athwart the
opened highway of progress. and no
man can be regarded as an exponent Of
Dakota opinion who stands in the way
of the operation OF the Springer bill"
but you will admit that there is con-
siderable opposition to that bill, will you
not?'
mo, will admit nothing of the kind.
There is, or was, considerable dissatiS-
faction at first, because every one eX-
pected more. but will not admit that
there is any active opposition"