Arizona republican., 1891-05-10


 : courage to stand up and say he was right, when every attorney in this town except myself and my partner, Earl Webb, said he was wrong. They called ] bar meeting in the office of Hereford X Lowell, for the purpose of denouncina Mir. Smith for having Arizona excluded from the provisions of the bill. I at tended that meeting for the purpose o endorsing Mark Smith for what he. had said and done, and was the only man there who dared open his mouth in favor of Smiths action on the Land Court bill. Can you answer that?
 They denounced his action? I stood for him. A mass-meeting was called for the purpose of denouncing him. went around this town, and Charles M Strauss is the only othergentleman whom 1 know of taking an active interest in the same thing, for the purpose of getting a large crowd there for the purpose of ratiting his action on that measure because it did not give the settlers their homes. At that meeting got up and made public speech for MT. Smiths action on the land court bill. 1 stood for the settlers and their homes.
 Brewster Cameron was my friend then. He did not rule me then and cannot rule me now. Nobody can rule me. (Applause). l say that Cameron was my personal friend then; but what has personal friendship to do with Democracy, or with Democratic princi- ples? What has personal friendship to do with the interests of the people of Arizona, unless man be corrupt (Applausel. Accuse me of being Brewster Cameron's friend and I admit it. Accuse me of being corruptly in- tluenced by Brewster Cameron and l say it is lie-an infamous lie. (Ap- plause). Let William H. Barnes point to one act let any other man point to one act of my life where I have been corruptly influenced by any one man and l will lay down and die. (Ap- plause). l certainly would not have the audacity to come and talk to an audience afterwards.
 say that supported Mir. Smith con sistently at all times. 1 had the courage of my convictions. I came out in the Citizen and stated clearly and distinctly and at length my position on the land grant question, and briefly it was this
 
 it provided that every settler should re- land grants should have lieu-land script for that part of it, or at his option lieu land script for the entire grant. 1 be- lieve in being fair. do not believe in robbing land grant claimants if they have good and valid title. If the set tiers have taken the cream of their grant give the claimant land script for the whole of it-skimmed milk and cream both. We can all afford to be fair, never unjust. Would it hurt the Territory No. Tine script would be placed over the desert lands of our Territory, and millions of dollars would be spent as soon as the title was in individuals, en- abing them to take water out of the Colorado river. no matter what the ex- pense might be. Groves of oranges, lemons and Hines would then be grow ing where now are barren mesas. And as our fruits mature so much earlier than in California our Territory would become known far and wide as the most profitable fruit country in the world Immigrants would come to us. The Territory would grow. These land grants, which have been keeping them back, could thus be used to give pow erful impetus to our industrial develop ment. l said let us settle them, but let us settle them on that one basis-that the settler shall retain his home-on that and no other principle. Let us set tie them Immediately on that principle.
 What was the reply that I met from William H. Barnes? "Your ideas are all right Frank. You are straight on every proposition, but we want to keep this political question:"
 Yes, that is the idea-harass the set tier and paralyze the development of the Territory-do all this so as to keep it political question, so that dema- gogues can use it and go out and say that because man is friend of Cam eron, that therefore he is corrupt or liable to betray his trust. Now. James Finley is an honorable gentleman and an honest man, and man of conyic- tion, and hope he is here tonight. I don't know that he is, but if he is not 1 shall seek his company at Harshaw. 1 want to talk with him. He is known to be friend of Robert II. Paul, promi- nent Republican. If Finley tomorrow was nominated for Democratic office, what would he think of me if 1 should go out and work and vote against him because he is a friend of Mr. Paul? Would he not be likely to call me to ac- count? Wouldn't he be very likely to say to me, "Mr. Heney, what do you mean? Can't I be the friend of Mr. Paul and still be decent? Can't be the friend of Paul and be honest? Can't l be the friend of Robert H. Paul and hold Democratic office, or hold office as Democrat, without being cor rupt and without betraying my trust" l don't think Mir. Finley wants any such accusation as that made. I think he is fair and candid man, and think when he hears all the facts of the case he won't stand where he stands today on the question. l do not think the people of Harshaw will either, when they learn that have stood with them first, last and all the time. do not be- lieve the people of Harshaw have so little gratitude as to say, "We want nothing to do with you because you are a friend of Brewster Cameron" What difference can it make to them if l am the friend of Cameron. if I am their friend? Cannot man have two friends who are not themselves friends? What a ridiculous proposition that is! But am not the friend of individuals; I am the friend of the people, on a question of vital importance to the people gov erned by principle.
 What kind of friend is William H. Barnes to these people, and what is his position on the land grant question While judge of this court he decided several cases. There was case known as the United States of America, plain. tiff, vs. Colin Cameron, defendant. The case was hrnnoht nn the rnlatinr of H.