The Superior times. [volume] (Superior, Wis.) 1870-1912, 1895-05-25
The State of Superior.

OntOnag0n Miner
Considerable discussion is going on II
the public press in reference to the
formation of a new state to be carved
out Of the states of Michigan, Wiscon
sin and Minnesota, to be called superb
or. The idea and mover, ent is claimed
10 have been started by Capt. McDougall
of Superior, but this is a mistake. The
people of the upper peninsula have al
WAYS cherished the hope that their sec
ton might be separated from lower
Michigan and organized az separate
territory or state and have made several
intellectual attempts to bring about such
a separation. The present editor of the
Miner has always been in favor of the
movement and once had the honor OF
being the delegate from Ontonagon tC
attend a convention at Ishpeming call
ed for the purpose of advocating such a
scheme.
The idea is not original with Capt
McDougal; over hundred years ago
Tbos. Jefferson advocated the creation
uf a state out of almost the identical
territory now proposed, to be called
"Sylvania" His main idea being to
have under the territory or state gov
eminent, all the United States territory
bordering Cd the north and south shore
Of Lake Superior.
Then again in 1854 when Hon. Abner
# a M m q nt
the state legislature, he introduced a
Joint resolution ceeding the upper
peninsula of Michigan to the United
States, for the purpose of creating a
new state to be called Superior, and the
resolution failed lacking only five votes
to pass it. The question attracted a
very general attention throughout the
country and was very favorablv receiv-
practically the New York Tribune,
whose editor, Horace Greeley, proposed
and insisted that the new state be call
ed ''Ontonagon" which he always
thought was appropriate and a very
musical sounding Indian name.
About this time a joint resolution
was introduced in the Wisconsin legis-
lature, ceeding large portion OF North
crn Wisconsin to the United States for
the purpose of creating the state of SUI
perfor, providing the State of Michigan
ceeded back to the United States for
the some purpose, the upper part of
Michigan. This joint resolution passed
and we believe it has never been re-
pealed; SO perhaps no further action
need be taken by that state if this
scheme is carried out
Every few years the question has
been brought up, agitated and discuss
ed and the Miner has ever advocated
the scheme, believing it would be for
the best interest of our own people and
of those in our neighboring territories
Of Wisconsin and Minnesota, that
border on the shores of our great lake
that we shall be governed by officers
and legislature of our own selection,
men identified with our leading indus
tries. mining and numbering which re-
quire special legislation, nurture and
care, which they never have had and
never can have from legislators COM
posed of the larger element of Michi-
gan, Wisconsin and Minnesota
But how shall this object be attained,
has always been the great question.
Perhaps Horace Greeley's solution of
the financial question Of the time is the
correct one. The way to resume is 10
resume" So the way to secede and
form n new state, Is to seCede But
there has always been a very serious
constitutional objection in the way, one
that we have seldom mentioned in our
columns 1t is this: The ordinance OF
1887 by which Virginia cceded to the
United States, the great Northwest ter
rltory, provided for not to exceed six
states and it was stipulated in the or
dinance that the articles of the COM
pact were forever 10 remain unaltered.
Hence how can congress create another
state out of the territory? Who can
answer the question? Perhaps some
one better Versed in constitutional law
than We are, can answer the question.
We viii have something further to
say Of the adyiaablitv of creating the
State Of Superior in our future issue.