Anadarko daily democrat. [volume] (Anadarko, Oklahoma) 1901-190?, 1902-10-25

be provided for that territory, either
In lands or other resources. Under the
recent treaty, enough lands are TO be
sold out CT which the government can
very readily provide a school endow-
ment fund. Under the recent treaties.
the mineral lands are to be sold and
the government can out of these lands
provide school endowment fund. CS
the government can MAKE direct ap-
preparation in money for this purpose.
The democratic party says that this
will be done. That is just, fair and
right MIR. Mcclure says, hSwever.
that It will not be done. but in tho
same breath MIR Mcclure says he IA
vors ultimate single statehood. MIR.
Mcclure is, therefore, In favor OF the
! division Of our school lands II any d.
vision is implied by single statehood.
II the democratic position Is sound.
Of course that settles the question and
there is no harm done. But II, on
the other hand, the democratic POSI-
ion Is unsound and congress would
not make any provision for the
school children OF the Indian Terri
tory, | still assert that there is no loss
to the people OF Oklahoma by reason
OF single statehood, and the facts and
figures prove IT,
The present revenue derived from
the leasing OF our school lands Is $685.
600. In the event OF single statehood
in order to equalize rents from our
school land. conceding that the people
II the Indian Territory have as many
children as we OF Oklahoma (Which Ia
not true) we would have to raise by
state taxation S225.OO0 in addition TO
he current expenses | assert to you
without fear OF successful contradic-
lion, that an additional 1925. 900 can bS
raised by state levy for school pur-
noses. which would be added to our
rentals from the school land and
'hus provide school fund for distri-
button, so that there will not be the
oss OF a dollar to the school children
j. " Oklahoma, and that still. after the
{ addition OF this 1928 900 for special
G school funds the state levy for taxes
. will be less with single statehood than
@ would be the levy with statehood for
Oklahoma alone.
Let us go back to the figures. We
u now raise for territorial expenses with
! 7ia mill levy $4,000 We can safe
u " estimate that would be the cost OF
81 / state government for Oklahoma.
let us include the Indian .erritory
= within the limits OF the same state
Il md add $4,000 for the additional cost
+ If the state administration. Now add
4 10 that $225. 900 to be raised as spe-
q ial school fund to Offset the rents
We are now deriving from our school
{ ands and we have a total of $780,
n 700 necessary to be raised. With single
5 statehood instead of having $72 000,-
100 OF assessable property, we would
ID have S132,000,000 of assessable prop
x erty In order to raise $4,000 we
IN would have to make a levy of Ga
X Mills, which Is IL mills less than the
e present levy in Oklahoma for territor-
ty al purposes. thus making a saving on
IL he $72 ,000. 900 of Oklahoma assessment
ut Of IL mills. or $4,000. so that, IL with
lis single statehood we make a special
nd evy and raise enough money to equal
1g ize the rents from our school lands, we
tn still have a lower rate of taxation
" 'or the state government, by IL mills.
n But we can make some allowances for
es possible errors in these estimates and
We lgure that 1t Is necessary with single
g. tatehood in order to pay the extra
a expenses OF the state government and
IL raise a school fund thu. we should
is lave a total state revenue OF 81, ,000,-
al 100 which Is allowing nearly 100000
q. or contingencies, and then what do
in We find? With the total assessed val.
Ia alton of both territories combined
ed We can raise $l,0O0,o0O with levy Of
h, l1a mills, which is exactly the levy
IS ge are now subject to.
n |, therefore. assert that this school
Is and division is a bugaboo and that
,s he republican politicians are trying tc
OF care the people with it without accu
O. acy of truth or honest regard for tn,
4 acts in the case
Ne In the fourth place they tell u.
v, hat we can not admit the Indian Ter
h ,rory to statehood until its lands ar,
er lliotted and that this will take severa
ch jears In reply to this, | beg leave K
Of nqi ire of my republican friends
n, whether the lands in the Usage Ma
re ion are allotted, whether the Poncl
mr. and Otoe reservations are allotted?
,Id Why Is 1t necessary to wait unit
II after allotment to make a state out c
ON he Indian territory? Isn't 1t tru
oJ that every Western state has beeel
admitted with Indian reservations Il
al II? II II has been done in the past
*. Shy, then, can it not be done now
,yt This proposition, like al the others
Iol, 3 unsound. II is not necessary I
Ids Wait until after the allotment TO ere
ne ate state government for the India
ldy territ.ry and there is absolutely q
INC reson, from a legal. commercial o
II political view point, why we shoul
na lot have immediate single statehood
the What Election Of Cross Mean.
rue or course, ii is true that the settli
nse ment Cf this question is in the hand
ads u congress and that our people ca
not control that body. But the ele'
ous don Ct Cross is declaration to this
ied body that we want single statehood
rty Congress will surely pay some attel
led ton TO the wishes OF half million Il
avv telligent American citiZans Or