Anadarko daily democrat. [volume] (Anadarko, Oklahoma) 1901-190?, 1902-10-23

vide school fund for the people OF the
Indian Territory, and the democratic
platform demands that school fund
be provided for that territory. either
in lands or other resources. Under the
recent treaty, enough lands are to be
sold out OF which the government can
very readily provide school endow-
ment fund. Under the recent treaties,
the mineral lands are to be sold ana
the government can out of these LANDS
provide a school endowment fund. or
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. Mr.. Mcguire says. h4wever.
that 1t will not be dome. bat In the
same breath Mr.. Mcclure says he IA
vors ultimate single statehood. Mr..
Mcclure is, therefore, in favor OF the
division of our school lands IL any di-
vision is implied by single statehood.
If 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-
ton 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.
900. In the event Of single statehood
in order to equalize rents from our
school land. conceding that the people
OF the Indian Territory have as many
children as we of Oklahoma (Which Is
not true) we would have to raise by
state taxation 1925, 100 in addition to
he current expenses | assert to you
without fear OF successful contradlc-
ton, that an additional 1925, 200 can be
raised by state levy for school pur-
poses, which would be added to our
rentals from the school land and
thus provide school fund for distri-
button, so that there will not be the
loss of dollar to the school children
Of Oklahoma, and that still. after the
addition of this $225. 600 for special
school funds the state levy for taxes
will be less with single statehood than
would he the levy with statehood for
oklahoma alone.
Let us go back to the figures. We
now raise for territorial expenses with
L 7A mill levy s540,OO0. We can safe
y estimate that would be the cost OF
state government for Oklahoma.
Let us include the Indian 4errltory
within the limits of the same state
md add $4,000 for the additional cost
If the state administration. Now add
70 that 1925, 900 to be raised as a spe-
ial school fund TO Offset the rents
we are now deriving from our school
ands. and we have a total of $780,
700 necessary to be raised. With single
statehood, instead of having S72,000,-
700 of assessable property. we would
have $132,000,000 of assessable prop
erty. In order to raise $4,000 we
would have to make a levy of ga
mills, which Is IL mills less than the
present levy in Oklahoma for territor-
,al purposes, thus making a saving on
he $4,000, 900 of Oklahoma assessment
Of IL mills, or $79.200; so that, IL with
single statehood we make a special
levy and raise enough money to equal
, ize the rents from our school lands, we
still have a lower rate OF taxation
Tor the state government, by IL mills.
But we can make some allowances for
J possible errors in these estimates and
J figure that 1t is necessary with single
tatehood in order to pay the extra
expenses of the state government and
) raise a school fund thas we should
have total state revenue OF 81, ,000,-
300, which is allowing nearly 5000 900
for contingencies. and then what do
we find? With the total assessed val
lation of both territories combined
! we can raise S1.OOO.O00 with a levy Of
3 119 mills. which is exactly the levy
{ we are now subject to.
|, therefore, assert that this school
land division is bugaboo and that
he republican politicians are trying to
B scare the people with it without accu-
'acy Of truth or honest regard for the
acts in the case.
, In the fourth place they tell us
' hat We can not admit the Indian Ter.
{ itory to statehood until its lands are
=. lliotted and that this will take several
B years In reply to this, beg leave to
{ nquire of my republican friends,
{ whether the lands in the Usage Ma.
. ion are allotted. whether the Ponca
:. and otoe reservations are allotted?
4 Why Is it necessary to wait until
after allotment to make state out OF
u S"O ANioh t0liiloIy iSut IL true
b that every Western state has beeen
admitted with Indian reservations in
D 1t? If 1t has been done in the past.
, why, then, can 1t not be done now
e Fhis proposition, like all the others.
J. unsound. II is not necessary to
6 wait until after the allotment to ere.
g ite state government for the Indian
y erritcry and there is absolutely no
O .eson, from a legal. commercial or
n political view point, why we should
I lot have immediate single statehood
e What Election of Cross Mean.
e on course, it is true that the settle.
Z ment CT this question is in the hands
$ of congress and that our PEOPLE can
a not control that body. But the elec-
s lion of Cross is declaration to that
d body that we want single statehood.
g, | Congress will surely nav sofne attan