The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1902-12-27

1 oC justly PtodA-
ION the other hand, for congress delib-
! erately to rend asunder this already uni
ted people, either for political reasons
| or because of the existence of an acct
dental dividing line between them, woSld
be an act violent to every reason of the
4 situation and grotesque and absurd TO
future generations. The statesmen of
the future would rightly survey such an
act in disgust: while the historian would
| find it hard to explain the causes for
performance so unnatural and unjusti-
| fed. Against the confirmation by con-
| gress of the unien of these territories
no constitutional reason can be urged,
nor can any reason of expediency be sug-
gested. The lands of the Indians have
already been allotted in enormous quanti-
ties, and the allotment is proceeding
with CELEBRITY. Before statehood govern
ment can be organized the quantity OF
| Indian land remaining will not be APP
preciable.
If it be said that Indian lands thus al
| lotted are free from taxation for five
years and that this throws an unjust bur-
den on Oklahoma, the answer Is that this
period of exemption will, by the time
required to establish 4 state government,
| be reduced in great part 10 three and
even two years: and even if this exemp-
! ton wrom taxation were a matter worthy
of the consideration of statesma nship. III
so large a problem. it is more than affset
bv the provision of the bill which shares
the burden of existing debt OF Oklahoma
with the Indian Territory. II IL be said
that this debt be insignificant, the ans
ri. of Erllr
! indian lands together with the amount
nrfst received from them. are proportion
ately insignificant.
In short, the Indian Territory and OK
| Iahorna combined have a numerous peo-
pie Of culture, progress and OF resources
already considerably developed; and thus
! every requisite for statehood which can
suggest itself to the thoughtful and con-
servative mind is present. TO deny To
such 4 people, in such a region, admi5-
sion into the Union is wrong, and 10 d.
vide them for reasons of partisan expedi-
| ency is disgraceful.
! ."Che committee has reached this con-
clusion after considering the argument
presented by the citizens appearing be-
fore the committee against the present
| admission of either or both territories
as a state. although the committee is
! 1rofundlv Impressed with ale solidity OF
| this argument
| eve have heretofore in this report call
ed attention to the contention Of the citi-
zens of Oklahoma that their condition is
highly prosperous; that the people are
| happv and out of debt; that the federal
| officials are satisfactory to the point OF
nop1Ilar applause; that railroads exist IN
gratifying mileage, built by the money of
legitimate investors and not as the
scheme of ephemoral promoters. and that
more are building and will be built by
the same laudable means; that If the ter
ritory remains in its present felicitous
| condition a few years viii give II all the
railroads il will need without burdeninS
the people TO build them; but that, on the
/ contrary, if admitted to statehood the
history of other states viii be repeated
| that the people VIII be induced TO bond
their future to construct roads when
should be built by the money of legit-
| mate investors. who alone Will reap the
profits: that other roads will be projected
| and constructed by unsubstantal pro-
moters, deriving their means from pop
| ular contributions, which they know SO
well how to secure; and that those people
and their children will be oppressed for a
| generation with an unnecessary ana
wicked burden of taxation.
mo thoughtful mind can deny the force
! of this reason. And yet, In spite of II, II
| seems to the committee that these two
| territories should be admitted TO the
| Union as a single state. They have reach
cd their manhood and should take on
manhood's responsibilities. They do not
need Incorporation into the active polit-
| zeal nation more than the active political
nation needs them.
THE argument against the admission
of Oklahoma made by her own citnzens
also applies TO the territories of Arizona
and New Mexico. With the immature de-
veIopment of those territories; with the
peculiar conditions of their people, am
particularly those of New Mexico; with
| the docile and easily persuaded character
| OF the native population OF the latter ter
| ritory. il is as certain as the future that
| they will be induced-and that with great
| ease-to vote enormous subsidies to pro-
posed railroads, sadly impoverishing
| themselves while enriching the enterpris-
| ing promoters. This is not an imaginary
forecast. but a future certainty. and it Is
| a certainty from which the innocent peo-
PIE of New Mexico should be protected.
AS they are. the shield of the national
| Limitation OF 4 per cent upon their in
| debtedness stands between them and ex-
ploiters Remove it. and they are de-
| fenseless in their ignorance and confid-
| ing simplicity against that maSterful
| vigor and srtful craft which the exploit
or always brings to his aid.
"In conclusion. the truth must be stat
| ed that mony of the people of New Mex
| leo DO not want statehood. The testi-
mony OF Martin Amador. Mexican far
mer who unsubpoenaed and unasked.
| because unknown 10 usl sought out the
committee at Las Cruces and who i'm
pressed every member with his sincerity.
wisdom and truthfulHess. proves this.
The testimony is as pathetic as it is con
vincing. and We call TO it particular at
tention.
The committee is further convinced
that this opposition to statehood for New
Mexico is by no means confined 10 this
simple Mexican farmer and the great
class for whom he spoke. Ii is true that
| no other rancher. farmer or merchant ap-
| peared before the committee TO the same
effect: but the comslittee has sound rea-
| sons for believing that large numbers OF
them are earnestly against the PROPOSE
/ don OF New Mexican statehood. II is not
/ believed that any advocate OF New Mex
| lean statehood competent to speak VIII
testify, under oath, that there is unaniIn-