Arizona republican., 1904-03-11
PHOENIx, ARIz.. MARCH II, 1904
An atrocitx Of Nomenclature.

We fully Eyrnpathize with our es- teemed contemporary, the New Yo:k Tribune, !n it's horror of the name Montexuma proposed for the state which COnsresg is trying to manIfac- 7ure out Of the territories of Arizona and New Mexico.
 Heaven defend us from the creation of a state of Montezuma! With the comparative merits of the two state proposition, the four-state proposition and the no-state proposition We are not now concerned. This IS an article on nomenclature. It is said in Wash ingto1 that two-state project is again talked of. and that the people of Ari- zcna are to be forced unwillingly mo state called MOntezlma by submit ting an enabling act for union with New Mexico to the combined popula- tions of the two territories. It is cal culaUed that Arizona woIld rather re- main a territory than accept such statehood. but by this little game of bunco they are to be permitted to be q minority in voting themselves on a general ballot of both constituencies into the union. The morality of that scheme might at another time arouse our interest, but we are too deeply i'm pressed by the horror oI Niontezuma to be moved by any such minor matter: Better to dwell in a perpetual state of slavery than be pitchforked into d state of MOntezuma,
 Who was Montezuma. that q sover- eign state of the American union should bear his name? What associa- tioE has he with the land to be ad-
 nitted? MOutezuma is the more or . less incorrect name of a more or less lNFUhical Indian chief who at the time or the Spanish conquest dwelt about thousand miles from the territory in question, and probably never saw or heard of it. He was not a great warrior or statesman, but appears to have been an amiable weakling whose mtsfortunes cast about him a halo of een;Imentality. It would be about as 0ppFOpriste to call the proposed state after the last Incas, Pocahontas Tous- saint LOuverture or the legendary TRmT9ny. Congressmen picking out such name suggests a romantic SDother calling her child for the heroine of the last novel she wept over.
 "Hf these two territories are to be c0snbined there are already two good RAtnss available. Arizona is euphon- t0lac and firmly fixed to one part of the soil. Descriptively and historically New Mexico is even better, and the SsISy reason for abandoning it would be the jealousy of Arizonians. New Mexico has been the name known the world over for that region for four cen turies. It has been in every geography since the arrival of the Spaniards. Il Is as thoroughly naturalized as Florida or Louisiana or Texas or California It is older than Massachusetts or Vir- ginia. It is no more un-American than the names of any of the other territories which have come down to us from Spain bringing their titles with them, and no more a servile imita- tion than New York or New Jersey or New Hampshire. The name should run with the land. It is of historic import ance. Wantonly to blot it from the map to replace it with some stupid new invention would be a piece of yer bal vandalism"
 dentexEma was pusillanimous and cruel heather, and according to the Spaaiards waE stoned to death by his nED people while trying to persuade Gnem from sttscking the place where De Wns Aetd prisoner. His nephew and successor. Guatemotzin was q much more heroic figure in the contest with the spanish invaders. but there is not the slightest reason why the name of either of these savages, should be given to the proposed state. We dc not agree with the Tribune. however. that the name New Mexico is prefer able to Arizona. The Spanish words, 'arida zona' (arid zone) which have been elided into the word Arizona, have gives Hs beautiful, euphonious and | cherished name for this territory, and | oaT people will feel that the camers | back has been entirely broken by the last straw of indignity if they must | give uo the name Arizona along with | their autonomy.