Bisbee daily review., 1905-12-24
Governor kibbeys Plea For Arizon
 n H Secretary of

The defeat of the bill enabling New
 Mexico and Arizona to jointly form 8
 State constitution. and providing for
 their ultimate admission to the Union
 Ss one State was received by the peO-
 pie of the Territory with universal
 qualification. The small marginal
 by which the defeat was effected ill
 the Senate and tRe prompt avowal by
 the friends and advocates of that
 measure of their purpose to renew
 their efforts at the next ensuing ses-
 sion of Congress has, however. excited
 general alarm.
 The proposed union is regarded by
 our people as a menace to the pros
 periJy and progress of the Territory.
 For more than forty years the peo-
 pie of the two communities have lived
 in separate Territories. and whatever
 of progress or achievement they have
 attained they have attained them un-
 der totally different conditions, both
 artificial and natural The proposed
 union involves necessarily a change
 in those artificial conditions. Either
 he people of New Mexico will have
 to abandon her laws and customs and
 adopt those of Arizona or the people of Arizona will have to submit to those of New Mexico As New Mexi- co has the larger population, it is not to be expected that the people of that Territory will voluntarily abandon their laws, their habits, and customs 10 adjust themselves to those preYa- lent in Arizona There is no reason that they should do so; if there were, then those laws would long ago have aSsimilated themselves to our own. IL is not at all probable that New Mex jeans would be persuaded that Arizona laws are to be preferred to their own, nor is it any more probable that Arizo- nians would have preference for those of New Mexico.
 The question of which of the two systems is better adapted 70 the pur- poses of the government of the peO- l pie of the proposed joint State is not | necessarily involved; if, it were. it l would be useless to discuss il. If 1 there are any lines upon which there would apt to be a division. the people ! of New Mexico. being the more numer- ous. would prevail. To suppose that il would be otherwise is to suppose . lldN t4-| ANIN 4hGA4tduo udNt htIbtA- ately adopted a system of lays with which the are dissatisfied. and yet one which they persisIently retain. lt is true that a system of laws diff ferent from that prevalent in either of the two Territories might be adoptt- ed for the government of the two Ter ritories when they shall have jointly become a State. but this is improba- bic. as it involves an abandonment by the people of both of the Territories of habits. customs. and laws to which they have long become accustomed. they are satisfied. This presupposes a double sacrifice-the voluntary aban- donmelt Of each Of those customs, habits and laws which have been the means or the incidents of their sepa- rate development, and the adoption of a radically different set of rules to govern them in the future. And it is not a question whether it might not be well for both that a new system | of rules should be adopted That may be conceded. for it may be true of every Commonwealth in the Union, but if it is iJ must be viewed from that standpoint from which no true American will consent to view the matter. That standpoint is the want of a superior wisdom and beneyolenCe of the proposed lawmaker 10 those . 10 be governed by the proposed law. The American, or the citizen of any , free and independent State, will not concede the superior wisdom and | benevolence of the lawmaker unless ! he himself is that lawmaker We haava fn hoT I,,A other Iawmaker than the people them | selves is necessarily a tyrant, and ! laws so made tyrannical edicts against which it is patriotic and heroic to rebel. SOphistry and philosophy may either teach a different rule, but Ameri | cans are not apt pupils in that school.
 That all just government must de- rive their power from the consent of the governed is a fundamental dogma of all American institutions. It admits of neither dispute nor argument. In recognition of and in cOnsonance with this doctrine Congress, in 1863, gave 10 the people of the Territory of Ari- zOna the power to legislate upon all rightful subjects of legislation not in- consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States. It is not necessary to discuss the origin of the power of Congress to grant this power of self-government, nor even to admit it. for it is fully. freely, and unques- tiOnably acquiesed in; nor is it neces- sary by the application of the funda- ] mental dogma that the power was not a subject Of grant by Congress, as that power was always and always will be inherent in the people. inde- pendent of their inclination or ability to assent to or exercise. Later Con sress imposed on the legislative pow CT of the Territories further limita- tions. but this does not impute want of the ability in the Territories of self-gOvernment, for these limitations are identically. those imposed by the constitutions of many of the States upon their own legislatures They i were found by practice and experience [