Albuquerque weekly citizen. (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1891-19??, 1905-09-16
SPEAKER CHALMERS
Is FOR JOINTURE
Writes UnansweFabIe Ar9u-
meRtS For Union Of Two
Territories
WAS SPEAKER ARIZONA HOUs.


PART I.
! have been asked by several why
am ] for joint ntatehoodf" / anvc not
heaitAted % give my reasons. and
with an idea that they may intevest
your readers they are herein present.
Cd for publication.
Primarily, ! am for Joint statehood
fcr che reason that II tho people OF
Arizona and New Mexico accept the
opportunity now Offered. we wifi live
N state. elect our officers and con.
duct our own government, lnAtep1 OF
hefing 4 c0nductod from Washington,
as now. We would have voices and
votes IN both houses OF congress. and
IN the electoral college a. wen. which
now We have not. And we would have
all the taxable wealth OF the counties
OF New Mexico 60 aid us In sustaining
the expenses of 0pr state government.
hec0nldslly, I am Cor Joint state.
hood because ! have never set heard a
single valid argument against iaint.
ure. while, upon the other hand. tho
cause 81 lointure fairly brlatles with
strong and cosent arguments, any one
Of which can be graspcd aud compre.
hcnd2d easily BY tenyoaroid boy.
II TIE uttcrancDs OF both delegates
IN congress from the two territories
are 20 be believed each territory
would make a magnificent state.
Then think Of what a grand common.
.foalth the two combined would make.
Area We want. Look 81 the grand.
magnificent state oi Texas. Admitted (
IN 1875, containing a fraction more
than 100000 population. she Is today
the flith state In the union. With near
H. -.
Of growth continues, BY 1890 she viii
lead ohio, ana within forty.five years
thereafter she Will be the Empire
State OF tho Union. outstripping New
York. Without a city OF 10000 inhab- /
itants. she II what might be called
sparsely settled. having resources TO
support more than twenty times her
present population, and that without (
croWding. Twice the size Of Great
ijYltaln, which has one city alone con.
|laining 100000 souls. Texas has now
|only thirteen people TO the square
mile while New York has 100 ana
England 62T. Think then Of the future
of the two territories merged into one
great state, and ours the sister state
OF that great commonwealth whose
magnificent Eplendors are already
dazzling and whose future gloFies are
|incalculable.
Texas now leads In railways, but
|thc rail facilities that will be afford.
|ed ihp people On the new great state
|oi Arizona arc far better, and the dis
|toncos less than IN Texas, and equally
|as good rs IN California. Many lcgls-
|latlve aad judicial districts. aud many
counties In both states are AZ far ,
|arcater distances from their capitals
than would se the most remote ~
|either Ia the new state. even with the
capital IN Santa Re, from where "a
|wili be- removed by the vote oi the
people Ia 1910, 20 more central and
convenient locality.
For time Il was supposed that
|roxas would be divided into five
|sinles. aud the act OF admission IN
|lSf6 p Divides that 4 can be 20 al.
llaed Lot any man IN Texas now
fare declare for diylsicn. and "inoc- .
'lous dosuonde" or an asylum for the ,
'nrane would be his lot m short order.
have failed 20 read anywhere of Cali
sforKis anneAinE any portion OF her q
Offensive domain TO Arizona ON ac- !
|onni 0f the Rrcht distance 20 hor cap.
ltal This argument" Of distance .
from the capital Is about a. silly as d
,hough single statehood advocates :,
|hould argue that the City OF Wash
|ngtnn was 100 far distant from Frog !
Tanks for Che convenience of our peo.
bic. aavlne business az tho federal cap
Hat There "a scarcely any business
'rhhaacicd al a state capital lexcept
political, where q la better TO walk
.ofty miles than TO write lotfor") q
hat a tWO-ceut stamp VIII not trans y
ct &
Remember that IN accepting state.
hood. Sc are not losing Arizona, hnt
4ainme NCw Mexico. Territorial az.
,resslon "a and has been. always. q \
bone Of contention between nations
Hates. aud men. For years Utah has :
'rlcd In vain 10 take a alice of from :,
Hrizona. even asking congress Tor u; .
IND about thity years ago Nevada Y
|oOli away from Us a gOOdly slice Of
|ur territory by nm act of congress-.
.ook at any map printed before 1870. y
Ind sou VIII see that the northern 3.
'oundary of Arizona went straight 10 y
|hc California line, and an that area
h NoSQia that reaches down 10 the
|niorado fivor, south from a prolonea. q
lion OF the Arizona northern line was
part of our territory There We ~
|ere deprived Of an area greater than o
|ochiae county. Now some Of our y
|eQple are kicking (uot all--thaDk n
loa,) because the general govern. A.
|ie ~ proposes 10 giye us outright an u
rth thirty times a. large For years ul
e4aH cuntended through every court VI
fhe land for "iusi little more" Al
is6minF her legal boundary extended bl
her D.A any citizen of tho state y
the area affected claim that the NJ
e wanted was 90 far removed 81
m the capiial7 Then why not &C. J..
9It the millions OF acres now thrown A
congress 10 ArlEonaf 81
Nwson ls ALIVE AND WILL Il