Albuquerque evening citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1905-1907, 1905-12-02
Il do not like you, DIR. Fell.
The reason why l cannot tell;
But this | know and know full well,
l do not like O DIR. Fell.n

The Arizona ants cannot give the true reason why
the do not like joint statehood-why, in fact, they do not
like statehood at all-and so they present the not un-
usual spectacle of en~veloping themselves in a gauzy gar
ment which can neither keep in heat nor keep out cold,
which neither conceals their nakedness nor deceives any
as to their want of clothing.
Mr.. Kibbey repeats the assumption that the vast
majority of the people of Arizona are opposed to joint
statehood; and yet, like the other leaders Of the ants,
he acknowledges he prefers to go without statehood in
definitely" rather than submit the question to the people
of his territory. despite his own statement as to the
vastness of the majority who, like himself, are unalter-
ably opposed to jointure. Would not such a vote, show
ing as the Arizona bankers claim SO per cent of the peo-
Pile or as the governor claims the vast majority-would
not a vote, showing such an opposition, do greatly more
against Joint statehood. when presented to congress,
than all the p~arrot-like repetition OF a statement which
is denied as often as it is made, and the truthfulness OF
which is disbelieved by many who have heard 1t? The
very uhwillngness of the anti leaders to submit the
question to vote, brands their repeated utterance of the
same old claim with unavoidable improbabiity.
The statement that in the constitutional convention
there will be 10 delegates from New Mexico to 40 from
Arizona, is slightly inaccurate. The convention, as pro-
posed, will consist of 10 members, A being from Arr
zona and sc from New Mexico. That s, Arizona will
have two ffths of the strength, to New Mexico's three
ffths. If this territory has three times the voting popu-
lation of Arizona, which Mr.. Kibbey says, then the APP
pOrtionment is manifestly unfair to New Mexico; and yet,
showing how anxious the people of New Mexico are for
statehood and how more than fairly they are willing TO
act toward their sister territory, this improper appor-
tionment has never been complained of.
Then, too, every one knows that the ants in this
territory would vote with the ants of Arizona against
joint statehood, while the pro- ointure people in both
territories would vote together; and thus the preponder-
ant vote would express the sentiment of the majority
in the two territories. Is there any thing un-American
in the control of the majority? Did not New Mexico
and Arizona formerly constitute one territory, and should
not the vote of the majority of the inhabitants occupy
ing that old area determine whether or not that area
shall continue as two territories or be admitted to the
union as one state? Such course would be most emil
nently American. Does any one suppose for an instant
that If congress should put it to vote in Arizona whether
the part Of that territory lying northwest of the Colorado
shall be united TO Utah, these same ants would contend
for a moment that the question ought to be settled alone
by the people living in the part beyond the river? There
is an old saying that those who cannot turn cannot spin
and another that it is a poor rule which does not work
both ways. @
But the fact of the matter is that none of Governor
Kibbey's contentious will be found to cut any ice. Con-
gress is tired of the territorial business. Arizona and
New Mexico, Oklahoma and Indian Territory for years
have been Knocking for admission into the union, thus
consuming much time that might have been used in at
tending to other matters. Congress has made up its
mind to two things: This territorial business shall be
ended; only two states shall be admitted. Neither muse
the people of the territories deceive themselves by the
opinion that congress cares a fig for the maudlin senti-
ment among them over names. lines, and territorial his
tory. On the contrary, The parts of the public domain
outside of the organized states, is considered in its to-
talty as a possession of the whole country, and to be
administered for the country's benefit. For doing this
ton, territorial entities have from time to time been ere
ated; but that there was an inherent right for such
creation, continuance or cessation, or that there was any
eternal fitness in boundaries adopted, enlarged or cur
tailed, is as groundless as il is absurd, Whether the old
territory shall be one state or two, whether it shall be
called New Mexico or Arizona, whether the meets anC
bounds shall be one thing or aDother-all these and many
other questions are for congress, the governing power
OF the country, to determine for the good of the whole
country or according to the wishes of the majority of the
American people.