Arizona republican., 1905-11-05
PHoEN1x. ARIZONA. NOV. 5, 1905.
Who Wrote the Letters of Junlus?

A closer study of the letter which Pioneer" of Tucson, alleged himself to have received from Senator Albert J. Beverldge congratulating Pioneer on his efficient work for Arizona the Great" serves to cast a serious doubt upon the authenticity of the missive. This doubt would be partially relieved if Pioneer would disclose ais own identity, but the genuineness of the document could not be wholly accept ed without personal inspection of the letter itself and the signature of the senator Then the last vestige of doubt would be gone, obscured by the sad dening reflection that MT. Beveridge at an early stage of his brilliant ca reer was descending into dotage.
 In the beginning, there was remark cd a wide difference in literary style between the letter and the various contributions of the senator to maga- zines and periodicals in which he de- signed to set the world right in a mul- titude of directions. Ever since the senator vas projected across the nori- zon he has been in print, so that the reading public has had the opportunity of becoming more or less familiar with his graceful literary curves with which the letter to Pioneer is wholly undeco- rated
 Those of more acute taste nave pre- tended to discover a certain resem- blance between the construction of the letter and the eccentricities of style of former Governor Hughes. editor of the Arizona Star, whO by the way. is something of a pioneer. This view of the case is partially supported by cir cumstantial evidence.
 Governor Hughes enjoys the distinc- tion of being the Pioneer" in ton of being the 'Pioneer" in the use of. and the actual coiner of the expres- sion Arizona the Great" which ap- pears thirteen times in the reputed Beveridge letter. Again, the letter which bears the date of September 30 abounds in the same joint statehood arguments which long before that date Governor Hughes had worn thread bare in The Star MT. Beveridge, or the writer of the letter, has not con- tented himself with the conscienceless theft of Governor Hughes ideas; he las not even disguised them; he has purloined even the words of The Stars editor
 In one place in the letter appear these words: After the breath of life is breatned into her nostrils and she rises in her majestic beauty the youngest and loveliest of our south western states" We recall that MT. Beveridge employed those exact words in a speech he made in the senate on the Hamilton bill. It Is difficult to be- lieve that the use of that expression has become a fixed habit of the sena- tor so that he would unconsciously let them falIsfrom his pen. A writer of his experience and ability would not pur- posely use a rhetorical expression he had used before without an explanato- ry statement. Assuming, as many sus- picious persons do, that Governor Hughes, in his capacity of pioneer, might have indited the reply to him self, it may be further assumed that the governor has read everything MT. Beveridge has said or written on the subject of joint statehood and that that expression having been scared on ms brain would easily find it's way into the letter.
 Then in the Beveridge letter there is a bitterness of antipathy to terri tOrial politicians which is quite un- natural. But Governor Hughes for some years has been severely at out with the 'ins."
 One of the standard arguments the Star put forth long before September 30, is expressed in the Beveridge letter in the following language: "The ter ritories are naturally one; one in to- pography; one in history; one in des- tiny. What New Mexico lacks, Arizona supplies"
 The last sentence must be construed to mean that there Is a diversity of in terests between the two territories, making an interchange of commodities desirable. Would MT. Beveridge, who has the reputation of being a reason ing man, urge that as a reason far an- nexing the territories? Would they be brought closer together in a commer cial way by joint statehood? Could not Arizona supply New Mexicos needs as a separate state or as a territory. as well as part of a joint state? We may also ask, would it not be difficult to satisfactorily legislate in a joint state for these diversified interests?
 We would not assert that the editor