The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-03-14
rnE srArEHoop MEAsunE.

it passed the House, and as he and | the President wanted it. That bill was to force Arizona and New Mexico in as one State, and Oklahoma and In- dian Territory as another. Not only did the Senate refuse 70 concur in the House bill, but cut out all mention of Arizona and New Mexico. and the bill, thus minus one-half it's original dimen- sions, goes back to the House.
 whether the Speaker will adhere to his determination to Tight 1t out with the Senate" is not certainly known and, of course. no one can foreten what would be the result of such contest between the two houses. Judg- ing from the way the Presidents will was carried out by the Speaker in forcing Roosevelt's railroad measure through that body, it may be that Can Tnon can influence the House to refuse to concur in the Senate amendments. If that Is done. there is little prob- ability of Statehood for any of the ter ritories at this session of Congress We do not believe that the Senate can be driven from its position. and if the House should prove equally stubborn. the matter must go over to another session.
 We have never been able to under stand Roosevelts insistence on his proposition to unite New Mexico and Arizona, unless it may be attributed to sheer obstinacy. Having once ex- | pressed himself in favor of such ac- tion by Congress. he preferred to stick to it. even after some of his besE Party friends showed him the wrong of it. The reasons he has given are hardly worth noticing, and no impar- | tiaI Congressman could properly be in- 1 fIuenced by them. Joining Indian Ter ritory and Oklahoma Is suf1cient1y in- | excusable. Each one of those territo- ries has sufficient area and population l to form a State and should be allowed to do so. and though they are willing to agree to the outrageous plan of uniting them, in order that they may come in as 8 State at once, we are not sure that It would not be better for them to remain out for the pres- ent and eventually come in as separate States.
 We join The New Haven Register in these views:
 The action of the Senate constitutes a stinging defeat for the administra- I tion must be admitted, The formation ! of two States out of these four ter nas 1eeR wsie To2ees 9f | for the favorable attitude of the House of Representatives, on the one hand, ator Beverfdge of Indiana, on the oth- CT hand, who has charge of the jointure
 in tna5 PO6y 6yw s tb do nGt pTstend came to lend its great name and in fluence to the propssed generalization State. The reasons for the consolida- tion of Oklahoma and Indian Territory into a State have been from the first case of the other territories the req sons all ran, and ran quickly in the opposite direction. Not only has it ity of the residents of those territories were opposed to the proposed Jointure
 fSa hut stas t has ia also se formed would be absurd in it's area and magnificent distances: To have ig- nored these considerations, which were brought to the attention of President Roosevelt upon more than one occasion, by men whose word he should have accounted for upon grounds not consis- square deal" What was proposed was to impose upon the people of these ter ritorics State form of government against their will and against the probabilities of peace and order. I It ia undoubtedly a defeat. and a de- served one. for the administrations po- sition was not creditable to 1t. It has been so plainly shown that the people of New Mexico and Arizona are opposed to joining themselves together that it Is difficult to understand why Roosevelt has not only insisted on such union, but has, if he has not been badly mis- represented, used both personal and official influence in the matter.
 There is one feature of the bill that really seems absurd. That is the pro- viso which prohibits the sale of in- toxicating liquors in the Indian Ter ritory portion of the new State for a period of twenty-one years. We may admit that it might be best for the Indians themselves, If deprived of strong drink. but how can the United States enforce it there any more than it can in any other State? That pro- viso can be inserted in the enabling act, and Congress might refuse to ad- init the new State into the Union un- less the prohibitory clause is inserted in the State Constitution, but what then? As The New Haven Register says. "once in the Union as a sovereign State, Oklahoma would have from the first day all the powers Connecticut has as regards her own domestic af- fairs. and the regulation of the liquor traffic is one of them.'
 Of course it will. It may have that proviso in its first Constitution. but as soon as the new State puts on the "toga virilis" of Statehood. there will l be nothing to prevent the calling of constitutional convention which will eliminate the prohibition feature and provide for licensed saloons. Besides, 1t is little less than an absurd par tiality to say that liquors may be sold in one-half of the State and not in the other. Perhaps Congress yielded to some sentiment when it inserted such an impossible regulation, but it was a ridiculous feature, all the same. -S-o-S-
 Judge" Hamilton once said that al- most a million and a half dollars of insurance money had been placed at his disposal to be used for legal and legislative expenses Now that he is back here and may be put on the wit