The Ketchikan miner., 1908-02-22
TIP TO THEM

Exactly what point is sought 10 be made in the subjoined article from the only paper in Alaska capable of such q strained attempt st setting forth what We are constrained to ae- eep. as it's belief that no people any where are capable of an intelligent exercise of the right of self-goyern- ment the reader is left to guess:
 ,It's been sixty years since state hood was first promised to New MeNl- co and the press dispatches today tell Us tha. it hss been promised 10 the New Mexicaus again by the present session of congress. Meantime. II Is doubtful if the southwesterners will take advantage of it fl they are allow ed 10. Railroads are few and far be- tween as they are up here. They have not yet enough people to sustain 8 state form of government, although they have eight times as many. at least. as we have. Yet those New Mexicans are long headed. The: have a big assessable property-more than Alaskans have. They also have porcelain mouthed political soldiers Of fortune who are hurrahing for state hood thinking they may be able 10 land an office, if the form of govern ment changes, just like We have up here. but il would be good propoSi- ton for betting man to buy a pool on that New Mexican taxpayers are not going 10 vote themselves into any advanced form of government which is going 10 cost them all they have 10 maintain il. They had chance 10 do 50 in 1872 and defeated it and the long headed men down there are likely to do just what they did sixteen years ago if they are given another oppor- tunity 10 do so.'
 II has not been long since promi- nent opponent of popular home gov ernment for Alaska-prominent be- cause of the position he held, and not because of any evident ability-used an argument made by the delegate from Arizona in behalf of a statehood and misrepresentation Of the smaller measure of seli-goTernment involved in the territorial form, as a reason why nor step in advance should be made in the case of Alaska. IL did not occur 10 him that If the delegate in question, in his deprecation Of the territorial form Of government had instead ot demanding something bet Ter insisted upon its abrogation and the substitution in it's stead of a bast- ard scheme of government such as Alaskans pray to be delivered from. there would have been some force to his contention against giging 10 Alaska an organization sneh as that from ~hich Arizona sought deliver ance az she now does. And yet that argument. em bodied in the official re- port Of the late unlamented. was about on par with the foregoing lame at tempt 10 contrast the prevailing con- di.ions in Alaska with those of New Mexico. between which there is 10 similarity whatever.
 The question Of statehood for New Mexico will be one for the people of that territory 10 decide for them selves, fl indeed. the congress shall pass an enabling act granting them she privilege of forming 8 constitution oi their own. l. is just possible they may not avail themselves of the privilege thus accorded them. but it is neither possible nor probable, that they will willingly consent 10 be de- prived of the measure of selt-goyern meut they already possess, or that egen the solid interests down there will be willing 10 discard the terri torial organization because of the req son hinted al in the aboTe screed. And yet all that New Mexico would gain or lose by statehood, would be the right of selection of it's own local officials on the one hand. and the nec- essity Of paying their salaries and the per diem of members of the legisla- ture and it's expenses. Though an ad- yoca;e Of territorial form of govern ment for Alaska, The Miner does not hesitate to admit that were it's editor 6 resident of New Mexico, he would, were the conditions the same as now. just as sirenuously oppose the surrend- CT of that form of government in fav- CT of statehood.