The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1910-05-30
oklahoma city's sohpjstry "
(Tulsa Worldl


In its fight for the state capital
Oklahoma City should at least stick
LQ the issue and not add an Insult TO
IGe voters intelligence in addition 70
The injury ii steadfastly proposes 10
20 him The following appeal to pre-
iudice, taken from the Oklahoman, IA
calculated TO cloak the weakness OF
the capital location scheme:
There arc some things that the peO-
pie of what was formerly The Indian
Territory should remember In this
state capital location contest
They should remember that Okla
Eoma City was from the first and al
ways at the front in the battle for
single statehood, and Guthrie was not.
Oklahoma City business men gave
financial aid toward the conduct Of
the campaign for single statehood.
Oklahoma City newspapers constant
/ ly championed the cause Of single
statehood
They should also remember. that
Guthrie newspapers and Guthrie poll.
ticians from first to last opposed sin
gle statehood and declared that In-
dian Territorys people were almost
entirely of the illiterate and criminal
classes
win the people of the East Side
| forget these slurs?
We hardly think SO Hs.r
Granting that all the Oklahoman
here AYERS is true 1t can not proper
" have any bearing on the present
capital location scheme, which Is OBJ
iected to, not on the grounds of favor
to one or prejudice of another of the
contestants, but because the scheme
ls: A. Al
/. A breach Of good faith. In that
| II proposes to controyert that pro-
vision Of the constitution which locat-
cd the state capital at Guthrie until
| 1913.
2. The most dangerous piece OF
legislation ever proposed to a people,
in that II bears on its face a deter
n'ination 10 raid the state treasury,
establish reign of graft, destroy one
community, not for the benefit of the
state or any tax payer, but for the
further enrichment OF single section,
and to tax the whole expense, not
against Oklahoma City property own
ers, who would be the sole and only
beneficial les, but against John Jones,
OF Ellis county; Dick Smith, of OF
tawa county, Bill Brown, of MuCur-
tain county, and every other small
land owner IN the state.
Outside of the precincts of Okla
homa City this capital location fights
addresses itself to the voter In these
terms
/. Is there any public necessity for
the state capital TO be changed at
this time? II so, what is that neees-
sity?
2. Will |, as tax pyaer already
burdened to the limit, be benefited in
proportion to the cost?
3. Guthrie has been assured OF the
capital until 1918; it is so written in
the constitution. The constitutional
convention spoke for the entire state,
and can |, as citizen of the state,
vote now to repeal what is made inn
possible of repeal, without doing vio-
lence TO my own integrity for no 9th.
or purpose than to remove the cap
ltal less than fifty miles, further bur.
den my own property, and do an in
justice to one community for no 9th.
er purpose than to further enrich an
ctber community?
And the conclusion being reached
by nine out of every ten voters not
Jailed with Oklahoma City in some
way Is just this. As
The present capital buildings at
Guthrie a-e costing the state not a
cent: Guthrie erected them and plac-
ed them at the disposal of the state
free OF cost Therefore there is no
necessity for a change at this time.
! will vote against the whole propo.
stion, leaving the question open for
unpreiudiced consideration at some fu-
ture time when my interests may be
more carefully safeguaTded
And great majority of the votes
VIII be cast along that line.
As to Guthrie having fought single
statehood while Oklahoma city fay.
cred II there Is just this to say:
Guthrie was then the state capital and
was conducting O selfish fight The.
obly reason that oklahoma City threw
Us Influence TO the side of single
Statehood was because Oklahoma City
did not possess the capital and
! thought by SO doing II was advancing
its relfl5h interest A
Will Oklahoma City or the Okla
boman pretend that II was actuatet
b- DatfiOfigm2