The border vidette., 1911-01-14
VOTE FOR THE CONSTITUTION
Hon. Frank J. Duffy's Reply to J.. O..
 Dunbar.
Nogaies. Ariz., Jan. 5, 1911

Dear Sir: First, let me wish you a
 very happy and prosperous New Year.
 Your letter of fecember 9 req ched
 my office while I was out of town,
 which partly accounts for the delay
 in acknowledging it's receipt and
 in forwarding you reply. In your
 letter ycu ask. "Do you believe Governor Sloan was telling the truthP'
 Do you believe Taft will rej ct the
 constitutioI.P' and 'What, in your
 opinion. is the best way out of the
 muddle?" And you request brief
 expression of my views regarding the
 situation confronting the people of
 A,izons as to the adoption or rejection l of the constitution.
 would not accuse Governor Sloan
 or any other man of insincerity. or
 wiIful attempt to misrepresent the | facts, and I have no doubt but that
 while in Washington and other eastern cities the governor found much op-
 position to the constitution as framed
 by the constitutional conventien; but
 it is also a fact that Governor Sloan
 can find much opposition among east
 ern people, and especially among the
 leaders of his own party to Arizona's
 admission under any form or kind of | constitution. I do not believe that ethe opposition to the constitution is 20 l widespread or so firmly grounded as
 che lo7ernor and other republican
 leaders who havelately returned from Washington would have us believe. They say congress wall reject the con
 stltution. They must mean the re-
 publican members ok congress. for
 by what right or authority does | Governor Sloan, or Mr. B. A. Fowler,
 or ex- Attorney General Clark presume ! to speak for the democratic members of Oongress2 One of your correspond
 ents says that no democrat has de- elared in favor of the constitution. | What democrat of National reputa | tion, may l ask, has declared against | the constitution submitted by the AtO OC, SOa6hOf OoAtOy AA ] his telegram to Delegates Webb and Cobb, advised that in his opinion 1t would be better to eliminate the recall provision of the constitution, but that l advice or suggestion, ss l understand it, was only as matter of expetiency, in order to placate as far as possible the opponents of Arizone's admission under any circumstances of under any form of contribution, and not as ex-
 pressivs of any opposition on the part | of Senator Bailey to the recall itself. It is a significant fact that the | opposition to the constitution emanates
 now from the same source and from
 the same political fountain head which
 during the campaign preceding the
 election of September 12 advocated
 the election of republican delegates to the constitutional convention as being
 the representatives of the only party
 who could or would draft constitu- tion suitable to the needs of Ari-
 zona. But the voters thought other
 wise, and expressed their opinion at
 the polls in no uncertain manner, By
 an overwhelming maj ority they elected
 delegates pledged to the provisions of
 the initiative, the referendum and the
 recall, and in my opinion they will on
 February g, 1911, in a manner equal
 lY as certain and emphatIc, approve by their ballots the action as their chosen delegates, by ratifying by a
 substantial ma ority the constitution submitted to them.
 What is there in the recall that
 would frighten any honest officIsl who conscientiously endeavors to perforn the duties of his office according to hi: sworn promise2 What is thele SC sacred about the judiciary that they must be exempted from it's provisions What halo surrounds the judge on the [ bench. and why Is he, by reason o that fact alone 30 far removed frcu ordinary mortals that he should not bt ' responsible to the people to mhom ht 2 owes his position and his power ana 3 authority?