Arizona republican. [volume] (Phoenix, Ariz.) 1890-1930, 1911-01-20
CONSTITUTION
PRO AND CON
Earnest Discussion Al City
Club Dinner Z
TAFTS STAND QUESTIONED
Cunniff Thinks Anderson,
Sames and Clark Prevar-
icated w hen They
Brought Reports of OPP
position in Washington.

Arguments Tor and against the pro-
posed constitution of Arizona; argu-
ments on the way 10 secure statehood;
arguments upon the initiative. the ref
erendum and the recall: arguments
upon every phase of the momentous
question now agitating the territory
from center TO border, were presented
at the City club dinner held last even
ing in X. of p. hall
Statehood and the Constitution" was
the subject for discussion, and il is
without doubt the most important sub
ject the club ever took up. Among the
speakers were three members of the
constitutional convention, a former
governor of Arizona md several promi-
nent citizens.
Nearly a hundred persons were pres
ent and from the way in which they
received the various speeches il was
evident that a majority were opposed
to the adoption of the constitution. The
documents supporters received cOnsid-
cradle applause. however.
NJ. G.. Cunniff, member of the con-
ventiOn from Yavapai county, was first
introduced by Dwight 3. Heard. Mr.
Cunniff vigorously defended the con-
stitution, declaring that it was just the
kind of a constitution the people want
ed and that the only hope OF state
hood was to roll up such a majority in
its favor that neither congress nor the
president could doubt where Arizona
stood
Through the argument Of W. F.
Cooper, member of the delegation from
Pima county and one of the most vigor-
Gus opponetns of the constitution in
the form it was presented to the peo-
pie. ran an earnest plea for statehood.
Judge Cooper said that he did not like
the constitution and thought it would
engander the government of Arizona
should it ever be put into effect, but he
was willing to run the chance of that
If. by it's adoption on February 9th,
statehood will be secured. After earn
estly reviewing the situation, however
he did not see any possibility OF 1t be-
ing approved by the president and con-
gress. They have the power To reject
and whether the people of Arizona
think they should have been accorded
that power, they must be reckoned
with. That they have the power 10
say whether Arizona shall or shall not
enter the union under this constitution
is a condition and not a theory.
Judge Cooper referred 10 the mes
sage brought back from Washington oy
Governor sloan DO you think the gov
ernor would lie?" he asked. The speak
or went on to point how unlikely 1t Is
that Arizona will ever have an oppor-
tunitv to test the constitution by ac-
tual application.
A member of the Maricopa delega-
ton. Judge a. c. Baker, was then In
PRODUCED. Judge Baker spoke of the
unrest in the nation the de-
mand for a form of government
which will place legislative power di-
rectIy in the hands of the people. and
declared the Arizona constitution TO
he a step toward representative instead
of misrepresentation government.
Concerning the statement of Senator
Beverage that the people of Arizona
are not fit for statehood, the speaker
declared that the Indiana senator had
no real knowledge of Arizona citizen
ship and is wholly mistaken" In re-
gard to the declaration that Taft will
turn down the constitution, Judge
Baker gave it as his opinion that Gov
ernOr Sloan has been misunderstood
that the governor has merely stated 1t
as his opinion that the president Will
refuse to approve the document. The
only ground upon which TAFT might
turn down the constitution was its un-
constitutionality, and he will not dare
declare il unconstitutional until the
supreme court has decided the case
now pending to determine the legality
of Oregons fundamental law.
The chairman read letter from f.
f. Ellinwood. a democratic member of
the convention from Cochise. who was
unable to attend Mr.. EllinwOod had
written that in his opinion there was
no remote possibility of President Taft
approving the constitution. He agreed
with Governor Sloan and with The Re
publican, which he cOmplimented very
highly
Rev Robert s. Fisher of the First
Methodist church declared himself to
be a believer in direct legislation. but
he did not believe it to be cure for all
governmental evils. 1t is a calm harbor
for the ship of state. but harbOr full
of mines. Corporations, he said. were
opposed to direct legislation because 1t
costs more to buy elections than To buy
legislatures. and he cited an instance
from his own knowledge in which
railroad company had controlled Cal
ifornia election by hiring leaders among
certain elements.
Mr.. Fisher expressed grave doubts