OCR Text |
Show 1880 TO 1912 OTT Delegate Andrews 487 took up the work where it had been left by Delegate Rodey. Mr. Andrews’s methods were entire ly different from those of Mr. Rodey. From long and intelligent acquaintan ce with affairs political, Mr. Andrews knew the full value of quiet, convincing conversation. He also understood the value of personal friendships brought about through favors rendered to those who were full-fledged members of congr ess and which, being a delegate statehood bill should be the ceeded in having it recorded the committee on territories, first introduced in that session , and actually sueas House Bill No. 2. The bill, as usual, went to ‘‘Unfortunately there was ative to the territories at this session. While but three of ' ’ anized territories still existed, each was making heroic effort 1 to the Union and each was selfishly anxious to be the first to recei id ion. Among the statehood bills then in the committee on territories were No, 2, the New Mexico bill just named; No. 152, an Enabling Act for Oklahoma; No. 2015, a similar Arizona; No. 4570, authorizing bill for single statehood for Oklahoma and Indian Territory; No. 9675, providing No. 11992, for the union of Oklahoma and Indian Territory ; anothe r bill for Arizona singly; No. 11995, a similar bill for New Mexico; and No. 12543, ‘to enable the people of Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico to form constitution s and state governments, and be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original states,’ ‘On April 1, 1902, the committee, the latter measure, thus uniting all the through Mr. Knox, reported in favor of territories in one omnibus bill. (Repor No. 1309). t In this Shape it passed the house on May 9th and was received by the senate on May 12th. ‘“It was at this Stage of the long strugg le, that Senator Quay of Pennsylvania became such an ardent champion of New Mexico, that the grateful people through their legislature named one of their counties for him. ‘The question of forming one state by uniting New Mexico became prominent at this time, the bill which elicited most debate 14749, which was an enabling act for Oklahoma and the Indian one state, and for New Mexico and Arizona as one state. On everidge made a and Arizona, being H. R. Territory as this, Senator notable speech, entitle discussion on February 6, 1905, in which d ‘Arizona the Great,’ in closing the he a Py P od eo" * EE PETE Ter trem Nee ae inte Tin te ORO hoy en ae eae ee ee oe fe: * Pea ar eke ci ane Cee a er ee er ae ee eh ee oe EL NTR eae Ee * ee * ee Pon 2 phi Cee bP, ara days eH 4 Wo before, on December 2nd, Ndrews introduced a single statehood bill thefor first day of the session, Delegate New Mexico, in the usual form bd ss). ik an? > Teller introduced a bill for separate stateh ood for New Mexico (Senate 079); the jointure project having been rejected by the vote of Arizon *vember; and as there was no chance for action at that time, he reintr a in oduced © Same bill the beginning of the next congress on December 4, 1907 (Senmo B46, 60th atCongre a committee on territories. Soon chairm quite similar to the one discussed during an of the committee, prethe preceding session, to enable Oklahoma and the Indian Territory to become one state, and New Mex‘co and Arizona another; and this passed the house almost immediately, on auary 25th. At the opening of the second session of this congress (the 59th) nator ere) ‘‘On December 13th, 1905, Mr. act with the usual title, which « Bradford Prince, Ibid., pp. 121-2: introduced H. R. 7042, an enabling customary course of reference to the afterwards, on January 20, 1906, Mr. Hamilton, Sented a bill Andrews took the * pictures the glory of the combined State in these eloquent words: ‘Not Arizona the little, but Arizon a the great; Not Arizona the provincial, but Arizon a the national; not Arizona the creatu re of a politician ’s device, but Arizona the child of the Nation’s wisdom.’ ”? *87L. |