USA > Oklahoma > A history of the state of Oklahoma, Volume I > Part 53
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96
The filibuster against the statehood bill was thus described by a Washington cor- respondent (January 12, 1903) :
"The debate on the statehood bill has now been running three weeks, and accord- ing to Senator Beveridge has just begun. He says that thirty-one senators expect to speak. Senator Nelson, of Minnesota, has been speaking for five days in succession in a dreary monotone to empty benches. The only members of the senate who have listened to him have been Senator Quay, representing one side, and Senator Bever- idge, representing the other side of the controversy, and they have been relieved from time to time by some other colleagues because it is necessary to keep a sentinel
on guard. From 2 to 5 o'clock daily Sena- tor Nelson continues to read from the tes- timony taken by the subcommittee on ter- ritories which investigated the subject; from arguments submitted for the admis- sion of Oklahoma and Indian Territory and against the admission of New Mexico and Arizona; from books, newspapers, magazines and other miscellaneous litera- . ture bearing on the subject, and he calls it a speech.
"When he is tired out, Senator Burnham or Senator Dillingham will take the job, and Mr. Bard, of California, is loaded with material and can take the floor at any time it is necessary. Senator Nelson is not to blame, however, for his part in this tire- some farce. He has been selected by the committee on territories to filibuster against the passage of the statehood bill by killing time, and the other senators named have engaged in the same ignoble conspiracy.
"Why? If they should stop speaking Senator Quay would demand a vote, and he has the majority of the senate behind him in favor of the bill admitting New Mexico and Arizona. He has announced that he will permit no other legislation except the regular appropriation bills to be considered until the statehood bill is disposed of."
The deadlock went on for weeks. The short session was nearing an end, im- portant legislation was pressing for atten- tion, the president threatened to call an extra session after March 4th, but Quay and his lieutenants remained obdurate. On January 21st Senator Quay had an oppor- tunity to display his strength. While the statehood debate was in progress, a motion was made to go into executive session to consider Cuban reciprocity. It was recog- nized as a test of the forces aligned for and against the omnibus measure. Senator
Digitized by Google
1
349
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
Quay permitted the vote to be taken, a roll call being demanded, and the motion lost, eleven Republican senators joining Quay and his almost solid Democratic support to defeat the motion.
Other expedients were adopted by the shrewd Pennsylvania senator. The "omni- bus" bill was attached in committee as a "rider" to the postoffice and agriculture appropriation bills, which, being urgent measures, it was believed might overcome the filibuster. Later Quay joined with Senator Morgan, the aged but persistent opponent of the Panama canal, and thus started another filibuster, hoping his pet measure might profit thereby.
But in the last days of the session the Quay organization showed signs of disin- tegrating. A compromise, on the basis of two states being formed from the terri- tories instead of four, was acceptable to Mr. Quay, but not to the Democratic sena- tors, who continued their efforts for four states. As the close of the session ap- proached it became evident that a vote on the bill could not be reached, and that the omnibus "riders" might endanger the passage of the appropriation bills. They were therefore withdrawn by Mr. Quay, and the regular business of the senate resumed.
The filibuster had accomplished its pur- pose, and one of the most dramatic chap- ters in the history of the United States sen- ate closed, without the cause of Oklahoma statehood having been advanced beyond the stage of partisan politics and unlimited discussion.
The fifty-seventh Congress expired on March 4, 1903, and the "omnibus bill" died with it. In the fifty-eighth Congress, which convened in December, 1903, and held over till March, 1905, no substantial progress was effected. Following the lines
of the enabling legislation proposed by the Beveridge committee in the preceding Con- gress, a bill was introduced in the house by. Congressman Hamilton, providing for the union of the adjacent territories and the creation of the two new states of Oklahoma and Arizona. The bill passed the house, but was defeated in the senate, largely by the combination which had previously sup- ported the "omnibus bill." (Senator Quay had died in the meantime.) In the closing days of the fifty-eighth Congress, while the senate had under consideration the house bill (14,749) to enable the four territories to enter the union as two states, Senator Beveridge in his speech closing the debate said, as to the change of sentiment regard- ing statehood with the last two years:
"Two years ago the majority of the com- mittee on territories brought into the senate as a substitute for the then pending meas- ure a bill uniting Indian Territory and Oklahoma. At the time that thought was presented it found chill reception in this body. It was resisted by most of the poli- ticians both in the Indian Territory and in Oklahoma, and the country received it with indifference. Two years have passed. Nothing has been done in its behalf. No propaganda has been conducted to further that idea. It has depended only upon its own vitality. But the idea was lodged in the minds of the people of those two terri- tories, and it has grown until it has formed an irresistible power, so that the people of these territories themselves today are a unit upon this question, and the politicians there, in obedience to the universal public demand, have also agreed upon it.
"Not only that, but the idea of single statehood captured the country, and I hold here in my hand editorials from papers all over this nation advocating this course, re- gardless of party. In addition, the idea has grown until in this body itself it re- ceives almost the overwhelming approval of senators. And now we are to have a single magnificent state made by the re-
Digitized by Google
350
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
union of these two territories, a common- wealth unsurpassed in the Republic in gen- erous resources, delightful climate, and a splendid citizenship-for such is the greater Oklahoma for which this bill provides and the only Oklahoma that is possible to be made a state."
It is now necessary to turn from Wash- ington to the situation in Oklahoma and Indian Territory. On July 12, 1905, a statehood convention, made up of five hun- dred delegates from the Indian Territory and an equal number from Oklahoma ter- ritory, assembled at Oklahoma City. They declared in resolutions that they had .but one petition to make to Congress, and that was "that immediate joint statehood be granted to Oklahoma and Indian terri- tories, on their own merits, and without reference to any right or claim of other territories seeking admission to the Ameri- can Union."
Almost at the same time that the joint statehood convention was passing resolu- tions for a single state at Oklahoma City, in July, 1905, a call for a separate state- hood convention had been sent out by some of the principal chiefs and prominent Indians of the Indian Territory. It was
" We, the chief executives of the Cherokee, Choc- taw, Seminole and Creek nations, have in confer- ence agreed to carry out the call for a constitu- tional convention made by the principal chief of the Choctaw nation and the principal chief of the Cherokee nation, for August 21, 1905, as being adequate and binding upon all the nations under their compact to convene at the call of the chief executives of the nation wherein the recording town is located. The original call for this con. vention is hereby modified and extended as fol- lows:
On or before the 5th day of August each chief executive in jurisdiction as above specified will designate such persons as he deems proper to act as presiding officer of said mass meeting for the selection of such delegates and alternates.
If, for any reason, such presiding officer should not appear and preside, then the meeting is author- ized to fill the vacancy. A list of the delegates
held that in view of the passing of the tribal system of government with the fol- lowing 4th of March, that immediate meas- ures were necessary to provide for a gov- ernment of the Indian country. Therefore a constitutional convention was called to convene at Muskogee on August 21, 1905, for the purpose of drafting a constitution and selecting a capital and name for the new state. The first call was signed by only two chiefs, but was later somewhat modified and signed by representatives of all the five nations." At this convention, which met in Muskogee, August 21st, 182 delegates were entitled to seats, though only 150 were actually present. D. C. McCurtain was temporary chairman, and the regular organization was presided over by Pleasant Porter, with C. N. Haskell as vice-president, and Alexander Posey secre- tary. After the organization had been com- pleted and all committees appointed, the convention was given a recess until Sep- tember 5th, when the work of the constitu- tional committee was reported and revised. The convention laid out its work in a methodical manner, and labored indus- triously for several weeks, and after de-
and alternates selected at such meetings shall at once be certified by the chairman to the chief executives of such nations and such certificates thereupon being endorsed by said chief executives shall constitute credentials necessary to entitle such delegates and alternates to membership in the constitutional convention to be held August 21, 1905. The convention when assembled shall have full power to direct its subsequent proceed- ings.
W. C. ROGERS, Prin. Chief Cherokee Nation. GREEN MOCURTAIN, Prin. Chief Choctaw Nation. P. PORTER, Prin. Chief Creek Nation. J. F. BROWN, Prin. Chief Seminole Nation. GEO. W. SCOTT, Secretary, Kinta.
Digitized by Google
ยท
-
35I
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
bating the provisions of the constitution in . full convention, adopted what has been known as "the Sequoyah constitution," the name of the famous Cherokee having been proposed for the new state. The conven- tion nominated four members (two Repub- licans and two Democrats) to go to Wash- ington and work for the admission of the state of Sequoyah under its proposed con- stitution ; it declared in favor of statehood for Indian Territory separate from Okla- homa, and submitted the whole to the people of Indian Territory to be voted on, November 7, 1905-the first general elec- tion ever held in the Indian Territory. Many people, while opposing separate statehood for Indian Territory, were con- vinced that the results of the Sequoyah convention would be beneficial. Hitherto, in a political sense, the position of Indian Territory had been anomalous, without power of concerted expression or action in political matters. It was feared by many that Indian Territory, if joined to Okla- homa in a single state, would be a mere tool in the hands of the more experienced political leaders from the western side, and that the Oklahoma clique would dominate affairs greatly to the neglect and injury of Indian Territory. But the action of the people of Indian Territory at Muskogee furnished a powerful argument in demon- strating their fitness for statehood, whether separate or joint statehood. The conven- tion had taken a step toward statehood far in advance of anything done or attempted by the people of Oklahoma; and, as was asserted at the time, "if these people must go into a constitutional convention with Oklahoma, they have demonstrated their right to demand equal terms with her." "Indian Territory," to quote an article written at the time, "with a population equal to that of Oklahoma, is vastly richer
in resources, of which many-notably oil, gas, coal and asphalt-are being turned into commercial channels to the extent of many millions annually. It contains un- known wealth of granite and marble, lead, zinc and other minerals; its agricultural output and its taxable property are both greater than those of Oklahoma. The people of Indian Territory revolt at the idea of uniting in statehood with a com- munity which may levy tribute upon their vast wealth of resources for the main- tenance of state institutions where they are now located in Oklahoma."
The campaign that preceded the vote upon the constitution served to educate the people to the importance of the statehood movement. The matter was complicated by partisan politics, and by the joint state- hood issue, and perhaps the chief result, as viewed from the present, was the union of the political leaders of the Indian Terri- tory in an efficient working organization which, when the enabling act finally passed, became a powerful factor in the politics of the new state. The campaign before the election was thus described by a writer in the Outlook, in March, 1906: "The opposi- tion both in Indian Territory and Oklahoma answered that it [the separate statehood movement] was an appeal to sentiment; that the administration is opposed to the policy ; that Congress will not admit two states made out of the two territories, and that there is no use contending for it; and through the newspapers, of which the op- position controls a majority in Indian Ter- ritory, it reproduced numerous interviews and letters of senators and congressmen committing themselves in advance of the meeting of Congress, to joint statehood and discouraging the separate statehood idea ; and it employed every possible argu- ment to persuade the voters to stay away
Digitized by Google
352
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
from the polls on November 7.5 Yet the result of the election that day, as an- nounced by the election board upon the sworn returns of the election judges, was 56,279 votes for separate statehood and the constitution, and 9,073 votes against. With- out election machinery, without rival can- didates to stimulate voters, and with no revenues to defray the expenses of such an election, a total vote of 65,352 votes cast is significant of a deep interest in the ques- tion by the people of Indian Territory."
In the final solution of the statehood question, after politics and public and pri- vate interests had caused a vacillation con- tinuing for years between the advocacy of separate statehood and of joint statehood, Congress settled the matter not so much in deference to the wishes of the territories concerned, but in consideration of the na- tional rights and interests involved. The conviction had been gaining ground in the country at large that the question whether any territory shall be admitted as a state and how it shall be admitted was one to be determined primarily by the nation, not primarily by the people of the territory ; that Congress had both a constitutional and a moral right to determine whether such a territory should be divided into two or
" The Sequoyah movement was the subject of the following criticism from Delegate McGuire in a speech in the house, in January, 1906, during the progress of the final debates on the omnibus statehood bill: "There has been urged against this statehood bill as a reason why it should not become a law, that the people of Oklahoma and the people of Indian Territory desire another form of statehood. There has been something said about the state of Sequoyah, and an election re- cently held for the purpose of adopting a con- stitution for the proposed state of Sequoyah, in- cluding the Indian Territory and nothing more. The real purpose of the convention which resulted in this movement, and the effort for the state of Sequoyah, in my judgment, was not alto- gether sincere. There is a strong element in the Indian Territory, and a most dan-
more states, or whether two or more ter- ritories should be united as one state. In the closing arguments on the statehood bill as it finally passed, Senator Beveridge, re- ferring to this aspect of the question, said: "The senator from Colorado says, as though it were a noteworthy fact, that the idea of joint statehood did not originate with the people of either territory. Why should it? Statehood is not a question to be settled by the people of the territories alone ; it is a question for the nation to set- tle. It is not a local matter only ; it is a national matter. It is not merely a tempo- rary arrangement for the benefit alone of the people living in these territories; it is a permanent arrangement which fixes their relation and that of their posterity to all the multiplying millions who shall live in this Republic till the end of time."
At the opening of the first session of the fifth-ninth Congress, in December, 1905, the solution of the statehood question, so far as the public opinion of the country at large and the action of Congress were con- cerned, had been determined. In his message President Roosevelt said :
"I recommend that Indian Territory and Oklahoma be admitted as one state, and that New Mexico and Arizona be admitted
gerous element, too, to civilized tendencies, so far as the Indian is concerned, which is most strenuously opposed to any kind of state- hood, whether it be single or double, whether it be statehood for Oklahoma or the Indian Territory. Sometimes the tactics pursued by these people are one thing, and sometimes another. First they con- tend that the Indian of the Indian Territory is not prepared for statehood; not sufficiently civil- ized to cope in business and other matters with his white neighbor. Other times they call a con- vention and inaugurate the Sequoyah movement, or some other movement, the real purpose of which is not to assist the Indian Territory to statehood, but to throw every possible impediment and ob- struction in the way of statehood of any kind or character."
Digitized by Google
-
353
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
as one state. There is no obligation upon us to treat territorial subdivisions, which are matters of convention only, as binding us in the question of admission to state- hood. Nothing has taken up more time in the Congress during the past few years than the question as to the statehood to be granted to the four territories above men- tioned, and, after careful consideration of all that has been developed in the discus- sion of the question, I recommend that they be immediately admitted as two states. There is no justification for further delay, and the advisability of making four terri- tories into two states has been clearly established."
It was in accordance with this recom- mendation that Congress acted. No sub- stantial opposition was directed against the proposal to unite Oklahoma and Indian Territory, but the disposition of the four territories being still considered together, the hostility of the powerful lobby that had fought for double statehood in the case of Arizona and New Mexico in the fifty- seventh Congress still threatened to thwart the joint-state bill in this Congress. Rather than have Arizona and New Mexico joined as one state, those interests preferred the territorial condition for both. Finally a . compromise was effected. The people of New Mexico and Arizona were to be per- mitted to enter the Union as one state pro- vided that, when the enabling act was sub- mitted for ratification, each territory should vote separately, and a majority of votes in favor of the measure should be required in both territories to secure its ratification. This proviso resulted as its supporters had planned. New Mexico gave a majority for statehood, while Arizona's vote was against it, and as a result statehood for those two territories has been delayed indefinitely.
The enabling act as finally passed re- ceived the approval of the president on June 16, 1906. After years of contest and
argument, involving many interests aside from those directly concerned, and in the course of which many notable figures in the Nation's history had acted their parts, Congress had performed its duty to Okla- homa, and the center of action and interest was transferred to the seat of the civiliza- tion that had sprung up on the lands once dedicated to the Indian races.
By the terms of the enabling act, the qualified voters of Indian Territory and Oklahoma were to vote for the acceptance or rejection of the act on the date of the general election (November 6. 1906).
The enabling act, under which the two territories proceeded to form a state consti- tution and government, being the basis of statehood and second in importance only to the state constitution, is given here entire, except its provisions as to New Mexico and Arizona.
OKLAHOMA ENABLING ACT.
An Act To enable the people of Oklahoma and of the Indian Territory to form a constitution and State government and be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the orig- inal States; and to enable the people of New Mexico and of Arizona to form a constitution and State government and be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the orig- inal States.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- resentatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the inhabitants of all that part of the area of the United States now constituting the Territory of Oklahoma and the Indian Territory, as at present described, may adopt a constitution and become the State of Oklahoma, as hereinafter provided: Provided, That nothing contained in the said constitution shall be construed to limit or impair the rights of person or property pertaining to the Indians of said Territories (so long as such rights shall re- main unextinguished) or to limit or affect the au- thority of the Government of the United States to make any law or regulation respecting such In- dians, their lands, property, or other rights by treaties, agreement, law or otherwise, which it would have been competent to make if this Act had never been passed.
Digitized by Google
,
354
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
SEC. 2. That all male persons over the age of twenty-one years, who are citizens of the United States, or who are members of any Indian nation or tribe in said Indian Territory and Oklahoma, and who have resided within the limits of said pro- posed State for at least six months next preced- ing the election, are hereby authorized to vote for and choose delegates to form a constitutional convention for said proposed State; and all per- sons qualified to vote for said delegates shall be eligible to serve as delegates; and the delegates to form such convention shall be one hundred and twelve in number, fifty-five of whom shall be elect- ed by the people of the Territory of Oklahoma, and fifty-five by the people of Indian Territory, and two shall be elected by the electors residing in the Osage Indian Reservation in the Territory of Oklahoma; and the governor, the chief justice, and the secretary of the Territory of Oklahoma shall apportion the Territory of Oklahoma into fifty-six districts, as nearly equal in population as may be, except that such apportionment shall include as one district the Osage Indian Reservation, and the governor, the chief justice, and the secretary of the Territory of Oklahoma shall appoint an elec- tion commissioner who shall establish voting pre- cincts in said Osage Indian Reservation, and shall appoint the judges for election in said Osage In- dian Reservation; and two delegates shall be elect- ed from said Osage district; and the Commissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes, and two judges of the United States courts for the Indian Territory, to be designated by the President, shall constitute a board, which shall apportion the said Indian Ter- ritory into fifty-five districts, as nearly equal in population as may be, and one delegate shall be elected from each of said districts; and the gov- ernor of said Oklahoma Territory, together with the judge senior in service of the United States courts in Indian Territory, shall, by proclamation in which such apportionment shall be fully speci- fied and announced, order an election of the dele- gates aforesaid in said proposed State at a time designated by them within six months after the approval of this act, which proclamation shall be issued at least sixty days prior to the time of hold- ing said election of delegates. The election for delegates in the Territory of Oklahoma and in said Indian Territory shall be conducted, the returns made, the result ascertained, and the certificates of all persons elected to such convention issued in the same manner as is prescribed by the laws of the Territory of Oklahoma regulating elections for Delegates to Congress. That the election laws of the Territory of Oklahoma now in force, as far as applicable and not in conflict with this Act, in- cluding the penal laws of said Territory of Okla- homa relating to elections and illegal voting, are
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.