New Mexico's Quest for Statehood, 1846-1912 (review)

346CIVIL WAR HISTORY the text. Of the three parts prepared by McCaIl, the series of individual reports provides the least information and is often tedious reading with repetition of relatively unimportant facts. Since McCaIl followed the format of the "56th Article of the Regulations of the Army," the product of these reports is about as interesting to read as those of unit military histories in today's services. Yet, there is much of interest elsewhere, especially in Frazer's thorough additions. The War Department knew "remarkably little" about New Mexico by 1850, but McCaIl helped to fill this void. He was skeptical about the assistance the "Mexican" citizenry could provide in defending the territory but was full of optimism concerning the possibility of employing Pueblo Indian auxiliaries against marauding Apaches and Navajos. Although he committed factual errors, especially about the Spanish period where, for example, he stressed the importance on mines as "the most productive of wealth," his military observations and recommendations for his own period were generally sound. These included the need for more soldiers, posts in the heart of Indian country, and mounted regular units. Finally, it should be added that New Mexico's problems in 1850, as noted by McCaIl, show an amazing similarity to those of the late Spanish period—inadequate numbers of troops, wide dispersion of forces, lack of good horses, inadequate supplies, medical problems, high transportation costs, and relative isolation of the territory. In reality, McCaIl provided U.S. authorities with the same information Spanish governors and military officers had supplied a century earlier. Oakah L. Jones, Jr. U. S. Air Force Academy New Mexico's Quest for Statehood, 1846-1912. By Robert W. Larson. (University of New Mexico Press, 1968. Pp. x, 405. $10.) New Mexico struggled longer to acquire statehood than any other organized territory in the United States. National politics proved to be a frequent stumbling block. Sectional division in 1850, the enthusiasm of New Mexico's congressional delegate for Republican views of the South in 1875, support for free coinage of silver in the 1890's, and big business connections in the Progressive period all retarded efforts to make the territory a state. Internal differences over public education, religion, taxation, and land speculation resulted in both violence and apathy which hurt New Mexico's image and chances of admission. Some congressmen questioned the size of its population and the rate of its economic growth. Yet Anglo-Protestant prejudice against Spanish-speaking , Roman Catholic Hispanos remained the most consistent note of opposition throughout New Mexico's sixty-six-year quest for statehood. New Mexicans intermittently renewed their efforts to become a state, BOOK REVIEWS347 however, out of individuals' political and economic ambitions, fears of losing land area to surrounding states and territories, and an honest desire for greater self-government. Amidst a sometimes confusing and perhaps excessive mass of names mentioned in connection with statehood campaigns Thomas Catron stands out for length of concern and influence. Catron constantly sought statehood to promote the value of his vast land holdings and the interests of the railroads he represented as an attorney. He aimed too at advancing his political ambitions which led him to domination of the territorial Republican party as its national committeeman, and to service as United States district attorney and as territorial delegate to Congress. Ultimately he won election as one of New Mexico's first United States Senators in 1912. Questionable interpretations in this study are few. Larson seems to accept Ramsdell's confusion of the plantation system with slavery in discussing the possibility of its spread to New Mexico. The author suggests strong nativist sentiment against New Mexico, but there appears little reason to emphasize its connection to Populism through "Sockless Jerry" Simpson. Most important, Larson does not develop the connection between federal patronage, state and national politics, and statehood efforts as fully as possible. It seems clear, for instance, that McKinley rejected Catron's recommendation for territorial governor because he had favored Reed as the Republican nominee in 1896 and the new President sought to strengthen his control of party machinery. The only important manuscripts to escape Larson's impressive research appear to be the William G...