New Mexico's Quest for Statehood, 1846-1912

XIII. The Knox Bill

THIRTEEN The Knox Bill statehood appearing so bright, the delegates from New Mexico, Arizona, and Oklahoma decided to pool their resources and make the fight together . The result was an omnibus bill which bore the name of William S. Knoxof Massachusetts, chairman of the House Committee on the Territories . Rodey took credit for this combined action, telling, in a letter to three New Mexico leaders, how he initiated the measure: "I managed to get a conference of the delegates, and I suggested to them that nothing could save us but an omnibus bill and I pointed out the reasons, such as unity of action, unity of time for consideration, etc. . . ." Rodey did give credit to Delegate Mark Smith of Arizona for having secured the co-operation of the entire Democratic membership in the House to resolve in caucusto support the omnibus measureasa party.1 The result of this united effort was to wrap the fortunes of the three territories in one package bill, H. R. 12543, which would enable the citizens to form constitutions and state governmentsand be admitted into the Union.2 The bill wasreported favorably on April i, 1902. The committee gave affirmative answers to three questions which it had propounded : Do the people desire statehood? Is the population sufficient? Do the territories possess adequate taxable wealth to maintain state governments accordingto the Americanstandard? The bill was similar to recent enabling measures enacted by Congress except for its provision that the constitutional convention in Oklahoma should by "irrevocable ordinance" expressits consent that Congress might 205 ITH PROSPECTS FOR W attach all or any part of the Indian Territory to the proposed new state. Another exception to the usual statehood bills was the issue of New Mexico 's name. A provision empowered the constitutional convention of the territory to designate the name by which the new state would be known when admitted.3 On May 7, 1902, the House began consideration of the Knox bill. "Praise the Lord from whom all blessings flow/' telegraphed an enthusiastic Rodey.4 The bill seemed headed for success with Representative Knox, a respected Republican leader, lending the prestige of his name and committee chairmanship in support of the measure. Influential Republicans as well as Democrats backed the bid, and Knox delivered an extended speech in the House in its behalf. Taking cognizance of the affirmative stand on statehood in both party platforms, he emphasized the bipartisan aspect of the movement.5 Although rapid passage seemed likely, the bill did not lack opposition. Republican Representative Charles Grosvenor of Ohio conceded Oklahoma 's worthiness, but opposed the admission of Arizona and New Mexico on the grounds that their membership would disturb the political and industrial equilibrium of the county. He compared the omnibus attempt to the old frontier custom of logrolling in which neighbors for miles around camein to help a man clean his land and roll in his logs. He likened the two Southwestern territories to a poor man, "poor in spirit, poor in industry , poor in everythingexcept the genius to attach himself to somebody else . . . ." The "somebody else" was Oklahoma, a territory characterized as a big, enterprising man able to roll his own logs.6 A number of Eastern newspapers repeated this charge and even the Arizona Republican praised Delegate Dennis T. Flynn of Oklahoma for staying with the omnibus measure when he could have had statehood for his territory any time he desired to desert New Mexico and Arizona.7 A most interesting development during the House debate was the proposal by JesseOverstreet, Republican from Indiana, to admit Arizona and New Mexico as one state, rather than two separate ones, under the name Montezuma. It was argued that the measure would bring the two territories into the Union on such a basis as would make their representation in Congress bear some fair relation to their population. Debate on the amendment lasted most of the day, with Representative Lacey of Iowa acting as chief spokesman. Lacey argued that the area of the two was certainly not too big for one state and that the combined population would be sufficient for a state.8 His assertion did not impress the territorial delegates , however. Rodey claimed that the range of mountains separating the two territories was sufficient reason geographically to keep them from becoming one state. Smith pointed to the new capitol building completed in 206 NEW MEXICO'S QUEST FOR STATEHOOD Arizona...