Chasing the Santa Fe Ring: Power and Privilege in Territorial New Mexico

11: The Myth of the Ring

207 Chapter Eleven THE MYTH OF THE RING Y I n September 1878, the Santa Fe Weekly New Mexican addressed recent criticism of the territory’s political elite, commenting, “We have had a surfeit of howling about a mythical ring and of vague and uncertain general charges of fraud, robbery, oppression and wrong.”1 The New Mexican went on to launch a spirited defense of the much maligned political elite that detractors insisted on calling the “Santa Fe Ring.” The paper disputed the very existence of such an entity. The term mythical was used to indicate something imaginary—fabricated, fictitious, conjured up out of thin air— which is what the writer thought of the allusions he was complaining about. Another common usage for the word myth has more to do with the legend or narrative growing up around a person, event, or phenomenon that may have some accepted factual basis. The existence of Stephen Elkins, Thomas Catron, Max Frost, and other familiar individuals as figures of importance in the public life of the territory was not disputed. Whether they comprised an alliance of men deliberately pursuing purposes inimical to the public interest was a matter of interpretation. Newspaper critics and political opponents, with later historians, fiction writers, film makers, and tellers of village and family tradition, have contributed to the construction of a narrative , simplified for ease in retelling, concerning a powerful elite group and its impact on the economic and political life of the territory. This is the other myth of the Santa Fe Ring. It could be said with some justification that the Santa Fe Ring is mostly or entirely myth. In the absence of artifacts confirming the existence of an organized conspiracy and identifying its participants, even serious historical works refer to the Ring in terms better suited for a discussion of traditional interpretive stories than for a clinical description of social and political phenomena . Scholars who are normally meticulous in researching and documenting assertions may fall prey to the myth, foregoing some of the usual 208 Chapter eleven rigor in research and documentation, and referring to the Ring as though its existence, nature, and impact were common knowledge. One of the first clues to the mythic character of the Santa Fe Ring, as revealed in various literary and historical references, is found in the language used to describe it. References to the Ring commonly imply structure and official character that did not exist. The well-respected Hal K. Rothman referred to Catron and Prince as “charter members of the Santa Fe Ring,” although there were no members other than by inference, and there was no charter.2 It is not unusual to see someone referred to as a “paid-up member of the Santa Fe Ring,” a “card-carrying member of the Ring,” or “a peripheral member.” In a literal sense, there were none of these. Howard Roberts Lamar writes that Charles Gildersleeve, a lawyer and Democratic Party leader, was “a land-grant speculator and unofficially a member of the ring.”3 Were there, then, official members, and if so, who were they and what made them official? Figure 28 “Santa Fe Ring,” cartoon in Thirty-Four, October 27, 1880. From early declarations of its existence to the present, the Santa Fe Ring has been an iconic symbol of corrupt power and a target of derision for its detractors. Image from Archives and Special Collections, New Mexico State University Library. 209 The Myth of the Ring Based on an informal survey of nonfiction works referring to the Santa Fe Ring, the most common adjectives used in introducing the notion to readers are notorious and infamous. Other common descriptors are ruthless, shadowy, nefarious, and the more clinical and less emotionally charged corrupt and powerful. A more creative writer styled the Ring malodorous. Sometimes the writer goes on to explain who has done what to merit such a judgment. Often he or she does not. Without elaboration, such depictions contribute more to the myth than to an understanding of the history associated with the phenomenon known as the “Santa Fe Ring.” Narratives that have the Santa Fe Ring generating collective decisions and acting as an entity have no documentary basis in history. Statements to the effect that “the Santa Fe Ring had lobbied the Department of Interior,” or that the Ring “arranged for Marshal Sherman to appoint Peppin an acting deputy U.S. marshal” or “levied...