This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 66-5979 HOOVER, Herbert Theodore, 1930- HISTORY OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN NEW MEXICO, 1867-1952. I The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1966 History, general I -a University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA OlADOATE COLLBŒ HISTORY OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN NEV/ MEXICO, 1867-1952 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY T/ttoiiore. PRBERTj HOOVER Norman, Oklahoma 1966 HISTORT OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN NEW MEXICO, 1867-1952 APPROVED BY r é  â . ^ 0 ' V ^ 6 6 / DISSERTATION COMMITTEE PREFACE The primary objective of this study is to trace the histoiy of the Republican p arty in New Mexico from i t s beginnings in th e I860* s to 1952» The reader will seek in vain for a detailed account of eadi party convention, a summary of every campaign, or even the mention of all the Republican leaders whose contributions to partisan history merit attention. He will find instead a discussion of the origins of the party, its rise to power during territorial times, its decline after statehood in I 9I I and some of the reasons for its relegation to a secondary role in public affairs in recent times. While the research was taking shape, personnel in charge of manuscripts a t the U niversity of New Mexico and the U niversity o f Oklahoma libraries offered inestimable assistance by providing direction into the papers of Thomas B. Catron, Albert B. Fall and Patrick J. Hurley. Also, ex-Governor Edwin L. Mechem, Earl Stull and James E. N elei^, all of Las Cruces, ware exceedingly generous in affording time for personal interviews which helped clarify some of the current problems of the New Mexican Republican party . Professor W. Eugene Hollon, chairman of the committee, has con­ tributed generously in behalf of this thesis, giving rigid critician and kind encouragement. Many of its merits are the product of his effort, \diile responsibility for its faults rests solely with the author. Other i i i members of the committee •(dio have offered critician and help are Professors Max Moorhead and Prison Gooch and Dean John E zell. Mrs. Donna B iel ski typed the preliminary and final drafts of the manuscript. Finally, my -wife, Karolyn, has been a constant contributor and friendly critic. Her understanding and willingness to sacrifice have been magnificent. %.thout them, this study would never have been completed. iv table of contents Page PREFACE i i i Chapter I. SPANISH TRADITION IN NEW MEXICAN POLTTICS SINCE 1848 II. THE EMERGENCE OF POLITICAL PARTIES IN NEW MEHCO, 1848-1910 ................................................................................ 23 in . GENESIS OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN NEW MEXICO, 1848-1875 .................... « ........................................... 39 IV. THE SANTA FB RING AND THOMAS CATRON, 1873-1896 . 59 V. THE GOVERNOR'S RING AND MIGUEL A. OTERO I I , 1896-1904- 83 VI. REPUBLICAN UPHEAVAL AND REUNIFICATION, 1904-1910 , . 104 vn. THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION AND ITS AFTERMATH. 119 vin. THE PROGRESSIVES AND THE BALANCE OF POWER, 1912-1930 137 IX. REPUBLICAN STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL, 1930-1952................. 160 X. CONCLUSIONS........................... ,.............................................. 184 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 187 SPANISH TRADITION IN NBf USKICAN FOUTICS SINGS 1848 CHAPTER I Nhy pe<^e vote as they do Is the result of the Mnd of envlnm- ment In #±6h thoy live, the nay they make their living» their racial inheritance • • • their educational attainments, their religious affiliations» their leadercthip, and vhat John Stuart ffi.ll once called th e ir * temg)erament, " ^ Hay Allen BUlington has observed that idien Anglo America clashed uLth Spanish America in the Southwest "the outcome was never in doubt." Anglo-American frontier technique "emgAiasized the role of the individual in Hie subjugation of nature» " vhile Sjpanish-American frontier policy subordinated the interest of the individual to that of the state. The success of those given free reign to exploit the new land for personal gain was inevitable. And "the conflict ended with the triumphant American frontiersmen planting their |lag—and their crops—on the blue Pacific's Wiores» the conquered continent behind thenu"^ BUlington's observation is a refreshing addition to the usual explanations for the outcome of the Mexican War. At the same time i t fails to account fo r the fa c t th a t the conquest of th e Southwest was a new eagperi- enoe fo r Americans» and th a t th e ir triumph in 1848 was an incomplete one. "^Thomas C. Poroieilly (e d .): Boekv Pop^t;^<^a (ALbnquarquex University of New Mexico Press; 1940), p. ZLÔ. ^ e Far Western Frontier (Now York: Harper and Row, Torehbook; 1962), p. 1. 2 vG.ih th e exception o f Frenchmen in the Ohio Valley, the fro n tie r had p r ^ viously engulfed few non-Aiglo-Saxons, other than Indians -sdio ultimately had to accept political domination. But mUitaiy conquest and occupation of the Southwest created new problems. Spaniards and Mexicans had been in possession of New Mexico for two and co&.half centuries. Their descendants, plus the Pueblo Indians of the upper Rio Grande, outnumbered Yankee immi­ grants by more than sixtyfold a t th e time o f the Treaty o f Guadalupe Hidalgo. ^ As a result, two distinct political systems would exist there after 1848; one based on Danish, the other on Anglo-Saxon traditions. Understandably, the change in sovereigns meant little more to the "natives" of New Mexico than the reluctant acceptance of a new flag.^ With strength of numbers and pride in their heritage, they showed no sign of total submission. Instead, th%r continued to a&iere to political rules based upon their own traditions.^ The importance of the "natives"?—or Spanish-Americans~in New Mexican p o litic s has gradually diminished since 1848 because o f the changing complexion of the population. Indeed, in less than a century Anglos gained numerical superiority. During the first seventeen years after the conquest migration to New Mexico was slow and sporadic. The population o f th e te r r ito r y did 3Rath Laughlin B aiter: "Where Americans Are * Anglos*." The North American Review. CGXXVUI (November, 1929), p. 568. ^*ln New Mexican political history the word "native" usually denotes any person with a Spanish, Mexican o r Indian name, excluding nonvoting Indians. It is used interchangeably with "Sjpanish-American, " "HiQ>a%a.o," "Hi^ano-Indian" and "Mexican" even thou^ their denotations are by defi­ nition more specific. ^Santa Fe Daily New Meodcan. January 19, 1883, p. 2. 3 increase by an estimated fifty percent, bat it vas not idiclly the result of Anglo penetration.^ Wmld-be immigrants in the East vers discouraged until afber the d u il War because of the possession of the best lands of the territoxy by "native" families, absence of adequate transportation f a c ilitie s , fe a r o f h o stile Ihdians, f i t t i n g in Eev Mexico between Confederate and Union forces and greater attraoti<ms elsewhere. From 1866 to 1880 Anglos began to arrive more regularly. This wave of immigrants did not immediately alter territorial society. For many returned to the East during the same period because of the capricious behavior of the Indians. And others vho reenained were scattered so as to hardly make their presence felt. Some took to the mountains in search of precious metals. Texas Cattlemen moved into the Pecos Valley to enjoy lucrative beef markets at United States Any posts and Indian agencies.® Nevertheless, by the end of the 1870's enou^ Anglos had entered New HOxLco to threaten the existing socio-political order. Then around 1880, they began to arrive in sufficient numbers to ®Populadon statistics for these early years are confused. Goxw temporaries optimistically estimated an increase of &t least fifty percent from 1850 to I 870 despite the loss of some 23,000 people to irlaona and Colorado in the I860's. Anglo iarndgirants aocounted for some of this iu. crease. Natural population grovUi accounted for seme. But also, a sub­ stantial number of "natives" vho had fled during the Mexican War returned upon learning that their properly rW ts had been secured by the Treaty of Guadalupe Bidalgo. ^Mesllla News. June 13, 18y4, p. 1; Tha New Miexioaa. May 22, I8 7 4, p. 1; Eanta Fe Gaxette. Jhne 4, 1864, p. It Marlon Bargant "New Mexico's light for Statehood 1895-1912#" New Mexico Historical Review. HV (January, 1939), p. 5* Am* 13, 1874, p. 2; The Daily New Mexiean. May 22, 1674, p. 1; Santa Fe Qmsette. June 4, 1864, p. 1; Charles F. Ooans H istory o f New Mexico (Chicago* American fiLstorlcal Society, Inc.; 1923), I , p® 391* 4 affect a drastic change in the -whole society. This rapid influx of immi­ grants resulted from several developments; the advent of the railroads, diminishment of Indian depredations, new economic opportunities and the closing of other frontiers. And once it began it soon swelled to flood proportions, growing steadily until around I 9IO. People came fo r commer­ cial reasons, cattle-raising, mining and irrigated farming—giving consid­ erable diversity -to New Mexican life . Old towns expanded and new ones sprang up, and lawyers, teachers, doctors and other professional groups re^onded to the demand for their services. ^ This inrush continued intermittently after statehood. By 1930 the number of Anglos had increased by more -than 3t500 percent since 18%, Tdiile -that of the "natives** had increased by a mere 150' percent. KLnally, ty the 19% census Anglos had gained numerical superiority.