Albert J. Beveridge's congressional report on Arizona Territory in 1902 Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Underhill, Karen Jean, 1960- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 23/09/2021 10:39:14 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/278349 INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfihn master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, prii^t bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms international A Bail & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313 761-4700 800 521-0600 Order Number 1S42482 Albert J. Beveridge's congressional report on Arizona Territory in 1902 Underhill, Karen Jean, M.A. The University of Arizona, 1990 Coi^ight ©1990 1^ Underhill, Karen Jean. All rights reserved. UMI 300N.ZeebRd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 ALBERT J. BEVERIDGE'S CONGRESSIONAL REPORT ON ARIZONA TERRITORY IN 1902 edited by Karen Jean Underbill /<• Copyright ® Karen Jean Underbill 1990 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate Csllege THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 19 9 0 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: Harwood P. Hinton M^te Professor of History PREFACE During my first year of graduate school, my advisor Dr. Harwood P. Hinton suggested that the testimony taken by Indiana Senator Albert J. Beveridge during a rushed investigation of Arizona, New Mexico, and Oklahoma's fitness for statehood in November of 1902 might contain valuable information about Arizona. He was right. The I hearings held in four Arizona towns by a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Territories (Senate Document 36. 57 Congress, 2 Session, Serial 4420) provide a unique view of the territory's economic, social, and political milieu at the turn of the century. Much has been written about the Southwest's struggle for statehood at the congressional level. Very little research exists which focuses on conditions in Arizona during this time period. The useful information is scattered throughout numerous popular and obscure works. Annotating and analyzing the hearings allowed me not only to explore 1902 Arizona in depth but also to combine my eclectic interests in ethnic, environmental, urban, twentieth century, and western history. Early on I learned from Beveridge's correspondence 4 that he came to Arizona determined to deny its admission to the Union. The negative evidence he collected mirrored Eastern hostility to Democratic, sparsely-settled western territories, such as Arizona, and their Hispanic populations, desert environment, and "uncivilized" inhabitants. Arizona in 1902 was a rough and tumble "mining camp" in some respects, exemplified by a high homicide rate, but quite civilized in others with competent judges, dedicated educators, and industrious miners, ranchers, and lumbermen. My goal has been to enable the reader to answer the question: Did Arizona deserve statehood in 1902? This work is divided into two parts. The introduction to the hearings identifies the document, provides perspective, and analyzes and evaluates the investigation. The document has been annotated from a myriad of primary and secondary sources—books, articles, reports, government documents, city ordinances, articles of incorporation, etc. Gathering material for the annotations proved to be an invaluable library experience. The greatest disappointment in my research has been my failure to locate the Arizona photographs taken by the Beveridge party of so-called Mexican loafers and inebriated Indians in Phoenix to supplement Senate Document 36. I am indebted to many individuals for their continued 5 support of my graduate work over the years. Dr. Hinton deserves special recognition for his patience, guidance, and standards of excellence. Special consideration goes to Dr. Juan C^rcia and Mr. Edwin Ferdon, Jr. for serving on my committee. I would like to thank the staff of the Arizona Historical Society, in particular Pierce Chamberlain, and my family, especially my mother Anne Underbill and my grandmother Elizabeth Carter, for their confidence in my abilities and their prodding. Lastly, I dedicate this thesis to my two-year old daughter Alyssa, who delighted in rearranging my notes. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT 7 1. PART ONE. THE BEVERIDGE REPORT OF 1902: AN 2\NALYSIS ... 8 2. PART TWO. "NEW STATEHOOD BILL" SENATE DOCUMENT 3 6 72 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 308 7 ABSTRACT From November 10 to November 24, 1902, a four-member subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Territories, led by Indiana Republican Albert J. Beveridge, investigated the fitness of Arizona, New Mexico, and Oklahoma for statehood. This thesis focuses on the brief hearings conducted in four Arizona towns—Prescott, Phoenix, Tucson, and Bisbee. The hearings provided a wealth of information about the economic, social, and political character of Arizona Territory at the turn of the century. Over 300 annotations illuminate the people, places, events, and industries mentioned in the hearings. Sectionalism, party politics, and personal biases influenced the type of evidence collected. The investigation and resultant document (Senate Document 36. 57 Congress, 2 Session, Serial 4420) generated a political tempest which delayed admission for a decade. 8 PART ONE 9 THE BEVERIDGE REPORT OF 1902: AN ANALYSIS On November 10, 1902, a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Territories left Chicago aboard a private car to investigate the fitness of New Mexico, Arizona, and Oklahoma for statehood. The four-man group, led by Albert J. Beveridge, included fellow Republicans Henry E. Burnham of New Hampshire, William P. Dillingham of Vermont, and Populist Henry Heitfeld of Idaho who joined the party at Trinidad, Colorado. Their flying trip through the Southwest began in Las Vegas, New Mexico and ended twelve days later in Guthrie, Oklahoma. For three days, the senators conducted hearings in several Arizona towns. Sectionalism, party politics, and private feuds influenced the nature of the information they gathered. The resultant document and majority report presented a negative image of Arizona and delayed admission of the territory for nearly a decade.^ iiijjew Statehood Bill; Hearing Before the Subcommittee of the Committee on Territories on House bill 12543 . .," Senate Document rSDI 36. 57 Congress, 2 Session (Serial 4420), p. 1. In October, 1903, Representative W. R. Hearst (D) investigated Arizona, as did Representative James A. 10 In 1900 both the Republican and Democratic platforms had promised the early admission of New Mexico, Arizona, and Oklahoma into the Union. Accordingly, Delegates Marcus Aurelius Smith of Arizona, Bernard S. Rodey of New Mexico, and Dennis T. Flynn of Oklahoma joined forces in the Fifty- seventh Congress to fight for House of Representatives bill 12543 which authorized their constituents to draft constitutions and seek statehood. On April 1, 1902, Representative William S. Knox, Chairman of the House Committee on Territories, reported the omnibus measure favorably. A month later, Jesse Overstreet of Indiana, invited the wrath of Arizonans when he introduced an amendment to combine New Mexico and Arizona into the single state of Montezuma. The House, however, overwhelmingly rejected the proposition, 106 noes to 28 ayes. On May 9 the lower chamber passed the original bill after brief debate.^ Tawney (R) in October,