Elizabeth-Town gazette. [volume] (Elizabeth-Town, N.J.) 1818-1821, 1820-12-19

OF ine United States at their next session.
they should then be admitted into the
Union.
Another circumstance. Mr.. T.. said,
Showed, beyond dispute, that ii vas not
intended by this House. 10 passing the
ACT Of the last session, merely 10 give aa-
thofity TO The people Of Missouri 10 pre-
pose constitution. but that II was intend
go 10 confer on Missouri, by that acE, all
the rights which the oldest and proudess
states Of the Union are supposed 10 possess.
When that act was under consideration
y appears by the Journal Of this House,
maj motion was made hg Mr. T.=le. e
amead the bill by striking out these
words" And the said state, when FORM
led, shall be admitted into the Uuicn upon
40 equal footing with The original states,
10 all respects whatever !" and Inserting
10 lieu thereof those which follow. g And
u the same, THAT Is the constitution, shall
De approved by Congress, the said terri
tory shall be admitted into the Union as
state, upon the same footing as the origi-
nal states"-the difference being that, in
the bill as il stood, the act as il now stands,l
We made her State-and 10 the other We
were 10 give her authority to form con-
stitutioa, and leave our appreciation to be
"a condition Of its fioai admission. A very
large majority, (i25 TO 40. even at that
time OF stroDg excitement and Dearly equal
division OF opinion with respect 10 the re-
striction, voted 10 the negative
The Substance OF MIR. LIS argument
then was, he said, thai, by the act author
izipg the people Of Missouri 10 form .
Constitution aud State Government, GER
tain rights were given TO them; by the
former practice OF the Government, he
had endeavored to shew that the mere
circumstance of asserting to the PROPOSE
lion of Congress yves eassssias 70 constitute
the people a state, the act of declaration
nov proposed TO The House, being mere
suFplusage. Missouri had, then, a right,
10 form conslitution absolutely aud inas-
ienably .--If she had not now the rights
'of stale, let it be shewn how she had
lcsi them. II IS contrary TO the principles
Eof The Constitution, contrary 10 the genius
of our government, that, hsyias eaics Civ
ca them the right of selEgovernment, Con-
gress eau now take it from them.
Considering the question as settled, the
next important question was, whether The
constitution thereof becomes void by lhe
Tasanissinn into il Of clauzr 1as cosnvati-
BILE with the constitution of the U. States,
admitting, for the sake or argument, that
such is the fact.
Whether that particular clause Of the
constitution, 10 which exception was uu-
derstood to be taken, was constitutional
or not. the interest of the nation, Justice
TO Missouri. and respect for itself, requir-
ed that the house should not undertake 10
decide. In taking this ground. Mr.. L.
said he knew he should be considered by
some as evadiDg the performance OLA du-
ty which, 10 the present case, they sup
posed to be devolred on this house to ex-
press an opinion with respect TO that
clause and inlimated that be could show,
were il necessary, that similar provisions
were contained 10 various acts of the
United States, to which exception had been
taken 10 neither house. The clause OF
the Missouri constitution 10 which he re-
ferred, was that requiring the Legislature
to pass laws TO prohibit the settlement Of
free negroes in the State, which was sup
posed to conflict with the provision Of
the constitution of the United States
which provides that I" the citizens of each
state shall be entitled to all the privileges
and immnnities Of citizens in tue several
states" MIR. L. here went into au argu-
meut of some detail, the amount Of which
was, that, as to nBmbers, very large
majority Of the free blacks in the United
States were not considered citizens in
their respective states; and that, in con-
STRUNG any general provision OF consti-
tuition. ii was fair to consider il as having
a general application, aud not as being
without exceptions. In any view, there
could be nothing more clear than that, il
the objected provision was capable of
construction which would reconcile it
with the constitution, ii ought to receive
that construction. For example, 10 this
case Of Missouri, he thought it might be
quite fair to say that that provision re-
specting free people of color must be con-
strued literally, as intending to exempt
from its operation such of them as were
citiSens in other states. However this
might be, he contended, as the committee
had laid it down in their report, that il
was question not for this house, bnt for
different tribunal, to determine.
But Mr.. L. said there were many who
object to this course; the course pursued
10 all other cases; who allow that the ju-
dietary could, with more ease, certainty,
uniformity, and effect, eypouRd constitu-
tional law, but contend that we must de-
eide whether the provision in question be
constitutional or not we must express an