Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1820-01-20
RICHMOND, JANUARY 20- ls2n.
MISSOURI QUESTION.

'respasSed upon your Indulgence. The
object al my addr IS Ia the public through
yohr excellent paper, seemed L. have
been accomplished. | had not designed
TO enter into detailed examination OF the
| Important question on which | have
touched. but 10 throw out some general
considerations which might awaken in,e-
rest, and call tortl, the labours of more
able pens. Perhaps IL would have beeu
wise 10 have adhered To- my original pur-
pose. But pamphlet has 10 day for The
first time fallen into my hands, on which
| cannot iorbear 10 offer some cursory
reflections speak of the memorial from
the inhabitants Of Boston 10 the Congress
of the United States /; IN which opinions
are advanced so entirely al variance with
the rights OF the states, and so utterly
subv1rsive Of all the grea, principles OF
the government, as TO demand the deci
ded opposition of every friend ofthe con.
s,itution. I would moi deiraci from its
ability. The production of the most
perspicuous aud acute dialecti,ian- OF The
eastern states, lis reasoning advanced with
apparent candOur, is calculated 10 throw
doubt arouad the claims of Missouri,
and to perplex those who have not leisure
for minute examination of It's SophIsmS.
When we anaiyze with attention the
principles upon which The memorialist
asserts the power of Congress to annex
restrictions TO the constitution of the
proposed state Of Missouri, we shall find
that his conclusions are 10 be resolved
into a few propositions, which he has
maintained with great ingenuity, and into
which he has cOnirIved TO infuse so much
Of truth aud so much of the appearance
of canduur, that we are at first unable
to perceive where lies the error-in the
statement OF his positions or in the de-
auctions which he has drawn. II mis-
take not, the leading propositions of this
drXirOus advocate are as follows:
That the admissions of new states into
The union is i'll the absolute discretion of
Congress, according to The principles Of the
Jederdt constitution.
That the right 10 annex conditions TO
such admission is a corollary from this
absolute discretion. and is therefore oc-
corda"s to the principles Of tie federal cont
StifittOM
That the convention Of 1903, having
stipulated for the admission of the coded
territory according 10 the principles Of
the federal constitution, and these principles
implying the power 10 annex conditions,
the exercise of this power is both CON.
paiible with the constitution, and with
the provisions Of the convention.
However, enveloped in plausible So
phstries, and however yelled from our
view, Is the skeleton of this argument in
the work before us, minute attention
will satisfy any enquirer that the sub
stance OF the essay is To be found in
these propositions and il is but Justice
10 acknowledge thai tney are maintained
with all the ability aud fortified with all
lac nf fhpI
Ii we could admit however the truth of
the two first propositions, they do mol
appear III any wise 10 Justify The conclu-
sion which is drawn from them in The
third. On the contrary they furnish,
when stripped of all ariifice. the strongest
weapons against the memoTalisi. For
as the ground work of the right of Con
Gress 10 annex conditions, is represented
IL be The absolute discretion ii has to
admit or 10 refuse TO admit new states
INTO the Uuion," il follows Of course thar
where this discretion 10 admit or refuse,
does not exist, SD neither does the right
exist TO annex conditions 10 ,ie admis
sion. New by The treaty of 1903. Com
grr>s ar bonnd 10 admit " the coded fer
rory mo the Union as soon as pos
sibic" So that the discretion 10 refuse
admission, does not exist IN relation 10
the cedcd territory :" and by c0nse-
qnrucc The right 10 annex conditions,
viii II Is ITS corollary, can 10 more
exist.
Thus il WILDE perceived that according
10 the very principles laid down by the
m PmOrlailSiS, these preiensIons are with
ont a inst foundation. However ingeni
Gus indeed HE attempt TO give 10 the
ieraIs oi The treaty construction con
inTuI.,l,i lie txIih their yipArS n ic
that il has no conformity with lie mean
ing OF the high contracting parties. No
man, whose perceptions are moi distorted
Oy the influence Of some selfish consi-
dcTdtiOns, can seriously contend that IN
tins clause OF the treaty which was in
tendedIO secure TO " the ceded territory"
the privileges Of All independent state in
THIS contederacy terms were introduced
with view ioleave to Congress the impo-
sliion Uf conditions, which of themselves
would degrade il below the other mem
bers of tile Union. If we consider these
words" dcc0ding to tie principles Of tie
fcde1'at constitution" as intended merely
To- qualify the phrase as soon as posi-.
ble," which Immediately precedes il,
there can be no pretcnce for supposng
they were used To affect the terms OF Tie
admission; for, according 20 THAT con
slTuciion, Tie clause would be equivalent
TO provision " that rs sOou as ii should
be possible, according 10 the principles
of The constitution, 10 admit the territory
into the Union, il should be admilted.'
Umder This view, IL could only have been
intended TO provide against The United
Slaies being bound 10 admit the ceded
territory, before they bad formed re-
publican OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES their num-
oil a
sentative, &c. &c.
ON Tic nihnr hand IL il1n ,rnrhs In