Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1820-02-05


1t was granted 10 them. Nothing else was
10 have been expected. No one proba-
| bly, wished IL otherwise and no one
questioned The propriety Of wla, was do.
Ing, or what had been done.-Under such
circumstances, the acts of Congress adj
| mltiing these staies into the Union, would
be very imperfect evidence of the opinion
Oh Congress itself, upon The question now
under consideration; much less can n be
| relied on, as authority for the opinions OF
| others.
The conditions prescribed by Virginia
! TO Kentucky, and by Congress 10 the
States OF mississippi, Alabama, and Lou.
isiama, have nothing IN them requiring
| particular comment most Of these CON-
dilions relating. To boundary, 10 The pro-
leciion of vested rights Of property, I'd
| 10 those principles dee ned necessary TO
| assure republican government, are plainly
within iheranse otlegltimale discretion. II
some oi them 20 further, they are for
The attainment of sOtne object of palpa
bic justice and utility, have probably
been prescribed without Objection, and
without investigation of their authority,
and may be void.
II would be wonderful, If preceden,s
like these, could be regarded as authority.
| Of Justice, where every case adjudged
has its advocate and its epponeni, bound
10 scruiiniZe II, and where presidents
are acknowledged, i'm all their forcc-io
form q precedent, follow il for years, with.
oui d question of lis propreiy, then dis
cuss u, adludge II against law, and dis
card IL forever.
II remains now 10 consider the infiu-.
ence OF the treaty upon this question.
Thar Congress is bound in good faith
by the provisions of the treaty, already
quoted, TO admit Missouri into The Union.
has never been denied. The obligation
bring admitted, aud there appearing Ia
be 10 difference OF opinion about the
time, the only question is, as 10 the
terms.
Can Congress, with good faith, now that the
time for admission has arrived, prescribe IA
the condition thereof. surrender of part of
| the property. which they have been hitherto
| hound 10 protect. and. along with il, 4 surren-
| der of part of the sovereignty of ihe state
which would not be taken away, by the federal
| constitution?
| A concession of the obligation TO admit. seems
| 10 leave no ground for the controversy The
| advocates of the power TO impose conditions
! have maintained il, upon The ground of the
| discretion OF Congress In admir- or refuse AT
pleasure; aud the discretion, in this case he
| ing taken away by the obligation of the treaty
| the right tounded upon ii must fail of course
But the treaty has itself prescribed the terms
| IN plain and explicit language, leaving nothing
| Tor inference to supply.--These are lis words
| = The inhabitants of the coded tertiary shall
| be incorporated in the union of the Uni,ed
States and admitted, soon az possible. ac-
| co'dlng to the principles of the federal con-
| stitniion, 10 the ENJOYMENT of all the r,ybts
| advantages and inmunties of citizens Of
the United States. DO the citizens of the
| United States ENJOY the right OF making their
state constitutions and laws, subject 10 no con.
| troll but tina, of The federal constitutions That
| they do. no one Is found TO deny vet il is de-
bied that this treaty has stipulated for the in
| hablta''ts oi the coded territory the right of
making their state laws and constitution con-
| troled OILY by the federal constitution
distinction is attempted, between the
| ciiizeEs of the II. States aud citizens of the
! several states-andit seems 10 be commended
that the right here spoken Of belongs 10
cit!zens OF Tue respective states and not TO
| ciiIzens OF the United States.-1his distinc-
| ton rs utterly without foundation Is tl,ere :,
cass OF people, in this country, VIM are sitl-
zens of the United States and not citizens of
any state or territory or district in the Union2
,, so, now have they become such, and what
rights do they possess ?-TheIe are 10 snch
| people. native of any state is. by birth, a
| c'tzeh or the state and a citizen OF the Uni
| ied States; one born an alien, and naturazed
eH 'd" is hereby made a citizen of the Unl-
! Tea States and a citizen Of The state where he
! resides
But 1t is said that the rights secured by the
treaty are such only as are conferred by the
| ieuerai constitution. What rights are confer
| ny The federal constitution? Upon the To-
| drIai government many upon the state row
! erhnehtS or upon the citizens none, one only
| excepted. the right of citizen of one state
10 me privileges OF citizen in all the states
ilcannOt be cOniended that the treaty intend
| eu 10 assure 10 rue inhabitants of the ceded
| territory the rights of citizens in other states
ana u" tights III their own. Ii Is pvobahly
meant, by those who take this ground, thai
,he TIshis. secured by the treaty, are those,
ohiy, which are secured by the constitution of
Tue united States. BY what authority can IL
| De sad, that when the treaty secures all the
rlS"ts OF citizens of the United States il meant
"b'! 10 Secure part of them! But suppose 1t
| were admitted, that the rights here intended
were those only, which are secured, BY tile
| constitution, 10 citizens of the United States
! womb tie argument be aided by this admiS-
| SION! ne constitution of the United states
"oosies 10 me states respectively, or to the
| people. all rights not delegated 10 tie general
| government. The right i'll question moi being
delegated to ihe general government, il is Sc
| cured TO tile people of the other states and
conSe quehtiy TO the inhabitants OF Louisiana
| me provisions ln This treaty. tor assuring the
| iights OF the inhabitants Of Louisiana have
| Deep supposed similar TO the provisions in tue
| iaWs relative 10 the north western territory
az" the territory coded, BY Georgia, which
| were intended TO secure TO the peoDle of these
| territories, when admitted into the union
| elnaI rights with the people of the other
STATES and II has been. from thence argued
tDat as The provisions in these laws have not
| Deeh interpreted, to restrain Congress from
ahueAlng conditions, TO the admission of these
states INTO the union. so the provisions in the
| uediN, Ohght not 10 toe interpreted, to restrain
| O0ohSless from anneXiBg similar conditions
IBIS argument, on tie slightest examination.
| WIZ ne iound Altogether erroneous. There is
| very essential difference in the language used
| Oh we inherent occasions, in relation to the
| equality OF rights provided for. and what is
| conclusive III answer TO tie argument il this,
| tndt III the acts relative 10 the north western,
| anu NieOTuia- tprritnries ,h. -