Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-01-25


could never he admitted. tie right, claim
cd for Congress. 10 81, III judgment on
The validity oi the constitutions of states
demanding admission insp The Union,
which was founded on The supposed en-
isicnce OF this Pow or, icll With II. Ii did
mol belong. therefore, 10 Che province Of
Congress 10 pronounce The iuvalidi,y Of
the clause al the Missouri constitution,
supposing II 10 be uuGues,ionably inva.
nd
What, then, II woul.l be asked, Was the
purpose OF requiring the submission OF the
, constitution TO Congress which no onr
denied 10 be essential The answer wa
obvious. IL was TO satisfy the clause of
The constitution Of The United States
which rendered u incumbent upon Con-
gress In guarantee la every STATE IA r, pub.
lican form OF government. The duty of
supcrvisal vas EXPRESSLY devolv,d upon
Congress as respected the political cha
Tarier OF the constitution of a stat. asking
admission iuio The Union. Bot this du-
~ did NOT extend beyond the political
character Of The constitution. On the
contrary, lis further extension vas ex"
cludcd by The operation OF q known rule
which hat already been adveried 10. This
distinction between detects in q constr
tuition OF a slate claiming admission inio
the Union, which related To the form al
lis government, anh provisions = hich al
though couiravCAiBg the constitution Of
Tie u. States, yei we're MOI 81 this iIaiii.
Cutar character, would he found to fur
Uls'I an answer TO the vaiiuuS cases whix !,
had been stated, IN iliuStraii.'n o! IN. in
nsdicti0n ~ COmgleSS, In the debate.
The paIilo uiar case at the Irregular na
minaiion or justification of M; NIB ~ 81
'ir SENATE by nrw stale, fouu,i Il Darti.
cUIar answer IN HE clause al The comsiiiu-
ton "f th' u. States, which assigned 10
each House It Congress The right OF Iutg-
ing OF the election and qualification of
lis own members.
HE proceedings which bad heretofore
ot'aned IN Congress on The admi sion Of
new states had evidently had reference 10
iha mere tormaIiy oi aunuiiviat.un nf the
accession 90 ihc state IN The Union. This
Was she"n by HE sta empni OF plecedenls
winch had been gwen by tbs CHAIRMAN
ot The committee. That ~ idea had ever
Oeen entertained ut ne. essitV of Il re-
coSni'ion by Congress q! The validity OF
every pa Of the constitution OF state
apps hg Tor admission, vas proved by
Tie fact that ~ eases OF The formation o.
new constitutions bX old STATES, III rcia,
Ton TO which M dct e. of republican cha
racier could he anticipated, and 10 Orca"
SION cx'sled for the annuncialion Gf the
accession q: Tie state 10 ihp Uaon. the
submission IN the constitution 10 Con
sress had never been required. pro-
ceeding whlch Is Quilt BE uhv,ausly indi~
penSahIc IN al cases, if Congress were
Invested with lie c0guizance rf lie vail
dIiy OF constitutions, winch HAT been i'm
puied 10 il.
II was not coniendcd, il must be r.
mcmb' red, thai there was no liability to
conditions on the part of a NEW state
about 10 be admitted into the Union. T.
"as only asserted HAT those conditions
were imposed Ivy Az authority paramount
10 COu.rcss-lhe constitution. 1t vas
not eoh'rnded that there existed ia COR
receive jurisdiction in the event Of the
violation OF t!.cee conditions. II was on.
fy c"ntcnded thai this jurisdiction. with
particular exception, was rcfrrable 10
= tribunal better qualified than Congress.
boih by importantly ana cnmprirnce-
iheJudicldry. II the jurisdiction bciomg-
ed 10 he Judiciary, there weIe Obvious
ana regular modes at proceeding far obs
tanning lie effect OF It's decisions. II II
belonged 10 Congress. there were none.
ana The want OF them was evidence cuu-
elusive against The existence of tie iuiiq
dtctIon III Congress. The waai Of ANY
regular remedy or mcaus of enforcement.
was The best evidence, IH disDronf Of
claim OF rIghi or jurisdiction. Il, i'm tar
exercise OF The jurisdiction asserted for
It's, The constitution offered bg Ail.soi.r.
or any part oil II, >hOnld br cnn,lcmueo
What was 10 be The effect Missouri wa;
TO he rejected from IIr Union. That il
To say, the mode Ot NiudiCaiIon OF unr am.
t'orlty was 10 consist III The discar,!al Of
~. his vas the case Of he foolish con
s'ab'e IN Sh"he' pearc, depuiing auiiori
~ to The watch. They are 10 bid aay
man lh"y meet - stand. But. how n
they would noi stand Then ihrv wrrs
to LEI bi'n 90, aud 10 thank Gcd lhry.
we're tId % 4 kn8ve. The exercise Of
authority recon- BIenGed to tbs was andio.
go"s, aId, Il attempted, wnuIl rcdoupd
IA Siuidr occasion o! consolation. I,
was sad, however, thai Missouri might
De cOfrCed ny the &c extension To her OF
terrIlOriaI regulations. the woulJ be
proceeding litlc less aHOmalous than The
Olbef. Whatever Missouri mign be il,
dcseptat'on and Fciton o. Law, il was no
TO 'Ious. 10 print ofIact hat she stood dis
charged IRON Tie condition Of a territory.
As there we're no intermediary condition
Tor which name could he found, The
territory mu have become STATE. If
with our au'hatitY, then e was mem.
Der OF The Uuiou II without it, v ha, was
her condiuou Cirarly condition al
separation from tic Unirn. The fru,.
Then, ct cur exercise of authority vas the
alienation aud loss If Tie subject Of our
-. Tins right Of jurisdiction
claimed for Congress vas like The rjght
OF Insurrecfion III the people, rigt,
WHICH operated by ilie dissolution OF an
relations bel"eeD the parties to il. Mr..
a. was NOT stating these considerations
III any vie" Of tie inpolcy Il The course
" hiCb Was recommended Io .,.,,.,