The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1829-02-25
POLITICAL CORRESPONDENCE.
Mr.. .Adams's Reply.-CoNcLuDED.

| That the power of annexing Louisiana to
this Union had not been delegated to Con-
gress, by the constitution of the United
| States, was my own opinion; and it is re-
corded upon the journals of the senate, Of
which was then member. But far from
thinking the act itself justifying cause for
secession from the Union, regarded it as
one of the happiest events, which had &C.
Cured since the adoption of the Constitu-
ton. | regretted that an accidental i'll
ness in my family, which detained me on
my way to Washington to take my seat in
the senate, deprived me of the power of
voting for the ratification of the treaties, by
which the cession was secured. arrived
at Washington on the fourth day of the
session of Congress, and on entering the
city, passed by the secretary of the senate,
who was going from the capitol to the Piesi-
dents house, with the advice and consent
of that body 10 the ratification.
took my seat in the senate the next day.
Bills were Immediately brought into Con-
gress making appropriations to the amount
of fifteen millions of dollars for carrying the
convention into effect, and for enabling the
president to take possession of the coded
territory. These measures were opposed
by all the members of the senate, who had
voted against the notifications of the con-
ventlons. They were warmly and cordial
ly supported by me. had no doubt of the
constitutional power to make the treaties.
J 1t is expressly delegated in the constitution.
The power of making the stipulated pay
ment for the cession, and of taking possess
ion of the coded territory, was equally I'M
questioned by me they were constructive
powers, but thought them fairly Incidental,
and necessarily consequent upon the power
to make the treaty. But the power of an
nexing the inhabitants of Louisiana to the
Union Of comforting upon them, in mass,
all the rights, and requiring of them all the
duties of citizens of the United States, it
appeared to me had not been delegated to
Congress by the people Of the Union, and
could not have been delegated by them,with-
out the consent of the people of Louisiana
themselves. | thought they required an
of the people of Louisiana; and offered to
the senate, resolutions for carrying both
/ those measures into effect, which were re-
jected.
1t has been recently ascertained, by d
letter from Mr.. Jefferson to Mr.. Dunbar,
written in July 1903, after he had received
the treaties and convened Congress to con.
slider them, that in his opinion, the treaties
could not be carried into effect without an
amendment to the constitution and that
I the proposal Tor snch an amendment would
be the first measure adopted by them, at
their meeting. Yet Mr.. Jefferson, presi-
dent of the United States, did approve the
sctF ofCongress, assuming the power which
( he had so recently thought not delegated
/ IN tboro and tbo Evooufivo off tho TTpiOn
carried them into execution.
Thus Mr.. Jefferson, the President of the
United States, the federal members of Con-
gress, who opposed and voted against the
ratification of the treaties, and myself, ill
concurred in the opinion, that the Louisiana
cesslon treaties transcribed the constitu-
tional powers of the government of the
United States. But it was, after all, CUES
ton of constructive power. The power of
making the treaty was expressly given
without limitation. The sweeping clause,
4 by which all powers, necessary and proper
/ for carrying into effect those expressly del
egated, mag be understood as unlimited.
1t is to be presumed, that when Mr.. Jeffer-
son approved and executed the acts of Con-
gress, assuming the doubtful power, lie had
brought his mind TO acquiesce In this some
what latitudinarian construction. opposed
it as long and as far as my opposition could
avail. | acquesced in it, after it had re-
ceived the sanction of all the organized
authority of the Union, and. the tacit ac-
quiescence Of The people of the United States
and of Louisiana. Since which time, so far
as this precedent goes, and no farther,
have considered the question as irrevocably
settled.
4 But. in reverting 10 the fundamental
principle of all our constitutions, that obe-
dience is not due to an unconstitutional law,
and that its execution may be lawfully re-
sisted, you must admit. that had the laws
of Congress 70: annexing Louisiana to the
Union been resisted, by the authority of one
or more States of the then existing confed-
eracy, as unconstitutional, that resistance
might have been carried to the extent OF
dissolving the Union, and of forming new
confederacy; and that if the consequences
of the cession had been so oppressive upon
New England and the North, as was APP
pretended by the federal leaders, to whose
conduct at that time all these observations
refer, the project which they did then form
of severing the Union, and establishing a
! Northern Confederacy would in their appli-
cation of the abstract pr'.ciple to the exist
ing state of things have been justifiable. In
their views, therefore, Iimpute to them moth.
ing which it could be necessary for them
to disavow; and, accordingly, these princi-
pies were distinctly and explicitly ayowed
eight years afterwards, by my excellent
friend Mr.. Quincy, in his speech upon the
admission of Louisiana, as a State in the
! Union. Whether he had any knowledge
of the practical project of 1903 and A,
) know not but the argument of his speech
in which he referred to my recorded opin-
ions upon the constitutional power, was ar
eloquent exposition of the justifying causes
Of that project, as had heard them detailed
at the time. That project, repeat, hac
zone to the length of fixing upon a military