The Arkansas advocate. [volume] (Little Rock, A.T. [Ark.]) 1830-1837, 1835-09-11

cri.er, will deny the people the right to do,
without any leave from Congress about IT,
Unless this leave to form Constitution in
cludes all the powers claimed for it by Mr..
Lowndes, it only gives Us a right to do what
we had the right to dc before.
Let US suppose then that we follow Gov.
Fulton 5 plan. We ask leave to form Con-
stitution, and that leave is granted. We go
on, form our Constitution, elect our Govern
ors, Judges, Senators and Representative,
and put all the machinery of State Govern
ment in operation. We are a State. We
send on our Constitution. It is found not to
be repubican--or we have not made certain
concessions to the General Government--or
the old question of slavery comes up--and we
do not get into the Union within three or four
years. Now, what kind of anomalous stua-
ton are we IN? We are State, with but
half the powers of an independent Govern
ment. We cannot coin money or emit bills
of credit-and we have no vote in Congress.
We should be placed in most ludierous po-
sition. We should not know BY What laws
we were governed, or whether the tribunals
of the country we're legal or not. We say,
therefore, that the plan which the Governor
would have us adopt, would tend to place US
/ in a worse condition than we are in at pre-
sent The arguments of Mr.. Lowndes have
only tended still more strongly to fix US IN
the opinion that the plan which We propose,
Of calling Convention to draft Constitu-
ton, is the only feasible one which we can
adopt. If we call that Convention, and a
Constitution is formed, conditioned to take
effect and be the law of the land, as soon af-
ter the action of Congress on it. as our. Gov
eminent under it can be ready to go into OPP
Grafton, we can change our form of Govern
ment and our condition, at onee--and pass,
at once, from Territory to a state-and that
State a member Of the Union-wthout that
interregnum into which the Governors plan
would put US. According to his plan, we
should be, certainly for months, and perhaps
for years, under an indefnable kind of Gov
ernment-neither in the Union nor out of it.
We should have ceased to be Territory
without becoming member of the Union
II short, we shonld be, We take if, in a sort of
purgatory--lik Mahomet's coffin, suspended
between heaven and earth. Now, we have
private wish of our own, and it is, to be Ell
Their one thing or the other, to become a mem
Der of the Union, or, if we cannot do SO, to
remain as we are. We do not wish to fore
go our present advantages, without receiving
those which nothing ehort of our admittance
into the Union viii confer upon US. We are
for taking a step which will change our con-
dition at once, if at all.
The Governor is fond of authority. IF he
will refer to the proceedings of Congress, for
Dec. 1919, he will find the following senten-
cos, in speech delivered by Mr.. Clay, on
the question of the admission of Maine and
Missouri. Hesays;
''Heretofore, when the population and
extent of a territory had been such as to en-
title territory to the privilege of self gov
eminent and the rank of a state, the single
question had presented Itself to admit or
reject it, without qualification. But new
doctrines had sprung up on this subject"
Itseems therefore that precedent has not
all been against our view of this question:
Dir. Clay further said;
'sEquality is equity, if we have no right
to impose conditions on this state, we have
none to impose them on the state of Mis-
sour.
''The gentleman from New-H Hampshire
would find himself totally unable to estab-
lish the position that, because the territory
OF Missouri was acquired by purchase, she
is oar yassal, and we have right to affix
to her admission conditions not applicable
to the states on this side the Missssippi.n
Apply these positions to the fact that Maine
had formed her Constitution and sent it on,
without any authority or permission from
Congress, and there is certainly some author
ity for the method of procedure proposed by
us. But we have some authority which is
still more to the point. Mr.. Smith, of South
Carolina, in his speech in Congress, Jan, 10,
1920, on the same subject, said
"If any difference did exist between the
two cases now before you, the preference
was IN .laror Of Missouri. The consent
of Congress must first * had, before Maine
can be admitted; Congress was BOUND 10
admit Missouri tpheneper che Y3resonfed bo,,