The Arkansas advocate., 1835-09-04


 gulations. There was no dictation from
 one to inc other-no influence attempted directly or indirectlYs either from the States s individually. or in their federal character l every constitution was left perfectly free and nntrammeled to be acted upon by the lndI- yiduals of that community over whom 1t was 10 have controlling or governing pow CT. There vas no express binding condi- lion, or any species of grant or instruction coming from any power on earth to the communities of the respective States, but that mutual compact founded oii the Pssnci- ples of he reEoluiion-the equal rights of man, that all should be republican,. Let US examine the history of fhe formation of one Of the old consultations, which in truth will be an abridged history ofthe whole. Penn sylyania. the ekey stone State," soon saw the necessity of creating a permanent basis upon which to found her legislation, and govern her institutions in her new state of ssuutried beiug,e and her Legislature, soon after the close of the revolutions recona- menaed .to the people 10 elect delegates as soon as practicable, for the purpose of form- ling a constitution. The suggestion was compiled with promptly on the part of the people, coming, as 1t did, from men who were part of the community, and at the time the chosen representatives Of the peo- pie of the State, and the convention was soon after organized in Philadelphia, with Ben. Franklin at it's head as President. They matured constitution, and without closing 1t by signing, had t printed and cr- ati lat fS I ioufned to give them time to decide upon it. The people decided for it; ant the same convention met, signed the instra- ment, and deposited the original copy in the archives of the State, as the basis of their laws, without consulting any other power on earth but their own community. 1 What difference is there in the political situ- ation of Arkansas now, and Pennsylvania at that lime? In point of power to form her constitution and enter upon seif-goy- ernment as well as 10 apply for admission into the Federal Union upon an equal foot ling with the other States, her situation is precisely the same. There can be no ar gument drawn from the admission of any of the new States into the Union, which could possibly bind Arkansas to your Ex- cellency's views by precedent. The cir cumstances which may have governed beiY admission can never be made imperative on Arkansas without violence in the construc- ton and tyranny in the accomplishment. :, There may bs something peculiar in the application and admission of the new States into the Union, growing out of the manner in which they may have introduced lheH- selves 10 Congress for admission. The new State, for instance, may have petition ed Congress lristaking Ter own rights, } for permission to form her constitution, and Congress, out of mere courtesy, may have passed the required act; bnt there Is noth- ing in any of those acts of permission from winch Congress claims legal or constitu- tioaal prefegaiiTe 10 grant perinissions of this kind; and the whole history of the pro- ceeding shows that Congress, Iii passing this extra legislative act, had nothing in view but an accommodating disposition of kindness 10 the new applicant, es well as to re-assert it's right to the waste lands in the proposed State; and moreover 1t will be seen by the ordinance appended to the con- stitutons, that the claim of Congress as the principal land owner ID their boundary, has been recognized by all the new States; and in truth, those acts of admission passed by Congress for the new States, were more on the ground of q parsimonious claim to pro- perty in the bounds of the State than 10 as- seft any claim to power or prefogative. These are the simple facts, and there is mo- thing Tn the whole transaction winch com
 mon sense can coustrue into d precedent to govern Afkans8s in her application for ad- mission into tho Union.
 q Whether Congress, by law, directs new ) State to prepare itseIffor admission into the ! Union, or the new State presents itself al l ready prepared, unasked by Congress, and ) respectfully demands admission, IS a matter } by which the dignity or prerogative of nei, ther Of the parties can suffer much; and as there is no constitutional provision, govern ing the case, it is, in my humble opinion. equal to mountain labor in producing 8 ] mouse, to argue 1t at all.
 What was the intention of the people oi Arkansas when they applied to Congress to be organized as 6 sEerfiteryl Was t not that when their population increased to the ratio of Congressional representation, they should become an independent State, and be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the other Statesf Fhs must have been their object, and Congress, act ing upon the original principles of the Gov :. ernment-the equal rights of man-could have had no other. Congress did not or ganIZe Arkansas from motives of nolicv nn