The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-08-14
FOR TIE MADls0NLAN.

1t is no, l,le surprising that the Acts for the or
ganization Of Michigan and Florida should be quoted
authority for The principle newly engrafted III.
Bank bill, that the assent OF the States The estab
shment Of branches may be inferred from their fail
ing to dissent within a given time. But so il IS and
in respectable quarter.
1t is true that the consent Of State may give au
hony to EoagTsss hlGhn~ iibept ethaie ne Of
ects Of the authority be conferred are fixed and
specified in the Constitution Congress may exercise
exclusive legislation" over all places purchased
by the consent ofhe LsgiSiatre or he STATE in uhici
NE same shall BE- for the erection Of forts &c MOI
only the subjects Of the authority 80 to be confer
red specified but in respect TO these specific sub
Jects, the consent must be expressed and in no wise
implied.
As the several States may thus confer power on
Congress, which under the Constitution it could no,
otherwise exercise, may the States with the con
sent Of Congress, exercise certain powers, which
without thai consent, prohibited to the States
NO State shall without the consent Of Congress keeI
troops ships Of in time Of peace This Stat.
might do, with the consent Of Congress. 50 as Ia
other objects specified in the Constitution Lay du-
ties on imports, fol instance Here also the consent
Of Congress must be actually given and not presumed
IN any manner. What would be said Of the states
man ID who would esteem il proper or admissible in
a State to lay lmposts duties imports or exports
and TO insist s right TO collect them asserting that
the consent OF Congress may be inferred from its fail
10 dissent and by dissenting re-assert the prohb-
ton. And yet well might that be done as NAV
those who contend that branch of a United States
Bank cannot constitutionally be planted in d State
without her consent be satisfied in this beh1lf that
States assent may he inferred from her not dissent
ing.
But to the acta Of organization by the comments
accompanying VIII IN the National lntelligcncer the
foregoing IDEAS have been suggested as have others
which il is not deemed important here 10 enter on an
expression Of.
The substance of those Acts is that the Acts Of
the legislative councils Of those Territories should
have the full effect Of laws complete within the same
il not disapprored by Congress. Observe Congress
possessed Of power which il transferred to those
legislative councils Congress did not fully divcsl IT.
sclfot the power it did not fully transfer il 10 those
councils. 1t merely and exactly delegated the law
making authority Of which was fully pnssesscd over
the Territories, rescrving veto power II presumed
well might and had the right that'the legislative
Office by the hands II was putting into would well
executed and yet not entirely concednr that ii
would be so, retained the power to veto Just 50 it
is With the legislative power Of Congress over these
States, except that these ms cad Of retaining to them
selves the veto power clothed the President Of the IT,
States with it. As did Congress with respect to the
legislation over the Territories So might the States
have done as to the law making power which they
gave up national objects Instead of clothing The
President with the veto power they might have re-
served it, and have ordained that the Acts Of Con
gfess u disapprored ~ The Siates Cor a gwen pro.
portion q them) shaH meHcet.rh be ofHo forcc
Congress had the power complete To lenlsate fpr
the Territories. Under the clause 10 make an
needlnl rules and regulations the authority of Con
grcss 10 erect territorial governments has never been
and Is not doubted Having this right Congress may
confer on such government such powcrs Legislative,
Judicial and executive. as It may think fit Ii may
confer general and unrestricted legislative authority
In erecting the territorial governments of Michigan
and Florida 1t did confer hut expressly reserved
the power 10 dsapproVe and thereby annu the Acts
of their legislative councils This was but another
mode OF rescrNing the veto power retaining not 10
qulrng permitling) it, excrc SCI and IN d manner
different from that prescribed IN the Constitution of
the Y ) IN check, if need be, on the lcgia ac
ton OF Congress
And It Is tins power, reserved, which il i int
mated Is retained on the same principle on which Mr.
Clay's compromise engratted the bank bill pro
cecds and sprung from. The legislative action IN the
territorial council, was law unless disapprY,ed by
Congress and thereby annucd The sanction OF
Congress was inferred from it, falling TO d,sappro,c
branch of the Fisca Agent is "a be established IN
a Stale unless, in given time, she uncond tonaly
disSents Her assent may be inferred from her failing
"a dissent Cor not being able to make up her udt-
ncni ~ the forms Of law
Now, the analogy, among others entirely fails in
tins vital and primal particular: Congress h sd ul
powers over those Territories hut has not full pow
cts over the States In nat case, having full powers
had the right to declare that tI did not dlsapprnvc
y sanctioned In ME case, not having full powers II