Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1842-03-01
COMMUNICATIONS
THE QUESTION OF OUR SOUTHERN
BOUNDARY.


MEssERs. EpTroRs
You are aware that this is no. a new subject and
that it has before this been discussed YOU are all
so aware that the opinion has been and continues
to be entertained to great extent by the people or
Wisconsin, that they have legal claim to all thai
portion of Illinois, lying north of an east and west
line drawn through the southerly extreme of Lake
Michigan. 1t is the belief in this ri CHIT that leads
so many confidently to assert, that the question can
not be settled without its recognition the part of
Congress and change in the present northern
boundary at the same time, | we'll satisfied
that it the people generally could be convinced
they have right of this kind, whatever advanta-
ges might follow from the acquisition Of the terri
tory, the subject would be permitted to rest AL
though there questions of expediency connected
with this subject yet it is the question of right
which must first be determined, if the matter is
agltated but, even five were well satisfied of the
right these questions of expedlency might have
some weight in determining whether it is for our
good that the right should be agitated.
have myself, heretofore been Of the opinion that
there was not shadow of doubt, but that Wiscon-
sin had legal right to the disputed tract. From
a more close investigation, however, of the ordi-
nance of 1897 and from some new views have
heard expressed on the subject, / am now equally
well satisfied that Wisconsin has no IegaL clain,
aohaterer to the territory IN dispute and that the
agitation of this question, to whatever length it may
be carried, can result in no practical benefit, but
may result in harm from the angry feelings it must
arouse am well aware that venture this opin-
ion in opposition to high authority but as liberty
Of opinion is boon which we all enjoyin common
| must adhere to mine.
In the year 1857, An Ordinance for the gov
eminent of the territory of the United States north
west OF the river Ohio" was passed by congress-
This ordinance divided this tract of country into
three separate states territories, Ohio, Indiana,
and Illinois, with their present eastern, western,
and southern boundaries, but running north on the
line of the east and west boundaries as far as the
boundary line of the Canadas. These three states
the ordinance positively established, with the above
mentioned boundaries but it also contained a
proviso follows, Il" Prorided ho,cerer, and it is
farther understood and declared, that the bounda-
RES of these three states, shall be subject far to
be altered, that if congress shall hereafter find it
expedient they shall have authority form one or
two states in that part of said territory which lies
north Of an east and aoeSt line draen through the
southerty bend or ertreme Of Lake Michigan" 1t
Is upon this provso of the ordinance that the whole
question is founded but, it really seems to me
that it need not have been the cause of so much
difficulty Taking the wording of the ordinance
alone, | cannot think it shows any intention that
IF of
cessty be this east and west line. The provso
says that these boundaries which are specified, may
be far altered as that Congress may, fit deems
1t expedent, form two states In that terri
tory north of east and west line it does not
say OF that territory. And it no where says that
this line shall form the southern boundary of the
new state which may be formed, nor in fact does
1t say that 1t shall form any boundary whatever. 1t
says nothing more than if the state is formed
at all, it must be formed north of this line and
certainly will dispute that Wisconsin is so
formed This, it seems to me, is the plain infer
ence of the ordinance from its language and those
who contend so positively for different construc-
ton, must base their conclusions on a forced infer
ence.
believe it is a principle of law when the Ian
guage of an instrument gives rise to different cong
structons, that the objects and designs, far
known of the trainers of the instrument in making
it, shall be taken into consideration in establishing
the true construction. For the benefit of those who
would force construction upon this ordinance,
foreign to its language, let see what was the
probable designs of the trainers of it, and particu
ary their designs relates to these " one two
states which congress might or might not, at
pleasure, form.
The ordinance is called, Gan ordinance for the
government of the territory of the United States
northwest of the river Ohio and the object APP
pears to have been the early admission of the states
into the Union, with a population sufficient within
reasonable and defined limit of territory, to sup
port the expenses of state government and the
object of the power granted to congress to form
Zone or two " more states, appears plainly to have
been, as they were unacquainted with the country
set off, of its extent resources and liabilities of
sustaining a population, that they might not in
making the ordinance, commit an error by making
unalterable the boundaries of a tract OF country
which might eventually be too large and unwleldly
as single state both in extent OF territory and
population. This is a plain inference, from the
words, if congress shall hereafter find it eXpedi
emit" The expediency was to be determined by
the knowledge which might thereafter be gained of
the country, both of its extent and ability to sus
tain population or from the unquestionable evil
dence furnished by population which might be
found within its borders. This being the inference,
it appears that the parties to the ordinance at the
time ii was formed, were ignorant of the nature of
the country they setting off; and it
matter of profound conjecture with them whether
the power reserved, would be ever used and is it
then probable that they designed fixing permanent
ly and unalterably the boundaries of a state,
of the actual extent of which they were ignorant