The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1843-10-30
MR.. ADAMS ANp TEX Az:

& We adVertcu some Ga
and reasonable address 20 the PEOPLE OF the
! free States of the Union put forth n May last
by the Hon. John Quincy Adams, signed by
hi.nselfalld Twelve of his felow-representatives
--congenial spiritsin the late Congress. II
appears that the address, shortly after its first
publication, received the signatures of eight
other members of the same Congress and pro-
badly additional names have since been affixed
10 IT,
The document Is therefore Of some import
ance, partly from the fact that so many men
possessing weight and influence in their respec-
tive sections Of the country, have thus publicly
and solemnly pledged themselves @ dissolu-
ton of the Union, in the event Of the adoption
of measure which they are pleased TO condemn
in advance Of any discussion oft and partly
because Mr.. Adams, the leader of this move
ment, Notwithstanding the doubts of his sanity
occasionally expressed, rather in jest than ser-
ously has still large body of admirers, who
entertain great reverence for his mental powers,
and who believe that, however apparently ex-
travagant he may be al times, he never deibe-
rately assumes position which is not logically
AMI legally unassailable.
We will recur, therefore, 10 the resolutions
offered by him in the House of Representa-
tives on tie 2Sth of February last, which are in
the following words:
resolved, That by the Constitution of the United
States power 10 delegated TO their Congress, or TO
any department or departments of their Government,
afix this Union any foreign State or the people
thereof.
Resolved, That any attempt of the Government Of
the United States by act of Congress or by treaty,
TO annex to this Union the Republic OF Texas or the
people thereof, would be violation of the Constitu'
ton of the United States, null and void and to which
the free States of this Union and their people ought
not TO submit"
In the first of these resolutions, which we pre-
sumo were carefully worded by so great preci
sion in language, Mr. Adams lays DOM the
PROPOSE ion that it would be Unconstitutional "to
atfix 10 thi, Union any foreign State or the peo-
pie thereof" He does not affirm that it would
be unconstitutional 10 annex territory to The
Union which, indeed, would be asserted with
an ill-grace by the man who negotiated the
treaty annexiDg Florida to the Union, and would
be equivalent 10 confession that, in order to
retain his post at the head Of Mr.. Monroe's Cab
met, he became willing and active instrument
in inHicting a most serious wound on the Con-
stiluton. And man who was in public life
when the cession of Louisiana look place, would
find il difficult to convince the world that, a
this la.e day, new lights had broken in upon him
respecting the consttutionaiIy of annexing Ter
ritory to the Union. The question of constitu
tionaty, as 10 annexing territory TO the Union
has been settled by precedents which are il
their nature irreversibe; or which could be re
versed only by expelling Louisiana and Florida
firm the Union.
But it is unconstitutional, Mr.. Adams says, t
afix any foreign State to the Union.
The answer TO this is obvious. There is nj
clause in the Constitution expressly permitting
the annexation of territory TO the Union. 1t il
altogether Silent upon the subject, and therefor
makes no distinction between STATE and Terri
tory Nor could any distinction well be made
or any limit OF conditions imposed on he acqui
sition Of territory. IL we have a right, unde
the Constitution, to affix single acre Of ground
or a single square mile or territory to the Uhon
we have the right to afiix ten or fifty THOUSAND
square miles If we have right to purchas
any potion Of the territory of foreign govern
ment, we have a right 10 purchase the majo
portion, or the whole Of IT, We have as mucl
right to purchase, or acquire in any way, tn
half or lhree-fourhs, or the whole Of Texas, a
10 purchase or acquire single acre of il: an
circumstances might arise which would rende
the acquisition Of part Of it Indispensable
The second Of these resolutions of Mr.. Adam
is corollary or, practical application Of th
first. 1t would be unconstitutional "to anne
to the Union the Republic of Texas, or the Pee
pie thereof"
1t is plain, we think, that it would be quile a
constitutional to annex any part or the whole
Texas TO the Union as it was to annex tn
Floridas or Louisiana If by annexing the r,
public of Texas to the Union is meant PEI
petual alliance offensive and defensive betwee
Texas and the United States, we can only e.
press doubt whether any one has dreamed {
such annexation But we could constitution
ally annex the whole territory Of Texas: and 2
TO the People Of Texas we have as much rigl
TO admit them into the Union as citizens as W
had to admit the inhabitants Of Lousian
and Florida.
These propositions seem so plain and indi
putable as hardly 10 require argument, if it we
not evident that Mr.. Adams in these resolution
seeks TO draw quibbling distinction betwee
aGring ga foreign State" and annexing te
ritory.
The question Of constilutionality, as to q