The Arkansas banner., 1844-04-24

I CT tFllRFH
 1st. By reaty.-Fhis right was established iii the cession of Louisiana and Florida, and cannot now be questioned, without mcnacing tae organization of the government and in- tegritv of the Jlnion fer, by virtue ot this power, three States and several Territories now compose q part of the republic. In iS42, we acquired territory by treaty, aud attached ii to inc States of New ! ork and Vermont There wasthege no disputed boun- dary, for tic call was for a certain parallel oi lafitude-a mere question of measurement-- which, when made. placed this territory With- in the unfloubted limits of Canada; Io conse- ouence of which. we had-tandoned the for tress erecting at Rouse's Point. and the ground il occupied, which was q part of the terri tory.1 which we acquired by the treaty of I8i2. The question of tbe power of annex alion by treaty k settled. and incorporated into ihc very existence oi the government and oi inc Union.
 2d Tue object may be accomplished by aet of Congress, without treaty.-The lan- qage of lhe constitution is "New S'ates may be admitted by the Congress into this Union: but no new Siate shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other S!ate; nor any S,ate be formed by the june 1 ton of two or more States, or parts ol States. without the consent of the legislatures oi the States concerned, as well as of the Congress- i 'fhe grant is unlimited, except that the boun- 1 diary of an existing State cannot be disturbed i by Congress without tie assent of the Slate 1 legislatures < New States may be admitted bY the Congress into this Unjon.o Tl,is. Is the broad language of tie constitution and, to confne il 10 territory then acquired, Is to interpolate most important words into that instrument. Nor could ii have been the Iu- teution of the framers of the constitution to prevent the acquisition of new territory Louisiana was not then part oi the Union, but t was a most important part ot the valley of the Mississippi, containing New Orleans, and the whole of the western, and the most essential part of the eastern portion of that territory, with both banks of it's great river for many hundred miles above its mouth, and Che only outlet of the products of the mighty valley starring at the Youghiogany in Mary and, aud the Alleghany in New ! ofk, unit ing at Pittsburg, where they form the Ohio, to the outlet of all into the Gulf, If we look into the condition of many of the States when the constitution was framed, we will find il could never have been adopted had 1t forbid den the acquisition of the only outlet of all the products of the West The waters of western Maryland, and of western New ! ork, commngle with those of the Ohio and Mis- sissippi There stood Pittsburg at the head of the Ohio; and one-third of Pennsylvania is mlersecled by streams which water a part of the great valley Virginia then included Kentucky three-fourths of her territory was within the great valley, and the Ohio and Mississippi itself were it's boundary for more than thousand miles. North. Carolina then included Tennessee, and was bounded for hundreds of miles by the river Mississippi; !; and Georgia then embraced Alabama and Mis- sissippi, and was not only bounded for seye- fal hundred miles by the great river, but ad- vaneed to within few miles of the city ot New Orleans. Is 1t possible that all these States, in forming the constitution, eeuld have intended to prohibit forever the acquisition of the mouth of the Mississippi, then in the hands of hostile and despotic foreign pow err The constitution contains no such sui cidal provision; and all the historical facts, both before and after it's adoption. are against any such anti-American restriction. As to a treaty, it Is only necessary as indicating the assent of the eeding nation; and if that has been given already, as in the case of Texas, without treaty, our acceptance may be made by Congress Suppose the constitution of Texas forbid the cession, except by Congress: when their Congress passed the assenting law, could not we accept, by act of Congress ;- Or suppose Texas, or any other contiguous territory, was vacant and unclaimed by any power: could we not annex it by act of Con- gress One of the grounds assumed Ill Con gress, and by our government, in defence of our title 10 Oregon, is its alleged discovery and occupancy by us, long before the treaty with France being one of the acknowledged modes by which nations acquire territory :; but if we can only acquire territory by troa- ty, then this ground, upon which We claim title to Oregon, must be abandoned. II would be strange, indeed, if the treaty-makiRg power 1 (which, under our constitution, Is purely an executive powcr) could annex territory, and vet that the Executive, and both Houses of Congress combined, could not Then, if France or Spain had forever refused to cede to Us Louisiana or New Orleans. could we never-no, not even by conquest in war have occupied and annexed them by act of Congress; Congress, then, having the un- doubted power to annex territory, and admit new States, and Texas having assented in advance, may be either admitted at once, as territory, or State. or States, or Congress may provide for the prospective admission of one or more States from Texas, as has often heretofore been done as to other new States, the whole question of annexation not heinz one whether His goternmem has the power, but only how t must be eXereised and whether only by one of the branches of this government, or by all combined And if the power vested in Congress by the constitution 10 admit new States, does not of itself en- brace territory then constituting part of the Union, as well as all future acquisitions, there is no power to admit new States, except out of territorv which was part of the Union.