The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-11-06
From IT, shi.saslpsls Issssu
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

y NONoIlt " iloN Al LAW
Ia arguing against the notification OF Mr. Slsds
the present Governor OF Vermont, we have appealed
Ito that foundation Of all our political institutions
both State and Federal. and indeed Of all popular
government the will of the majority. We have said
that each State Of the Union, by adopting the Fed
eral constitution, subscribed 10 agreement founded
upon the will Of the majority that tins agreement
did not provide for the secession Of Us members; that
IL did provide for alterations of Its conditions under
the will of the majority and from all this we have
inferred that State which has entered the Union b,
adopting the Federal constitution, cannot secede from
il without the consent OF the majority. Will MIR
Slade answer this II he cannot, he must take the
credit Of recommending TO his State, lis Governor
a very unconstitutional step. And why this recon-
mendationf Because, in his opinion, the xation
of Texas the Union is not authorized by the Fed
eral constitution. What kind of logic is that which
recommends violation OF the constitution in one
point as a remedy for a violation Of il in another
Two wrongs cannot make right
But is the constitution violated by the anne alton
of Texas This involves the question whether the
United States can acquire territory or not for
if they can, they admit II 10 the Union after
wards and il they cannot the constitution has been
violated by the admission of Mississippi, Alabama,
Louisiana Missouri and Arkansas The third sec
ton Of the fourth article of the constitution SAYS,
"New States may be admitted by the Congress into
this Unon but no new Steie shall be formed or erect
ed within the jurisdiction of any other State nor
shall any State be formed by the junction of two or
more States, parts Of States, without the consent
Of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well
as OF the Congress The second clause of the same
section says, "The Congress shall have power to dis
pose of and make all needful rules and regulations
respecting the territory or other property belonging
to the United States and nothing IN this constitution
shall be construed as to prejudice any claims of
the United States, or of any particular State" Ac-
cordng TO the first Of these clauses, new States may
he oHu ipfp tha NAV a OBJ
ted by Congress. Then if Texas should be admit
ted Immediately as State, would the constitution be
volatedi We cannot perceive how. And if il he
not violated by such step could auy member of the
present confederacy make il justification for
sion' We find no such constitutional power in any
State ensuing from such admission The right to
admit new States is penary, limited to no particular
time or territory, and therefore comprehends Texas
Canada any portion of The continent, or hereaf
ter, well the Northwestern Territory granted to
the old confederation by Virginia, the Georgia
Western Territory granted to the present Union by
Georgia. The first of these teri itories granted
BEFORE the second AFTER the adoption Of the present
constitution. An act of Congress under the old
federation dated July -, 1887, provided that this
Northwestern Territory should be divided into States,
not less than three than five, and that such
States, when containing the requisite population, AID
complying with certain conditions mentioned in such
act should be admitted to the Union and IRON this
territory have grown the States of Ohio Indian,
Illinois, Michigan, and the territory of Ouisconsm
Now this clause Of the constitution, respecting tie
admission of new States, RELAXED solely to the terri
tory then possessed by the United States or that
| and any other which they might subsequently
quire Upon the first hypothesis, no State could be
admitted into the Union, excepting Ohio, Indian,
Illinois, Michigan, and Oulsc9DsiD for the Federil
constitution was finished by the convention and pre-
sented to the States September II, 1857 and the
Georgia Western Territory now the States Of ALI
wa IN he I1non Ev
Georgia in 1896 or 1897. Hence upon this hypo,h.-
sis, these two States part of the Union. We
may add that Tennessee was coded TO the Union ty
North Carolina in 1889, and therefore was acquired
as a territory after September l3, 1881 and hence
upon this first hypothesis it has no const tutonll
place in the Union But upon the second hypothesis,
that this clause of the constitution respecting the ad-
mission Of new States, related TO any territory that
might be acquired after the presentation of the
stltuton to the States, or It's adoption by them not
only are the four Northwestern States, and Alabama
and Mississippi, and Kentucky Tennessee, Louis.
ana, Missouri and Arkansas constutonally within
the Union, but Texas or any other State may
become so hereafter. If this part Of the Fedenl
constitution covers new acquisitions, 1t covers them
without limitation OF time or space, for no limits OF
either are specified. Then upon this part of the
constitution, we give to Mr.. Sade the alternative OF
admitting Texas of rejecting seven of the present
States. Ii Texas cannot be admitted hec-
after, Kentucky Tennessee, louisiana Mississippi,
| Alabama and Arkansas were admitted unconstiti-
tionally.
| The case of Kentucky is peculiar and upon NJ.
SHADES doctrine, II Is part Of the Union 1t
was a territory of the United States, and was nota
State of the Old Confederation, or 10 the conventcl
OF 1857 that made the Federal constitution. Ii wis
separated from Virginia in 1885, 10y mutual conselt
of the two, and not admitted to the Union till l7P.
| Therefore when the Federal constitution was pr.
sented, Kentucky could not under the clause for s,-
hitting new States, be regarded part of the terri
tory then belonging to the United States to be az
mitted like the States Of the No thwesern Territory
1t was then an independent sovereignty, owing allie
glance to no government but its own. Hence whel
1t was admitted in 1892, it came in as foreigi
country an Independent nation. Then if foreigr
country could be admitted in 1892, another foregu
country may be admitted in lS44 or hereafter.
| And what is the case Of Vermont MIR. SHADES
own State In l777 IT declared itself indepe ndeni
of Britain and all the world, thus nufyinc the ces
sion of It to New York by the British Crown in 1864,
On October II, 1890, New York relinqushed all
claim to IT, and March 4, 1921, it was admitted "a
the Union. Therefore II never was a territory OF
the United States, il was not a member of the Old
Confederation represented 10 the convention Of
1877. Therefore in 1857 il was foreign country
which had declared its independence in III, aud as
such foreign country II was admitted the Union in
1894. Hence if Texas cannot be admitted OF
hereafter. Vermont could not have been admitted in
l79l; and hence the same principle which shuts
the door upon Texas, must require Vermont to paH
out # the house. IL we understand the Green Noun
tain Boys, they will not relish their new Governors
notification.
We shall continue the subject upon that clause OF
the constitution, quoted above, which provides for
the government of territory.
II nj