The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1845-01-18

saeb0~~tis ~ xatbss,f - &fYsppsh~ss ~sasss ~
uAsns, 90 -ssas sesss 81 rss~sss ana Chasis~sos"
snosgs spa ~. vAsa shsi J. as~-..afv sss Psss~F
10 prostds sna sss,.4s.sa nasy asd g. thsar 40
thosis &C. 10 asissss ssp~.t.J % B~sasa ans Ne
fors iss ths essn~afeeiaea VI es.ta hassss bsi &C.
ths s@ns W. ~ s~es~.aY a uftsf a. sissi 80 So
sass. II .b@~ld s.s ths ssstsus.a Bees feilsasi-
ph,a iof ths sashasas - tsaa a. Usaisd ~s@ss.
eei. mo ssy 1" saa sss nat ihs mlni 90 nssssn4fr
s.s pss,~s 10 e.frs sh~t ps~~F sx~s~ss~ ~s,
" ! Should sss M ehsF@sa a tts Csaasssiass u
Ways and Mssss 90 b. sstkosHy ~ fsy-si 80 s..ns
balls sppfognss,os ssuatis-a aaaias ~ lssss -ssp
hestions, Asa srss".s, sspeass ~ ~e~is essni y
and -, nat u go ssas-ssr, g. as p~sys-s 90
n I sho0ld "a kis g. hs aathefiiy h ss.sf 60
mofy Of sprtushsid, N.s..ebasslts. sal II Hsfysfs
Ferry, N,rsiais 10 ~oal4 sstafa - ma s4ns 90
swer. knd n shoaid ga a.. Cousssias 60 Cu,a.
house. asd Asrbor - Ne Asisa,h sa.., .as 40
horthsm la.ss, ! Pfsssu.s thsy $500 fsi.f ~ -
the powsf 10 rssaials eosnasfrs" sad gsftsgs -
the po~ss 10 pfossts 90 A. saaa@aa tsfssrs
and " should ssk M Coa.aairs As fusi O~ses
and Pc, Road for th.H sstAsfay ~ ssfrs 49,
mails and IA 'hs rates q pa-ssss, tlss .o~1 -.
Ter me 10 ths Po~sf - s.tshiish Posa oe.sss I'd
po-t rosis"
IL Is no, m, pyrpq-s a ths uns b. tsqaHs ~hstsss
all Of thess uscs.saf, snt pfagsf - carr
nto sssoutioo ,hs eofresPond'ss .uuasssstsa gg-sf
IL Is suniei.nt iof nay psrpo-s that, go n tisss
eases, 10 toe pose expressly Efsutst NJ ess.tis
tioa and 4 ssi.t. Al III, col, casa. ), siits. q
the principle that = Bscss-srY snd pfs,sf - carr
the expressly granted poser iuto ensst Ap.iy ths
principle To the pfOpositioo % snssx Tess fts
constitution says ths, nss State M, - aaa.d.
ted by the Co0sw.s iato ne tsian.n 4 sssf
this clause COosro-s WISHES 10 saaaa Tssa. o.
new States bat thss o.asos b. does ~thoui 90.
nexing The territory. The snss,stoa - sai oaiY a.
esssAy and propsf bot isdi-peasatls 81 ths sda,s-
sion Ia 10 pfsre u-sss, ~ithout ths yfiofaascs a
which Texas cannot be admitted Stil ths sos-its-
ton says that Congress may sdmh boz, aud nay ala
pass all laws necessary and pto,sf o. Tho s1uni..on.
repeat Is not the la~ Of ahRsssi,oa aecs..sf, snd
proper 10 the admss,oni II o. tho esustlsti5a ssys
that Congress may pass b. Language cannot ~
more explicit The piOposuon aisno.t ssifss idsni
and any attempt al slueidalion would col, serve D.
confuse II. am aware that an stismTt ~ili h. made
TO evade or break the force Of hs Argument ~
ing true Congress has the power admit 1saas "a
To the Union a State States bat that Il 10 Do
ees-sy to annex the territory frs aud that ne an
neration can only be made BY the testy rskiag poo
or To this objection have 70 reply, that such not
the requirement Of the eoosututun. That instfu-
men does not saw that the PRESIDENT and sspst, may
admit new STATES, that they shall make laws (fr
treaty Is declared by III. Constitution 10 be q isw)
or the acquisition Of territory In order 70 enable Con-
gress TO admit new States. There is no such prosi-
SION In the constitution But Il dos sAy that Con-
nave power 10 pass all laws necessary and proper for
The admission But II Is further bJecled thst law
Tor the admission Of territory Is contract with fa-
elgn nation that all contracts with foreign nation.
are treaties and tina, the Treaty -mAking power is
vested IN The President and Senate. Tbs objection
is plausible, and therefore requires examination.
lapprehend that all contracts with foreign nations
are not treaties within the meaning Of the consttu-
lion. For instance, the constitution provides that
Congress may borrow money This power being
general grant, Of Is 10 be exercised In such
manner as Congress shall direct. Congress may
borrow money of an individual a bank, or foreign
government Suppose Il should be found expedl.
ent TO effect the loan Of the government Of France
this would certainly be a contract between two for
eign powers but IL treaty within the meaning Of
the constitution? IL SO, il must be made by the
President, and ratified by ,wo-thrds Of the Senate
But the constitution says that Congress shall borrow
money and pass all laws, and Of course make all
contracts necessary to the exercise Of the power
lhis case shows that the y-making power must
be understood 10 include the right make such con.
tracts only as are not specially granted other
department OF the government, or not necessary
and proper to carry some more of the emu
merated powers into effect could give many other
instances in illustration Of the same principle Sup
pose that Congress should PASS law admitting Eng
iish merchandise into this country at 20 per cent
duty Tor ten years. on condition that Great Britain
would pass similar act admitting American pro-
accede to our proposition, and notify our government
OF the same, would not that be a contract between
Inc Two nations No one doubts but that il would
be contract; but is II a treaty within the meaning
OF the constitution Clearly not for if so, it could
only be made by the President and Senate whereas
the constitution vests the power to levy duties and to
regulate commerce, in Congress. The same principle
applies to all other cases where power specifically
lodged 10 Congress. The grant of a power carries
with It by necessary implication the right TO use the
means essential to its exercise. When the grant of
power IS to Congress, the authority to pass all laws
necessary to It's execution is also in Congress and
the treaty making power is to be confined to those
cases where the power is not located elsewhere by
the constitution
Returning to the question before the House, and
applying these principles to 1t, the conclusion ire
sisuoe that Congress, possessing the power admit
otate, mas Inc right TO pass a law of alton
when such annexation is essential to the admission -
do not wish to be understood saying that terrific
ry cannot be acquired in any other way than BY act
OF Congress, for II may be acquired in various ways
under particular circumstances. We may acquire il by
conquest as incident to the making power or hy
treaty, discovery or act of Congress- dependent upon
the pecuIiar circumstances Ofthe case. We claim the
oregon territory by virtue of the ight of discovery
and occupation-a right certainly not derivablc from
the treaty making power, but doubtless having lis
source IN some Of the specific powers of Congress
If Texas and the United States were at this nom. nj
in state of war, and We should conquer that coun
try, apprehend that the very act of conquest itself
would be- psoJdeo, an acquisition of the country and
that Congress would be authorized 10 extend our laws
over ~ WITHOUT the intervention of the treaty -makn
power, and without the consent of any other nation
on earth This would furnish case of the acquisi.
ton OF territory by conquest, incidental TO the
war-makng power vested in Congress But if we
wish TO acquire Texas without treaty. or Iely-
ing upon discovery we mus, fall back upon the pow
er to admit new States and acquire the territory by
act Of Congress Of the necessary and indi.
pensable means ofe1ecuting that enumerated power.
Another objection to the annex alton which has
been strenuously urged, and is relied upon with
great confidence, is that Texas and Mexico are now
at war about the title to this very country, and that
the annexation, under these circumstances would be
an adoption Of the war. This objection was taken
to the treaty last session. and used with some success
upon the ground that the war-maklpg power was
vested in Congress- and that the President and Senate
had no right to make war either by declaration or
adoption. We were told then that the treaty was I'M