Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1845-03-11


he more convenient in the hands OF the later
Blu, The plan had great coun;ervalling ncheh''
which gentlemen ought not 10 forget. MS r.
solution got entirely rid OF the difficulty oil me
assumption of the Texian debt. ms u Wouu
lie remembered had been one lfu'liul source
of objection 10 the Treaty formerly suoin,9eu.m
With that feature, The measure never co'''u nav
received the assent Of the other HOUSE, VI, .,Ii
if it had it probably never couIl nsve ile. wy
appreciation OF the community II was neA. ~.
jec,ed, that the resolution proposed 70 'ahe ave
from Texas her custom -houses-ohe l,le%"o u
paying her debts II did so propose, aha, DIS
think, very properly; but il e't her puphc
lands; and if even a fourth Part Of them re,
NAMED unsold. they alone would be suiheieu', ana
more than sufficient 10 pay all her opiiSa.lois:
As soon as the union should be eiieC'eu' '"e
of these lands would Immediately rise; ana d.
the tide of emigration poured into that quarter
those prices would be sustained, anu "oui' w %n
aise enough to provide for her puoiic uep'. -;
injustice, therefore, would be done 10 'ne cleu,,
tors Of Texas, if enough OF her PUBIC Paope.S
Quainted with the law, knew inc souhune.s u
this principle in private transactions, ana II aP-
piled with equal force 10 public DEBT. =
But il was said also that joint resolution oi
this kind was not respectful 10 Texas IL lh,s
were the first communication proPosea'o oe ma,
| to her by this Government, there might POSSIBLY
he something in the objection; bu, had we hol
been negotiating with her for years Dla het
people know nothing about this malter, ana iiau
they done nothing about II, when 'hey Vo'eo, d
the veIv adoption oil their Constitution, ior d
union with us? TO adopt the resolution, would
therefore, seem to be perfectly respectful 10 Texas
and much more so, than different course would
be 10 our own House OF Representatives, WHO
had sanctioned this so strongly.
But the great question TO be decided was, whe-
Their the act proposed was constitutional IN lis
character. Now, if understand the positions
taken by gentlemen on the other side, The first
was, that Congress cannot admit new STATES
formed out of territory not before within Inc
Union. And another branch OF the objection,
still more serious, was that Congress could mol
admit new State unless ii was formed ont oil
territory which had been in the Union in 1889.
TMr. Archer here in:erposed, and said that the
gentleman was correct in his statement as 10 the
first branch Of the objection, but not SO as 10 the
second No such position was 10 he found in the
report of The committee on Foreign Affairs.l
will show presently that the opponents OF the
measure hold both doctrines. The friends OF the
resolution maintained that Congress could admit
new States, whether the territory out Of which
they were formed ever had previously been in
the Union or not. On what reasons did gentle
men on The other side rely2 Their doctrine was,
that the lreaty-making power only could acquire
foreign territory The friends OF The resolution
sa that Congress could organize States in what
had been foreign territory, whether acquired by
the uea,y-making power or By legislation. They
denied that a treaty was indispensable. Again,
as 10 the grounds OF these positions. The oppo-
nents the resolution relied entirely on construc-
ton and implication, and on nothing else. It's
friends relied on The simple letter Of the Consli-
tuition, plain, ard in accordance with its spirit,
without any implication or forced construction
in the matter The Constitution said that ncc
States may be admitted by The Congress into The
Union And what were States? Did not State
consist of lands and peoplel The clause then
meant the ncw lands and people may be admitted
into the Union. Gentlemen denied this. and in
sisted, that before we could admit a Stale, we
must interpolate requirement 10 golo foreign
government by means of The treaty power and
thus buy The territory out of which it was TO be
formed. How must these conflicting views strike
the country in respect 10 principle? The friends
OF the measure on his side of the House stood now
inst where they had always stood. They sup
/ ported the Constitution in its express grants Of
! power, while gentlemen on the other side relied
| upon construction and implication for destroying
one OF these express grants. We go for the plain
common-senSe meaning of words, while YOU re.
sort 10 refinement and Subelties Mr. w. had
often heard of the Constitution being construed
Tor the purpose Of charging the boundaries OF
| power which il granted; but this was the first
! time in his life that he had witnessed resort IL
| the power of construction 10 batter down express
grants by the force of authority conjured into ex-
istence by implication. He and his associates
| had ever stood up for The rights OF the people
and the rights OF the States, against The claims of
! Executive usurpaiOn founded on mere conSiruc-
| ton of the Constitution; while thase on the other
side Of the House had been more noted for their
attachment 10 Executive power, and their adroit-
ness in constituting away The letter of the Con
s,itution. The real contest here, was between
the power OF Congress and the power OF
| the President. But the Senator from Vir-
gina [Mr. Rives] had represented it as a
contest between the Senate and The House OF Rep
resentatives. To listen TO the language OF gen
tlemen, one would think that the power 10 make
treaty was in the Senate. This was not So
The Senate originated no treaty; il was in The
President, with the advice and concurrence OF
the Senate. Look at the appointing power-who
made the appointments under this Government
The Senate? Not at all. The appointments
were made by the President, though the Senate
was required 10 approve them, their concurrenc,
being resored to only Tor greater security. All
these were Executive powers; and The real con-
test here was, whether the arm OF Executive pow
or al The other end of the avenue should by mere
construction be suffered 10 defeat the power Of the
Legislative Department.
Senatorial jealousy need not be excited as this
body was 10 act whether territory be admitted by
treaty or BY Congress. AM! |, for one, would
scorn 10 seek 10 obtain power in the first case
by mere construction, in order to destroy an ex-
press power in the other case given by the people
and The STATES 10 the more immediate representa-
tives OF the former
| will treat the arguments of gentlemen on the
other side with fairness will meet them in The
teeth, and not dodge or finch from any position.
They insisted thai the Constitution had conlided
the reaiy-making power 10 The President OF the
United States, with The advice and consent OF
iwo-ihirds Of the Senate. Very we'll: had this
ever been denied by US! Gentlemen were fight
ing with wind-nllls. He (Mr. W. and his
friends had never denied it. He had before him
the famous resolution of Mr.. Madison in 1896
These had ever been the guide OF the party 10
which he belonged; and they were so now. He
would take The liberty Of reading part
"RcsOircd, That il being declared by the second
setcion the second article oi The constitution
that the President shall have power, by and with
the advice and consent al The Senate, 10 make
treaties provided two-thiris OF the senators pre-
sent concur, the House OF Representatives does
not claim any agency in making treaties, &c.
Gentlemen said that the House of Representa-
tives could not ra,ify treaty; and who denied
ihat2 The friends Oi annexation left the ralitica-
ton or rejection to the Senate But next il was
insisted that the treaty which The Senate had re-
fused TO ratfy was sent 20 the House. will re-
mind you OF an important difference between the
treaty as submitted TO the Senate, and the Joint
resolution now proposed for adoption. Twas By
the treaty proposed 10 annex Texas as Terri
tory; now it was proposed TO admit Texas as a
Stale. Itnever had been proposed 10 admit a
State by the treaty power. The treaty was TO
obtain il as Territory; and even then it was
Stale must be admitted by Congress, and Con-
gress alone. We did not now undertake to rali-
fy treaty. The treaty had been repudiaied
and lis subject matter, the getting Of Texas mere
| " as a Territory. The Senate was now asked
10 act with The House under another and sub