Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1845-03-24

St<ss- : ,SSreS2SSS
N. pc~sf II se7ul,nt territory, by treaty, TIE
Distinctive opinion VI Mr. Jefferson EssEe al rnor.ss. lie
died in that faith. Such also. wiheu, this limitation have
hitherto bcse The coneurng opinions II all other American
statesmen The resolution considering for the fni
time in the history vi legislation ovees those bounds
not only oterleaps them but ithss no operation an
uaui II gets beyond limits. As IL ps.sss from
your hands. and while remains within the United States.
Is esps nortaum. Life, vitality, only be impaired
to by the Government and people Of Texas. acting with
in the limits Of Texas lfthsi people, with just OF
this aggression upon their rights and upon their national
dignity ~ a sovereign and independent State, your
equal in their claim upon the oi nations. shall
fepel a With scorn. the poor bsnng IL destined
TO see the hight oi jay. although will have been ye
much exposed Ia H. IT, nom whatever cause they tam,,y
submit to your mandate aud do Your bidding they the
accoueheurs who will Usher into being. As 1t passes
irom hands Il viii be stlbom and eless Il Is tho
child Ut many iahcs but they alone mpar vitality
H. IL must be born again. and in foreign land.
We to look Of the The clause which
'horlres Congress admit into the Union.
medaiey followed by disinct provisions, which limit
the exercise OF the power and which by their terms
confined to the L. $. This is denied Now, Iadcrss
myself to the Senators from Penn.yv,uia Mr. Buchan,nl
and from New Hampshire Mr.. Woodbury.. They have
argued this question ON legal unds IL n. lawyers
appeal 20 them 10 in constituting instrument grant
ing an authority the power and the matonu that po~c
are not held TO have relation the subject Do they
contest this proposition lapprehcnd Well, here 10
the grant o power 10 admit new Saics and that s fol-
lowed by Limitation. which prescribes with the
serrpu Gus care. But the limitation, all adm, Who'll
conhnedto States arising within the limits OF the Uneo
States IL II not natural TO conclude that intended
10 contnc tue grant IN like manner Does the grant OF
:he power rcste subject and h. to anoth
er the power to foreign, the limitation domestic Ss,csi
Apart hin this natural necessary relation between pow.
er and the Limitation OF the power the inference
irresistible that the subject the minds oi the
trainers OF the Constituonin granting the power, in
prescribing its limitation
Look 10 the Constitution, for proof how uniformly
this i
The number Of Representatives shall no, exceed one
tor every thirty thousand bu, each State shall have
al. Rvfa
branch Is the object vt the limitation well the grant
All balls Tor raising revenue shall originals. in the House
OF Representatives Isi the Sen'e may propose or
wi'h amendments. as IN other bills Here again the sub
cSs oi the srsnt and is oitl,ion identical. Bills Tor
raising revenue tie obec, Of both.
"Congrcss shall have power lay and collect taxes du
ties. infOsts, aud uscc, all duIts impOsts, and
e'sts. snail be uniform throughout the United St'cs"-
Thi- case Is sikingly analogous. The grant power
G"limted asio place. 'to ay and collect taxes duties, i'm
posts, oad rxcise The limitation requires that duties
m?oss and excuses, sha!! he unn,m throughout the Unit
Ell States No one doubts that the grant well the
limitation, is confined to the un ted States.
"CnngToSs shall have power declare the punishen, Of
treason Bvr no aiiander Of Treason sha work corruption
OF bood Herr, sgain the grant aud the limitation
applied TO the sabjscithc punishment Of treason
hi- true Of every ether clause in the Constitution
which IN genera giant has been subjected subs, u mt
hHi'aiion-'shy soai 1t Not he 50 in the clause
cbnsd crng
New States may nc admitted" &c, I.a j. tic grant,
" but Ssie shall be iarmed," &c snd that the
limitation Nov. IN ta' limitation, every bsdy adr that
tie United States. Why. following the uniform analogy OF
the Constitution. should the have the
Interpretation in the gsauti
There is another perhaps, sir. you vii! consider it
stronger reason IN support Of this Argument.
The power TO admit ieFeiga States into the Union, all
wi agree Is much larger power than that OF admitting
those which composed ii people already within ou.
territorial limits. Tie latter limited; the former il
Unlimited. Il vastly Interesting 10 the cxl.uag
members OF the unioa-more difficult in its
more far more important in its conssqgeness.-
that
wa reluctantly wrung IRON oil them. sii they
might 90 r1g IN ADM, the inhabitants al territories.
whose limits w.hE tc@e of the DATED Siaes into
rh'on with them, and Yet b. very unwilling extend THE
privilege 70 those of fuTeign land Unquesionsy zach
al extension wond be greater concession would
Ter upon COnsiess larger pSwcr- would Tepose
delicate Tie caution which had them care
fully &c Iii this power, when applied the admission Ut
States, newly created within Existing boundaries would
opet.ie with accumulated force, when troy.Cr q DO
made IN The Constitution for ;ranscendng those boundaries
by the admission Hi foreign States. Ii Senators who -
SeIi is power sFc night Is absolute uaniisd dycsled
OF al 2"sf!-, uncncnmbersd 10y any IL
power 10 majority Of .--Egi each House of Con-
Eess, with the President uncoa..oet Dis,
cIson IL Is chartered ibeI,iue," furnished with
T1'ns commission 20 range the world guest "i dominion
it,.s.I d,.... |i,,h whs! setgPo9us care after
ed the s1,ar ns ~ ~ g ne SoEsiitu,ion guard
ing Up within our limita lis conceivable thai they would
nave granted The larger difficult more dangerous
power mas OF admitting foreign States. without slug
some eheck, some guard Restraint, ie
caution winch rad characterized all their deliberations; cay
whish actually and very moment eaerted on The
les important proVfoa the susIec, In word can
YOU beese that II was INTENDED confer tic greater power
ida' g admitting Dfc!sH Sise, ,lury u-ilimi:ealy
Mho'V without Chez -a5'TalHtaEd is ini- .o which
the advocate, OF ihis RESOLUTION euuies-v,lls H. tie
'e same esuse tie smaller power that OF admitting STATES
aiiSng within our Limits, palousy guarded by s
Eiee'ss Limitations which Imposed upon III Credat
Jndeh' Apsiz. u Tie quaint, but expressive language Of
our aanuca! brethren, yog "ie s 20 the marines
the sailors wont believe IT,"
Can you sT, can any Senator sgine motive Tor dis
elimination between these tEO powers. which would no,
nave led 10 dtecty opposite results which wonld not
nave imposed the stronger guards upon greater moro
Important and more dangerous poweTl address these an
9o,es respectfully but earnestly lhe calm and deliberate
judgment OF Senators, ia spin. equally elevated above
party or aeehone consldsraoIs and too above
the impuehon OF hen, and ask ha, their answer may be
given in toe same .pirit.
lnke another view. Hitherto have been arguing az II
a1 word States, for OF quslying term pre-
hxed TO II, was indc;ermnae aud open 10 inerprrtaton
ana eYc2 admitting tbs have endeayorsd TO show hat
nsea IN The Coas"s,iGu, j. apO.isd to States arising
"I'hin our own limits Bls th!s Is yieuins ysn,sge
ground Sir the term Ssies found in the C,,as
'puon - not unqualified. 1t has qualification, which
! ought 10 DC cecisl7- Of this CONTROVERSY
70 81 'ySIisrED.