Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1845-01-25
THE TEXAS DEBATE.

fr;ands or /. Immediate Annexation " in the debate
now nearly exhausted in one branch of Congress,
which, from their novelty, and out OF respect for
the powers Of invention they display, are entitled
to some notice from us.
One gentleman has put into lofty philosophic
form that wild and loose idea, proper only to the
allowable rhapsodies Of an Anniversary Grafton,
that this Government of ours is destined to cover
thu entire earth! But, as he is somewhat too well
informed not 10 be aware Of great historic diff
fculty the fact that Governments have always been
oppressive and therefore unstable, somewhat IN pro-
portion 10 the surface they and the variety Of
races they embrace-he has been obliged 10 build
secondstory Of theory upon the first baseess one
and TO PROFOUND the notable idea that the tendency
Of all civilized institutions is to simplify and igneR
themselves as they advance. The worid' cries
he, is governed too much y In other words' nc
holds that barbarous nations have complex laws,
and that cultivated ones come constantly TO have
more and more meager code, until finally they VIII
probably in the last stage Of refinement have none
at ALL To sustain this hypothesis he adduces some
singular proofs--the Magna-Charta and others.
Now, this is as ii one should argue that the Com
nandments--the first law given through Moses in
the desert to men yet without fixed seats or variety
Of .occupations--wcre more complex, more multi
farious, than the Deuteronomy imposed upon the
same men, when they passed into land where they
were to exercise arts to acquire every sort OF
property, to trade, to sail, to build, to coin and
every thing else that advancing society will pro-
excessively do. II is if one should say that the
Roman Ten Tables more voluminous than
the Justinian Code and Pandects the laws of Clovis
more numerous than the Captularies Of harlemagne
and Five Codes Of Napoleon; Magna-Charta am
pier than De Lome on the English Constitution; or
the Blue Laws more cumbrous than the present
statutes at large of Connecticut.
What can be palmer than that, in each society,
the law should embody particular provision for
each relation, for each fact that belongs to the par
ticuar condition of that society When all sub
sst by the chase, few and simple rules are necessa
ry. So, when all are herdsmen or fishermen. But
when lands come to be an object Of cultivation and
property, the new pursuit requires new body Of
regulations. Superadd exchange of mems mutual
productions, and the advancing community must
have additional laws. Let the arts and pursuits
of every kind spring up, and still other legal
provisions must come. Before the invention of
letters, laws against forgery were probably not
needed; bankrupt laws not before men bought or
sold and it is only since FuLroN's time that acts
to regulate standardization have got among our
statutes.
So much for the auxiliary proposition, in civil
sense. Let us slightly examine in political one.
Can Governments come TO be of fewer and more
limited powers, in proportion to their accreon of
territories differently peopled of opposite climates,
pursuits, habits, languages, opinions In word,
can the mixed, the heterogeneous and the hostile
bring about simplicity
II is with the political as with the civil power.
The simplest and rudest form of authority is king
ly despotism and popular liberty is the most re-
fined and complex of social contrivances. How is
the former to be lmitedl By progressive law,
prescribing the extent to which personal discretion
may go. And how is the latter to be secured
Only, in like manner, by well-defned legislative
limitation that provides whatever the Government
ought to do, and that it shall be made to do it
that prohibits what it cannot be permitted to do and
takes that the prohibition shall be made eff
Client by being in every case clear.
As, in perfectly simple society, few laws are
necessary, SO, in Government embracing in its
control communities all alike, the political power
may be made the most limited. Add new pursuits
to the society, and you create the inevitable neces-
sity for new laws; add heterogeneous communities
TO the Government, and you must in proportion
enlarge its powers. 1t is true that you may give
these guardedly, taking that they shall not be
inadequate, notbe excessive. But larger they must
be; and, to limit them, you must set up no empty
idea that your Government is going to be weaker
because its powers larger you must, on the
contrary, take that il shall have means equal to
the end. II is law, well-defned political code,
that makes and keeps Government free. Leave
IT only restricted by such vague theories as we are
discussing-iet uncertainty, let distractions be your
only defence--let philosophc generalities be your
only charter and wide phrases that will apply to
any thing, and therefore to nothing, be your only
constitution, and you will soon see where vour
Government is, or what it is good for
Not limited, we have said, by express prov;-
sion for particular cases, il will Of course when
those cases occur and are recommended by an OBJ
vious public necessity, assume the power. Now.
the very business Of Freedom is the opposite
of all this people is as little free whose Govern
ment cannot do what it ought TO do, as one whose
Government can do what il should not be permitted
to do. Freedom, in word, is Government Of
laws, and not, as this theory of Mr.. OWEN sup
poses, agradua frittcring away of them to nothing
ILL L. -