The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1845-01-25


what he could to elect President Polk Two Con
xr.,sss have discussed the measure. aud Mr. Hs,s
has been upon the spot q hear their ds'cu pe
h a representative und lawyer, and bound 10 have
examined this qusptioa, aud lhsi, Toe, ."o'ousn,yT
Now what docs MI. Hale cay snous VIC s,,,
Atty of anne xatioui Why, iorsooen, that nc WI,
neither ann, n~r dsny ssgk thsrssf" himself oal VIII
RELY upon The op,nsous Of others lie says
B.fors I make the suggestions which propose
on the resolutions adopted by our legislature al '
lato session, wish TO add a word touching the con
power of this government TO incorporate
foreign STALE nation INTO the Union But on ns'
ter OF SUCH grave and serious import snail mol uo'
my self before you with any crude remarks OF my own
will nlither affirm nor deny augbt thereof but WIN
simply submit TO you the opinion OF two men Justly
Standing high 10 your estimation, and doubt no'
10 the estimation Of the whole country, as any Two
living statesmen. 1 mean Martin Van buren, ana
Levi w Oodbury whom to name Is to praise,
sod who have been honored by holding tho highest
Offices the In the nation, and the other IN our
own state"
MIR. Hale is writing of Texas, and these two em-
ncnt statesmen, 'whom TO name is TO praise" have
written fully upon Texas; now what "opinions" DO
find cited 10 this letter. Extracts from the recent
| elaborate argument of MIR Van Buren, settling, aud
forever the constitulonality Of annexing Texas Z
EXTRACTS from the powerful reasoning OF The New
Hampshire Senator, equally conclusive both as 10 the
constitutoDaity aud expedicncy OF the measure :
No; not word from such documents Such OPP
mons we're not suitable for the political purposes Of
Mr. bale, whether these purposes we're patrioue OF
iactious. he prefers to go back To 1876, quotes
| resolution stered by Mr.. Van Buren, IN the United
States Senate respecting the proposed Panama Con
gess, for the opinion Of the one, and speech made
by MIR. Woodbury. in the same place in support oil
this resolution, the opinion OF the other bo'h
are strong Nptess against the policy Of this coun-
tfy's becoming 10 soiyea in a . vortex Of new coa-
nd dar ~ both Law. led
and Clays visionary scheme of uniting the American
continent in a Congress at Panama. And after ma
king such quotations. Mr. Hale says
al leave the constitutional question where those
gentlemen Left it, satisfied that puny efforts of mine
add strength 10 the mpregnable position IN which
they placed it."
Who but the Hon. John p. Hale could have seen
the analogy between the constitutional question" Of
forming an eDtaDgng alliance" with the South
American republics and becoming involved with their
disputes and The constitutional question Of incorpors-
ting additional territory into our Union Among
those MIR. Hale names having voted Tor the rcsoiu-
ton Of Mr.. Van Buren, Mr. Benton. Did this
gentleman suppose that, while he was publishing IN
the newspapers his series of articles In favor OF ma
king Texas part of this Union, he voting in the
u States Senate in favor of constitutional principle
that wouli forever keep it out' But such "puny eff
iorts on the part OF Mr.. Hale roe, too, satisfied,
can never weaken one jot the strength OF the " I'M
pregnabe position" in which both Mr.. Van Buren,
and Mr.. Woodbury. have repeatedly placed both the
constuonality and expediency Of this great nation
What this position was take what Mr.. Van Buren,
wrote April 20, 1874 in his letter TO MIR. Hammett.
He says
"f there be nothing in the situation condition
| of the Territory of Texas which would render its
admission hereafter into the Union q new State
improper, cannot perceive any objection on constr
tuuoDal grounds TO its annexation territory. In
speaking Of the right 10 admit States, must OF
course, be understood referring TO the power Of
Congress. The Executive and Senate may, as
have already Observed by the exercise OF the treaty
making power, acquire territory but new States can
only be admitted by Congress and the sole authors
y over the subject, which is given TO Il by the Con-
sttution, contained in the following provision, viz
new States may be admitted by the Congress into
this Union" The only restrictions imposed upon
this general power, are-lst, that new States
shall be formed or erected wi hin the jurisdiction Of
any other State nor, 2dIy, ANY State formed by
the junction Of two more States parts OF States
without The consent Of the legislatures concerned
well as OF Congress'-restrictions which have no
bearing upon the present question. The matter,
therefore, stands it would do if the Constitution
said new States may be admitted by the Congress
into this Union, without addition or restriction.-
That these words, taken by themselves, are broad
enough TO authorize the admission Of the territory Of
Texas cannot, | think, be we'll doubted; do |
perceive upon what principle can set up limita-
tons to power unqualfedly recognised by the
Constitution in the PLAIN simple words have quoted,
and with which other provision of that instrument
conflicts in the slightest degree"
And after dwelling upon the Louisiana annexation,
Mr. Van Buren, adds;
| Certainly no remarks necessary to show that
there can be no possible difference produced in the
constitutional question by the relative positions Of
the territory comprising louisiana the Foridas and
Texas in respect to the United States"
| With all this before Mr.. Hale, where is even the
common honesty of twisting what Mr.. Van Buren,
said in 1896 against the proposed Panama Congress
into opinion against the consttutionalty OF an
nexing Texas' Is not Mr. Hale hard pushed when
he resorts TO such poor subterfugel