Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1845-03-01
ron THE NATIONAL IsrErLrsKSerm.

Many of our ablest Members i'm both Houses OF
Congress seem 10 think that the annexation of For.
eign States is within the treaty-making power 9th
ers contend that this may be done by an act of Con
gress. Now, the one mode is Just as uneonstitl-
tonal as the other The treaty -making power, as a
matter of policy, is safer than the other, as ma
Jorlty OF two-thirds Of the Senate must concur to
rahfy treaty. But neither mode is constitutional
Can tins Government, by treaty, annex Great
Britain, or France, or both Ii can upon the same
principle that il can annex Texas. If it may annex
one foreign State it may annex continent. Has
any one looked at the principle in this view
It's true we have annexed Louisiana and Florida.
But does that settle the construction of the Const-
tuition! Those who contend that it does are gene
rally opposed to the constitutionality of Bank Of
the United States, although that question has been
repeatedly decided by Congress and blythe Supreme
Court.
But, change the inquiry. Can this Government,
by the treatymaking power, or by act of Congress,
cede its sovereignty to England or France This
is exactly what we ask Texas to do and we can
do it as well as Texas. Does not the right to re-
celve such cession involve the right to make il (!
assert that it does.
If we may enlarge our territory by the treaty.
making power, we may, on the same principle, re-
duce it. If we may receive cessions of territory,
we may make them. And if we may merge the
sovereignty of another Government in ours, we may
the same principle, merge our sovereignty in that
OF another Government-and this through the treaty.
making power. The giving and receiving of terri
tory are both within the treaty-making power, if
either be within it.
There is no power given in the Constitution to
cede nor to acquire territory. If either can be done
by an act of Congress- or by treaty, then the exer
else OF either of those powers may subvert Gov
eminent 1t may introduce into the body polite
people more numerous than ours, and which may
change the Government. This lies within the prin-
ciple asserted And it be that our Constitution
is nothing! Is it to be blown away by the breath
of popular excitement. Is it to be overturned bv
the exercise of the powers it coners Does it con-
tain within itself the seeds of Its own destruction
If this indeed be the Constitution it is not what it
was taken to be. Its foundations were thought to
be laid deeply, and upon great conservative prnci-
pies. II 1t be what ii is now represented to be, ii is
cheat and fraud upon the world. II is nothing
more than the plaything Of demagogues.
fear not so much the annexation of Texas as
the principle on which it will be annexed. History
proves that the lust of power is an uncomfortable
passion of human nature. The Texas excitement
may pass away with the acquisition of Texas but
otner acquisitions will be brought on the political
theatre by demagogues, to excite the public mind
and control party action.
There is no security against this lust of power
but by fencing it in with great and fundamental prnci
pies, which can only be changed by majority of
the people that shall approach to unanimity. This
is what we supposed, what our fathers supposed.
and what the civilized world supposed, had been
done by our Constitution. A CITIZEN.