Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1845-02-28

ther party afterwards. This treaty-makng power,
in this government, is expressly delegated to the
President to be exercised with the consent Of two
thirds of the Senate. 1t must be quite obvious,
therefore, that, except in the of conquest in
war, the power of acquiring any of the territory Of
a foreign nation alone be found in the treaty.
making power. If anything can be drawn in pre-
cedent from the acquisition of the territory of Lou
Islam or Florida it confirms this view. But we
are not left to mere speculation or our individual
conjectures, nor on cases of supposed executive Il
surpation Nor do those cases rest alone on acqu
escence for authority, In the case of TnE AMER
IcAN Insurance COMPANY against CANTER, repor
ted in the LIST Of Peters Rep, Chief Justice Mar
shall, delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court,
decides 4" the Constitution giving power to make
war and make treaty, enables us to acquire terrific
ry by conquest treaty." In that sane case it
was also holden that when once the territory is OBJ
tanned. by treaty, then the power of Legislation by
Congress extends over it; and il seems, as clearly
to me- that until then it could not.
If, then, we respect and regard this judicial OK
position of constitutional power, it settles conclu-
svely the present question 1t decides these points
lst That obtaining of foreign territory, except by
war and conquest, is in the treaty-making power.
ID. That the obtaining Of territory, and the making
that into a State, or in any way exercising power
of legislation over it, two distinct and lndepen
dent powers, and not the incidents Of each other
81. That the territory must be obtained before the
legislative power Of Congress can be exercised O.
yer it, 4th. That obtaining territory by legisa
ton is usurpation Of the treaty making power.
Legislation implies jurisdiction, that is, laws
be made by no nation but to operate within its own
territories, and on those who owe allegiance and
obedience.
Allegiance" says the Supreme Court, is trans
fcrred with the transfer of territory" by treaty.
The idea of legisatng for territory, not then with
in our jurisdiction, involves political paradox 1t
contounds the first principles of civil government
To transfer allegiance and jurisdiction peaceably,
requires the consent and compact of two nations,
and that is treaty. This measure is all an i'll dis
guised attempt to take an appeal from the treaty
making power 1t is an attempt to exercise q ju-
rsdicton before it is obtained. We should re-.
member the old recipe for cooking a lobster
" First, catch lobster" So much for the PROPOSE
ton to admit Texas as a territory to this Govern
ment
Let us now examine the project to admit it as a
State. This seems to me subject to all the same
objections and many in addition. Admitting it as
State, clearly is taking it into our territory, as
| have before defined that term, whether VIC leave
Texas her public lands or not. 1t is taking it into
our jurisdiction, and so making it part of our terri
torn, as much US Virginia is. Nov, because Con
gress has power to admit new States, yet they mus
not from that deluce the contingent or incident
power to acquire the territory from abroad to make
Them when that power of acquisition is as before
shown, substantially granted to the elty-makng
power. 1t cannot be disguised that this attempt to
annex Texas Il State by its consent, is a com
pact recurring the agreement of two nations, anC
when completed, not subject to repeal by one par
ty, or by Congress, end therefore it is usurpllior
by Congress OF the treaty making power.
The Constitution ant. !, Sec 3. =" NeC State.
NAV be admitted by Congress into this Union; bu
no new State shall be formed erected within the
jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State b,
formed by the junction of two or more States, o
parts Of States, without the consent of the legsla
iures of the States concerned" Tbs, it is insist
ed grants to Congress power to admit foreign
States, because the power is granted in such un
limited terms.
What was the intent Of the Convention, as ex
pressed IN this grant of power? That must be as
certained by the words used, read with reference t.
The state of circumstances and subjectmatter theI
existing, and comparing the same with other pro
visions in the same instrument.
1t is to be observed that the States to be admit
ted were ne,c Suites. Now if the power intende
to be conveyed was to admit foreign countries, a
is now insisted, the more appropriate word woult
have been other STATES countries.
1t is next observable that the nep States to be ad
mtted were evidently such as were to be forme
or erected by the authority OF Congress, for it
provided that ne,0 Stale shall be formed or cree
ted within the jurisdiction of another, &C., an
therefore | conclude the ne,o STATES mentioned
were States to be ne,o formed within their jursdic
tion
The state of circumstances to which | aud,
was this. The country, then within the territorlt
limits of the nation, was composed of the thrice
States, with known definite limits. Beyond tn
limits of those several States, but belonging to tn
nation, n large tract of territory, west of tn
Ohio, to which the several States had coded
their right, and which, by the terms ofthe cessions
the nation was bound to erect into new States whe
inhabited and besides that, was more terrilor,
which had never been claimed by any of the seV
eral States, but which was together with the State
coded to this country by the treaty of 1893, fror
England. Over all this country without the limit
of the several States, the Constitution gave tn
control to Congress. 1t was expected the sam
would become inhabited, and new States would
wanted therein, and possibly other States might b
wanted within the existing States, as some, Ken
lucky, and Vermont and Farmland, had been the
applied for. In view of these circumstances thi
article was formed, and should now be read an
construed. 1t is obvious there was then in The com
; trL subject matter requiring both the provisions
this section, and to which both apply and so, hay
ing an existing subject natter and natural applies
ton, to which it then reasonably referred, with
the country, and within its jurisdiction it seems
: inc unreasonable now TO refer either clause to
/, new subject matter, and to say the first clause wa
/, intended to give, and did give, to Congress tn
power to admit to our Union countries never will
in our jurisdiction.
t The Constitution was formed for The Unit
States for the country then known by that name.
3 Not for the then existing States merely, but {;
that uhole country and nothing but that country
Hence, in the Introduction, they say, 8" do ordai
and establish this Constitution Jor the United Stat
Of america" If the principle now contended ft
is true and the spirit now addressed be successful
" INDUCED, we may go on in acquisition, until
will not be the United States Of .4merica, merel
But the trainers of the Constitution having thu
stated, in the beginning, that it was formed for tn
United States, did not think it necessary to repel
that at every section, or add it anew to every graz
, of power in order to restrict its action within OF
IL, jurisdiction. The grants of power are all, whol
Limitation, in express words to our own territor
Thus it is said "Congress shall have power to la
and collect taxes" This is entirely unqualified an
unlimited as to territory. lift should be asked tcLe
i, may Congress lay and collect taxes, any man an
: every man would answer Congress NAV lay an