The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-07-04
Tor the NATIONAL Era.
TO THE HON. DANIEL WEBSTER NO 4.

DEAR SIR: lit was my purpose as IL is not, to
make out a case Of inconsistency against you,
could show that you once held different idea in
regard to the validity of the Texas annexation.
Two foreign States cannot become one except
by treaty; and the treaty -making power belongs
to the President and two-thirds plurality of the
Senate. This power was usurped by a simple ma
jority Of both Houses of Congress, aud Texas an
nexed. If the Texas resolutions had have been
clearly legal, | still deny the power of one Con
gress to absorb to itself power which the Consti.
tuition has made the right of all Congresses alike
And if the difficulty of remedying an evil which
affects such large masses of people forbids US to
expel Texas from the fraternity Of States, neither
sense, good faith, or good morals, compel us to
complete an unconstitutional and criminal agree
ment. Such is the doctrine of law and of morals
Whilst l. then, am as fully impressed with the ne
cessity, in governmental affairs, to submit to pre-
cedent and with conservative spirit to acquiesce
in the national determination, think n excess of
moderation" OF in too bot haste to take tilt at
the Northern Democracy, you oyerrun the wri-
tings of the bondD
But. granting for Arguments sake that the res
olutons of 1915 are first constitutional in their in
ception, and next, binding absolutely upon sue
ceeding Congresses take issue with you in their
construction.
The resolutions are, In part, "New States Of
convenient size, not exceeding Jow in number, In
addition to the said State Of Texas, and having
sufficient population, MAY hereafter, by the con-
sent of said State be formed out Of the territory
thereof which shall be entitled to admission under
the provisions Of the Federal Constitution. And
such States as may be formed out of that portion
of said territory lying south Of 800 80 north lat
tude commonly known as the Missouri Compro-
mise line. shall be admitted into the Union, with
or without slavery as each State asking admission
may desire and in such State or States as shall
be formed out Of said territory north Of said Mis-
souri, Compromise line, slavery or involuntary
servtude Except for crime) shall be prohibited
Now, in the face of this, you have these extra
ordinary words: 4" And the guaranty is, that new
States shall be made ont Of it, and that such States
as are formed out Of that portion Of Texas lying
south Of 800 3O may come in as Stare States to the
number Of jonr, in addition to the State then in
existence
Here, again, you are ahead of the bondr The
most favorable construction can only give the
South thyes slave States for all north Of $50 30
Is prohibited from slave contamination and, Of
course, can never be distinct slave State. II
must, therefore, become free State Of itself, or
joined with part of the soil south Of 800 30, be
free State In either case, three slave States can
only remain Here you have not rightly "ex.
pounded"
Again: what necessity Is there to form three
slave States south Of the line, and only one north
of the line, more than there is for the reverse
Or why not presume that two may be made on
each side Are all inferences-all advantages
to be forever on the side Of slavery Once more
you overrun athe bond.s
You are not only wrong once twice, three times,
but radically wroBg-wropg in the premises, and
Ia the conclusion-wrong In spirit and in intel
lea!
The truth is there is not shadow Of obligation 10
admI mem SAFES out Of 7t1as al all! unless one free
one north of $50 30', in order TO preserve the
spirit Of the Compromise; else, where's the equiv
alent for the slave State Of Texas hersefY
Congress, by the resolutions only reserves to
herself the contingent power OF breaking down
the overgrown bounds Of Texas, but imposes no
obligation upon herself TO dose.
The language is @MAyo Now "may" 10 al
ways contings pr conditional. II "may," or II
"mayp not Rthey may not be admitted, Why
are you so ready TO pledge yourself both now aud
hereafter to admit slave States2
" there was any obligation ON Congress TO adj
NIT new slave States, the language would have
been shall" When they come 10 define the
character Of the States, IL admitted. the oondi-
tionAl may 10 dropped, and the definite ahsll7
adopted. This all seems too plain for dispute.
Precedent In ordinary laws, as well as grammar
Congress may admit new States into the
Union ls Congress here bound to admit all new
States into the Union, which may ask or con.
sentT IL %, how came you to violate Your oath
OF obedience 10 the Constitution. bv voting
against Texm7 know NOT which l. most to be
deplored, your cause, or your advocacy
Your denunciation Of those Nertheyp Demo-
Gratis who betrayed the cause Of freedom 10 the