The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-10-11

The I'd. Sd. and 4th. Mr. Madison said, ought to b
decisive with Virginia and they were
Now SIR, before go further, desire to pause hereto
call the attention of the committee 10 the similarity be
tween the influences which existed in the OF Yer
mont and those which exist now, and against the dom
naton OF which the provision OF the constitution unde
consideration was designed 10 provide. Then there wa
the prejudice against New York-now against Texas
then the interest Of some OF the people OF New Eaglane
IN lands 3 u n, Vsrmont-now similar interest, s sup
from Texas; then. principally, Mr. Madison tells Us
from the accession OF weight the admission Of Vernon
would give the Nohaow sa as none w DIS
grounds OF opposition were very similar. N. ..lss
Besides this difficulty about Vermont. which had aeu
ally occurred, there others very analogous 10 i
which were anticipated at The time the formation Of the
constitution. Kentucky had already manifested dispo
son TO separate from Virginia; Tennessee had actually
done so from North Caolina and set up separate gov
ernment, under the name OF Frankand; similar diff
Guilty was anticipated, which afterwards actually oc-
cured between Georgia and the settlers on her western
similar one between Maine and Massachusetts, Be-
sides these cases, The people OF western Pennsylvania
numbering nearly two Thousand, residing in the disputed
territory between that State and Virginia. had sent long
petition the Continental Congress- complaining OF the
grievances to which their distance from public authority
exposed them and particularly OF late law OF Pennsyl-
vania nterdicng even consultations about new State
within its limits and praying that Congress would give
sanction to their independence and admit them into the
Union" sFt e
From this historical narrative we ascertain the mis-
chief intended 10 be provided against. And II was SO
manifest, that in nearly every proposition submitted IN
the convention contemplating, the admission OF new
States, remedy proposed or, IN other words IN
nearly all Of them restriction was imposed upon Con.
gress in the admission OF States, extending to all
OF disputes as TO the regularity OF the formation Of
the State.
| The first resolution moved on this subject was part
of the Virginia proposition, drawn by Mr. Madison, but
submitted by Governor Randolph, on the s day OF the
conyeAton. II was in these words eta # ~
Rsoiped That provision ought be made for the adj
mission Of States hmy arisag WfhiH the limits Of the
Onnsd Slat,s whensr rom voluntary junction % o. goy-
number OF voices lees than the whole" ~ 9e sl
The resolution, as proposed by Gov. Randolph. was
adopted by ss 1onysnon asa together win @ oihe,s M
Patterson of New Jersey. referred to the committee
deta charged with the duty OF preparing the draught
for the resolution Of Gov Randolph, which contained
the provision among Others that 'f new States shall
arise within the limits OF any OF the present States. the
OF the legislature Of such State shall be neces
sary 10 It's admisiono The provision underwent vari
notifications, until il assumed the shape IN which
we now find il in the constitution. While 1t was
under discussion Luther Martin violently opposed
all but the first sentence of it "Nothing (he said)
would 50 alarm the limited States as 10 make the
Of the large States Giaim'ng the western lands
necessary the establishment of new States within their
limits It is proposed to guaranty the States Shall ver
mont be reduced by force in favor OF the States claiming
a Frankland and the western country OF Virginia were
in the same situation" Again: he (Mr. l.. Martn)
urged the unreasonableness of forcing and guaranying
the people OF Virginia beyond the mountains the western
people of North Carolina and Georgia, and the people OF
Name, 10 continue under the States now governing
them" To obviate his objections, he moved the follow
ing substitute: "The legislature of the United States
shall have power 10 erect new States withn as well as
without, The territory CLAIMED by the several States, or
either oil them, and admit the into the Union; Pro-
uided That nothing in this constitution shall be
srued to affect the claim OF the United States to vacant
lands ceded 10 them by the late treaty OF peace"
In support OF the original proposition, Mr. Butler said
"If States to be erected without the consent
OF the dsmembered States nothing but confusion would
hana t,x ahould dnraa
demagogues would set up schemes oil new States"
Doctor Johnson " afraid that. the clause stood,
Vermont would be subjected to New York contrary to the
Mr. Wilson: /" When the majority OF State wish TO
divide, they do The aim OF those in opposition
to the article he perceived that the general govern
nent should obe the minority and by that means divide
a State against its own consent" .ala
In favor of MIR. Martins substitute only New Jersey,
Delaware, and Maryland voted and the provision as IL
now stands in the constitution was agreed TO.
We thus that there perfect accord between the
friends and opponents of this clause of the constitution
as TO the effect would produce IL was agreed on all
hands that would prevent Congress from admitting
State, which should arise territory situated as the
western territory OF several OF the States was nj that
time, without the consent oil the State concerned For
illustrations, let suppose case which might have
arisen in the Northwestern Territory II Virginia had not
ceded TO the United States Virginia claimed il part
OF her territory, although she had never actually ex-
tended her jurisdiction it. But her title dispu
ted by the other States They said that, although was
within the limits she claimed under her charter yet she
nan not aCttai occupancy Oi was VI occu
pancy OF hostile indians; that IL had been acquired from
France by Great Britain the treaty Of 1863 that had
been rescued IRON Great Britain by the common efforts
all OF The colonies who by their conquest had succeeded
10 her rights and that therefore ought TO belong 10 all
Now suppose this dispute had not been ended by the
Virginia deed of cesson, and the nbab OF the ter
tory had met and formed constitution and applied Tor
admission into the Union will any say that Congress
could have decided the favor OF the United States
by their admission Was II not precisely such case
against which the provision under consideration de-
signed 10 provide Ell t5.a tsU8AytS. J Z 5a.l. .6
But, sir, take higher ground not only contend that
the provision under consideration intended TO apply
where there dispute, but that IL only
TO such Il was designed TO apply The idea that Congress
could dsmember State without its consent, by admitting
portion OF its people, who should meet within iis known
and recognised limits and form constitution, into the
Union as a new State, would have been al with
every notion OF government prevalent al the iime and
never would have entered the head oil the wise who
favored the constitution. II aporon OF the people OF
State within its undsputed jurisdiction, should meet
without authority from the existing government, to form
constitution preparatory 10 admission into the Union
State, IL would be OF domestic violence,
constitution would provide The provision TO which
aude is the fourth section OF the fourth article OF the
constitution the ore to which Mr. Martin referred, and
which Is in these words "The United States shall guar
anty to every State in this Union republican form OF
government and shall protect each o them against lnva-
sion, and application Of the legislature. or Of the er
eeuf'pe, when me iegisaue cannot be convened against
domestic pioienee."
We have thus seen the history OF the restriction upon
Congress IN admitting new States Now, sir LEI us ap
ply to Mf rule OF construction in such cases
On every question Of construction (sad he) carry our
selves back to the time when the constitution was adopt
ed recoect the spirit manifested IN the Debates and IN