Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1857-04-24

of those who framed and adopted tho Consti-
tuition. that they were making frame of gov
erument for the people of the kindred States
and their posterity, under which they hoped
the United States might be. what thoy have
now become, great and powerful nation
With these in view. turn to examine the
clause Of the article now in question.
Il is said this provision has no application
to any territory save that then belonging to
the United States. have already shown that
whom the Constitution was framed, "a confident
expectation was entertained. which was spood
lily realized. that North Carolina and Georgia
would cede their claims TO that great territory
which lay west of those States No doubt
has been suggested that the FIRST clause of
this same article, which enabled Congress to
admit now States refers to aud includes new
States to be formed out Of this territory, ex-
pectcd TO be thereafter ceded by North Caro-
lima and Georgia, as well as new States TO be
formed ont Of territory northwest Of the
Ohio, which then had been coded by Virginia.
10 must have been seen, therefore, that the
Same necessity would exist for an authority
20 dispose Of and make all needful regulations
respecting this territory. when coded. as ex-
isted for a like territory which had been oeded.
No reason has been suggested why any re-
luctance should have been felt by the trainers
of the Constitution TO apply this provision to
all the territory which might belong to the
United States, or why any distinction should
have been made, founded on the accidental
circumstance OF the dates of the ccssions a
circumstance in no way material rs respects
the necessity for rules and regulations, or the
propriety Of comforting on the Congress power
TO make them. And if we look at the course
Of the debates in the Convention on this ar
tice, we shall find that the then unccled
lands, SO far from having been left out Of view
in procuring this article. constituted in the
minds Of members, subject of even para
mount Importance.
Again. IN what an extraordinary position
would such construction of this cause place
the territory which lay within the chartered
limits of North Carolina and Georgia The
title was then claimed by these States. and by
the United States; their respective claims are
pnrposely left unsettled by the express words
of this clause, and when csssions were made
by those States they were merely Of their
claims to this territory. The United States
neither admitting nor denying the validity OF
those claims, SO that it was impossible then.
and has ever since remlined impossible. to
know whether the territory did or did not
then belong to the United States and conse-
quently to know whether it was within or
without the authority conferred by this clause,
to dispose of and make rules and regulations
respecting the territory of the United States.
This attributes to the eminent mon who
acted on this subject want of ability and
forecast or a want of attention to the known
facts upon which they were acting, in which
I cannot concur.
There is not, in my judgment, anything in
the language. the history or the subject mat
ter of this article which restricts it's operations
to torritory owned by the United States when
the Constitution was adopted And am not
aware that snch a construction has ever before
been suggested as even possibly true.
But il is also insisted that provisions of the
Constitution respecting territory belonging to
the United States do not apply to territory
acquired by treaty from foreign nation
This objection must rest upon the position
that the Constitution did not authorize the
Federal Government TO acquire foreign ter
ritory, and consequently has made no provis-
ion for its government when acquired or.
that, though the acquisition OF foreign terri
tory was contemplated BY the Constitution,
its provisions concerning the admission of
new States, and the making of all ncedful
rules and regulations respecting territory be-
longing to the Unsed States. were not de-
signed to be applicable to territory acquired
from foreign nations.
IL is undoubtedly true that at the date of
the treaty Of 1903 between the United States
and France for the cession of Louisiana, it
was made question whether the Constitu-
tion had conferred on the Executive Depart
ment of the Government of the United States
power to acquire foreign territory by treaty.
There is evidence that very grave doubts
were then entertained concerning the exist
ence of this power But that there was then
a settled opinion in the Executive and Legis-
lative branches of the Government that this
power did not exist cannot be admitted, with
out at the same time imputing to those who
negotiated and ratified the treaty and passed
the laws necessary to carry it into execution,
a deliberate and known violation of their
oaths to support the Constitution. and what
ever doubts may then have existed, the ques-
ton must now be taken to have been settled.
Four distinct acquisitions of foreign terri
tory have been made by as many different
treaties, under as many different administra-
tons Six States, formed of such territory,
are now in the Union. Every branch of this
government, during period Of more than fifty
years, has participated in these transactions.
TO question their validity now, is vain. As
was said by Mr.. Chief Justice Marshall, in
the American Insurance Company agt Carter,
Peters j42 "The Constitution confors alb
solutely on the government of the Union, the
power of making war and Of making treaties /;