Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1857-01-09


jocts, and for political purposes to mako use of
the institution of slavery as source of political
power within the Territories and beyond the
States. ! would not here intimate that think
any man who was personally engaged in the
making Of the Missouri compromise. and get
ting enough votes from the North by virtue
of it 20 admit the State Of Missouri. so as TO
enable The South 10 succeed at the time. ever
attempted TO break IL up. That is not the
case but 10 is 10 be recollected that a great
. leading feature in the message we have before
US Is that there has been on the part of the
people of the North, a systematic course of
aggression upon southern rights. We view
the facts as entirely otherwise and we Wow
this attempt to present picture Of that kind
as nothing more than an attempt 20 escape
from and Disguise what has been the true
character Of the aggression We consider
that course of aggrossions has been put on
foot, and prosecuted, to some considerable ex-
tent, successfully by the South, When use
the word aggression | wish 70 be under
stood. II is not merely doing that which pco-
pie have legal and constitutional right to
do but what ! understand by it is. doing
that which is contrary TO an agreement upon
their part, either contained in the Consttu-
ton or IN any other way which renders the
"a IN
up of such agreement, TO say the least.
breach of common propriety. Now, what are
those aggrossions which we think the South
have put upon foot: The first is in relation
to the admission of Texas
Mr. Calhoun was a man who had but little
DISCUSSES. He participated in the formation
of the Missouri compromise line, aud he, with
the South, took the advantage it secured. He
never attempted to make any breach of it, but
when the progress of population. and the
increase of the numbers. wealth, and inhu-
encc of the free part of the United States
came TO be. was thought by him and some
others. somewhat comparatively large it was
dcsirous 10 the South, as he viewed il. 20 Sc
cure in some way or other, at least a balance
of power in the Senate of the United States
What was attempted Did he attempt to
break up this compromise line Not at all.
lie looked abroad and saw the inviting regions
Of Texas, and "a treaty was formed for the an
nexation of Texas. There was no disguise
about its objects and purposes. Look at the
letter of Mr.. Calhoun, as Secretary of State
TO Mr.. King, then our Minister in Franco
See the whole purpose it declares. ltSyas to
sustain, perpetuate. and secure the institution
of slavery: in short, to obtain more territory
out of which TO make new slave States for
the purpose of balancing, at least in the Sen
ate Of the United States. new States settled
by the people from the North. That was the
object. not disguised, but publicly declared
and officially announced. What means were
taken to effect that object; The treaty was
rejected by the Senate. Two thirds could not
be obtained for it, and the treaty failed
What was the next step taken: The pco-
/ pic OF the South went into the Democratic
Convention at Baltimore Immediately after the
rejection Of this treaty, and there they insist
ed upon the admission of Texas. Many de-
clarcd they preferred that to the Union They
said at once to the Democracy. " ou cannot
obtain power, you cannot elect a President
without Us, and you shall not elect one with
us, but upon the condition of thatannexation
The only man who had ever been talked of up
to that period as their candidate was Mr. Van
Buren, and he had published a letter in the
spring opposing the annexation of Texas
There was no other way left for the Democrat
ic party but to agree to make the annexation
of Texas part of the platform. Then, when
they came to nominate man to carry that
platform into effect, it was insisted that a man
must be nominated who was not already com
mitted against it, and thereupon Mr.. Polk was
nominated and elected.
\ word now as TO the manner Of that an
try at times whether there was any power in
this Government to annex foreign territory at
all. We all know that Mr.. jefferson express
scd great doubt on that subject in relation to
Louisiana at an early period This question
ultimately came before the Supreme Court of
the United States in the case Of the American
Insurance Company as. Canter, the Florida
case which has been often alluded to here. 1t
was a revenue case. II was there insisted
that Congress had no power to legislate in
Florida at all. because it did not belong to
her jurisdiction, but had been annexed by
treaty; and it argued that there was
such power Of annexation conferred by the
Constitution 1t was then decided, among
a variety of topics, that the power TO make
war, which existed in the General Govern
ment, was of course a power to conquer and
a power of conquest included the power to
{ hold territory if the treaty of peace made by
the treaty-making power provided for it
/ Therefore, the court said il is true as an in
odent Of sovereignty that the treaty nalIing
power includes the power by treaty to annex
another county, OF territory of that country TO
this. When the treaty making power has
been thus exercised, the Legislative authority
Of the country spreads over it. IL is brought
within our jurisdiction by treaty, and being
J Wlthin the lutlSuctlon OF lhe bnlleu otates,
the power of logislating for it necessarily fol-
lows.
There is no power in this Government which
can be exercised indiherotly by any one of
two or three of the departments of the Gov
ernment For instance, the President pow
er of appointment, whether he exercises or
neglects it, can never be exercised by Con-
gress The power Of the Supreme Court to
decide causes, whether they decide them or
not can never be assumed by Congress 70
have the same power left to be indiforontly
exercised by any one of two or three different
departments, would nesessarily produce an
endless confusion in the Government. No
/ such thing exists in our Government What
ever power exists in one department, exists
in that department alone, exclusively.
The annexation of Texas, like the annoxa-
ton of any other country, was attempted to
be effected by the treaty-making power; but
it failed. The attempt was a concession that
the subjoct-matter was proper one for the
exercise of the reaty-making power, and
therefore not proper subieot-natter for the