The Washington union., 1858-02-26
WASHINGTON CITY
FRIDAY MORNING. FEB. 20. 1868

FRIDAY MORNING. FEB 30, 1868.
THE ORDINANCE OF 17sT-THE TREATY OF 1903
AND MR. DOUGLAS
The first consideration which would be likely to
occur to a stranger who should examine the contro
versy we involved in in regard to the admission
of Kansas would be the practice of the government
under similar circumstances. He would examine to
see if some definite rule had not been established
some precedent precedents rising sufficient
ly high in importance to be called the common law
of American politics In the pursuit Of this inquiry
he would find that in the earlier days of the repub
lic in order to entite new State be received in
to the Union, permssionary Legislation by Congress
was required. By the fifth article of the Ordinance
of 1887 which was enacted for the government of
the Northwestern Territory, it provided that,
when any State "shall have sixty thousand free in
habitants therein such State shall be admitted by its
delegates into the Congress- of the United States
on equal footing with the original States" This
provision Of the ordinance has been claimed au-
thority to create State government within its terms,
and to ask admission without any permissory legis-
laton by Congress By Article Ill of the treaty be-
tween this government and the French republic, of
the both of April 1903, by which acquired the
territory of Louisiana including that of Kansas, it is
declared:
That the inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be
incorporated into the Union of the United States and nd
mted possible, according to the principles OF
the federal constitution the enjoyment of all the rights
advantages, and immunes of citizens of the United
States and in the mean time shall be maintained and
protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty property
and the religion which they profess
There is identity Of language and purpose in
these covenants which cannot escape the notice of
the reader, Their object alike to provide for
the protection Of people not then in existence.
They contemplate future settlement Of the
tries respectively embraced in the two laws and lay
down certain principles in reference to their adms
sion into the Union The act of 1887 has been raised
to the dignity of Compact between the federal gov
ernnent and the people inhabiting the Northwest
ern Territory; the treaty of 1903 is Compact
between the United States and the republic of
France. They are, then, equally binding Now,
if the former is to be received as an enabling
act, it was treated by the people of Michigan in
1885, we why the latter should not
be treated at this time by the people of Kan,
There be question about the mean
ing Of the covenant Of 1903, " that the inhab-
itants of the ceded Territory shall be incorpo-
rated into the Union of the United States, and
admitted possible according TO the prin-
cples of the federal constitution They shall be
incorporated into the Unon,' and they G shall
be admitted possible That is the
plain, simple language Of the law. The principles
of this government in reference to the question of
admitting new States into the Union have been set
tied by Congress. The number of their inhabitants
the character of their institutions their State bound
aries, are matters which have been determined by
the national legislature The right of the people to
claim admission on the conditions in this respect or
dained by Congress- can no more be questioned un-
der the Treaty of 1909 than the Ordinance of 1887.
The latter sixty thousand inhabitants, and
thus forecoses that point. The practice of the gov
ernment, or what may be termed the common law of
the case, in like manner settles the question in
regard to the admission of Kansas. In addition to
all this, the republicans voted last year to receive
that State into the Union, and the democracy have
committed themselves to the course this.
But Mr.. Douglas who says the Ordinance of 1887,
was an enabling law for the northwestern States,
and was extended to Tennessee is clear that the
people of Kansas, though acting under express
autnOTlty Oh IeHlsIatuIt, WHICH was piouBHt
into existence by law Of Congress-, and who have
in addition the special guarantee of the Treaty of
1903 that they shall be incorporated into the Union
as soon as possible" had authority to organize
State government. When Mr.. Douglas is referred
to the case of Florida which was admitted without
any permssory act and to California he trembles at
the mention of such irregularity, and appeals to the
controversy about Arkansas, an antecedent affair,
when Mr.. Benjamin F. Butler, then attorney general
now republican of the purest black, gave opin-
ion adverse to the right of that State to establish
constitution and demand admission without perms-
sorry Legislation by Congress. Not doubling Mr..
Douglass anxiety to get rid of this Kansas difficulty,
we cannot help asking, if he is not able to find author
ty in the provisions of the treaty referred to- to
able him to sanction the proceedings in that Territory
The proprety of admission being settled by all par
ties and Mr. Douglas resting his objections upon the
failure Of single link in the legal chan-npon what
may be termed quitclaim conveyance from Con-
gress-we feel sure he viii be able to find in the
covenant of the Treaty quite sufficient to cover the
defect If it is said that Article iii of the convention
of 1903 by fair construction, guarantees only to the
Inhabitants of the ceded territory" the general
rights of citizenship without intending to embrace
special agreement for admission of States into the