The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1865-09-26
0heGnteltrqer
lRATEs oF sURsORfpTIoN.
Berkeley and Jefferson
Counties. @

Counties. -.
SecondIetter from Hon. II. L. Dawes,
Member OF Congress from BIRsSa.
ehnSetts. .als.
PrTrsFIELD, MASS, Sept. 10, 1865.
Editors oThe InteUigenecr
Ihhve been furnished with copies of
your paper containing replies from the
Hon. MIR. Van, Wrinkle and Hon. Bcni,
stanton to my letter of tho 18th ult.,
! upon tho Hdisputed boundaries between
Ihe Two Nlrgtntns." 1 Am reluctant to
may be considered an antagonist TO
| your proposed line, voluntarily enter
4 ing the lists ngainstyou. Nothing can.
however, be further ffom the fiSct, /
have from the beginning believed that
the line ought to BIO established as YOU
contend 1t has been, and one, ut least
OF your representatives in tho last Com
gress Is aware that at the time It came
under my notice in the contested cleo
ton case Of McKendsie rs. Kitchen,
urged upon him the propriety of hay-
ing it so established by consent of Con!
gTess while all parties were of ono
mind. And yOu, Mcssrs. Editors, know
that 1 come not uninvited into this dis
cusston. Having no other desire, there
fore, than to aid In arriving mt the LcguL
establishment of your boundary line
where you desire to have 1t established,
venture once more upon your pa
tience IN u few words of reply, first, to
hLr. Van Wrinkle, and second 10 Mr..
| Stanton. -
Bear in mind that my communication
wns called out by your doubling wheth-
er Itwns justified in snying that sno
| two States could change or alter their
boundary limo without the consent of
Congress;' that "the Supreme Court
had so said, md that ithad always been
| tho rule ncted upon.n And en0eavor-
ed to show in Tint communication TINT
for two adjacent States to alter the
boundary line between them, was in
the nature of n compact, which by'arti-
clio l, section 10, OF the constitution.
they are expressly prohibited from do
Ing, without the assent of CongreSs,-
And that such was the opinion OF the
supreme Court, and such hnd been its
Precedents, cited the opinion of the
CHIEF Justice, and of NIr. Justice Cur
It's, and two preeedents to thIt eifect.-
Alr. Van Wrinkle admits that two States
cannot enter intoiany contract or agree
neHt without the consent of Congress (;
ana that when they mutually change
tho boundary line between them, by
compact or agreement, then the consent
of Congress must be Ind. But he
holds that two States can change tho
boundary line between them without
entering into nny compact or agreement
AS TO 1t, and thus can, by the mode of
doing II, avoid the constitutional obliga-
ton. He says:
''The argIment of Mr.. Dawes and
1.-THE decisions OF the Supreme Court
"quoted by him, are founded on the
"clhuse of the constitution of the
Omitted States which forbICls a State to
enter into any agreement or compact
with another State without the con-
fOn
t.of the two States under consideration
ARE an agreement or compact between
"them, or even in the nature threof, It
"must be admitted thnt the sO.c1lied
"annexation will not be complete until
"the consent OF Congress is given. But
lit is submitted that such is not the
Tease"
And he says that such is not the case
because F1it
"There was nothing in the nature OF
negotiation between the two States at
"any time; there were no mutual, de-
pendent, or conditional undertakings
tOr promises, nor was there anything
"moVing from either to the other In the
mature of a consideration"
If there can be neither "compact" nor
"agreement' between the two States
without tn indenture in two parts,
with consideration expressed, signed
and sealed "on the day and year first
4
negotiation" us is wont to precede a
trnde between two brokers, he may be
Il right. But i submit that Independent
4 States do not often, Fever, net in that
mode. No one man Is tho State so thai
he could ..sign and seal" such an
"agreemenp or "compact, and if he
A ever does, 1t Is by express aIlt thority ol
the legislatures of tho respective States
first had and obtained, / do not sup.
J pose 1t mikes one particle of difference
4 what Is the mode resortel to, but
whRt is the substance. Can Mr..
Van Wrinkle tell me how 1t is possible
for two Stntc8 TO peaceably chnnEe the
boundary limo between them, except by
mutual consentH Let us start the two
Ytrglnins on this business anew. Is Il
possible for West Virginia, without
war, to tnke Berkeley county from ole
Virginia, except 1t be with her consent
a Is ft any moro possible for old YirginiI
, to thrust Berkeley county over tho lin
into the Jurisdiction Of West Virginit
without the consent Of the latter State'
II It can be done, Mr.. Van Wrinkle caI
show us how, / presume. If It canno
? be done except each State some how
consents to Il, the one to let 1t go ant
the other TO take Il, then that is 5f.ittttn
consent, and mutual consent comes a!
near an agreement" as anything
. know Of Nor does It matter that thi
mutual consent is not obtained ut thl
same time from both States. 1t cotilS
hardly BIO simultaneous. One must pre
rcetle the other in its action; but whel
:. both have acted, the, one agreed :,
give AND tho Other agreed to'talSc, thei
1t becomes mutual agreement o
compactS Two nations agree to sucl
a. transfer as change Of bOun
Diary OF tho United Stated and Eng
i land, and so did tho United State
and Franco agree by treaty to chang
of boundary Hne-but they did not nc
simultane usly-one executed the tten
ty before the other, but whom both laG
Z done II, thenft becnme a mutual com
pact. And there wns no other wny {,
lido it except by war. Until Mr.. Nnl
Wtnkle points out n way for two State
of this Union to accomplish the sam
end pelceably, which is not after nll
mutual agreement, must hold him l.
his admission which L have quoted. tina
the consent of Congress Is necessary
There was nothing in the nature Q
negotiation between the two States n
any time, says Mr.. Van Wrinkle. Blu
did not each State deliberate upon til
lquestion and friends of tho fneasur
acting in the interest OF one StRte or tn
other tsnegoti e''-that IS, confer, Nj
) / Van Winkle himself says.
THAT the great majority of our con
HBtitutional convention desired to In
'clude them, in order thht the Bait
Hmore and Ohio Railroad might Il
le who'll II within the States OF AIafylan
Aahd West Virginia, and, as hn,aot (
Justice to the old State, steadily reftii
"ed to incorporate any of the countft