The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-05-10
.VlRGINIA'S LANDS
CEDED TO UNION
Difference of Opinion Be
tween Author and Critic. A
Scholarly Discussion.

fSeverhl months ago, in Tho Dispatch,
There. was published review. written
by an eminent jurist OF this city. of
book called '"rhe Territorial Growth of
the United States" the work Of q dis
tInguished educator In Massachusetts,.
We have received q letter from the au-
thor, Or. William A. Mowry, OF Hyde
Park. Mass, In defence of his book; and
reply to this letter at the hand of his
critic There Is so much of historical
research and Informed discussion In this
correspondence that we take pleasure IN
laying the two letters before our readers.
Editors 1imes-D Dispatch.
DIR. MOWRY's LETTER.
To the Editor OF The Richmond Dispatch:
In your issue Of Nov. 30 is q two column
article, signed "B. II. W." reviewing my
book. recently published, with the above
tide. c.rhe Territorial Growth of the
United Stntes'D
am grateful TO the scholarly reviewer
for his favorable opinion OF the DOCK:
He says: "As tcrse compendium OF
the history of the territorial acquisitions
OF the United States 1t will be valuable
handbook to historical and political stu
Gents He further says: 1.-THE outline
OF the Louisiana Purchase and OF other
territorial acquisitions OF THE United
States appears to DO fair.
But the critic takes exception TO the
authors treatment Of some OF the cess
stons made by Individual states to the
general government, especially of the ces-
sion made by the State Of Virginia. In
one place he calls the author OF tho book
tc. account for "a palpable misrepresenta-
ton OF historic truth" After discussion
OF the matter in question he adds: But
this Is not the worst Of this statement Of
the author"
Now wherein has the author fniled7
Tho statement criticized was as follows:
'.At length one state after another
agreed to cede to the national government
all claims and title to this Western land. :"
Was not this true? Wherein lies the
objection to SO simple a statement as
that7
The. critic replies: This phraseology
o; The National Government, has pro-
nounced sectional twang." What should
have said? The States did cefe those
Western lands. They must have benn
coded to some power. The power to which
they were coded was THE United States
of America" This new power. or this
new nation was begun by It's putting forth
through its representatives, In congress
assembled, the famous Declaration Of
Independence which says: When
$3.50 1t becomes necessary for one peo-
Pile to dissolve the political bands which
have connected them with another. and
10 assume among the powers OF the
Garth. the separate and equnl station etc.
This certainly looks like q nation
Subsequently the Articles OF Confed-
Grafton were styled ARTICLES OF Confed-
Grafton and perpetual unlon," And they
again and again assert that .'The Union
shall be perpetual" Again the Consu-
tuition. in Its preamble says: I'm order to
form mora perfect union" Still further.
IN our Provisional Treaty with Great
Britain. Nov. 80. 17s2. The expression Is
used. "In behalf OF HIS Majesty on the
one part and John Adams" etc. com
missioners OF the said states, on
the other part and again 1t speaks Of a
Satisfactory intercourse between tho two
countries This surely must mean the
power or government OF Great Britain on
the one hand. and the United States on
the other.
grant that the national powers at first
were limited even to such an extent as to
cripple the government and make broad
err constitution necessary. The whole ma
ton saw the difficulty and made Con-
atitution. Again. I grant that the ma
t.Gnal powers have been gradually In
creased and particularly so by the Civil
War, but 1t was nation from the Begin
ming
Most of these land grants from indiv-
iGual states were made to the general gov
ernmcnt undor the Articles OF Confedera-
ton, but ono, at least, was not made TIL
. < after the CONSTITUTION WeIl INV c'ACSI
and Washington was President. Surely
n good. loyal virginlan need not hesitate
to call this power nation at that time.
Again the critic objects to the follow
Ing:
NEW York was the first to give up her
claim on March Il, f17sls Three Years lat
err to day. Virginia coded to tho gem
oral government that part OF Ohio, In
diana and Illinois which falls south OF the
forty-frst parallel" The critic objects
to this statement both as to Virginia and
New York. and claims an earlier date In
both cases. But the dates have given
are the true dates, that Is. these were the
date when cesSions were consummat-
ed, or course, there had been, both in
the case of New York and OF Virginia,
preliminary action leading up to the final
cesslon. But tho cessions were made on
tho dates mention. General Francis A.
Walker in his Statistical Atlas of the
United States" accompanying the census
OF 1870. says
d "New York authorized cession In Feb
ruary. 1850, and executed 1t March J. ISL. ;"
He also says: "Virginia offered to cede.
s8g, act OF January 2. ISL. Congress, by act
September Is, 1888, agreed to accept the
,ssion ms offered. Thereupon Virginia,
by act of October co. l7s3 authorized Its
delegates In Congress to complete the
transfer, which was done by deed, March
/, 1854"
OF course. might have given these pre-