About Southern recorder. (Milledgeville, Ga.) 1820-1872 | View Entire Issue (March 14, 1820)
SOUTHERN RECORDER. VOL. I. M1LLEDGEVILLE, TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 1320. No. 5. PUBLISHED WEEKLY, (on Tuesdays) jlY .9. 07?.?.VTL.4.VD tf R. M. ORME, AT THREE DOLLARS, IN ADVANCE, OR FOUR DOLLARS AT THE EXPIRATION OF THE YEAR. Advertisements conspicuously inser- .trdat tiie custonuiry rates. " DEBATE IN THE SENATE, On the MISSOURI QUESTION. ( Continued.) purity of our.institutions with the ilecrepi-. out any exceptionable restriction. To the tiKle ol the old world, and the rottenness of residue of those inhabitants, now in the Mis- meir systems, it this lie our predicament, if, souri territory, it was sufficient, to say that the 1 resident ami Senate can, by treaty, ao- . it was not possible, in the words of the trea- quire possessions in all parts of the globe, ty, to make them a state. They were too and hind us to admit them into our Union, | few, and eould have no pretext for claiming without any restriction upon their laws and | this privilege. As to another class—those usages; should he chance to travel through j who bail migrated thither from the United any part of Europe, after these should he ad- j States, they could claim no rights in Missou- nutted as acknov, ledged principles of consti- 1 ri under the treaty, correctly speaking..— lutional law, and hear his country branded as | They cannot place themselves in the. situa- a region of hypocrisy, and its people as a , tion of the French subjects who were retire- TUESDAY, JANUARY 25. Mr. Otis, of Massachusetts observed, that when the bill for admitting Missouri into the Union, at the. lust session, passed the Senate, lie was among those who voted in its favor. It was introduced only a few days before the adjournment, and was certainly not regard ed asa measure pregnant with the, important interest which had since been attached to it. There was hardly a serious debate about its passing, in which two or three gentlemen on ly took part. Having, at that time, but im perfect means of examining the merits of (lie question, he first voted with those who were in favor of a postponement, but finding this was lost, he thought, underthe best view he could then take of the question, that the people of that territory, having migrated thither, under an expectation of being placed on the same footing with the states r.lreadj carved out of the same cession, had some claims to a similar indulgence. But his idea was, that it. should stop here, and that all would concur in measures 1o prevent the fur ther extension of slavery into the territories and the states in future to be erected within them. And if this could now be effected, and the bill for admitting Missouri could be accompanied by such guards and provisions as would forever preclude the spread of that moral pestilence, he should not repent of the oblation he had then offered to the spirit of conciliation. He should, on the other hand, with his present impressions, be inclined to repeat it. But perceiving, as yet, no disposi tions promising such a result, and consider ing that the ground now taken by the friends to the bill involved an absolute denial ofthe powers of the general government to make any compact binding on states hereafter to be admitted into the Union; a doctrine a- gainst which he altogether protested; befell it to be his duly to support the amendment. These circumstances would account for, and excuse his indiscretion, in attempting to en gage the attention of the. Senate, after the display of eloquence with which they had been regaled for two entire days. He was sensible of the disadvantage under which he labored,and could only forewarn the Senate of the disappointment which awaited them, if his rising should be thought to indicate an intention of replying in detail to the argu ment of the gentleman from Maryland, (Mr. Pinkney.) Various considerations forbad his making any such effort. He was quite sen sible of his own incompetency to follow him through his enchanted grounds. To many of his principles he was disposed to assent. Some of them his recollection could not em body: like the rays of the diamond they sparkled, dazzled, and were gone. And a very large class of his remarks he could re gard merely as the gold and silver tissue, wheiewithuie honorable gentleman had en riched the splendid dress, in which he had thought fd. to present himself to the Senate for the first time. With these exceptions, enough would still bo left for him to under take, and this he, should do in the order in which his mind had been led to investigate and decide on tiie question, noticing inciden tally, and in his own course those objections ofthe honorable gentleman which appear to have the most immediate bearing on t lie sub ject. It was asserted by gentlemen, that a more grave and portentous question had never been agitated within these walls. This he would not deny; and yet lie could not con sider it a new question. If a stranger to our country, but familiar with our history, upon arriving here, at this moment, and witness ing the perturbation of men’s minds, within doors and without, should be told, upon en quiring the cause, that, it arose from a dis cussion of the question whether slavery should be inhibited in your territorial pos sessions ; his first impression would certainly be, that this question had been put to rest some three and thirty years ago. I have fc read, (he would be inclined to say) that the earliest exercise of your authority over the domain ceded to the United States, was ma nifested in a solemn protest, against the in troduction of slavery into it, and that you thus afforded an earnest of your future poli cy ami intentions in regard to all similar ac- cpii-itions of ceded territory. Wherefore, in the ordinance for governing the north western territory', did you, with such grave deliberation establish, as one of the funda mental principles of civil and religious liber ty! for the regulation of your territories in all fiit'irc time, the exclnrion of involuntary ser- u , > s t w . r — I • - i ..wi. u. uix, j ix.m it uuiFjxx 10 dud iveic IllJIU - race of men, who, with liberty in their mouths , sen ted by Napoleon. They wore American carried rods for the backs, and chains for the citizens, and as such, inhabiting the old do- feet of unborn millions, into a new world; lie main, they were parties under thoU. States, should stand in need of the speech of the ho- j For any violation of the treaty, affecting the norable gentleman from Maryland ns the on- | inhabitants of the ceded territory at the time ly panoply competent to.ennble him to repel | of tiie cession, the French government might tin* point of such injurious accusations, as demand redress; hut, in behalf of those Mtudc, and w ly would you now relax a sys tem established in the'healthful vigor and freshness of your newly acquired liberty, mid bring into doubt principles which were then so solemnly determined?” To these inquiries, he said, he should only be able to Answer, “teinpora mutantur et'nos muta- HRirin illis.” If the obligations imposed upon us by Ihe constitution were rigorous to the extent winch gentlemen seemed to insist, our con dition was indeed deplorable. If, while the Rations of the old world were forming confe derations in order to exclude from their ow n dependencies the future introduction ofslaves ®tid to propitiate heaven by an attempt to jfcjtone for the past abominations of that trnf- « c .?fthe human species; we are not only pnihited from coming into their system, hut ffyeMlv obliged by treaty, to open a new r 1 . 'U'Riitible market within our own terri- and while they are contracting the »p iere of human misery and servitude, we . J' compelled to widen its expanse from the ississippi to the setting sun; then, indeed, jP our situation most humbling. It will be in »,sm, Uu fearedj to compare the youth and his own invention would not supply him with a satisfactory answer. Still, if in reality, our faith, bv treaty, w as thus plighted, though lie should deem the acquisition of the whole territory a vital mis fortune, nndshouldthink it would have been happier for us if the Mississippi had been an eternal torrent of burning lava, impassable as the lake which separates the evil from the good, and the regions beyond it destined to lie covered forever wit h brakes and jungles, and tiie impenetrable haunts of the wolf and the panther; yet, he would not then advo cate a breach of the public faith, lint he should think it the duty of Congress to re commend a new negotiation with the pre sent henificcnt monarch of France, to the end of obtaining his release from the provi sions of a treaty so fatal to our best interests. In all the discussions of the main question, which had come under his eye, the dispu tants on each side had placed the constitu tion in the. foreground, and reserved the trea ty of cession for subsequent examination.— But to him it appeared more proper to invert this order of enquiry. The people of Mis souri had no claims to a participation in the benefits of the constitution, except such as were derived to them through the medium of the treaty, and so far only as those bene fits were alluded to, or secured to them by express reference in that instrument. The constitution was the temple, and the treaty the portico, through which done they were entitled to admission. In this view of the subject this distinction was extremely mate rial, and he could wish to render it clear.— According to the principles of the law of na tions, a country, the domain and jurisdiction of which is ceded in full sovereignty to ano ther country, can have no claims to partake in its government which are n it to be found in precise, terms and stipulations. The right to make war is an attribute of every sove reignty. Conquest i incident to war, and tiie right to hold a conquered territory fol lows upon conquest. If peace is made on the principle of uti posniilelin. without more words the victor disposes of his conquest, and governs it at his pleasure. But if the cession of the conquered territory is extend ed into spec'a! articles, looking to the future condition and government of the inhabitants, the right of the conqueror is thrnlimited and defined by tiie treaty alone. The principles applicable, to a conquered territory ai e equal ly so to a territory acquired by amicable purchase. Louisiana was ceded to the. I. States in full sovereignty, with all the rights over tiie same which belonged to France or Spain. Had the grant been comprised in these terms only, it would have been abso lute. The United States might have held it forever as a colony, or prohibited Its settle ment, or governed it by a prefect; and why not have admitted it to a partial enjoyment of state rights? Such an admission might well he conceived to he a boon to the inha bitants. It certainly would have been a re laxation of the absolute right of dominion vested by the cession. What objection could be raised against proffering to the inhabitants of a country, thus unconditionally surren dered, any limited faculty of partaking of the powers of your constitution, which pru dence and policy might induce you to grant.- Why should you be compelled to grant to them all or nothing? Why should they be restricted, from accepting of a part that would he “useful to them, and sufficient for all their purposes, because the whole, which might he unsuitable to their circumstances, or unimportant to their weltare, is unattain able ? No conjecture could he raised of any good reason for placing a government, and its newly acquired subjects, in any predica ment respecting each other, which could not be altered or modified by a fair compact; and he could not doubt that either the rigid to acquire territory under the constitution must be renounced, (a question now too late to be stirred,) or that the faculty of impart ing to the ne w domain so much and no more ofthe absolute power of the sovereign as to him should seem good, must be admitted.— Keeping, then, in view these general princi ples, he was prepared to examine tiie treaty of cession in detail; and ascertain how far the absolute sovereignty, or rigid of soil and jurisdiction in Louisiana, was controlled by the special provisions of that instrument It would, however, facilitate the explanation of his views, to consider who were the parties to the treaty. As to this, he observed, that negatively they wore not the white peopled states on one side, and the slave-holding states on the other, as the course ofthe ar gument might sometimes almost lead us to conclude. It would afflict him to see the Senate dividedinto the factions of the Gtielfs and (Jhibelines, nr the white and red roses suspended in the festoons of thc.r tapestry. He should not agree, without a struggle, to give up Ills right to be considered as the ci tizen of a common country, of which the gen tleman who preceded him was so distin guished an ornament The. parties then were the United States of America, in be half of the citizens who were original parties to the constitution, the old states then in the Union, on one part; and Napoleon, First Consul of France, in behalf of the French nations, (of which Louisiana, including Mis souri, was a portion,) on the other part.— With respect to, by far the greater number and most important interests of the people at that time inhabitants of Louisiana, the treaty has been executed to their entire sa tisfaction, and they have nothing to say.— They hai c been erected into a state, with- w! use migration thither is posterior, that government could not he entitled to iuttr- pnse. It is undoubtedly true, however,that if, by the sale of lands, or by permitting ci ther states to be erected in the territory, exempt from the restriction of slavery, or by any other circumstances, these persons have been induced to settle in Missouri, under an expectation of retaining their slaves, it would he repugnant to the principles of equity to disconcert their plans, and liberate thfene groes already there. And against this effect they are protected by the amendment. It touches not the property in slaves already introduced, but regards the future augmen tation of their numbers. So that justice would he done to all parties to the treaty,in the most ample sense, and also to those whose claims arise not under that instru ment., hut underthe laws, grants, and acqui escence of the government ofthe IJ. States Thus not a mortal can make any reasonable complaint Nor is the hardship greater up on the owner of a slave, who is prevented from “liking him hereafter into that country, than upon the proprietor of a house or a ship, which cannot be removed. Let us then, having designated tin* parties, their rights, and their present attitudes, proceed to those clauses of limitation ofthe absolute right of sovereignty, which the terms of cession used in the treaty, if not qualified, would import. The enquiry, he readily agreed, should he approached wilh a spirit of liberality and fair interpretation, and not with the artifices of forced constructions, and the narrowness ofjuridiral forms. The material words are these: “The inhabitants of tiie ceded terri tory shall lie* incorporated in the Union of tiie United States, and admitted, as soon as possible, according to the principles of the federal constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and immunities of ci tizens ofthe. United States ; and, in the mean time, shall be main'ained arid protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, uid the religion which they profess.” Mr. O.Would not pause to consider whether all these words might net he. satisfied by im parting to those inhabitants a territorial go vernment, such as they now enjoyed, though much might he urged in favored such a con struction. The first consul Napoleon had, indeed, extended tiis paternal care to most ofthe nations in Europe, and taken at least a bird's eye view of the affairs of the United States, and shewn a condescending willin \"ss to display his good offices in giving te ~ ‘ie doubt) them a convenient direction. But hr ed how far it was an indispensable rimsk!:*- ration with him at the time of making the treaty, that the people of Louisiana should become independent states, and members of the Federal Union. He Was a great give f of constitutions, which he took from his own pigeon holes, and hung upon the necks of his allies with chains: but they were gene rally of a difiere.nl d>■-cription from those of the United Elates. But waiving this consi deration, and accepting the phraseology of tiie treaty in the most popular and liberal sense, and granting that tlie terms “incor poration in the Union” and admission to lie states, are synonimons terms, the question naturally occurs, w hat was the condition and character of this union of states at tli* time of framing the treaty ? To this, whatever it might be, both parlies, certainly the minis ters of the United States, must lie understood to refer. There is no rub* more certain in the interpretation of treaties, than that which prescribes a regard to be had to the condi tion of tiie parties, and subject matter of the negotiation at the epoch nfits conclusion. At this period the Federal Union consisted of states which had joined the confederacy under various circumstances. There, were the old United States; there were also Ken tucky, Vermont, Tennessee, who had come in without the restriction upon slavery, and Ohio, which had acceded to the restriction and adopt* d it as a part of her constitution. Provision was also made by the ordinance of 1787, (justly styled the immortal ordi nance,) for tiie admission of other states in the only territorial possessions ofthe United States, subject to the. inhibition of servitude. All these states were incorporated into the Union at that time. But as the inferences resulting from this ordinance, are all import ant and conclusive iti the illustration of the subject, and applicable as well to the con struction ofthe constitution as of the treaty, (which lie should endeavor to demonstrate,) he must crave, indulgence to re capitulate its history, and to shew in what manner it had become engrafted into the whole ^>ody of our laws appertaining to this power of ad mitting new states. On this topic, dates, though dry, become material. The north western territory was ceded !>y d irginia, in March, 1781. In July, I7!U!,Unngjrss pass ed a resolution recommending to V irginia to revise, her net of cession, so far as to empow er Congress to erect toil more than five, or less than three states, as future circumstan ces might require, in the ceded territory, which should have the same rights of sove reignty, freedom, and independence, ,"s the original states. In July, 1787, w as passed the celebrated ordinance for the govern ment of that territory, establishing funda mental principles of civil and religious liber- tv as the basis of all laws, constitutions and governments, which should forever after be formed therein ; and providing also for tin establishment of states, and their admission to a share in the federal councils, on an equal footing with the original elites. Among these fundamental principles is found a per petual canon against involuntary servitude Now, sir, please to observe a most decisive and leading fact. In December, 17H8, t|w state of Virginia by an act reciting the re commendation of Congress, of 1788, and in express words recognizing the ordinanre. of 1787, assents to the proposal mnde by Con gress, and ratifies and confirms the article of that ordinance which contained a repetition ofthe terms of that proposal; thus giving its solemn sanction ami adoption to the entire ordinanre, to the extent of her power. No imagination, he believed, could form an idea of a more perfect, compact than this,—Here wore parties, consideration, solemnities, ex change of documents, perfect and mutual intelligence, and due deliberation. Hence it follows irresistihly, that, by the admis sion of all parties, of Virginia who made, and of Congress which received the cession, the prohibition of slavery to nil perpetuity, and m all governments in that territory, was not deemed to impair, in any respect, but to he perfectly consistent with “the sovereign ty, freedom and independence" of the states, and “the original footing” upon which lliey were to be admitted into die union. Yet this ordinance had been despatched by tin* honorable gentleman who preceded him, as an usurpation. But it was an usurpation in favor of the rights of mankind, with the con sent of all parties concerned; and Mr. (). cared not at: this day whether Congress un derthe old confederation,had powers to ac quire. territory or not. Virginia, whogrant- cd, could not have disputed the title, any court of chancery would have decided that the grantees took and held an estate in trust for the whole American people. If they eould not have held it,’there was no title elsewhere to be found. But the recognition of this ordinanre does not rest here. Hr would demonstrate that it had been wrought into the entire system of the constitution and laws, and interwoven with the very warp and woof, so as to have become a part ofthe fabric. One ofthe first actsof the first Con gress, under the new constitution, was fram ed to infuse new vigor into this ordinance, nd to giv r it full effect, under the new or der of things. InDecemher, 1780, North-Carolina cedes to the United States that portion of her ter ritory, since .cnstitilted into the state of Tennessee; and expressly refers to, and es tablishes, so far as her consent could do it, this same ordinance, excepting Imvvcvr the slave article (thus implying that without the exception she w ould lie hound by it) and this cession i.- accepted by Congress soon after the adoption ofthe new constitution. In April, 1788, an act of Congress for tiie amicable settlement ofthe limits of Georgia makes tiiis ordinance, with the same excep tion, the bases of all the rights and privileges of the people of the territory. In May, 1800, the very first section of the act relative to the territory ceded by Georgia, sets up and extends this ordinance to that, country, by express reference; again in April, 1802, tin: articles of agreement between the Unit ed Slates and tiie state of Georgia, for the cession of the Yazoo lands, recognize thd au thority' of the same ordinance, and stipulate for the future admission of the ceded territo ry “into the union.” on the same conditions and restrictions, and w ith the same privileges, and in the same manner, as is provided by that ordinance.” Such being the state of facts connected with this ordinance, at the time <.f making the Louisiana treaty, i' is al together Inconceivable that the Anier'enii ministers, in constructing an article, which looked to the future, incorporation of states from n territory which was to he trail fern d to tile United Elates, should lose sight either of an ordinance, or of the practice under it. w hich contained the fundamental principles that had been recognized and adopted in every former instance of the admission of a territorial” state. It is equally impossible that the franu.rs of the treaty 'hnuid have intended to tie up the hands of Co'igres? from the power of “incorporating the in habitants into the union,” in the same mode that the inhabitants of other territorial pos sessions, or any of them, had been so iiieor- lorutcd. Hence, it irresistibly follows that Congress, by corporatiiigthe people of Mis- otiri into tiie union, upon the same princi ples and with similar restrictions to those which at the time of that treaty had been ac tually mouldedinlo the constitution ofOhio, and w hich were promulgated am! establish ed as fundamentals for future states to he crectedin t ie north-western territory, woqid execute the treaty not only in the spirit, but to the very letter. But they were not only to be incorporated in the union; they were to he admitted, according to the principles ofthe federal constitution, to the enjoyment f all tiie rights, immunities, and advantages of citizens ofthe United Stales. What, then is a just description of rights, immunities, and advantages, derivable from the constitu tion of the United Slates; fur it is those alone which fill without the scone ofthe authori ty ofthe negoeiators of the the treaty your behalf? They were not entrusted to bargain for any l ights or immunities which the people acquire from a state, or a state from the people. He denied, unequivocal ly, that what was called the right, of self-go vernment in the peopleor faculty of making a state constitution, proceeded from the principles of the federal constitution. On the contrary, it was on nrigincl right in th people of the several United States, vested in them by the laws of nature and of nations, w hen sovereignty was east upon them, and they were compelled to form these govern- incuts for themselves. This right in I host old inhabitants was paramount to the forma tion ofthe federal constitution,and had been exercised before it breathed the breath of life. It was physically impossible to plaei the people ofthe subsequently acquired ter ritory, and die states hereafter to tie formed in the same precise relation to the union that exists betvvi en the union and the citizens * f the old states. In the latter connection, all hat i;i not granted to the union is reserv and irrigate the ceded tciritories, and Con gress, as their agents, may and ought to prescribe the course and direction, and elect the. mounds and the dykes which a re gard to the common welfare may denial d. lit a word, he insisted, in reference to the two casus, that in one the states were grant ors, and the constitution the grantee, and that in the other, the grantor is the constitu tion, and the grantees the territorial stales. The principles of the constitution had no hearing on one class of these relations.— Principles are postulates which constitute the essence! of the subject to which they re late, which make it w hat it is. But there are no principles touching the municipal re lations between states and citizens in the fed eral compact, except that n republican go vernment shall he guaranteed. For the rest, the treaty stipulations determine that the in habitants of Louisiana, w hen incorporated, shall lie eligible to be presidents, vice-presi dents, members of Congress, and rapalile of sustaining all offices uniter the constitution, civil and military, and entitled to their fair and proportionate share of all the great con tracts and little contracts, and to all sorts of privileges ami advantages enjoyed by any other citizen of the union in that capacity.— But it does not secure to them that they shall he admitted without tin* slave inhibition, as was Tennessee; nor absolutely subject to it as were the north western territorial states; blit that, either one or the other of these mode* of admission should lie adopted m the discretion of Congress, exercised under u fu ture view of ail circmnstanecs. This is sufficient for all purposes; and it is in unreasonable complaint from the lips of those who have been the subjects of a des potic government, that they are degraded by being placed on a level with tin: vigorous and flourishing states of Ohio, Indiana, and l’li . iis; whose senators and representatives would he close upon his heels, and «ith great reason, should he contend that they were not sovereign states, on the : • me footing with the original associates. He wav not disposed to expatiate upon the import of other words used in the treaty. He admit ted that slaves, considering how valuable a portion they constituted in a part of laniisin- na at the epoch of tin* treaty, ought to In* comprehended in the term “property,” ami protected as such : a just confidence was en tertained, no doubt, that they should he pre served and protected, and that slavery would he permitted in that part of the territory, where that, unhappy condition of society ex isted; and that, where it did not, a sound dis cretion would bo exercised by Congress.— On this ground the state of Louisiana is not inhihiteu from hoWing slaves; and on this same ground tin! amendment does not affect slaves already in Missouri. All abstract dis cussions, therefore,on the philological mean ing of the term “property," wore, in his hum- hit: opinion, superfluous, on this occasion. Having shewn, as be thought, conclusive ly, that no impediment could he found in tile treaty of cession, to the annexation of the proposed condition to the charter re quested by Missouri. Mr. O. was prepared to in*esligale the objections suggested as a- rising fr on the constitution. As his entire reliance was placed upon tin* express power, and he fell not the least necessity of r* sort ing to any constructive or implied authority, lie should advert to certain clauses of the constitution, cited on both sides, in which no express power was apparent, merely for the purpose oflaying Rieiri out of his course.— The first of these, w as the article r< specting the migration or importation ofslaves. The opponents of tin* amendment were welcome to that article, and to any construction which they had seen fit to altach to it. He had no disposition to impair the force of the arguments of his friends, deduced from thin article. They might he satisfactory him! conclusive in their estimation, hut he had al ways believed that the scope of that articb embraced (lie mischief, (and that only.) of bringing slaves into the United Stale:; from foreign countries; that importation hod al lusion to the bringing in byt water, and mi gration to the introduction hv land; and that it never was contemplated to prevent a proprietor ofslaves from taking them from one ofthe old states into another. In support of this const ruction, Mr. Otis recurred to the Journal ofthe Federal Con vention mid traced this article from the ori ginal report through the various amend ments, ami to its final adoption in its present form. As, he said, he gathered no assistance from that article, so he found no obstacle in another, w Inch had been cited !>y the hono rable gentleman from North-Carolina, (Mr. Macon.) He meant that w hich provided for tiie apportionment of representatives and taxes, by the constitutional ratio, on states “hereafter” to be admitted into tiie Union The Framers oft he Constitution well under stood that Kentucky and the western divi sion of North-Carolma w ould at some future day he admitted into the Union, and proba bly other states in which si ivery was alrea dy exiding. They merely intended, in that event, that the. same ratio should be applied: and against this elaim nobody contends. 1“ Missouri is permitted to tolerate slavery, m doubt her political weight will he augment ed by the whole unrulier of sluvrs. Ifnnv inference arises from this consideration, it certainly is not in favor of allowing that right. This article in‘lie Constitution, there fore, proves nothing l<> the point in contro versy. Mr. Otis said, the provision ofthe Constitution on which In* placed his rolotic- pcndence, nnd considered clear and all-suffi cient to support thp claim of right to annex conditions to Ihe admission of a state, was the ;3d section ofthe 4th article, which con- vcys the power of admitting new states and of disposing of and regulating the territories. Let us occupy a moment in fixing the defi nition here intended of the term state. It is a word of various signification. Every inde pendent community is a state. Turkey is a state, so is Russia,and the various European governments, and so are the states of Barba- Nf to the states. In the former, all that i* not I ry. The {states’ General ofthe United Pro- granted to the new state, is reserved to the ( voices used to designate the individuals who union. In one ease, the states are. the sour-1 represented them, k. the term foreign slat* ees ofpowi r, and the constitution is the rr-|isnscd in our Constitution as a collectiv j servoir: in the oilier, the people of tile Unit- tion, “ New states may be admitted into the U»;.. ;; .” We all agree that these words must refer exclusively to Republican stales. Now, the condition of the United States and itn territory at the time of forming the Consti tution, was tiiis—some of the existing states might not at first accede to it. New states, (as Happened with Kentucky nnd Tennessee) might, and it was expected would be. formed within the jurisdiction of old states. Other new states, it was distinctly understood,' would lie formed within the North Western territory. The provision for the admission of new states w as, then, beyond all contro versy, intended to apply to all these descrip tions of states. Of consequence, It compre hended the stntcH whose election 'ind estab lishment was provided for in the ordinance of 1707. But to these, the inhibition of sla very was attached, as wcil as other conditi ons ; and thus it follows, to perfect, demon stration, that the term “ new stall s,” in this clause of the Constitution, imported all such states as were then ready, or as were expect ed to he ready, to join the Union; which ie all that is required to be proved. In short, tiiis article was intended to provide for tho admission of the North Western territorial states, ns well ns others, or it was not. If it •lid look to them, it. looked to states, to which conditions were annexed, and the ex clusion of servitude among tin m. If it did not regard them, there is no other article in virtue of which Ohio, Indiana, and Iliin* • or indeed any territorial state, could be ad mitted ; and they ought not to he consider ed as members of this Union. In short, lie put illo the Senate with the utmost confi dence, that no inan could read the ordinance so often cited, and thinkof the advances then already mad** by the people of Ohio in po pulation, and their preparation to become a slate, and deny that the f amen* of the Con- stitution had them in their view, and promi nently so, in framing that arti-. le. And IP that were true, it of itself made an end of all uestion as to the constitutional power, if that one fact were granted it was enough for liin. For that fact alone by shewing that tiie states mentioned, in the ordinanre were among those mentioned in the article, is en tirely conclusive to shew that arpeciisoP pew stales might hi* admitted into the l T nion, upon v ' ell conditions should have been im posed by Congress. But, sir, said Mr. Otis, the fiiir and undo njalila conclusions resulting from this article, do not rest here. By the same article, Con gress have power to dispose of, arid make all needful rules and regulations respecting tho territory or other property of Ihe V. States, Much stress had been iaid, nod with great propriety, upon the latter branch of this pow er—that “ of making the needful rules, ke. hut non** that he had vet seen or limed upon the first words “ to dispose of,” Ac- It win taken for granted that these words imparted to (’(ingress merelv the faculty of telling tho territorial lauds, flnt he claimed for them ■ a much greater latitude. The verb, to dis- signified not merely to sell, but to “ »- dapt,” “ to form for any purpose," “to ap ply' to any purpose,” “ to place in any con dition,” kc. These are definitions not mere ly In la* found iu a dictionary, but such as had by legislative construction been applied t<> this very subject. In the .*’d section of the. act enabling tho people of Ohio to form a constitution, is provided, among other things, that ell that part of tiie territory not included within Ihe boundaries of the state, iitaelied to Indiana, subject to be. h*11alter “disposed of,” by Congress, ne- -•iwding to tin right resent..! in tin* 5th ar- ic!e of tiie ordinance. Upon adverting to his article, it will lie found to presertiovth® manner of forming slates, mid of admitting them into the. Union ; and not at all to tiie sale or alienation ofthe lands. Of conse quence. the power to dispose ofthe territo ry'll'the Ullited State*, expressly delegated to Congress by the Constitution, is to lie ex ecuted afterwards, in the same mode that it uni before In en exercised, under tile Confe deration. That is to say, by forming it into states, agreeably to its pleasure and discre tion, and with such conditions as (without infringing upon a republican form,) its vii vvs of policy might dictate nnd require, lie'**, then, said Mr. Otis, is found an express ami indubitable power,couched in language freo from ambiguity, (A admit new states, and to hind tliem hy compact to the ohservtnce of just and mural conditions. In pursuance of tins authority, limitations have uniformly ac companied the grant of the power to frame State Constitutions. The very assignment of boundaries is in the nature of a condition) some restraints upon the right of taxation? the language of judicial proceedings; the se curity of trial by jury, nnd of habeas corpus : all ot which are subjects of municipal juris diction in the old states; of (lie navigation of rivers— the reservation of mines, and of tho soil itselt. If Congress possessed no iliseri- tinn in these particulars, the entire territory of Louisiana, according to the letter ofthe treaty, should have belonged to those who were inhabitants at the time of the cession, and been admitted as one state, into the U- nion ; for the requiring the inhabitants of one part to confine their jurisdiction to n li mited tract, was equivalent to imposing a condition that they should renounce the re sidue; for which, it might lie said, the trea ty nffordati bn justification. Without this power of annexing conditi ons, tin* United States, he said, would he a strange anomaly in the society of nations t compelled to admit to their bosom, and to a participation of their fundamental powers St priv ileges, without terms or restrictions, any people in whatever part ofthe world, whicfl ihe Executive Government should acquire- by treaty, however alien their laws and usir. ges might he from those of our own nation. For it is insisted that a colonial policy is ab horrent from the genintis of ourCoustitution, nnd that states must he formed as soon am possihle In ail our poaresrinus. He believed no nation on earth but ourselves, were ever placed in such a predicament, nor did h« perceive how a sovereign state could ever form a union with a foreign sovereign or pe ople, without such a power. On the same, foundation alone could Scotland be held t t> 1 ie Unit-1 name and description fov ail foreign nations, j the restrictions imposed by the article* of led Slates are* the fountain, from whrncej But none of these dereminntion of states can | Union with England. Cases, and those»hj* / | must issue Ihe streams destined to fertilize| be intended hy the phrasg in the Constitu-jr.o means extreme, might, hi* imagined^ irp
