Newspaper Page Text
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