H. or R.]

Constitution of Michigan.

[DEC. 24, 1835.

so far as it respects the gentlemen composing it. He
thought, however, it was not the appropriate committee,
because the object of its creation was to attend to the bu-
siness and interests of the Territories, as such, and did not,
contemplate its action or decision upon a question like
the present. The rights of the adjacent States are invol
ved in this question, and, for that reason, it would seem
not to be the proper committee. The Committee on the
Territories is presumed solely with a reference to the
knowledge possessed by its members of the local wants
and interests of the Territories, and without any re-
gard to their legal attainments, which alone could fit
them to decide the questions to which the pretensions
It would therefore be very
of Michigan give rise.
proper to place on the Territorial Committee gentle-
men of all professions, while it would be a matter of
surprise if any other than lawyers, and those, too, of
high legal attainments, were put upon the Committee on
the Judiciary.

this reason, in all former cases, a select committee had been raised for the occasion. Even in the case of Tennessee, the claim of right was denied; and, as is apparent from the journal of the proceedings attending her admission, she was received into the Union on the ground of expediency alone. In the present case, Michigan claims that she is a State, by virtue of certain laws and ordinances of Congress already passed. No act of Congress has expressly authorized her to form a constitution and erect herself into an independent State, as was done before the States of Ohio, Indiana, and the other new States since admitted, formed their constitutions. There being no act of Congress authorizing her to form a constitution, nor any in express terms recognising her right to become a State, she deduces that right by interpretation and construction of certain laws. The laws principally relied upon, as conferring upon her this right, are the ordinance of Congress of 1787, for the government of the Northwestern Territory, and an act of Congress of 1805, erecting the Territory of Michigan into a ter ritorial Government. She maintains that, by virtue of certain general terms, in which one of the sections of the latter act is expressed, she has a right to form a constitution and State Government whenever the Territory created by that act shall have sixty thousand inhabitants. Nothing is said in the act about the formation of a State Government; but by connecting it with the ordinance of 1787, and then by putting a construction on the ordinance, she raises the inference that she has a right to form a constitution, and demand admission into the Union, without further or other legislation on the part of Congress. The Michigan construction, both of the ordinance of 1787 and of the act of 1805, is seriously disputed; and Mr. V. said he, was one of those who believ ed her construction of both of them to be wholly erroneous, and her pretensions groundless. Many other Mr. HOWARD, having made the motion to refer this acts of Congress were connected with, and explanatory matter to the Committee on the Territories, would very of, the two acts. Now, when laws are to be explained, briefly state his reasons. He thought so intricate a suband rights deduced from their interpretation, the Judici-ject should be referred to one of the regular standing ary Committee, and it alone, would seem to be the ap propriate committee to discharge that duty. So long as Michigan puts forth her claim to admission on the ground of right, and does not ask it as a favor, the question, and the only question, to be determined is, do these acts bear her out in her interpretation of them? For his part, he had no doubt that Congress had an absolute and plenary power over the Territory of Michigan, and could make a State of it or not, at its own pleasure and discretion, and with such boundaries as it might deem expedient, subject only to the qualification, that its southern boundary could not be extended into the territory of the States south of it.

Mr. MASON, of Virginia, did not think the subject ought to be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. He hoped the House would not at this time go into any examination of the merits of the controversy-a controversy he hoped to see adjusted to the satisfaction of all parties. Mr. M. then referred to the proceedings in the cases of Tennessee and Ohio, as recorded in the journals, in both of which select committees were appointed. Such had been the uniform practice of the House. It was true that the subject did not appropri ately belong to any one of the committees of the House, for it was an extraordinary application. Taken alto. gether, if a select committee was not the appropriate one, it appeared to him the Committee on the Territo ries was the most appropriate. Still, he hoped the former course would be adopted.

committees of the House, for the reasons he had stated when he made the motion. He was aware of the former usage of the House to refer applications for the admission of new States into the Union to a select committee, and that that long practice ought not lightly to be departed from; but, since the admission of the last State into the Union, the Committee on the Territories, whose peculiar province he thought this matter was, had been organized, namely, in 1825. Prior to that year, no such committee had existed in that House. [Mr. H. then desired the Clerk to read the resolution under which it was organized.] The non-existence of such a commitice he believed to be the reason why this subject hadbeen referred to a select committee. That reason, however, no longer existed, and he hoped the House would suffer it to take the reference he thought to be the only ap

of the last Congress on the same subject, to be found in Journal of the House, pages 33 and 398. For himself, be said, he was totally indifferent to what committee the House should send it, believing only that the whole subject should go the same committee. It was for that reason he had made the motion to reconsider the vote by which the House had departed from the practice settled by the last Congress, and referred the subject of the Ohio boundary line to a select committee, instead of to the Committee on the Territories. He hoped, therefore, both subjects would be sent to the latter com

Upon so grave a matter of interpretation as that set up by Michigan, it was important to bring to its deci sion the best legal talents of the House. The Judiciary Committee was always supposed to be composed of gen-propriate one. Mr. H. then refered to the proceedings tlemen of the highest legal attainments; and being selected with reference to those attainments, and without regard to this question in particular, its decision would be looked upon as an impartial exposition of the law; and, on this account, it would be entitled to and receive more of the respect of the House than would be given to the report of aselect committee, organized for the occasion. An able gentleman from the State of New York presides over the Judiciary Committee, and no member of it be ing from those States beyond the Ohio, which have an interest in the question of boundary, (which is one of the legal questions involved in the claim of Michigan for admission, with the constitution she has formed,) an impartial decision upon these pretensions might be expected.

Mr. V. said he desired it to be understood that he knew no objection to the Committee on the Territories,

mittee.

Mr. STORER next addressed the House upon the question before it. Whatever difference of opinion, said Mr. S., may exist among the delegation of Ohio upon other points, it gives me pleasure, sir, to believe that we are united upon this question. It is not my wish

DEC. 24, 1835.]

Constitution of Michigan.

to give the present debate a wider range than the motion of my colleague would properly embrace under the rules of the House, though the mode in which the subject has been heretofore discussed might seem to require a departure from the usual course of debate. Yet, sir, whenever the important matters connected with the message of the President, which are asked to be referred to a select committee, shall come before this House, and the field is fairly opened to argue the merits of her border controversy, as an humble Representative of Ohio, I shall not shrink from duty. Sir, it is not, as might be presumed from the manner in which the reference to a select committee, or to the Committee on the Territories, has been regarded by the gentlemen who have advocated these propositions, that the message of the Pres ident, with the documents attached to it, embraced the question, merely, whether the Territory of Michigan could be admitted into the Union or not; but the whole of the unfortunate dispute in relation to the northern boundary of Ohio is opened for consideration. The constitution of Michigan, which has been laid upon our tables, is predicated upon the hypothesis that the boundary between her and Ohio is established. And she insists, in the ordinance, by her convention, that her territorial limits are irrevocably determined. By these acts, sir, a valuable part of Ohio is taken from her jurisdiction, and, under the pretence of claiming admission into the Union, an attempt is made by the same movement to secure a recognition, if not the establishment of a boundary, that Ohio never will admit, if she is true to herself. If the question was one of admission as a State only, which could be examined and decided without reference to the rights of other members of the Union, I should, perhaps, have no objection to the reference asked by the honorable gentleman from Virginia; but when I am assured that the boundaries of three States are to be changed without their consent, and, sir, against their express protestations, I wish to inform the House that the subject assumes a graver character than it would seem many have attached to it.

Disguise the matter as we will, the decision of any committee to whom it will be referred must be upon the merits of the whole question; and it is not the least important consideration, that, as legal rights are claimed to be involved, they should be subjected to the scrutiny of the Committee on the Judiciary, whose appropriate function is to give construction to the laws of the Union, preparatory to the action of the House. It is asserted by Michigan, in her memorials and publications, and we have been favored with not a few, whether offi. cial or otherwise it is not for me to say, that her claim to admission into the Union depends upon the ordinance of 1787, and the law of 1805: to these she has referred as the foundation of her right, and by them she must be judged. Now, sir, upon so important, so responsible and delicate a matter as the increase of our Federal Union, depending not upon questions of policy or expediency, but the simple claim of mere right, I would ask, what committee is so appropriate as that of the Judiciary? An ordinance of Congress, under which three States have already been organized, and which, if I can confide in the periodicals of the day, has been pronounced, by high authority on this floor, as conferring upon Michigan a right as sacredly vested "as any compact ever ratified in heaven"-an ordinance, sir, the wisdom of whose provisions has been felt and acknowledged throughout our whole western valley-upon the faith of which Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, have long confided; and if it is now to receive a construction where they are interested, they ask that the same measure of justice should be meted to them as is extended to the humblest individual in the Union.

Sir, upon every question where the citizen appeals to
VOL. XII.-131

[H. OF R.

Congress, claiming indemnity for the consequence of any act which has been remotely caused by or depends upon a law of the land, his memorial is always referred to the Committee on the Judiciary; they, sir, have the appropriate control on all such questions, from the very nature of their organization. Selected for their legal acquirements and general knowledge of the interests of the Government as well as the rights of the citizen, taken from all portions of the country, and not knowing in advance what will be submitted to them, they can enter upon their duties with impartiality and without feeling. Not, sir, that I would detract at all from the ability of any special committee which might be appointed, nor distrust their candor, intelligence, or integrity; but I should feel that I had not done my duty, if I did not urge the reference to the committee designated by my colleague.

Sir, I have said the humblest individual is protected by that committee; and I ask for Ohio no other right than he, in his relative situation, could properly assert. We do not wish, sir, to vaunt; it is not for a State like ours, great and populous as she is, to arrogate any superior right, or ask any extraordinary interference. We place ourselves on a level with all our sister States; and, while claiming for ourselves no more than they honorably could, we shall insist upon all that is justly secured to us. It has been said that the powerful were waging war with the weak, and on this floor a picture has been drawn not very flattering to the dignity or the honor of our State. As I have already said, this is not the time to defend ourselves against such insinuations, or repel such charges: when the proper period shall arrive, I trust that the Representatives of Ohio will be prepared to silence every unmeaning sarcasm, and throw back every imputation, come from where it will, and when it will. It is urged by the honorable gentleman from Virginia, that it has been the usual course to refer all such memorials to select committees; and he instances the cases of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. Now, sir, there is a manifest distinction between these cases and that of Michigan. In those, a convention had been already held under the act of Congress; and when the constitutions they offered for approval were submitted to a select committee, it was only to ascertain whether, under the ordinance of 1787, they were republican in their character. All previous steps had been provided for by the laws authorizing the convention to be held. But Michigan comes before us demanding admittance, without previous consultation, and without asking our consent. She has formed her constitution, established her Government, and proclaimed it as already in full force. Not merely the question of the character of the constitution, but the right to admission, are involved. The gentleman has said that he supposes the preparatory steps to the passage of the several laws authorizing conventions to be held in Indiana, Illinois, Mississippi, and Alabama, were referred to the Committee on the Territories; but it would seem that could not be the case, as all these States were admitted previous to 1825, and there was no standing Committee on the Territories until that year. But, sir, be the fact as is contended for, the present is an extraordinary case, full of delicacy and responsibility; and we who are deeply involved in the controversy would again repeat, let us have the opinion of our legal advisers.

The honorable gentleman from Maryland supports his motion for a reference to the Territorial Committee on the ground that the organization of that body embraces, most appropriately, the matters asked to be referred. The language of the 70th rule of the House is, that "It shall be the duty of the Committee on the Territories to examine into their legislative, civil, and criminal proceedings, and to devise and report to the House such means as, in their opinion, may be necessary to secure the rights and privileges of residents and non

Election of Chaplain-Constitution of Michigan.

and the copy of the constitution adopted by the people of Michigan for forming a State Government, to a select committee; and as the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. HOWARD] had suggested to his colleague, [Mr. HAMER,] that the question might first be taken on referring the subjects to the Committee on the Judiciary, by moving to amend his [Mr. HOWARD's] motion, by striking out "Territories" and inserting "Judiciary," he would, if his colleague was in his seat, request him to move the amendment, instead of relying on his motion to refer it to the Judiciary Committee, which would be the second motion in order. He expressed the hope that, if the question was taken first on the motion to refer to the Committee on the Territories, it would be negatived, as he believed the Judiciary was the proper committee to investigate the subject.

He regretted that the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. MASON, in rising to correct errors in others, should have fallen into them himself. He had stated to the House the question of boundary was only incidental, and ought not to affect the main question, which was, as the gentleman stated, "shall Michigan be admitted into the Union as one of the confederacy?"

The question of boundary, Mr. W. contended, was so intimately connected with the admission of Michigan, that it could not be separated without violating the rights of three States. To ascertain what territory Michigan claims, it is necessary to examine several documents; and it can be most satisfactorily demonstrated by them, that Michigan claims not only the land west of the Miami bay, between the lines run by Harris and Fulton, but a much larger extent of territory in the northeast part of Ohio, a part of which was within the district he represented, and a part of it in the district represented by his colleague, [Mr. SLOANE.]

The boundaries of the proposed State are declared by the convention to be established by the act of Congress of the 11th January, 1805, in conformity to the fifth article of the ordinance providing for the government of the Territory of the United States northwest of the river Ohio. The fifth article of said ordinance, so far as the boundary is concerned, is as follows: "There shall be formed in said Territory (the Northwestern Territory) not less than three nor more than five States; and the boundaries of the States, as soon as Virginia shall alter her act of cession and consent to the same, shall become fixed and established as follows, to wit: The western State in the said Territory shall be bounded by the Mississippi, the Ohio, and Wabash rivers, a direct line drawn from the Wabash and Port Vincents, due north, to the territorial line between the United States and Canada, and by the said territorial line to the Lake of the Woods and Mississippi.

[H. OF R

been said, here and elsewhere, that this ordinance is as unalterable as the decrees of Heaven."

The Territory of Michigan is bounded, by the act of January 11, 1805, as follows: "All that part of the In. diana Territory which lies north of a line drawn east from the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan, until it shall intersect Lake Erie, and east of a line drawn from the said southerly bend, through the middle of said lake, to its northern extremity, and thence due north to the northern boundary of the United States."

This ordinance and the act of the 11th of January, 1805, as the southern bend or extremity of Lake Michigan is now ascertained to be situate, conflict with the title of the Connecticut Western Reserve; and it will be seen that the ordinance, and the several cessions and acts connected with the question of boundary, involve important if not intricate questions of law, which can best be decided by the Judiciary Committee.

It is known to every member of the House, that the State of Connecticut, under the charter of Charles II., claimed to have a title to all the land which lay west of the Narragansett bay, south of Massachusetts, and north of the forty-first degree of north latitude, and extending west to the Pacific Ocean or South Sea. She contended with the colony of New York for that part of her territory which was embraced within the degrees of latitude by which she was bounded. This dispute was settled in the year 1733. She contended with Pennsylvania for a part of the territory embraced within her limits, which was decided by the federal court at Trenton.

The extensive tracts of western land engaged the early attention of those States whose charters did not embrace any portion of that region, and they required, inasmuch as these lands were uninhabited, and had been conquered in the common cause, that they be surrendered for the common benefit of all the States. The State of Connecticut was one of the States to cede a portion of her western territory.

The act authorizing the cession by her delegates in Congress, or any two of them, bears date the 14th of September, 1786, and authorized the conveyance of all the right, title, interest, jurisdiction, and claim, of the State of Connecticut, to certain western lands, begin. ning at the completion of the forty-first degree north latitude, one hundred and twenty miles west of the western boundary line of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as then claimed by said Commonwealth, and from thence by a line drawn north, parallel to and one hundred and twenty miles west of the said west line of Pennsylvania, and to continue north until it comes to forty-two degrees and two minutes north latitude. The State of Connecticut claimed all the land west of the State of Pennsylvania, north of the forty-first degree of "The middle State shall be bounded by the said di- north latitude, and south of latitude forty-two degrees rect line, the Wabash, from Port Vincents to the Ohio, two minutes. It will be perceived by the cession, that by the Ohio by a direct line drawn due north from the she reserved a tract of land lying between the degrees mouth of Great Miami to the said territorial line, and by of latitude mentioned, and extending west from the the said territorial line. The eastern State (which is Pennsylvania line one hundred and twenty miles. If the now Ohio) shall be bounded by the last-mentioned direct boundaries of Michigan, as they are given in her constiline, the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the said territorial line: tution, based on the ordinance of 1787, be established, Provided, however, and it is further understood and de- then a part of the counties of Cuyahoga, Geauga, and clared, that the boundaries of these three States shall be Ashtabula, will be included within the State of Michigan. subject so far to be altered, that if Congress hereafter The number of citizens which must be affected by this find it expedient, they shall have authority to form one decision is from twenty to thirty thousand. It is strictly in two States in that part of said Territory which lies a legal question, whether the State of Connecticut, benorth of an east and west line drawn through the south-ing a party to the ordinance of 1787, waived or abandonerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan."

This ordinance was adopted on the 13th of July, 1787; and at that time it was supposed, as evidenced by all the maps then extant, that the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan was so far north that a line drawn due east would strike the lake, or the territorial line, far north of the most northerly cape of the Miami bay. It has

ed any portion of the reservation in her deed of cession in 1786. This question the Committee on the Judiciary is competent to decide; but the Committee on the Territories, not necessarily being composed of gentlemen of legal attainments, is not supposed to be competent to decide intricate law questions, arising from deeds of cession, ordinances, and laws.