| OCR Text |
Show 218 '!'liE 1\US~O UlU QU E::>'l'ION. chaser, and still less bud Co11grcss any property in the rights of the people. And if Congress eYer had the power contended for, while they owued the lnud, it would surely cease to cxii)t so. oon as th y parted with the soil. 1'he sovereignty of Congress over the territory, as the lords paramount, was but tcmpornry, an<l could only endure ::;o long ns they retained the soil; when that was dil-lposed of, their sovcr ·ignty ceased o I so. Y eL, by v irluc of this brief' UJI(l I em porn ry a II thori ly, limiLcd in its extent, anu short in its cluralion, Uungrcss W'ro about to fix on Mi'sonri a. ncve1·-rnding eondiLion, thut was to continue long after the authority ou which it re1)tcd for existence, had passed away. If, in con eqnencc of owning the land, Congress po sc. sod that description of ovcrci1rnly that wonld authorize them to legislate in regard to the property of the citizens of a ~rcrri Lory or a SLate, ot· to dictate w hn.t ki HLl of property the citizens should introduce and hold, thou might they at this day nndcrtnkc to rc~nlatc the affairs of the tales of' Ohio, Indiaua, Illinoi., Lonisiana, l\1i. sissi ppi, unci .Alabama; and thci1· right to impose n' trictions ou each of them, similar to that contemplated iu regard to l\1i ·sonri, would be equally as unquc Lienable. The whole amount of the authority Congress could claim under this clause of the Constitution, wnt-;, to make rules and regulations for the surveying and di~1wsing of the public lands, to regulate the quantities in which it should be sold, the price, and the crerlit. But this power wns limited in its operation to the property alone, and uy no construction conld be extended to the rights of the citizens iuhauiting the territory. Congress had no power over the right or property of the citiz;cn, but, in certain cases, to levy taxes; o.nd tlli. ant hority was one or Til~ :MI~SOUlU QUE~TION. 219 those cxp1·essly conferred by the Constitution, and was not alone supported by inference. * * * * * * To ascertain what powers Congress had under the Con-stitution, which was ratitle<.l on the 17th of icptcmbcr 17 7, resort was made to an oruiHancc of the 13th ~f ~uly, 17~7 , 1 months in dale 1n·ior to the Conslltutwn of the severa , ' United States. The ordinance wus passed by the old Congress, unucr the Articles of Confcderu,tion. 'l'he adoption of the federal Constitution was the forma-tion of a new government, and an abolition of the old; and yet, an ordinance passed by the former government was brought up in judgment to defllle and. ~xpound the powers of ongress under a new and totally utflercut government-under a new Constitution, and new organization. Gentlemen had contended that Congress had revive<l nnd ratified the ordinance in the act of 1802, relating to Ohio; the act of 1816, rclatipg to Indiana; and the act of 1 18, in reference to Illinois; these being the acts by which Congress authorized those Slates to form a Constitution and State government. But, were he to surrcnuer this pari of the argument to gentlemen, could it possibl~ be de~luced, that, because Congress had revived the ordmancc 111 reference to nny one or a1l those States, that, by that revival, it would have any operation beyond the State actually named, and to which it was applied. Nor, bad the question ever been made, by any of those States, which Missouri now made, how far Conrrress had the power to impose the provisions of that ordi~ance over a State; they hnd taken it as n matter of course because it comported with their wishes and their will. Missouri did not intend so to take it, because it neither promoted her interest, nor complied with her wishes or her |
