The Conquest of Mexico

mence was restrained by the invasion and conquest of Mexico. But victory could only aggravate the differences between the States, because it extended the boundaries of the country to the

Sec. 2; the Legislature resolves that it is, April 11, 1842. This act of the Governor provoked counter-resolutions in Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama, and Mississippi. Extension of slavery into the Territories should be forbidden, resolutions of January 27, 1847, and January 13, 1848; the laws of Texas and slavery should be excluded from the region between the Neches and the Rio Grande and from New Mexico, east of the Rio Grande, resolution of January 4, 1849. Extension of slavery to California should be forbidden and Congress should abolish the slave-trade in the District of Columbia, resolution of January 16, 1850.

Ohio.-Joint resolution that slavery should be excluded from Oregon, February 8, 1847; that Congress has power to exclude it from acquired territory, February 24, 1848; that the Ordinance of 1787 should be extended to territory acquired from Mexico, February 13, 1847; February 25, 1848.

Pennsylvania.-Joint resolution instructing the Senators and Representatives in Congress to vote against the acquisition of new territory unless slavery be prohibited, January 22, 1847.

South Carolina.-Joint resolution advocating a call for a convention or Southern congress to arrest further aggressions and restrictions on the rights of the South," December 20, 1850. Compare resolutions of December 17, 1841. The commonwealth put into a "state of defence," act of December 20, 1850.

Tennessee.-Joint resolution in favor of annexation of Texas, January 20, 1838; another for its admission into the Union, on an equal footing with the sovereign States of these United States of America," February 7, 1842.

Vermont.-Joint resolution against annexation of Texas; for abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia and in the Territories joint resolution given in "Acts and Resolutions of 1838," p. 23. The perpetuation of slavery a violation of the national compact, 1844.

Virginia.―Joint resolution that Congress can impose no condition on slavery extension, as such limitation is not within its power; laws preventing the removal of slave property to a Territory unconstitutional and in violation of the Missouri Com

Pacific. The acquisition from Mexico became at once a new subject for controversy.

The Texas question, and all that it involved, did not suddenly supplant in popular interest the question of State banks and internal improvements. But it was an open cause of division between the sections. They were less divided over the Oregon question. The boundaries of the Oregon country no man knew. Its joint occupation by Great Britain and the United States only postponed a struggle. Public opinion found expression here and there in the resolutions of State Legislatures favoring the "immediate occupation of all Oregon," and this meant to 54° 40' north latitude. New England, for a time alarmed at the prospective dismemberment of Maine in settling the northeastern boundary, delivered herself of strong State-sovereignty notions and appeals to the States, but finally acquiesced in the decision promise, March 8, 1847. See also the joint resolution on the Wilmot proviso, January 20, 1849.

Wisconsin.-Joint resolution favoring the application of the Ordinance of 1787 to all new territory, June 21, 1848. Joint resolution favoring the "immediate occupation of Oregon,” January 13, 1844.

66

* See the following authorities having reference to this subject: Resolutions of the Massachusetts Legislature, February 9, 1830, protesting against the adoption of the decision of the King of the Netherlands and declaring it to be in violation of the rights of the State as secured by the Federal Constitution, and 'consequently null and void and in no ways obligatory upon the government or people." Resolutions of February 24, 1826; February 15, 1832; March 23, 1832; March 14, 1836, and April 19, 1838, the latter declaring that no power is delegated by the Constitution of the United States to Congress authorizing it to cede to a foreign nation any territory lying within the limits of either

Opposition to the Federal System

under the Webster - Ashburton treaty of 1842.* The hostile attitude of Maine for a time indicated how thoroughly the doctrines of '98 possessed the people of a State when they thought themselves injured by the general government. Objections of this kind, North or South, all tended to become obstacles in the pathway of the national idea.

of the States of the Union. Resolutions of March 26, 1839; March 13, 1841, and March 3, 1842. Resolutions of Maine Legislature, February 28, 1831, that the convention of the United States with Great Britain, made in September, 1827, tended to violate the Constitution of the United States and to impair the sovereign rights and powers of the State of Maine, and that Maine is not bound by the Constitution to submit to the decision which is or shall be made under the convention. Resolutions of the Maine Legislature, January 19, 1832, that the United States has only a "special and modified sovereignty." Governor Enoch Lincoln's message of January 8, 1829: “ By Senators in Congress we represent our aggregate and consolidated population in its common and combined wants and demands. It is the senatorial representative who is to appear for us all against invasion of the sovereignty which belongs to the republic." Laws of Maine, 1829, p. 11. The question of State sovereignty involved in the Alien and Sedition laws, the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, the tariff in South Carolina in 1828, the taxation of the United States Bank by Ohio in 1820, and the settlement of the northeastern boundary, brought out a mass of resolutions by State Legislatures. Many of these are given in a pamphlet entitled The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and '99; with Jefferson's Original Draught thereof. Also Madison's Report, Calhoun's Address, Resolutions of the Several States in relation to State Rights. With other Documents in Support of the Jeffersonian Doctrines of '98. "Liberty-The Constitution-Union.” Published by Jonathan Elliot, Washington: May, MDCCCXXXII.; 82 pp. Maine and Massachusetts were present, in their commissioners, when, at Washington, in June, 1842, Lord Ashburton and Webster signed the treaty. The northeastern boundary question was thus, at last, amicably settled. New England had declared, but not applied, the doctrine of State sovereignty.

* Treaties and Conventions, 432-438.

Russia, in 1824, agreed with the United States by treaty that the boundary between the two countries should be along the line of 54° 40', thus laying a foundation for the extreme American claim.* But the Oregon country was far from Washington, and was of slight commercial interest to the East. Its boundaries seemed of no moment, as probably population would not reach the country for centuries. The treaty of 1846 with England,† fixing the boundary along the forty-ninth parallel, did not provoke great public interest. This treaty settled the northwestern boundary as far as Puget Sound. On the 2d of February, two years later, by the treaty of Guadalupe - Hidalgo, the boundaries of the purchase from Mexico were established. Thus, by the middle of the century democracy in America was in possession of the heart of the continent from ocean to ocean, from the great lakes to the Rio Grande. Florida was out of the lines of migration. Immigrants in the North were passing into Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa; in the South the tide flowed into Texas. As an inducement to settle in Florida, Congress now offered a quarter of a section of land to any person, being the head of a family or a single man over eighteen years of age, able to bear arms, who, within a year, would settle in East Florida. The population of the Territory had doubled in twenty years, but was still small.

*Treaties and Conventions, 931-3. + Id., 438-9. + Id., 681-694.

§ Act of August 4, 1842. | Population, 1830, 34,730; 1840, 54,477; 1850, 87,445.

Texas Admitted by a Unique Resolution

The effect of the act was immediate. In ten years population increased over thirty thousand. The rush of settlers caused numberless land disputes, so that Congress found it necessary to revise the late act. As early as 1838* a convention had assembled at St. Joseph's and formed a constitution, but seven years passed before Congress passed an enabling act. It applied alike to Florida and Iowa, and admitted both States. But Iowa, dissatisfied with the boundaries imposed by the act, refused to enter the Union with them. Congress passed a supplementary act on the same day relative to Iowa, and in the following year,‡ in a third act, again defined the boundaries and referred the boundary dispute between it and Missouri to the Supreme Court. This act made the usual grant of lands for schools, public buildings, and internal improvements, and admitted the State on the 28th of December.§ On the 1st of March, 1845, the popular clamor for the reannexation of Texas was satisfied by a joint resolution of Congress, which remains unique in our history. Texas was not asked to adopt a constitution in conformity with that of the United States. The condition imposed by Congress was the submission to it of all questions of boundaries. A State constitution should be made, and, with evidence

*December 3d. + March 3, 1845.

August 4, 1846.

§ See journal of this convention, held May 4-19, 1846; Iowa City, 1846. Also, the Documentary Material Relating to the History of Iowa, edited by Benjamin F. Shambaugh, Nos. i.-viii. ; published by the State Historical Society of Iowa.