The committee in Congress, to whom the constitution of Ohio was referred, reported that the proposition to change the boundary was not submitted to that body in a proper shape, nor by any competent authority, and therefore that it was inexpedient to consider it then.

The question of a division of the north-western Territory was presented to Congress again in the year 1805, on the application to separate Michigan from Indiana, to which the former was attached on the admission of Ohio. On the eleventh day of January, 1805, the Territory of Michigan was created. The act declares "that all that part of the Indiana 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, shall, for the purpose of temporary government, constitute a separate Territory, and be called Michigan."

Again was this fundamental line brought to the attention of government in the year 1812. On the 20th of May of that year, an act was passed by Congress, which authorized the surveyor general, under the direction of the President, "to cause to be surveyed, marked and designated, so much of the western and northern boundaries of the State of Ohio, &c. as divide said state from the territories of Indiana and Michigan, agreeably to the boundaries as established by the act, passed April 30, 1802."

Thus it appears, that from the time the northern boundary was first fixed by Congress, to the year 1812, the general government has recognized no other than the east and west line from the southern extreme of Lake Michigan, as the true boundary of the states which border upon the Ohio river; and that it has steadily persevered in the intention to dispose of the whole of the Territory north of that line, at some future period, as should be deemed most expedient.

The right "to attach" the Michigan territory to the state of Ohio, at any period after the admission of that state, which Congress attempted to reserve in the second section of the act of 1802, cannot be sustained by any principle contained in the ordinance of 1787. The power to declare the inhabitants of our country, without their consent, subject to the laws and jurisdiction of any state, is not, it is supposed, granted to the general government by the constitution of the United States. If Congress can enlarge the boundaries of one state in this manner, it may at its pleasure reduce the largest state in the Union below the smallest.

The original states have been secured in their boundaries by charters or by agreements. If the United States was truly the sovereign over the territory north-west of the Ohio river, the ter

R

ritories must regard the fifth of the articles of compact as their charter, and as unalterable as that of either of those states. It is not competent for Congress to abridge the rights which were thus solemnly acknowledged to belong to the infant states.

The power which was given to Congress over the boundaries of the north-western states, by the fifth article of compact, was not a general one, but was limited to the country north of the east and west line. It was to be executed in one of two ways: either by erecting states north of, and bounding upon, that line; or admitting the three states bordering upon the Ohio river to occupy the whole of the territory-to extend to the north as far as the boundary line between the United States and Canada. The words "shall be subject so far to be altered" are clearly a limitation of the power, as they prescribe the limit beyond which it was not competent to act. Congress has in no instance declared that it was expedient to admit those three southern states in the shape prescribed by the ordinance. But it is insisted that by designating other boundaries on the north by declining to give them the whole of the territory--and by their admission as states whose limits thereafter were not subject to change, except in the manner prescribed by the constitution, the declaration was, in effect, made that it was "expedient to form one or two states in that part of the territory north of an east and west line," which would otherwise have belonged to those three states. And this was all that Congress could do. When the question of expediency-which was the only question submitted by the article to Congress, was determined, the provision, that the line, passing through the southerly extreme of lake Michigan, should divide those from the states in the southern part of the territory, then began to operate, and to the exclusion of any jurisdiction of Congress over that subject. The ordinance established the line, to take effect after Congress should decide it to be expedient to have more than three states. It then became as positively and firmly established as either of the lines bounding those states on the east and west.

The question of expediency did not embrace an alteration of this or either of the boundaries, but simply the formation of new states north of THAT line.

The point referred to Congress by the ordinance was not the propriety of fixing a new line for Ohio which should terminate at the north cape of Miami Bay; nor for Indiana, a line ten miles north of the extremity of the southern bend of lake Michigan; nor for Illinois, the line of 42 deg. 30 min. north latitude. But it was, whether it was "fit and proper," having a due regard to the relative size of the older states, that Ohio should be six hundred miles long, from north to south, Indiana eight hundred miles, and Illinois one thousand miles !_whether it was "expedient" to create

such mighty empires in the west, and unite them in the confederacy with the states of Rhode Island and Delaware?

It cannot be inferred that it was the intention of Virginia to give her assent to such boundaries, when, by her act of cession, she made it a positive condition that "the territory ceded shall be laid out and formed into new states containing a suitable extent of territory, not less than 100 nor more than 150 miles square."

Your committee, in further elucidation of their views upon this important subject, beg leave to refer to the letters of the Hon. William Woodbridge to the Governor of Ohio, and to the secretary of state of the United States, and likewise to the message of the Hon. Lewis Cass to the Legislative Council, in regard to the boundaries of this territory, and they ask that the facts and arguments therein stated may be received as a part of this report.

[DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THE PRECEDING REPORT.] From the Hon. W. Woodbridge, to His Excellency E. A. Brown, Governor of the State of Ohio, dated

DETROIT, M. T. August 11, 1820. SIR-In the temporary absence of Governor Cass, it has devolved upon me, as Secretary of Michigan, to perform the Executive functions of this government; and I have the honor in that capacity to solicit your Excellency's attention to the subject of the collission of authority, which unfortunately exists between the state of Ohio and this Territory, as it affects the people, who live between the line running due east from the southern extreme of lake Michigan, and that which is claimed from the north cape of Miami Bay, in a direction towards the same point.

It is understood that a new county has recently been organized by the authority of Ohio comprehending the disputed country; that proceedings have been instituted there to levy taxes; and that every indication exists of a determination to enforce contrary to the wishes of the people and to the interests of this Territory, the claimed jurisdiction of Ohio.

In this exigency my official interposition has been claimed; and painful as it may be to me individually, to oppose myself to the views of Ohio, the State of my early adoption, it is yet with much satisfaction that it is to you, Sir, from whom I have so much of candor to expect, that I feel called upon to submit briefly my views of this interesting matter.

The claim of sovereignty over the district of country in question, which Ohio prefers, rests I understand, upon the alleged acceptance by the General Government of the Constitution of Ohio; in which constitution is a clause, providing that in a certain event, with the assent of Congress, the northern boundary of that state, shall be as is now claimed by Ohio.

If such statement of the case be true, and if it were competent for the General Government; "with the assent of Congress,' to alter the previously established boundary, it may nevertheless be submitted to your Excellency, whether any other deduction be fairly inferrible from the premises, than that the General Government agreed with the people of Ohio that, if Congress should thereafter assent to it, the boundary in question might, at a time then future, be altered in the manner suggested by the framers of that constitution; and leaving it still for Congress to act specifically upon such a proposition, when it should thereafter be presented to them.

The strongest aspect in which the question can be fairly presented by those who would favor the pretensions of Ohio, is one in which Congress may be supposed, by adopting the constitution, themselves to speak the language of it. What then may they be supposed to say, other than this, that we (the General Government) agree that in a certain event, the boundary line in question may be altered, provided Congress shall agree to such alteration, whenever afterward such proposition shall be made. Such a deduction from the premises assumed, I beg leave to suggest as the true one. But there are other considerations and of a more general nature, and which would not be deemed the less applicable, if the alteration contended for had rested on words of positive import. The framers of that constitution were certainly incompetent to make any positive alteration in the boundaries previously defined. The act of Congress of the 3d April, 1802, which was the substantum of all their authority-which alone sustained the political fabric which they erected, expressly circumscribed them. In whatsoever respect they may have transcended their powers, in so far their acts must have been merely void. Nor could it have required an affirmative act of Congress to make them more so. Is it fair, then, to presume from the absolute silence of Congress concerning this subject, (whether the proposed alteration, were in its terms, absolute or merely conditional) that therefore they assented to the specific alteration, thus without previous authority exhibited in this fundamental law of the State? Had that constitution contained any other absurd or void proposition, as for example, had it proposed to extend the sovereign power of the State so far as to comprehend a part of Maine or Virginia, would such void act have acquired validity upon the admission of the State, because Congress should not have taken notice of such void proposition?

It will not have escaped the observation of your Excellency, that Congress have not by any positive legislative act, expressly avowed their assent to any part of the constitution of Ohio. Can such assent then be inferrible in regard to any proposition contained in it, except in regard to such as, by the constitution of the United States, it is imperatively made the duty of Congress to act upon,

upon the admission into the Union of any new State? It may be conceded, that upon a view of the leading features of that constitution, Congress have assented to the proposition, that the Government of Ohio is Republican, but that the rest of the principles contained in it, not requiring the sanction of Congress, must rest for their validity upon their own intrinsic and respective merits; otherwise, all responsibility for their moral and political correctness becomes shifted from the people of Ohio; the whole instrument becomes the act of Congress; and consequently cannot be altered but by the assent of that body-a result which I feel confident your Excellency would reject.

It is made, by the constitution of the United States, the duty of Congress to guarantee to every new State a republican form of government. With a particular reference to this topic, I would admit the legal inference from the transaction to be, that Congress examined and were satisfied with the form of government adopted: they assented to it. But what legal necessity was imposed upon that body to examine further; to travel through all its detailed provisions dissenting from what they did not approve, judicially declaring null that which of itself had no validity, and approving and giving validity to that they might think morally and politically correct? And if no such legal necessity existed for the act, why is such examination and assent presumed ?

A reference to the proceedings of Congress, however, will show that the particular provision in the constitution of Ohio, to which allusion is made, did not pass totally unobserved. The constitution of Ohio was referred to a very respectable committee of the House of Representatives. That committee made a long report upon it, which, so far as it regarded the suggested contingent alteration of boundaries, was accepted by that body, and the sentiment contained in the report, and so accepted was, that as the suggested alteration was not submitted in the shape of a distinct proposition by any competent authority for approval, or disapproval, it was not necessary nor expedient for Congress then to act upon it at all; thus expressly excluding the inference contended for by the authorities of Ohio. (See report of Com. 2d Session, 7th Con. page 327-346.)

And I beg leave further to solicit your Excellency's attention to the important fact, that the claim set up by Ohio is opposed by one uniform course of congressional legislation, commencing with the ordinance, of 1787, and extending to a period long subsequent to the admission of the State of Ohio.

The ordinance of Congress evidently contemplates a line due east from the south extreme of Lake Michigan, as the true and immutable boundary of the State, to be formed in the eastern division of the North-Western Territory. The act of 1802 expressly es