PROCEEDINGS IN CONGRESS

The movement in Congress for the admission of Wisconsin to statehood was initiated on January 9, 1846, when Morgan L. Martin, territorial delegate from Wisconsin, gave notice of motion for leave to introduce a bill to enable the people of Wisconsin to form a constitution and state government, and for the admission of such state into the Union.28 Four days later the bill in question was introduced, twice read, and referred to the committee on territories.29 On May 11, 1846, Stephen A. Douglas reported an amendatory bill on the subject, which was committed.30 Four weeks later (June 8) the bill to enable the people of Wisconsin Territory to form a constitution and state government and for its admission into the Union was taken up in the House in committee of the whole. A debate ensued, which is but briefly reported in the Congressional Globe,31 and the bill was reported to the House. On the following day the bill, slightly amended, passed the House ;32 the next day (June 10) a motion to reconsider its passage being before the House, an important debate ensued. Rockwell of Connecticut informed the House that Martin, the delegate from Wisconsin, had procured the insertion of a proviso in the bill which the House, on being apprised of its presence, would never sanction. He then laid the objectionable matter before the body, which proceeded with great unanimity to strike it out and then, over Martin's protest, to pass the bill.33 It was 2 Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 171; House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 213.

"Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 196; House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 253.

30 Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 789; House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 782.

31 Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 941; House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 921.

32 Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 949-50; House Journal, 29 Cong.. 1 sess., 931.

33 Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 925-53; House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 936-38.

received in the Senate June 11, and by that body referred to the committee on territories.34 Four weeks later (July 9) this committee reported the House bill back to the Senate unamended; four weeks later still (August 5) the Senate took up the bill for consideration, considered it as in committee of the whole, ordered it to a third reading, and passed it without amendment.35 On August 6 the bill was signed by the speaker of the House and by the vice president,36 and on the same day it became a law through receiving the signature of the president of the United States.37

HOUSE DEBATE, JUNE 8, 184638

The bill to enable the people of the territory of Wisconsin to form a constitution and state government, and for the admission of such state into the Union, was then taken up.

A debate here sprung up, in which Messrs. Dromgoole and Douglas were the chief combatants, but in which Messrs. Vinton and Thurman also took part. It turned on the question, whether the Ordinance of 1787 was or was not obligatory on Congress, in that part of it which restricted the number of states to be formed out of the Northwest Territory to the number of five. It was contended, on the one hand, that it did bind Congress, because Congress had accepted the cession from Virginia with that condition in it. It was maintained, on the other hand, that other states also claimed the territory, and also ceded it, and that, in their deeds of cession, no such condition was found; that Virginia had no more right to bind [the] United States than they had; that

"Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 958; Senate Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 340-41.

35

Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 1194; House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 1229; Senate Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 482.

"House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 1242; Senate Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 489.

"House Journal, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 1256. The act is in U. S. Statutes at Large, IX, 56-58.

» Reprinted from the Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 941.

it was doubtful whether the territory belonged to Virginia at all, or at least whether she had a better title to it than the other states which claimed it; and finally, that, whether the deed of cession had or had not once been binding, it was superseded and virtually annulled as to the restriction of new states by the clause in the Constitution which allowed Congress to admit new states into the Union, without any restriction as to number or size.

HOUSE DEBATE, JUNE 9, 184639

The bill to enable the people of Wisconsin Territory to form a constitution and state government, and for the admission of such state into the Union, was next taken up.

The amendments adopted in committee of the whole were read and concurred in.

Mr. McClelland moved an amendment, which, he stated, had been agreed upon between the members of the state of Michigan and the delegate of Wisconsin, to that part of the first section which defines the boundaries of the new state.

Mr. McClelland also moved to amend the bill by inserting therein a new section, as the second section of the bill, as follows:

"That the lands hereby granted shall not be conveyed or disposed of by said territory, or by any state to be formed by the same, except as said improvement shall progress; that is, the said territory or state may sell so much of said lands as shall produce the sum of $30,000, and then the sales shall cease, until the governor of said territory or state shall certify the fact to the president of the United States that one-half of said sum has been expended upon said improvement, when the said territory or state may sell and convey a quantity of the residue of said land sufficient to replace the amount expended; and thus the sales shall progress as the proceeds thereof shall be expended, and the fact of such expenditure shall be certified as aforesaid."

39

Reprinted from the Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 949-50.

After some conversation, both the amendments moved by Mr. McClelland were agreed to.

The other amendments reported from the committee of the whole were read and concurred in, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time. And being engrossed, it was forthwith read the third time and passed.

At a subsequent period of the day's session, a motion was made by Mr. Rockwell, of Connecticut, that the House reconsider the vote by which this bill was passed. The motion was entered and laid over, to be hereafter considered.

HOUSE DEBATE, JUNE 10, 184640

Mr. John A. Rockwell rose and called up the motion submitted by him yesterday to reconsider the vote by which the House had passed the bill "to enable the people of Wisconsin to form a constitution and state government, and for the admission of such state into the Union."

Mr. Brinkerhoff claimed that he had the floor, and that his motion had the priority.

The Speaker said it had been usual to take up a motion to reconsider (which was a privileged motion) in preference to any other business.

Mr. Hoge moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The motion was not entertained, because the floor was the property of Mr. John A. Rockwell, who placed his motion on the ground that a proviso inserted in the bill on motion of the delegate from Wisconsin contained provisions and gave a power to the convention of Wisconsin of which the House had not been aware, and which, when understood, it never would sanction. The proviso, as worded, left it discretionary with the convention to fix such boundaries to the new state on the north and west as it should deem expedient; and the phraseology was so loose and undefined that the convention might include the whole of the residue of the

Reprinted from the Congressional Globe, 29 Cong., 1 sess., 952-53.

Northwestern Territory within the state of Wisconsin. The terms employed were ambiguous. They might mean either that the convention might take the whole territory of Wisconsin, or they might take elsewhere territory equal to it in size. They might take the whole bank of the Mississippi northwardly, or they might bound the state by straight lines, selecting the best land where they pleased, and leaving out the residue. This would certainly be contrary to the intent of the committee on territories, as well as to the understanding of nine-tenths of the members of the House.

Mr. R. had no desire improperly to limit the new state. He did not wish to confine her within narrow limits, but, on the contrary, thought it desirable that her boundaries should be ample; yet he thought that the remarks of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Vinton) had great force, and were entitled to deep consideration. The assigning to these new states territories disproportionately large would be eminently injurious both to them and to the Union at large. Mr. R. had not opposed any of the just claims of Wisconsin. He had voted in favor of all such accommodations as she had asked for in the way of roads and harbors; but there ought to be some limit to this compliance, and especially as to the extent of territory. He should follow his motion for reconsideration with another to recommit the bill, with instructions that the proviso be stricken out.

Mr. Thurman entirely coincided with the views which had just been expressed by the gentleman from Connecticut. He, too, thought that the proviso ought to be stricken out. The bill, as it stood, gave permission to the convention of Wisconsin to make a new state which should contain 68,000 square miles. Had the House any idea of conferring a power of this kind? Would it assent to the creation of a new state with a territory of 68,000 square miles? He hoped not. And he trusted that no gentleman would be influenced by the idea that he was compelled to do this by the Ordinance of '87. That ordinance required no such thing, its power in that respect having been superseded by the Constitution. We had