Note 14 — NOTES TO THE PRECEDING LETTERS.

Professor Stuart, in a pamphlet entitled “Conscience and the Constitution,” pp. 78, 9, steps in to defend Mr. Webster’s position that we are bound, by contract with Texas, to admit from her territory, “slave states to the number of four;” and he incidentally refers to and combats my views on this subject.

I respectfully submit to the revered and learned professor a single consideration, which I trust will convince him that I am not in error.

For argument’s sake, admit the contract with Texas to be unimpeachable; although, if it be so, I see not why any one Congress may not absorb and exhaust all the power to admit new states, which the constitution contains, by making contracts for centuries to come, for all the new states that shall be admitted; and for all the applications for admission that shall be rejected. But, admitting the validity of the Texan contract, what does it purport? That “new states,” “not exceeding four,” “may be formed out of the territory thereof.” Those south of 36° 30´, may be slave; that, or those, north of 36° 30´, shall be free; the whole “not exceeding four.” Here, then, is an executory and mutual contract. It is executory; because it is not to be executed at the time of making, but in futuro. It is mutual, because, for the State of Texas, and for the one or more slave states, south of 36° 30´, there are to be one or more free states north of it.

Now, the principle is so clear that I think no one will for a moment dispute it, that when an executory and mutual contract is to be executed, say at four different times, each preceding act of execution must be such as to allow of the ultimate execution of the whole. Neither the first, second, nor third act of execution, must be so executed as to render the fourth impossible. Neither the first, second, nor third act, must be so executed in favor of either of the parties, as to render the execution of the fourth, in favor of the other party, impossible. But if Texas can have “slave states to the number of four,” formed in succession out of her territory, then, as the whole number to be formed is not to exceed “four,” there can be no free state formed, under the alleged contract.

It is not within my knowledge that such an interpretation of this supposed contract was ever suggested by any Texan citizen, or by any southern man. I suppose it to have been advanced, first, by a northern senator; and seconded, first, by a northern divine.