The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-10-28
Dolllesttr
From tie [ Bottom Independent Cbronielt.
TO DECIUS.-(coNcLuDED.1

| From tie BoRon) Independent Chronicle.
TO DECIUS.-(coNcLuDED)
will only add concife review of the OBJ
Jections urged againf the act of appropriation
for the purchare of Florida.
The firft and great objection was that the Pre-.
hdent had not recommended an appropriation
for that Object. The objecor, to ufe his own
words, :" would never agree to fuch a meafilre,
beeaufe the money had not been aiked for in
the mefagc. He could not content to lift
upon his own fhoulders, or thofe of the Houfe.
the proper responsibility of the executive"
One aniwer, given in the debate, has been al.
| ready noticed, while we were correcting your
details of the proceedings of Congrefs. 1t was
further anfwered, that this could not be an ar
gument asainit the meafure itfelf, but at mott
a mere punctilio, quefion of comparative ref.
ponhbility, matter of form as it refpetted the
nation, and very little moment to the exc
eutve orlegiilature for each member, by vot-
ing for the bill, each Honfe, by paf1ing il, and
the PrefideRt, by approving and figning it, would
| respectively incur their proper responsibilities.
According to 'he spportionment of powers by
the contribution, the PreGdent has a right, but
10 not under obligation, to recommend fpeciic
meaiures of legiflation. IF he lays before Con-
| grets the facts and documents, lodged in his de-
partment, and necef1ary or proper for their in
formation, he discharges his duty, in that ref.
peet. The objection is not merely unfounded
and UNREASONABLE. 1t involves dangerous prin-
ciple. If it fhould be determined to be impro-
per for the two Houfes to pats bill, without
a previous recommendation of it by the Pref.
| dent, left they fhift upon their own ihouders
the proper Responsibility of the executive, the
| consequence mutt be that the executive will
have the executive origination of legislative nea-
lures principle fsbveriive of the contribution.
al independence IF the les;1...r-
But the objeetor went even further. Neither
the appreciation and Ggnature of the bill by the
Prehdent, nor his previous proportion of it,
would be satisfactory. Without confulting
Congrefs at all, he ought, i. frrns, in the cx-
erclie of his executive powers, to negotiate
the treaty of purchafe, upon his own refponfi-
bility. The Houfe of Representatives would,
IN that cafe, be left free to ratify or annul the
contract" otherwife they could not ssrefufe to
ianetion any treaty entered into under the auf-
pieces of the Legislature, and with powers 70 un-
limited" The fame gentleman once held a
different doctrine. In the cafe of LouiGana, he
advocated and voted for preliminary appro.
priation and whatever differences there may
be in other points, in this the two cafes are
exactly fimilar. His apparent inc oniiftency, it
is true, is no Certain proof that his prefent OPT
nion is wrong. He may have been erroneous
oSioiSt anu INV COHViUCcu Oh DIS cTTOr. Iet
the variation of his own Judgment ought, at
leait, 20 teach him little charity for thofe who
fill think and act, as he once thought and att-
ed. The whole force of the objection confifts
in this that the Legislature, by fuch an appro-
priation, deprive themfclves of all Discretionary
right to refufe their fancton of any treaty what
ever, which may be thus negotiated. The fame
procefs of reafoning, if admifiibe, would prove
that the Prelident and Senate, by appointing an
envoy, are 70 pledged for any treaty; which he
may fgn under fuch appointment, that the
Senate have not right to refufe their af1ent,
nor the PRECEDENT to withhold his ratification.
BY proving too much, the argument appears
to be inconcluhye and falIacious, and need not,
therefore, be conhdered in other points of view.
The principle, which srraeficalIy and / think
correctly adopted by our government, is that
in 70 important tranfaetion as that of acquiring
territory, the executive ought not to proceed
to negotiate for it, until the Legislature has CIV
en- fome expreifion of the fenfe of the govern
ment in favor of the acquihtios. In the two
great cafes, which have occurred, an ACT of
appropriation for the purpofe has been deemed
the proper mode of expecting the Legislative
fenfe.
1t was objected, that by this appropriation
the money was left applicable, at the difcretion
of the executive, "to any extraordinary purpofe
of foreign intercourse whatGoever." This OBJ
je6tcn was urged by gentleman, who in sos
was aleading advocate for the Apr ,priation
which led to the Louifiana treaty, and which
was not more fpecihc than this, but fubRantisl-
ly fmilar, if not precifely in the fame terms.
The majority of Congress, however, entertain.
ing an undiminifhed confidence in the executive,
were not convinced that there would be dan.
ger in pafiing the act on the fame principle with
the former. The reafon why the ACT was ex.
prefIed in fuch general terms is obvious. Al
though the preliminary proceedings, which
specifically defined the Object Of the neafure,
were intended to be kept fecret, until the me-
gociation lhoEld be concluded, yet the aet it.
felf was expected TO be publilhed among the
other acts of the FELTON,.
Il was further objected, that the proportion
contemplated the purchafe of "the Spaniih
territories ealward of the river Mniflipp,"
generally, without excepting that part of Weh
Florida, which has been in difpute between the
two nations, being claimed by the u. s. as
part Of Loufians, coded by Spain TO France and
by France to Ne, and alto claimed aud retained
by Spain, as not included in that cefIion. It
was commended, that to propofe general pur-
chafe under exiting circumstances, "would not
only be compromitment ofthe national honor,
but might fairly be conhdered as furrender,
on our part, of all pretenfons to the dilputed
territory" The purchafe of Louifana was a
MOT fortunate acquhtion. Without eliminating
the value Of the public lands acquired without
taking into account tbs mere iDeftimable advan-