Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-01-27

d udy OF tWO OctOIe, was lOun0Su upon an
act otParliament, passed, as he had un-
derstood. tor the express purpose of ena-
bling the Prince Regent to conform the eX-
sting regulations OF commerce to the trea-
ty which might be made by the Ministers
of the United States and Great Britain. Gs
IN the discussion of the principles of which
they were then engaged. The Order in
Council, Ike the act upon which it was
founded, was to continue in force until six
weeks alter the next sess son Of Parliament
Within these SIX weeks after the NEE ting
OF Parliament, the necessary provision,
VIII, no doubt, be made by the competent
authority in the ordinary mode.
The gentleman from n. Carolina, (Mr
Gaston) had advanced singular opinion,
that by exercising the power Of passing
laws to give eff CT to treaties, you diminish
the responsibility without diminishing the
power of the President and Senate. Mr.
+. could not conceive, how a check upon
the exercise of any authority could dimin-
lSh the responsibility Of the person to whom
1t was granted. 1t was certainly true,
when Congress passed acts according to
the provisions OF a treaty, they declared to
the people, 1t was better to perform the
stlpulatons it contained, than to violate the
faith OF the nation, which had been pledg-
ed by the constitutional authority. But if
Congress, from conviction that the rights
OF the people had been wantony surren-
dered or the national honor furnished by
treaty, should refuse to pass the laws ne
cessary for its execution, the President and
Senate would feel, what they can feel in
no other way, the responsibility under
winch their power is exercised.
1t adbeen said, that treaties are the
laqo Of The hand. Ii is SO printed in the
margin of the article of the constitution to
which the gentleman (Mr. Gaston) had re-
TERED, and 1t seemed to be- taken for gran
TED, that law and treaty were convertible
terms. III this idea is correct, the distinc-
ton taken between acts of appropriation
to pay the expenses of treaties, ami other
legislative acts to carry them into effect, is
unnecessary. The constitution SAYS, that
money shall not be drawn out CT the Trea-
sury unless appropriations are previously
made by law. But treaty being Law.
an appropriation may be made by treaty.
Eut Mr. F. said. the object of that part of
the constitution was, to decli re the supre-
macy OF the constitution. acts made i'm pur-
suaEce thereof, end treaties made or to be
made under the authority of the u. States,
over the constitutions and laws of the
states. The relative force or effect of
treaties and laws was to be collected from
the whole charter /; from the nature and
dependence ofits parts-from the objects
over which treaties and laws severaly op-
crated-and from the intention of the peo-
pie By whom the powers Of making them
were granted-and for whose benefit they
are to be exercised. But Mr.. F. said, the
examination of these topics would REQUIRE
him to enter further into the constitutional
question than he wished or intended to ga.
For the present he would content himself
with the expressio of the general PROPOSE
ton upon the basis of which the bill had
been reported. Wherever a treaty con-
talns any thing Contrary to the constitution,
1t is Void----wherever it contains any
thing Contrary to existing laws, the laws
must be repealed by Congress before the
engagement can be complied with-be-
cause the constitution can be altered only
by the constitutional mode OF amendment.
a law car be repealed only by the autho-
lIty which enacted it. Mr.. +. said, although
the question respecting the propriety of
the amendments made in the committee of
the whole house, was superseded by the
motion of indefinite postponement, he hon
ed to be INDUCED with few observations
IN reply to some suggestions of the gen
tleman from louisiana (Mr. RobcrtSon)
from Virg. (Mr. Tucker,) and from N.
Carolina, (Mr. CASTOR He was not
conscious of having committed any impro-
priety in referring to documents printed bv
order of the Senate. He did not SUPPOSE
information was less valuable in one form
than in another. He had not taken his
construction Of The treaty from the CORES
pondence he had quoted, but from the in
strument itself, and he could not see the
irrationaity or irregularity of referring
to such documents for the confirmation OF
an opinion previously formed.
From the gentleman from ". G.. (Mr.
Gaston) he certainly did not expect cbser-
yations OF the character which had drop
ped from him, a S he had been informed
that they agreed in opinion, upon the CON
structiDn Of that article Of the convention
which had been the source of discussion.
MIR. +. said, he was not induced to offer
the amendments to the committee, by be-
lief that such a construction was advan-
tageous to the United States, bu; simply be
cause he believed it to have been the in
tention of the parties. If the calculation
of advantages was to govern the construc-
ton, the amendments ought not to prevail.
II had been suggested by the gentlemen
from Virginia and Louisiana, that vessels
of the United States bound tn France and
Spain, might reach the port of destination.
and finding bad market might choose to
go to England in search Of a better
Gent emen asked If such vessels were 90 be
| deprived of tie benefits of this treaty.
| Mr.. +. said, he was not able to speak with
pre- -ision aud certainty on this eubiect Inf