The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1838-03-01
nRMARzs oF sTa. sARLAaD,


M, Hbpard, as modified BY mr.. Bsa, tsing under !.
consideration.
Ma GARLAND said that he concuued entirely IN
opinion with tho gentleman from tennessee nf.
Cfocket.) aud the gentleman from ConnecticuL ne,
Whisdesey) that 100 much Of the time o. the House
had been exhau,tcd in the discussion Of this measure,
which might have been appropriated 70 some oi the
other Important business Of the country ne haa no
design to occupy bot short space ~ the tune o. the
House, IN briefly explaining the reasons upon which ne
should yae 10 arm the Executive with ample powers 70
preserve the neutrality Of the Government growing out
Of the present state OF AFFAIRS
Mr. Garland said that the law Of nations created the
obligations OF neutrality between all nations, in state
OF peace with each other. which 4 was their duty scru-
puously 10 observe was an obligation, the iuhlnent
Of which had the right to exact from all foreign pow
ers. aud it was duty which equally hound TO
perform towards Them and that he could not imagine 10
himself, that there any Government which was
bound to observe this obligation and perform this duty,
that had the power enforce H. II true, that
the constitution contained specific provision upon
this subject yet the Government possessed this as an
appendant--as necessary incidental power, growing
out Of the obligations and duties Of neutrality. The
very fact Of the existence OF the Government imposed
upon il the observance Of all tho obligations and the
Performance Of all the duties required by the law OF ma
TONS and the power Of fulhmeDt necessarily attended
IT, without the necessity Of any specific constitutional
provision expressly granting i. Il this power were not
possessed them indeed there would be in our history,
he anomaly which could not be found in the history OF
any other nation which has exists, OF BEL
Hgerenf eifizeas aud neutral Government The right
Of citizens 10 wage and the observance OF all the
relations of peace by the Government He said that
among the numerous rights growing out Of the relations
Of peace between nations, was their mutual protection
against hostile invasion from the citizens subjects Of
each other and any Government which fails restrain
its citizens subjects from such OF hostile agrees
sion, gives Just Of 10 the Government upon
whom the aggression is committed Ia case OF hostile
aggression from the citizens of this or any other TO
yernment would be vain urge, 10 extenuailon the
want Of power in the Government We would not re-
ceive il as suficieni apology from other powers nor
would il be received from sufficient BY any other
power We might well he told that should not incur the
obligations efnatonal relations, If our Government had
power fhl the obligations and enforce the duties
growing oat OF such relation. The consequences Of
such want Of power would be too serious 10 contem
plate-n the Government has not the power prevent
awless aggression upon others, then, indeed might
few lawless maraudes by committing acts OF hostility
upon any conterninous powers involve the nation IN
all the horrors and calamtes Of war, while the Govern
ment and the people sincerely disposed to observe
and cultivate the relations of peace and amity, so de-
sirable and beneficial 70 the nation Il unneces
sary however discuss the question Of power for il
had been asserted in the act of 1918, and could not
now, with propriety, be questioned The reasons upon
which it is founded too clear
Mr. G. said that until he had, with some attention.
examined into the act Of 1875 he had thought that all
the powers of the government upon that subject had
been exhausted in the enactment Of that law but the
result Of the examination was that the sixth section OF
the act was defective in its preventive remediesthat
while it inflicted punishment for the violation Of our
neutral relations, it failed to arm the executive with
sufficient powers to prevent such violation, and this
was defect and the only which he any neccs-
sy for attempting to correct BY the sixth section Of the
act Of 1918, fine and Imprisonment is inflicted upon any
person who SHALL within the territory and jurisdiction
Of the United States begin set foot provide,
prepare the means for, any military expedition,
enterprise, to be carried on from thence against any
foreign power with whom the United States are at
peace. The punishment imposed by this act is to be
inflicted after the offence has been committed but
gives authority prevent the execution Of such en-
erprse by arrest and seizure The ineciency Of this
remedy would be manifest when ecollected that
before the finding Of indictment, trial and Judgment
could be had under the slow progress Of judicial nves-
tgaton all the mischief intended to be prevented
would be effected, and the punishment OF the guilty
would not satisfy the injury inflicted upon the foreign
power against whom the enterprise or expedition was
foot Preventive remedies BY arrest and seizure
inroducedino the act SO far related such en-
terprises expeditions by sea; and existing crcum
he thought conclusively proved the necessity
OF such remedy in the present case. Mr. Garland
said he thought that the remedies be applied should
be fully adequate to the evils to be corrected-that the
power impaired should be adequate to the fulment Of
the duty TO be performed.
The remedy proposed by the gentleman from Mary
land, (Mr Howard) as modified by the gentleman from
Tennessee tMr Belly Mr. G said he regarded as ade-
quate TO all the purposes Of maintaining neutrality
arising either from the present or any future
and he should feel it his duty to vote for il as preferable
to any which had been offered The bill from the Sc
nate with the amendment which had been adopted he
said he regarded too strongas subectng our citi-
to undue and unnecessary restraints and prohibit
ing that trade in and munitions which was per-
United by existing treaties with Great Britain and Mex
co, and could not therefore vote for it, He thought the
powers conferred upon the Executive by the amend
ment of the gentleman from Maryland, ample and was
unwilling to enlarge them.
Mr. g. said, it true that the 9Th section auho-
rises the President of the United States to call ont suf
hcient military force to prevent the execution Of such
military expedition or enterprise might be set on foot
in violation Of the 9th section Of the act but tia reme-
dy he regarded entirely insufficient from the fact that
before sufficient military force could be called out and
organised, the expedition enterprise might have ef-
fected It's purposes and be placed beyond the reach Of
any preventive remedy. The object now was to arm
the civil authority with sufficient power prevent any
hostile aggression set foot in violation OF the 9Th
section of the Of 1915 SO as to preserve the peace
Of the nation Mr. q. said he thought it was due TO
ourselves for the preservation Of peace-to the world
as manifestation Of our faith and sincerity the OBJ
servance o. all our national obligations and the perform
snce OF all our national duties growing Of our in
ternatona relations that should adopt some system
Of legislation which the observance of these obligations
and the performance of these duties required.
II had been Object d-tothe adoption of such mea-
sure that in its operation might subject to arrest and
seizure the persons and property Of citizens who had
design whatever of violating the provisions Of the law
This, said Mr.. g. true; it might possibly have that
effect yet this substantial argumen, against its
adoption, for there never any adopted for
the suppression punishment Of crime that might not
sometimes, fall upon innocent men; il grew of the
fabiy Of human nature and the uncertainty Of human
testimony and upon this ground no law could, with
proprey be enacted for the punishment Of any crime,
because il might, as had been done, be inflicted upon
innocent persons In cvprocecdings under those sys-
TENS Of laws where 10 actions bail may be of right de-