New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-12-20
lioypAY EvESISG.
Hon ALERT GALl.rt,.

NEw-YoRK, Dec. 18th. lcii-
DEAR SRI have received your note OIL Fes'et
dsv, asking my opinion respecting me cons'i'ui9Hai
character OF the resolution for anne1lng texas by
legislative act now before Congress. Had not that
resolution been proposed should not have thought
The there could be difference OF opinion on that
subject f.,,a-,I
Government has tho right, by It's sole au!hoitF' ~
ada foreign independent State 10 the Union; aud
hs eyer 6sen of opinion that conditions might oc-
cur in treaty. ratified by the President ant Senate,
such as any binding the United States TO pay sum
oc money, which would require the Tree assent OF
Congress- before such conditions could De carried
into eject But il is unnecessary on THIS occasion
to discuss those questions. That now al issue Is
simply this: In whom Is the power oi "in".ns
treaties vested by the Constitution? The United
S,otes have recognized the independence Ell Texas
and every compact between independent nations Is
The Constitution Of the United States declares
that The President shall have power, by ard with
the advice and consent Of the Senate TO make trea-
ties, provided wo-thirds OF the Senators concur.
This power is not gwen 10 congress ny any |'ause
of the Constitution.
The intended Joint resolution proposes that the
treaty of Annexation between the United States o.
America and the Republic OF Texas, signed on the
18th of April 1874 (which treaty is reclted verbatim
in the resolutcnl shall, by the Senate and HOUSE
Of Representatives in Congress essemnled' DC DC
clared TO he the fundamental law OF union between
the said United States and Texas so soon as the
supreme authority OF the said Republic OF Texas
shall agree 10 the same.
The Senate had refused 10 give IFS consent 10 thf
said treaty. and The resolution declares that 1t shall
nevertheless he made by Congress fundamental
law binding the United States. IL transfers TO
msiority of both Houses OF Congress, with the "p
probation OF the President and TO two-hrds oil botf
| Houses without his appreciation, the power c
making Treaties, which, by the Constitution, wal
expressly and exclusively vested III the Presidrn
with the consent of two-thiids OF the Senate. L
| substitutes for written Constitution which dis
tributes und defines powers, the supremacy, or as l
| is called, the omnipotence of British Parlia
! ment. The resolution is evidently direct and II
| its present shape, an undisguised usurpation o
| power and violation of the Constitution
1t would not be difficult 10 show that II is not les
at war with The spirit thnn with the letter OF tina
sacred instrument; and that the provision which re
auirrs the consent OF two-tbirds OF the Senate, wa
intended as guarantee of the Stntes Rights, ant
10 pro eel the weaker against the abuse OF the treaty
msking power, Invested in hare majority. But TN
case appears TO me clear that would fear TO o5
scure That which is selfevidenr, by adding any argu
ment TO the simple recital OF the constitutional Prov
sion and Of The proposed resolution.
| have the honor 10 b., with high consideration
aud personal regard dear SIR, your most obed!en
ALBERT GALLATlN
DAVID DUDLEY FIELD, E.Q., Ne.Yofk.