The Woodstock age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1844-1845, 1845-03-20

l at all. The appointments were made BY
the President, though the Senate was re
CURED to approve them, their concurrence
: being resorled TO only for greater securi
: 'y, All these were executive powers; ant
the real contest was, whether the arm o
executive power at the other end of the
avenue should by mere construction be
, suffered to defeatsth the power of the legis.
lative department.
Senatorial jealousy need not be excited
as this body was to act whether territory
be admitted by treaty or by Congress, s.
And |, forone, would scorn to seek to OBJ
tain power in the first case by mere con.
struction, in order to destroy an express
power IN the other case, given by the peo,
pie and the States to the more immediate
representatives Of the former.
will treat the arguments of gentlemen
on the other side with fairness. | will
meet them in the teeth, and not dodge or
finch from any position. They insisted
that the constitution had con fded the treat
y-making power to the President of the u
nIted States, with the advice and consent
Of two-lhirds Of the Senate. Very well;
had this ever been denied by US? Gentle
men were fighting with wind-mlIs. He
(Mr W )and his friends had never denied it.
He had before him the famous resolution Of
MIR Madison in l70G. These had ever
been the guide Of the party to which he
belonged; and they were so now, lie
would take the liberty Of reading a part:
"Res0Ired, That it being declared by
the second section of the second article Ct
the constitution that the President shall
have power, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate, to make treaties,
provided two-thirds of the senators present
concur the House of Representatives
does not claim any agency i'll making treat
les" &c.
Gentlemen said that the House of Rep
resentatves could not ra,iiy treaty; and
who denied that The friends Of annex
alton left the ratification or rejection to
The Senate. But next it was insisted tina,
the treaty which the Senate had refused to
ratify was sent to the House. | will re-
mind you Of an important difference be-
tween the treaty as submitted to the Senate
and the joint resolution now proposed tor
adoption. 1t was by the treaty proposed
to annex Texas as TERRITORY; now it was
proposed to admit Texas as a State. 1t
never had been proposed to admit State
by the treaty power The treaty was to
obtain it as Territory; and even then it
was held that, five got the territory first,
still the State must be admitted by Con-
gress, and Congress alone. We did not
now undertake to ratiiy treaty. The
treaty had been repitudated and its sub
lect matter, the getting Of Texas mere
y as a Territory. The Senate was nav
asked to act with the House under
another and substantive power in the
constitution. Last session they had been
invoked to act under the treaty-making
power alone, and its incidents This was
the broad distinction The gentleman
from Virginia, therefore, took nothing by
saying that the House of Representatives
could not ratify a treaty. The power now
to be exercised was different in essence as
well as in form, But why did be not tell
us wha, topics the treaty power was eX
pressed, in the constitution, to act on? |
would ask this question: Could the treaty
making power by mere implication take a
way from Congress an express grant made
to Congress alone in the constitution? ! |
would appeal to the gentleman from Viz
gina MIR Archer what express grant
the constitution contained to the treaty
making power either to buy territory or
admit a State! The gentleman could show
none, while we could show such a one to
Congress to admit States. Thus the at
tempt is made indirectly and stealthily, to
strip Congress Of this express grant, in
class of cases which come plainly within
its language, and, as will be shown ere
long, within its spirit also.
The report objects to this clause being
considered as comforting such large author
ity because it is so short---it is IN so few
words. Let me ask the honorable chair
man Oft the committee, Mr. Archer how
long is the section which gives the treaty
making power to the PrdsIdenH and how
many express grants are there in that
clause? 1t was before him. "The Plesi-
dent shall have power, by and with the ad-
vice and consent of the Senate, to make
treaties" Just two and half liues!-
Where was the express grant in it to bring
in State, or even territory! Upon what
did he found that authority? This merely
conferred the power to make treaties, Bat
treaties upon what! that was the question.
On looking into the report, he saw that,
after wandering over the whole constitution
no express object as specified, and mere
inference was that this power could be ex-
arcised upon all matters connected with
rhe ~ cral welfare" Only let US make
treaties on what conserns the general wei
fare, and the whole clause, which has been
known from the foundation of the govern
nent as nose of wax, would be construed
% give power to do anything by treaty
for the general welfare! But, again: it
happens, unfortunately, that the clause in
relation to the general welfare is a power
,iven to Congress, and not to the Presi-
lent and the Senate. Congress shall