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

grant 10 ADMIT new STATES, because It was
embraced in so short space, he must tell
onorabl the he chairman Of the committee
that his report covered double, treble the
space Of the whole constitution itself md
that many of the most important grants in
this instrument are in three or four words.
To dtcfarC wGr was one of them, a most
momenlus power; 10 prouide and maintain
Macy was another, costing one-third Of
all our annual expenditure; and 10 raise
ana SUpport armies another, which, with
Its incidents, swallowed up half our whole
revenue.
One of the chief beauties and excellen-
c!es OF that instrument was its surprising
brevity and terseness-lke the Bible itself,
the whole history Of our religion in sin
gle volume. The greatest proof of its
cle0rness and comprehensiyeness was found
III the fact, that, although the country had
been governed by it for half century, it
never had been altered, save in one slight
instance, respecting the election Of Il Pres,
Ident, and one other, in the prohibition 10
receive foreign titles.
Another objection had been urged.
which had about the same weight. Ii
had been said that the clause was hidden
away III an obscure corner-it had not
been put in the forefront Of the constitu-
tlon-it was thrust away to the end of it.
MIR w. denied that it had been hidden,
or that it occupied an obscure place
The clause was found just where it ought
to be, among the arrangements Of the
constitution respecting States.
| will proceed to tell gentlemen, with
the utmost frankness, how understand
the power to be gained in respect to
the subject-matter of treaties. 1t was
not that the treaty-making power had re-
lation to all the interests of the country
which were foreign and exterior. This
distinction had been attempted to be set
up in the position that the legislature had
charge of whatever was domestic, while
the treaty power was charged with all
that was foreign, Almost the whole lcgis-
Iatlve power, the whole general govern
ment almost, had respect to our foreign
relations, and not the treaty.makirg pow
er alone. The constitution contained
several express grants to Congress of
power, the exercise of which expressly
respected our foreign and not our domes-
tic affairs, as these were chiefly left with
the States. What was the pow er to de-
clare war? Was it not power granted
to Congress, and referring to our foreign
relations! We declared no war at home,
when war arose within our own borders
1t was called an Instruction, and Con-
gress was empowered to put it down, but
not by declaration of war. What was
the power given to Congress "to regu-
late foreign commerce." Had that an
aspect alone to our internal concerns -
Did gentlemen claim, that too, exclusive
ly for the treaty-making power when the
constitution expressly confded it to Con-
gress: Was it given entirely to the
President and Senate, though it had ref
erence to our external affairs? How
could any gentleman attempt to maintain
position that all foreign matters be-
longed to treaties, which was contradict
ted by half the express grants in the con-
sttuton! Congress had power 'to Dor
row money!" yet most of our loans
were formerly made abroad; and would
the gentleman place the power to borrow
money exclusively in the President and
Senate on that account? A State might
make compact with a foreign power"
by the assent :of Congress. Would the
gentleman take that power away, also,
and give it to the treaty power? Where
was this to lead? He was sorry to see
this doctrine maintained by gentleman
who had taken his scat at the feet of
Gamaiol. Had Mr. jefferson held such
a doctrine as this? Mr. Jefferson at first
thought that the constitution contained
no power to make treaties or matters
not expressly delegated to the President
and the Senate. Gentlemen will read this
IN his correspondence.
That a certain thing could be done by
treaty in foreign government, was a.
mother rule laid down for the extent Ct
the treaty power here. But that was no
rule for us, This was not primary
government; it was government only of
delegated powers from other governments
and the people Would the gentleman
do that by the treaty power which the
constitution had not empowered this gov
eminent itself to do, but had reserved
% the people or the States' No, no.
Te treaty power must be limited by those
powers given TO Congress respecting our
ORE ign affairs. The action Of the treaty
power could not be extended to anything
which had not been at all confded to the
general government, nor that had been
delegated to another depart
nent in the government, and which it
could perform without the help of a trea-
y. No matter how common 1t had been
abroad to sell or buy States by treaty
without their consent, or regulate reli-
zion, &C., it could not be done here
Here we had limited governments, and
written constitutions. The custom was
n Europe and Asia for the Emperor or
he King to do everything bv treaty which
lad relation to foreign powers? Did not
he monarchs Of Europe transfer and con-
'eV SiatpS amOnU themselves uit hout cl