The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1845-03-27

proofs Of his skil snd apsissde for Sots sAm which
sfterwards licd hin 70 the Premiership 81 AnEisod
II uss with this country hss the irsnsfs % osr ooo
siiuttoa were best scQnanepd --Sotofpusiy usuE -
ons Of the regular uesns = sovs.nn .;s,r. "a
u her own sxslaiors, " sshsAa every mn'esyi sea
of cour.s therefore, always prepared " use Inc same
instrument 10 corrupt the Legislators or ministers OF
other nations to accomplish her ends Against susn
iuhuences-w hich wss most likely TO DC esteemed .ne
most eneclual security sssnst cofiup''o', uo ussy
thirds Of the Senate or Congress-, consisting oil The
ma iority Of the House Of Representatives, aud ma
| orty OF the Senate The difference between Two
thirds and ma joriy of the Senate, amongst tho OH
kins States forming the Union, was only six' a"d
| now only nine senators. Which Is tho least cor
ruptble source of power-noe Senators OF the House
| OF Representatives, consisting oil TWO hundred ana
| twenty three mem The trainers OF the Constitution
acted wisely IN placing this great power 10 ooagessi
and they acted justly Ia allowing the people TO con
..si a. The people were certainly .ne parties nos
the i~sst interested In admitting new States into the
Union why then should their voices nol be heard In
the admission The States, as States, are not alone
concerned but the people Of The States are also IN
eresled aud II Is the plain dictate Of night reason,
therefore, that the will OF both, represented IN Con
ress should be required and received on such ques-
uoo. And the policy for success, agrees with the
right No act deeply Affecting the people under our
forms Of Government be satisfactory 10 the Union,
| without their sanction and authority.
But In ORDER IL possible to make this matter clear
er, let descend step hover into the nature and
limits Of the treaty. making power, and Ihe legislative
| power Of Congress.
Gsntemen, In arguing this question, have assumed
two ihings-Hr,l thai all agreement between add
foreign nations are treaties and, secondly, that all
matters adeit,ns foreign nations. are exclusively
| within the scope OF the treaty making power. by
both of these positions, they attempt to show that
| Congress cannot admit Texas into the Union.
Nov, sir, on the hrst OF these two points may
only differ from difference OF meaning IN the terms
We use What Is the meanins OF the term treaty /"
Does II mean a compact OF an agreement between
nations simply think not, for ind the Constilu-
tution amongst is prohibitions TO the States, speaks
IN the same clause of treaties, alliances, conledera
lions, and compsets. Alliances considerations, and
compscts may De made BY treaties but they may also
be made without them. Every treaty may be a com
pact but II does not follow that compact may not
| exist without treaty. A compact may be mad,
| through the legislatures of two countries, which
would certainly be DO treaty. What then Is tres-
yt answer, n Is an agreement or compact made by
troang-that Is, nsgOtiaiton IL treating Is not ro
gu red-f ne EQUATION does not take place-bu two
nations, by reciprocal legislation make agree
meot compact with each oiher-u Is nothing bu
| an agreement or compact and Is no treaty. Nor can
| comprehehd the Distinction which has b. attempt
ed to be drawn, the ground of the public faith be-
ing pledged in treaty, but not exist ng in act II
legislation. Either form OF agreement between ma
! tons, Is equally obligatory; and one, more than
the other involves the public faith. II one nation
stipuates with another IN consideration OF certain
advantages received TO give certain other advantages
for certain specified Tune, Il matters not through
what organs they act-their faith is pledged; and TO
repeal law before the expiration Of the time stipu
lated would be gross breach Of the public faith
the direct Reputation Of treaty II time for is
duration IS stipulated of course law, Ike treaty,
may, at any time be repealed or pat aside. ! con
tend then that compacts not necessarily treaties;
1 an -inU a
as, we do not propose to make treaty. So far as
treating is concerned it has indeed been had ares-
dy. The treaty-makng power, on this very subject,
has exhausted itself 1t has Negotiated, and ascer-
| tanned what terms will be accepted by Texas. We
now propose to effect Union between ourselves and
Texas, and have need of further treating
COLLATION..
Blu, there are compacts and agreements with TO-
reign nations, which exclusively within the scope
ofthe treaty -making power and there compacts
and agreements with foreign nations whice require
the operation of the treaty making power and the
legislation Of Congress; and there compacls and
agreements with foreign nations which and ought
| TO be made by Congress alone. A brief considera-
ton of these different points, may show to which of
these classes the of annexlng Texas to the
| Union belongs.
lay down this proposition: that in all agreements
with foreign nations, which are extra-teuitorial in
their operatioD and which be fully executed by
| the treaty making power itself, the treaty making
| ton. There many interests Of this kind such
as the right Of search at sea-makDg peace-conlra-
band-mutual rendition of prisoners Of war and pro-
perty seized IN war-setlement of boundaries, where
the territory belongs to the nations conractingin
all such cases, the treaty making power has exclusive
| jurisdiction, because the agreements compacts
made executed without the territory of the United
States and the President of the United States, part
Of the trta making power, can fulfil them.
| But when compact or agreement with foreign
nation inter territorial well xtra-territoria,
is municipal as well foreign in It's operation, Con-
gress has right to act, and always has acted, in
rying them into effect although made by the treaty.
making power alone. The corporation of both is
required nd each is independent Of the other in its
| action. In consequences of its international aspects,
the treaty power acts In consequence of its
internal effects, Congress acts The treaty for the
purchase of Louisiana exemplifes the uses, well
the power of both ofthese departments ofgovernment
LOUISIANA could never have been acquired but by the
| treaty making power. That secresy, despatch, and
energy, by negotiation, for wi ch it entrusted to
one man-the President of the United States-was
absolutely necessary in the uncture Of affairs which
then existed. Napoleon had acquired it from Spain,
vet he could not keep it, with the mastery of the
in the hands of his great rival and foe few months
delay, and Great Britain would have seized it. By
tie Teaty-maklng power, it saved u.s. and saved
TO France, in the consideration we pa d. But then
Congress had to Iegsate, because The treaty required
money TO fulfil II, and Congress alone could apiro-
pirate the money of the people. Congress had 10
pass laws authorizing the President 10 axe
OF It, by the military and naval forces of the United
States, and to erect government and to extend the
laws OF The United States it, because all these
were municipal, internal interests and regulations,
beyond the power of the Executive to execute or
control, without the sanction and direction of Con-
gress. Another striking instance, in which both of
these departments of Government co-operated, oc-
CURED under the navigation law of 1914 Congress
passed general law, proposing to all foreign nations
certain terms OF equality and reciprocity in the duties
to be eIaced on the tonnage of vessels the goods
they carried. Great Britain made treaty with US.
substantially accepting these terms but varying some
what from the terms proposed by Congr IS. bill
introduced into Congress modify the tonnage duties
In conformity with toe treaty. and then the de-
bate arose, TO which the gentleman from Massachu.