The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1845-02-21
SPEECH OF MR.. WOODBURY.,
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,
On the Resolution for the .anneration Of Tsras.
.-. (Concluded.)
IN sENArr-FEBRuARY 16, 1916

In confirmation ofthis Mr.. w. went on to inquire
who had the power of making treaties before the
adoption of the present Constitution The Congress
of the Conf liberation. The power then in Con-
gress alone, and expressly. But, he asked did Con-
gress act upon all subjects by treaty Certainly not,
They acted as Legislature till they came to some
thing in our reign relations which could not be
complished without u treaty. How could Congress-
Legislature, for example, deal wi IN the Sultan If
Siam or the Sultan of Muscat or the Emperor Of
Russia, neither of which sovereigns had any Legsla-
ture in their Government In these cases the action
of the two Governments could not be accom- lished
by mutual laws because one side there no LIE.
glslature to make law. The transaction must then
be accomplished by the medium Of treaty, or not at
all. The old Congress, however, were placed under
Restraint IN reference even TO some treaties Some
commercial treaties, for example, could be made
at all, such prohibited certain imporlaIions Here
Is the clause before But how was it here The
treaty power instead Of being conided in an unli-
miied manner to Congress, as was the case in the
Confederation, was taken away from Congress, be-
cause It's exercise by that body would be cumbe some
and Involvement and had been given to the Execu-
tive, checked, however, by requiring the assent of
two-thiTds of the Senate. This change, Mr. w. said
had been made for the sake Of convenience and not
for safety The people surely might safely have
entrusted such a power with their own representa-.
tives, 10 whom war and taxation weI. confded so
largely, as have given IT TO the Executive with two
thirds Of the Senate. When they wanted greater
safety in regard to any power they went to the House
Of Representatives. That had been Patrick Henry's
argument against the Constitution, namely that the
assent Of the House Of Representatives was not made
necessary to the ratification Of treaty. Without
that il was deemed by him unsafe, and some Of the
States actually proposed an amendment in the Con-
.,iiuton 10 that effect And here let him tell gentle
men little piece of history respecting the Hartford
Convention, which he mentinned IN spirit of dis
respect taunt, but - matter Of history that very
Convention recommended the necessity of the assent
Of tvo-thrds Of both Houses to The ratification Of
treaty. How, then was il possible to say that The
clause empowering Congress TO admit new States
unsafe, and hence IL should he so construed as 10
make it, the pr, euement Of territory in all Gases
the exclusive preTogaive Of the king pow
81 2 IL Congress could not admit new States with.
out encounteripg some obstacle in their way which
prevented the further action without treaty, then
indeed they might do II By treaty But in this case
where was such obstacle, and Why wa, the inter.
position Of the treaty power required r. indeed,
Texas should refuse to accept Of the terms proposed
IN this JOINT resolution, and, instead Of coming
STATE, should prefer TO the Union territory
sna not by legislation Of any hind then the treaty.
making power would apply because then the mplics-
ton 10 the Constitution would ARISE but not till then
hats treaty being necessary, The President must