Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1845-02-04


Compacts and Treaties, would have been far more
palalable 10 the Wings during The pending OF the
Texas treaty in the Senate chamber last year.
than they are likely TO be now. Indeed, believe
there has not been single Wing member, who
in the recent debate in the House, il he admitted
any power at all, has not contenicd strenuous
IT, that the only Constitutional mode Enumeration
was BY Treaty. But little aiorctime, il was not
So When Mr.. Senator Choale tim took the po-
sition, that Legislation and not Treaty was The
Constitutional mode Of annexation, his admiring
friends were thrown into spasms OF exutaion and
with ravenous gluony lhey ravined down as
delicious morsels, all the sparkling dfoppings OF
his eloquence; but now, alas for human gratitude
they "Iepudiate" and cast from them, with sort
Of loathing and retchiDg, the most vigorous and
racy passage in the whole oratory Of the learned
and accomplished jurist. Hear him
"The Constitution is The language OF the peo-
pie. II is spoken 10 the people. 1t is The record
oflheir will. lis words then are used in the po-
puar sense. Even its professional, technical
and legal language, is employed in the known,
current, usual, professional or technical sense
"Wha were the oompacts then, which accord
ing 10 the received, uniform, general use of publ
csis and historians at the date OF the Constitu-
ton, were denominaled Ifcaties7 They were
such as were made between communities or 60
vernments, which were separate and distinct
rhen The compact was made, and which were 10
remain separate and distinct after il was made,
and DURING THE LIFETIME or THE CONTACT, &c.
Such comPacts were Treaties. They were made
10 regulate the intercourse Of governments, which
lrcre distinct, and were 10 remain distinct
| "But arrangements BY which two distinct 60.
vernments became amalgamated into one, distnc,
from either or by which one government be-
comes absorbed and lost by complete ncorpo-
| ration with another which thus alone survives
the process were not then usua nor ever in the re-
ceived language ofpublic law and of history, demo-
minated TREATIES. Such transactions were and
are called Acrs OF SrRRENDER-AcTs or UNION
ARTICLES OF CONFERENCE.-The CoSsTITU.
TING a GovERSMENT-TnE FORMATION or 4
/ UNION, or the like: But TREATIES THEY ARE NOT
! AND WERE NOT so CALLED.
Now, sirs, that the ordinary and usual sense
in which writers on public law employ the word
! treaties, is that which have ascribed TO it, is
indispuiable, &c, &C. Every where they as
sumo the word 10 be a compact between t,co com.
/ munitieS or Governments-t,ro al its creation
t,ro during IFS existence: a compact not TO make
them oSE-but to enable them 10 have intercourse
| as TWO. II would be to read half library to
verify BY references what your own recollection
Of these studies will am sure, confirm"
II is not all improbable but that this erse and
cosent argument considerably influenced the re-
| lection OF the Texan Treaty. Atall events, the
the same session. record their formal and solemn
assent 10 the general principle laid down-curb-
/ ing within fer narrower bounds, Than these epis-