The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-08-29

OF the laws is obstructed The words mean no more
than that where the civil power is inadequate, mill
tary power may be employed.
The gentleman from Georgia who addressed the
committee yesterday, Mr.. TooMBs) read some cx-
tracts from message of General jackson in 1892,
TO show, that in the case of the difficulties with
South Carolina, the President did not think that the
act of 1895 conferred the requisite power. ! have
| not had an opportunity To refer TO that message,
and do not know what particular defect the Pres
ident supposed TO exist in the act referred to- lie
speaks, as understood the gentleman III reading,
OF some slight notifications being necessary. can
well imagine, in such an emergency, necessity in
various respects for additional legislation. The
message of General Jackson related to the act of
1895, which provides for calling forth the militia,
and his remarks may have applied TO that branch
of the public service, and not to the army.*
But however that may be, ii is worthy Of obser-
walton, that the Constitution makes marked dis
tncton between the employment of the militia
and the employment OF the army and navy for the
purpose OF executing the laws. The Constitution
provides that Congress shall have power to pro-
vide for calling forth the militia to execute the
laws OF the Union, suppress insurrections, and re-
pei invasions;" but it is nowhere provided that
| they shall have power to authorize the employ
ment of the army navy for such purposes. Why
this difference? May it not have been because it
was supposed that the military power, properly
and exclusively belonging to the United States,
was applicable to those purposes without special
| that the executive power shall be vested in the
President, and that she shall take that the
laws be faithfully executed )" and it coniers upon
him the command of the army and navy. The ex-
ecution of the laws implies the exercise OF force
here the power to execute Ia given, and the force
| requisite Is also given. A thing ID commanded to
| be done, and the means are given TO do 1t; may
the be employed for the attainment of the
| end Suppose that what the Constitution and the
treaty with Mexico together contain were in single
law suppose that il was provided in such law that
| the inhabitants of New Mexico should be protected
in their liberty, property, and religion that the
President should have and that should be
his duty, To that this law was faithfully
ted and that an armed force was placed at his
command could he not use that force for the pur-
pose designated! If Congress pass law declar-
ing war with foreign nation, may not the Presi-
dent use the army TO execute that law If SO, why
not 10 execute any other law!
Ii Is not denied that the army may be constitu-
lionaly employed to execute domestic laws as
well as to carry on war. The gentleman from
Virginia (Mr SEppoN) denies that il can be en-
poyed against State OF the Union; the gentlemen
from Georgia (Messrs. STEPHENS and TooMBs)
contend that il cannot be 80 employed, under the
acts OF Congress, except in aid of judicial process
but none deny that such employment Of the mill
tary power OF the Union is in accordance with the
Constitution. But if the President may not by
virtue OF the powers vested III him by the Constitu
ton, employ the army and navy to execute the
laws, whence do Congress derive the power to au
horize him to dos so? All the power given to them is to
ralse and support armies, - "to provide and main
tam navy and 'to make rules for the govern
ment and regulation of the land and naval forces"
II seems TO have been taken for granted that the
force OF the nation might be employed to give effect
To the will of the nation, and that the powers CON
icrred upon the President rendered any special au
thorizaton by Congress unnecessary. These views
may be novel, and if so, unsound 1t is not in
tended to deny that Congress may limit and regu-
late the use of the army for the purposes referred
to- My suggestion goes no further than this-that
where Congress command thing TO be done re-
curing, or that may require, the exercise of force
and place an armed force at the disposal of the
President, he may, under the power vested in him
by the Constitution, the force they give him to
accomplish what they have commanded him to do
But whether this be not is not material in the
present case, since the requisite powers have been
clearly conferred upon the President, as have
deavored 10 show, by the acts OF 1895 and 1907.
Another objection Of understand him) OF the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. STEPHESs) is, that
this treaty is not now the law of the land; that it
cannot become the law of the land until Congress
shall pass the acts necessary to enforce it.
Mr.. STEPHENS. hold that the obligation of the
treaty rests upon the Government of the United
States; not on one of its departments only, but up
on all-lcgislative, executive, and judicial con
Jointly; and until the law ma king power shall de-
line the rights under the treaty, and the judiciary
shall pass upon them, II is not for the Executive to
| execute it.
Mr.. DUER. The Constitution declares that trea
ties made under the authority of the United States
shall be the supreme law of the land; il uses the
same language precisely with respect to treaties
and acts of Congress, and can difference be-
] tween the power of the President in one case and
III 10 Ntldl III cases Ut ca
ties may require the action of Congress before they
| can have effect. treaty may stpuate for what
II Is beyond the treaty making power TO perform.
In such case II Is prOmissory merely aud binds the
! faith OF the Government. But far as a treaty
executes ITSELF and requires the action of no other
department OF the Government TO give il effect, il
Is as binding as an act Of Congress. The gentle
man asks, II treaty promise TO pay money, can
the President put hs hands into the treasury and
take 1t OUT No, certainly not; because the power
To appropriate money is exclusively in Con gress.
But this Is not such case; there is defect here
/ IN the treaty making power. We may certainly
regulate by treaty the acquisition Of that which we
/ acquire by treaty. If We may by treaty acquire
] sovereignty over people, we may, by the same
treaty, place limitations on that sovereignty; we
may supulate 10 leave them their property or their
religion. To give full effect to what we have prom
iced to these people, do not dispute that egisla-
| ton IL necessary. We have promised that they
shall come into the Union, and that will require a
| law. Legislation, too, Is requisite to secure to
them that protection which, in the mean time, has
! been guaranteed But when tile treaty SAYS that
! they "sball be maintained and protected in the
Tree enjoyment OF their liberty and property, and
secured In the free exercise Of their religion, -
these words have certainly an operation per Sc;
they would be operative in an act Of Congress;
and 80 Tar az they arc operative, act Of Congress
re-enacting them would give them no additional
Mr.. WooDwARD here made some remarks, which
were not heard by the reporter.
Mr.. DUER. ] am coming to that will come TO
~ now. bOw does the extension Of the laws Of
Texas over the Cedcd territory impair the rights
guaranteed TO the inhabitants by the treaty. ''Are
the lave Of Texas," says the gentleman from cor
gia, (Mr. TooABs,) "inconsstcnt with Hbcrtyy''
! answer, NO--not with the liberty Of Texans; but
the extension of those laws over persons not sub
JcCt to them is inconsistent with the liberties OF
those over whom Jurisdiction is thus usurpcd
The following IA the passage in the message Of
General Jackson referred to by the gentleman from
Georgia.
at is believed that there" (rcforring 10 certain
measures before rccOmmendcd) would prove ade-
quate unless the military iUrccs Of the State Of
south Carolina, authorized by the act Of the Legis
lature, should be actually embodied and called out
IN aid Of their proceedings and Of the provisions Of
the ordinance generally. Even in that case, how
ever, II - believed that will be necessary
than a few notifications Of il terms 10 adapt the
act Of 1895 to the present emergency, "a by that
act the provisions OF the law Of 1872 were accom-
mOdatcd to the crisis then existing"
The fifth section of the act Of March ID, 1893,
commonly called The Force biu, which was passed
| in pursuance Of the Presidents recommendation,
! provided that Whenever the President of the
United States shall be officially informed" &C. that
any law or laws of the United States, the
ton thereof, or IF any process from Tie courts Of
the United Staies IL obstruCtcd by the employ
/ of military mr. ~ ms ptlter fnl