The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-01-05


moro patriotic or more familiar with the facts,
than they were?
The President appears not to have possessed
the proper degreee of information on this sub
| ject | do not believe that he or bis Cabinet
can have examined it with that care or atten-
ton which the Courts bestowed upon it. Isay
this for the reason that he states in his message
that "this claim is believed to rest on the
obligations imposed by our eristing treaty with
Spaino In what treaty. La what article of any
treaty! The reoort Of former committee of
this House insisted that the 9Th, 9th or 9th
articles Of our treaty with Spain, of 1895, i'm
posed upon US that duty. The committee did
not know in lOhich article nor in which clause
of either article such obligation could be
found The Supreme Court however, as
have already remarked looked very carefully
through that treaty, and all other treaties be-
tween Spain and the United States, and upon
solemn consideration declared that no such
duty existed under that or any other treaty,
That Court, sir, was composed of nine able
Judges, learned in the law; they had listened
to the most eminent counsel of the United
States, and after full elaboration, were clearly
| of opinion that no such obligation existed un-
der any treaty. And sir, / have more conf
dence in the opinion of those judges, in relation
TO our treaty stipulations, than have In the
opiHion Of the President
Well sir, the President insists that we are
bound by treaty to pay for the bodies of these
Africans; and wish to say to the Chairman
of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, that when
he draws up his report, hope he win inform
US of the article, the section, and clause, IN
which he finds such obligation? | hope the
gentleman will be specific on this point.
Mr. BAYLY. Ishall be very likely to do that.
Mr.. GIDDNGs. take the gentleman at his
word, and will hold him to his promise.
The 9th article Of our treaty of 1895 stipu-
lates, that "when a ship and merchandise Of
either nation shall be rescued out of the hands
of pirates or robbers, it shall be delivered oyor
to the owner, on sufficient proof" Now, the
Court said, in order to bring the law within
that article it must be shown that the negroes
were merchandise" and had been rescued out
of the hands of pirates or robbers; neither of
which could be true; for it had been clearly
proved, and was admitted by the attorney for
the United States upon the record, that the
negroes were Africans recently imported, and
therefore freemen and not slaves; and even in
slavehoiding language could not be regarded
as merchandise.
) Secondly, that being freemen, and not slaves,
they had perfect right by the laws of Nature
and of Natures God, to their liberty Yet, in
opposition to these plain dictates of our judg-
ment, and in defiance of that branch of Gov
eminent which, by the Constitution, is autho-
rized to give construction TO our treaty stipula-
tons the President insists that we are obligated
to pay these slave dealers for the blood and
bones and sinews of those freemen.
|, sir, as an humble member of this body and
a Representative of the People, protest against
this disrespect which the President manifests
towards that coordinate branch of Govern
ment. Il is more than disrespectful for him
thus publicly in his message before the world,
to deny the accuracy of that decision of the
Supreme Court, and to call on US to reverse it.
Nor does it become members Of this body to
sit in silence when the Executive thus attempts
to overthrow the official action Of the Judiciary
IL is surely becoming each branch of Govern
ment to keep within Its constitutional sphere.
1t would be as excusable in US to withhold
appropriations to pay officers of the Presidents
appointment, whom we deem unworthy and
thus control the Executive action by compel
ling him to make such appointments as we ap-
prove as it would be to interfere with the
solemn decisions Of the Supreme Court. 1t
would be as proper for US, by our votes here, to
express our contempt for any act of the Execu-
tive within his exclusive jurisdiction, as it is
for the President to treat decision of the Ju-
dioial branch of Government with disrespect.
Sir the President has his constitutional
sphere of duties; while he confines himself to
that sphere we are bound to respect his acts
The Judiciary has also its constitutional sphere
of action, and is to be respected while acting
therein. | will not consent to interfere with
sither nor will | consent that either shall IL
terfere with our duties and when the Presi-
dent asks US to reverse the decisions Of the SUI
preme Court, will repudiate his suggestion.
We are compelled TO take this position. If
the decision of tho Court be correct, we shall
violate the Constitution by complying with his
recommendation to pay those slave dealers for
the loss of their anticipated speculatlons in
human flesh. We can, therefore, only comply
with the Presidents accommodation by pro-
nouncing the decision Of the Judiciary CHROME
Gus, that the judges are incOm petent 70 the
duties imposed upon them; and by saying to
the world that we will correct the errors of
that branch Of Government the Constitution
to the contrary notwithstanding.
But, in order to induce us to grant this ap-
preparation, the President informs US that "its
justice was admitted in our diplomatic CORES
pondence with the Spanish Government, as early
as 1S47." And does the President suppose Us
sent here to carry out the views of Secretary
of State? Was such Secretary authorized to
speak for us ITO commit the nation to the.
payment of these Spanish pirates, for the blood
and bones of freemen whom they were unable
to enslave?
Mr.. Chairman, | am frank to say that
am dissatisfied with this suggestion of the Pres
ident. In 1910 and 1841 this claim passed
through all the various courts, and was fully
heard, considered, and passed upon, and by
them declared to he unfounded and unjust
In 1S47 Secretary Of State, endeavoring to
subvert the power and influence of the Judici-
airy, In his official correspondence with a
foreign Power admits this claim to be Just
which the Supreme Court had sOlemnly decided
unjust ; thereby apparently bringing con-
tempt upon the Judiciary for maintaining what
they regarded as the law of nations, the Con-
stitutiOn of our country, and the rights of hu-
mainly. And that disreputable act of the
Secretary of State is quoted as an authority to
guide the independent Representatives of this
body in the discharge of their duties Sir,
with my whole soul repudiate the PROPOSE
ton. Why, sir, does the President believe the
Secretary of State in SAT really constituted the
brains of this House? Was he authorized to
think for us! have thousands of constituents
who are not beneath that Secretary of State in
their estimate ofmoral and political duty; and
hesitate notin saying that not one of them of any
party, would advise me to sustain this claim.
Nay, sir, they would condemn mo for such vote
| am responsible to them, and not to a pOliti-
cally repudiated Secretary of State, for my
vote. Those constituents are the depositaries
of power. They have a right to demand that
| shall carry out their views; bA- that Secre-
sary of State has no right even to ask an ex-
PLANTATION of any vote which may give
Again, the President says that this claim hes
been reported upon favorably by committees in
both Houses of Congress Well, sir, we are
not sworn to act in accordance with the report