The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-07-15


sentatives, Tuesday June II, 1854
The House being Committee of the Whole the state
of the Union
Mr. BOCOCK said
Mr. CHAIRMAN At this late period of the debate, rise
10 sneak on account of the very extraordinary OF
remark which has been pursued by gentlemen who have
to-day engaged in this discussion.
1 regret the course of many. am more particularly
surprised at that of onel aude to the gentleman from
the st Lawrence district Of New York, Mr. PERKINS
That his colleague from the Buffalo district Mr. HAVEN
shou have felt disposed to deal harshly by THIS admins
longs the exed dynasty and has the same love for Gen
Perccs administration that Bourbon has for that OF Louis
Napoleon That his other colleague who has recently spoken
Mr PrcxHAu should array himself with energy and bit
terness against any act however proper or Important OF
our present executive officers only to follow out the
Leading principle which has marked his course on this
Aoor Other gentlemen who have joined with alacrity in
the attack were but acting in their vocation
But had expected better things of the gentleman him.
self have observed his representative course with inter-
est and though have been able to agree with him on
some important subjects yet have always admired the
ankness and cndor OF his bearing and the strong VEN
of practical common that has through his
speeches On this occasion, confess that admire ms
little as approve the conclusion to which lhey
lead him. Let how this question stands what Is
our relation to it, and what reasons are assigned for OPP
posing this bill
treaty has negotiated through the agency of our
minister to Mexico, Mr. Gadsden. The President has ap-
proved and the Senate by twothrs vote has ratified it.
or rather by of amendments the Senate has given
its present shape provides for paying to Mexico IN c
lars and this is bill oappropriae that sum Tor that pur
pose. 1F kH-N
have not been able Mr. Chairman, precisely to agree in
relation to position towards this subject either with
nv talented colleague Mr. MrLsoN, who has recently ad-
dressed the committee, with my friend from South Car
olina M BOycE who entertained us with SO much ab-
ty and learning short time before, with the dstn-
gushed gentleman Mr. BENroN who has led this oppo
siton or indeed with any gentleman who has spoken on
the subject according to my understanding OF the posiohs
which have been taken.
1t has appeared that the right of the House OF Rep
resentatvc in relation to treaties rested on certain CON
stituonal and legal principles which, they could no
be precisely Defined might at least be marked out with
sufficient distinctness make the path of duty plain
The constitution says in treating of the powers OF the
President: He shall have power by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate make treaties provided two
thirds of the senators concur
This is the ay-making authority under the constitu-
tom and to perfect treaty no other consent necessary
The constitution further says that treaties shall be the
preme law Of the land Of IT refers to treaties made
by the authority which itself had marked out-vH the
President and Senate There is nothing doubtful about
this and this plain reading of the constitution is fully cor
roboracd by what occurred in the convention which framed
it. In that body the proper depository OF the treaty
making power subject of anxious attention and in
quiry treaties being compacs between sovereigns, the
smaller States who stood upon their sovereignty were re-
uctant surrender the power to make them The larger
States wished to get that power as much as possible under
their CONTROL because they had the largest interest at stake
As basis reconciliation 1t was at last determined that
the treaty-makng power limited by the terms and pur-
poses of the constitution should be nrusted to the Presi
dent and Senate the smaller States considering that pro-
vision Difference to their sovereignty and the larger ones
regarding the twothrds vote required Of the Senate as
aording them guarantee against danger to their rights
with the wisdom of this determination that fnd
subsequent day. when proposition was made by the State
of Pennsylvania that the House Of Representatives should
be included in the treatymang power it was almost
unanimously voted down of the eleven States present
one only voted for it, and ten agnst it. This should DC
conclusive against the idea that the House of Representa-
ves possessed under circumstances OF parcpa
ton in the treaty making power.
But independent of this very decisive action of the
vcntion, find strong cotemporaneous authority in ht
action of the different State conventions held to adOp4p
reject the constitution The States of Pennsylvan Vr
ginia and North Carolina each earnestly recommended
amendments restricting the extent of the power, and i'm
parting to the House OF Representatives liz cases
particpaton in its exercise These amendments clearly in
dcatc that these States were satisfied that without amend
ments tho constitution did not admit the House of Repre-
sentaves constituting any part Of Me rcaty-maknl
authority The amendments spoken OF were not adopted
that it is also declared that Congress shal
have lay and collect taxes duties mposts and ex
cise to pay the debts &c. and also that no money shal
be drawn from the treasury bI in consequence Of appo
priations made by law and further that AL bills 70
raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representa-
tives" 1t is admitted that money cannot be obtained
pay debt arising under treaty. except by the action
the House Of Representatives. But it does not follow ne
cessay therefore that the treaty is not complete and oh
ligatory till the House acts debt may exist, and be il
every respect obligatory when means are appropriate
to its extinguishment
But gentlemen say that the fact that the House of Repre-
senatives is caedhpon to take legislative action TIN
subject, necessarily gives it "H dscrion' and that
treaty provides that money shall be paid the gentleman
from Tennessee Mr. JONES has expressed the opinion
and in it others have concurred with hiinthat the Hous
Representatives is just free TO refuse the approprato
it free to refuse the most unimporant item in an or
binary appropriation bill | cannot agree to such doc
trinc
II this right exists in the House. it arises whenever h
legislative action is called for and is in respect snbec
modification by any action of the President and Senate
Itis right claimed against the President and Senate le
us test it, then.
fths treaty had been different in its terms if it ha
provided that Mexico should at deliver up the lane
and whatever else she agreed grant to the United State
and that two years after such delivery the United State
should pay to Mexico $4,000 900; II, with such pror
IONS it had been duly ratified and the United States
pursuance Of it, had gotten possession OF all the advantage
accorded 10 them; when the two years had elapsed an
the question had arisen whether the appropriation soul
be made to enable the President TO pay what we ha
agreed to give part, will il he conondcd that "
would be as free to refuse the appropriation
refuse an appropriation TO enlarge the greenhouse
adorn the public grounds? The legislative action
called for in that in this-the only difference b,
tween them being in the time of payment fixed by t
President and Senate 1t perfectly clear that geneme
draw consequences too important from the necessity of
operative action the part Of The House to carry
treaty The action of the courts often necessary TO
ry out law yet it will not be pretended the
in such cases have q full discretion to say that law is il
cxpedicnt and niudicous and therefore must not be ca
ried out They have right to refuse carry out la
duly enacted, If it be unconstitutional, and for no 9TH
To illustrate this further. The constitution pr
vdes that ugtves from service escaping shall be deyerc
up The action of Congress has been found to be
ry for carrying out that clause of the supreme law Do
the necessity of legislative action in that give
House of Representatives full discretion disregard tn
law otherwise according TO its pleasure CONNER
that inquiry TO the gentleman from Virginia Mr.. MLIso