Washington sentinel., 1854-07-19
Wasbingtnn ssntimsl,
TIE MEXICAN TREATY.
SPEECH OF HON. G. 5. HOUsTOl

Inc house Delng IN the Commlttee OF the
Whole on the state Of the Union
Mr.. HOUSTON said:
propose, Mr.. Chairman, to occupy an hour
this morning in submitting to this committee
the views / entertain on the points presented
in the discussion of the hill now under consid,
Grafton. And that there may be no misunder-
standing of my position as to the rights and
privileges of the House Of Representatives, and
its constitutional authority to actupon treaties,
the extent of that authority to read and adopt
as containing my sentiments, this resolution:
''Resolpea, That il being declared by the second
section of the second article OF The Constitution.
that the President shall have power. by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate, 10 make
treaties. provided twolhrds OF the Senators pres
ent concur the House of Representatives do moi
claim any agency in making treaties; but, that
when treaty stipulaes regulations on any of The
subjects submitted by the Constitution TO the
power of Congress, II must depend for its execu-
ton, as 10 such siipuations, on a law or laws, 10
he passed by Congress. And il is the constitu-
tional right and duty Of the House of Representa-
tives, in all such cases, 10 deliberate on the expe
diency or inexpediency Of carrying such treaty
into effect, and 10 determine and act thereon as
IN their Judgment may be most conducive TO the
public good
Mr.. Chairman, that is the resolution which
was adopted by the House Of Representatives
in l796-after long and very able debate on
the British treaty, and after General Washing
ton, who was then President of the United
States, had refused to communicate to the
House the correspondence which led to its for
nation, and which the House had, by its reso-
luton, previously called for.
Before, however, enter into discussion of
the merits of the proposition, must be per.
mitted to notice briefly matter which regard
ms preliminary TO the main subject, and which.
think, was most unfortunately (for the actors
in it) brought into this discussion at so ad.
vanced stage of our proceedings on this bill.
Two gentlemen from New York, Mr.. HAVEN
and Mr.. PEcKHAM, also the gentleman from
Missouri, Mr.. Benton have dwelt with seem
ing earnestness upon the fact that we have not
before us the instructions and correspondence
which transpired between this government and
Mexico, relative to the Gadsden treaty
/ said on yesterday. nd ] repeat it now, that
the proper and legitimate deduction to be drawn
from the course Of those gentlemen is, that they
really did not desire the information they
seemed to seek, for the purpose of aiding them
in coming to a conclusion as to the merits or
dement's Of the treaty; that their judgments
had already been formed and, so far as two
of them are concerned, (Messrs. BESroN and
PEcKHAM, / have no thought they would vote
for this bill, even if they could find no objection
arising ont of the instructions and correspond.
ence and, Mr.. Chairman, draw this deduc-
tion from the fact that the call was not pro.
posed until Monday, after | had moved the
House to resolve itself into committee, for the
purpose of taking up for action this bill. Nor
had / taken any advantage of those gentlemen.
had notified the House some days before thai
/ would on Monday, make that motion. I'm.
der these circumstances, ifthey had desired the
correspondence to enable them to form proper
conclusions, ] have right to suppose they
would have made the call many days before :
they knew when the treaty was sent to this
House, and, rs the message and treaty were
open to the inspection and examination Of mem.
bers, have right to suppose taey knew the
correspondence had not been sent in with it
Why did they not then make their call WHY
sleep upon their rights, when they pretend now
to think the privileges of this House have been
invaded? One of those gentlemen Mr. BES
TON has been long in public life-in Congress
and is presumed to have the largest and most
extensive experience of any member Of this
body; gentleman who not only understands
his own rights, but who seems disposed to take
into his particular charge and guardianship the
rights of the rest of us, as well as the high and
important privileges of this body. would not,
therefore, pass upon him so great an insult as
TO say he did not understand when and how 10
call for the information.
But have special word to say to my friend
from New York, on my right, Mr. HAvEN.l a
gentleman who commands my highest respect.
That gentleman properly understands what is
due to him, and what is due to this body He
knew that the correspondence had not been
furnished, and that we had a right to call for
it, if we thought it necessary to our action
upon this bill, yet he has made no effort to OBJ.
tain it-none whatever. He is a member OF
the Committee Of Ways and Means, was pre-
sent when that committee instructed me TO re-
port this bill to the House. and if he had de.
sired the papers about which he now speaks
with such warmth, it does seem to me he
would have then made the call Why did he
not make t2 / am curious to know why he
allowed that opportunity TO pass, when, If be
had wanted the papers, be could have had
them, regardless Of objections or opposition
from any quarter, or he could have kept out
the bill; mean to say he could have had such
of them as the public interest would have au.
thorized the President to furnish.
Mr.. HAVEN. Will my friend allow me one
word? If my memory serves me right, the
bill asking this appropriation was reported or
Thursday last. When it was reported the gen
tleman from Missouri Mr.. BEYToS1 got the
floor, and informed the House that he was mo-
prepared then, but he desired to raise ques
ton of privilege and think he expressed 8
desire to see the correspondence connected
with this treaty. / do say in addition what
ever the gentleman from Missouri Mr.. BRE
Tox1 said, he gave notice of his intention Il
raise ana argue this question Of privilege be
fore the House, and Monday last was the first
day when it was in order for any one--for the
gentlemen from Missouri, myself, or any ont
else--to move a suspension of the rules, il
order to submit resolution calling for this in
formation.
Mr.. HOUSTON. No, sir; the gentleman i
mistaken. 1t was no more in order to snbmi
such resolution on Monday than it was tn,
day the treaty was sent to the House, or th'
day the bill was reported. On, either day th,
consent Of the House had TO be asked, the onl,
difference being that on Mondays it is in orde
TO suspend the rules, il consent could not b.
had. But at the time the resolution was pro
posed. motion to suspend the rules was pend
ing, and cnother motion of the same characte