Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1869-01-20
THE RECIPROCITY TREATY.
Speech of senn,or MorrIII Of Vermont.

WASHINGTON, Jan IA, 1860.
Senator Morrill, obtained the floor after the
business hour to-day and spoke in opposition TO the
reciprocity treaty. Annexed is an abstract Of his
speech -
Mr.. Morrill, in commencing his speech referred
70 the resolutions Of the State Of Vermont upon
the subject saving that they expressed the
opinions Of some Of the ripest statesmen Of the
country in times past. lie expressed his diap-
probation Of reciprocity treaties whereby the
foreign commerce Of the country is regulated BY
the treaty making power instead OF by Congress,
to whom the subject Of foreign trade properlyand
constitutOnally belongs. by the ratification OF
such treaties the House OF Representatives is
forced 10 accept Of q subordinate position and re-
sign some share Of the functions conferred by the
Constitution, in that provision which declares
that all bills for raising revenue shall originate
m the House Of Representatives.
lie remembered that in earlier years the learned
senator at the head OF the Committee on Foreign
| Affairs, Senator Sumner), under the lead Of the
present Secretary Of state, was a robust defender
Of the privileges Of the House in the respect re-
ierred 20, and hoped that he, Of all men, would
not 90 back upon his record. lie proceeded 10
show that the circumstances OF modern nations
did not require that the common benefits deriya-
bic from tmde should be solicited through
| diplomacy as a favor lie thought it might be
assumed rs a sound axiom under the Constitution
OF the United States, that subjects proper for
D W. i-AiAiil hIt not proper lOf NIthNlt-s
Mr.. Morrill, then went Mt length into dsqui-
siton on the constitutional nature Of treaties,
showing that executive power ought 10 be incrcas-
ed in this direction. By the first article section
eight, Of the Constitution it will be found that
COngess-n0t the President and Senate alone
was 10 have the power " to regulate commerce
with foreign nations" If Congress was to have
the power to do this it is clear that it cannot be
done by either the judicial or executive authori-
ty, nor was it the purpose to lodge the power in
any body less responsible than the whole Con-
gress Since the decision in the case of the JAY
treaty and the recent treaty for the purchase Of
Alaska il may perhaps, be considered the settled
doctrine that treaty made by the President, with
the consent of two-thirds Of the Senate, involving
an appropriation, binds the House. or at least
Overwhelmingly urges it, to make the appropria-
ton without stopping 10 consider its justice or
eXpediency, or whether the treaty is good or bad.
Is not that enough Foreign nations, 1t is ar
| gued, can neither interfere with our internal ma
chinery nor know whether our agents exceed their
authority not, and they deal only with the sove-
reign authority regarding the mouth-picce Of
that authority as the authority ITSELF whether 80
/ In point of fact or not such considerations
should inspire great caution about simplifying or
enlarging the jurisdiction of the Senate in the
/ formation of treaties 1t is enough that we con
fine the Senate to its Legitimate and unquestion-
ed functions, but when we step beyond and re-
move subjects Of ordinary legislation by Congress
we justly arouse a suspicion that If we are not
aiming at consolidation, we are removing, step by
| STEP from the popular control OF the people
! Among the admirable checks and balances Of our
system OF government there is none more rever-
enced than that the Senate, but lift attempts to
magnify its office by engroSsing doubtful powers,
/ frcm that moment It's prestige will begin to wane
and its usefulness will he seriously curtailed-
| The question in its whole length and breadth is
| this can the President, with two-thirds of
quorum Of the Senate, repeal laws passed By both
/ branches Of Congress and approved by the Presi-
dent, and at the same time iasten upon the people
an irrepealable law 2 If this cannot be lawfully
done, there is an end of reciprocity treaties
In continuation MIR. Morrill, gave history OF
/ the French and ZOyercin treaties to exhibit in
how far precedents justified the making Of reel
procity treaties. The cesson Of Louisiana, he
| proved, brought us no reciprocal benefit, owing
to the reclamations made by France, and because
any reciprocal concessions made by that country
were 10 cancel large claims made by the United
States. The Prussian treaty, drawn up By Mr..
Wheaton, and highly commended by Calhou
and Others was again and again rejected, not b
a party vote, but upon the ground Of Difference
the constitutional privileges of the House of Rep
resentatiyes, with which the treaty conhicted-
( The first report, penned by q distinguished
statesman of Massachusetts, (Mr Choate) and
reiterated and amplihed in the second report by
Mr.. Archer Of Virginia, declared that
The committee then, not prepared to sanction 80
large innovation on the ancient and uniform practice
in respect Of the department Of Government BY which
duties imports shall be imposed that the Constitu
ton In express terms delegates the power to Congress to
regulate commerce and impose duties and to no other
and that the control Of trade and the functions Of taxing
belong without abridsmcnt or participation, to Con
gress.
After analyzing the terms of the Zollyerein
treaty Mr.. Morrill, said alt is quite apparent
that the American negotiator of the proposed
treaty, however learned and accomplishment other
respects, was sadly deficient in practical knowl-
edge of revenue laws or of the industrial interests
of the United States and without any apprehen-
sion Of the strides these interests destined to
make in the immediate future. Whatever of bud
ding promise there might be in the efforts then
| being made or subsequently made TO establish
manufactures Of worsted, of silk, of linen and
hemp, of wooden and cotton goods made on trllnes
of scythes, saws, files, planes, tish-hooks, lead
pencils, and 50 on TO the the end, or whatever
were the prospects Of American wines, it is quite
certain that il this treaty had been accepted all
| these varied interests now counted by millions,
would have received their death knell, or if not
their advent would have been postponed for gen
Grafton and if the treaty had been in force at
/ the outset of the late rebellion, the Government
of the United States would have been almost par
alyzed, and without the power TO mend its finan-
/ cial condition so far as that then depended upon
receipts for duties upon foreign merchandise. 1t
was found necessary, for revenue purposes, 10
place three or four times the amount of duties up
been done had the Zollyeren treaty been in force,
and under such rates of duty the protection to
! home manufactures has been so great that we
have largely diminished our dependence upon for
eign supplies for silks, worsteds and whole class
es of other manufactures included in the treaty
This only illustrates the extreme inexpediency,
not to say folly, of reciprocity treaties. A great
and growing nation must be left free to act in |
any and all emergencies as its honor and interest
may demand"
Reviewing the complications growing out Of
reciprocity treaties 10 the nation, Mr.. Morrill,
said " 1t will be found that nearly all of our
treaties bind US to extend TO all nations with |
whom We have commercial treaties the same terms
granted to the most favored nation, either with !
or without compensation. Therefore, reciproci-
ty treaty is neither more nor less than an
extraordinary mode of amending the tariff so that
1t cannot be again amended in the ordinary way
by Congress for term Of years. and for the con /
slderation that some other nation will shackle |
itself in the same manner. 1t should be noted |
that practically these treaties, whatever may by |
the requirements Of the Treasury, must inyaribly |
contemplate the surrender of more or less reye- |
nue., II the tariff is too high let it be reduced I
If too low, let it be increased but solely with
reference to the welfare of our own people and |
in manner that will not complicate our engage
ments with all foreign nations BY opening the |
door TO the wool of Canada we leave the door liar .
as to the wool of Buenos Ayres and if the low
ter grudes of Cuba cannot he resisted or il they
can be, then the Executive and the Senate viii .
have become the architects of notified tariff
white here and black there, and rng-streaked
everywhere"
Mr. Morrill, continued 1t may be said that the
treaty of 1854 settled an important question re-
lating 10 the fisheries. Ii there is any point
where American diplomacy ought to blush, II is
in relation to this very question of the fisheries
and the last adjustment was hardly more wise
than the pusilanimous surrender Of 1918. Great
Britain conceded by the provisional treaty of 1882
and rcaihrmed word for word in the treaty Of 1888
all the rights we demanded and all that ever could
be of practical utility. The language was most
comprehensive
The people the United States shall continue 10 eSjoy
nnmeiesied the right 70 take h Of srsy Kind the Grand
Bank and on all other banks Of Newfoundland also In
the Gulf Of st. Lawrence and all paces IN the sea
uAsrs the nhabaHt Of both couafrs used any time here
feors 10 A and also that the inhabitants the United
States shall have hbfy 70 take fish Of every kind such
part OF the coast OF Newfoundland British fishermen
shall use Out not to dry or cure the that sAnd
and also the coasts bays aud creeks Of oil other OF
Britannia Majestys dominons In America and that the
American fishermen shall have liberty dry and cure
Ash N of tha I'D has