The States and Union. [volume] (Ashland, Ohio) 1868-1872, 1871-08-23

annexation scheme with q foreign
country, the United States acquired a
certain right and title to that land,
even though the negotiations had not
been ratified by the Senate, and that
the President has The right to defend
this title through war measures in the
same that the public has the
right to defend itself against a foreign
people. One word is sufficient to
prove the absurdity of this argument.
Let US assume that the President ne-
gotiates a treaty with a foreign power.
This is his only act, and now it is said
the President, through his own act, is
empowered with authority which the
Constitution expressly gives to Con
gress, namely, the power to declare
war. In other words, although the
Constitution expressly clothes Con
gress with power to declare war, can
the President commit acts which con
fer upon him the power to declare war
without the consent of Congress? You
see how absurd this is. But e this
lame apology does not cover the case I;
for the annexation treaty was solemn
ly rejected by the Senate, and then af
ter no negotiations exist, the United
States, of course, hold my mysterious
title to San Domingo.
Although the affair fell short of a
battle, our troops had often taken an
actite military part in the operations
on the island. Yes, eve at this mo-
ment, if the newspapers are to be be-
lieved, the saroe thing is going on
now, and the wal vessels of the Uni
ted States are really under the orders
of an adventurer in the West Indies.
On this point, [ must refer you to
the lucid arguments of the Senator
from Iowa, whose speech, translated
into German by thousands, has been
scattered over the country, and many
Of you have no doubt seen it. He
argued that our vessels of war, with
out previous declaration of war, had
fired upon Chinese pirates, and that
our troops on land, without a DECLARE
ton of war, had chased Indians, and
that we, without q declaration of war,
had raised armies and put down the
Southern rebellion, and consequently
the President had power to make war
when he pleased, if he took ARE not to
declare war. [ call this IN argument.
But MI. Harlan went further than
this. He argued that the lease of the
Bay of SANTANA, although it had new
er been sanctioned by the Senate, had
somehow retained its life, and that
the President consequently was en-
powered to give Baez all the protection
he might ask.
Now, gentlemen, in order 10 appre-
ciate this talk in all its bearings, let
us assume q case; that President Grant,
in time of Louis Napoleon, had leased
a place on the French coast tor the
rendezvous Of our fleets. Now come
the troubles between France and Ger
many. President Grant sends the
fleet to Europe with the express Or
ders to defend Louis Napoleon against
all enemies, that the lease might not
meet with injury. The Germans are
about to attack the French army
Hold there" cries Grant; keep off
Napoleon's land l have a lease with
him, and must defend it. Hold, there,
or l will shoot" Let us go n step
further: After the battle of sedan,
the French care nothing for Louis Ma
poleon q revolution has taken place.
In accordance with the lease, the
President is bound to keep Louis Ma
poleon on the throne. He says {:
s'Thcre must be no revolution here,
gentlemen it will not be allowed
Hold, or l will shoot" Does not this
sound ridiculous?
Now let us put Baez in the place OF
Louis Napoleon and we have the full
glory of the argument. This remark
able dedut ton from the effects of q
lease on the constitution is unquestion-
ably new. 1t belongs to Senator Har-
Ian.