Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1919-07-04
ESTABLISHED 1855
PRESIDENT and The TREATY
CONGRESSMAN Stevenson Digs up I'M
pOrtant PreCedentS.
MAKES SENATE APPEAR MEDDLESOME

impossible to Make Headway III
Treaty Making in Cooperation With
the Senate Gave that Body the Sack
and Went it Alone-other Presidents
have Followed His Example.
In a brief speech in the house last
week Congressman Stevenson cited Hle
records to show that the senate Is
without the sanction of law or prece-
dent in it's efforts to usurp the treaty.
making power of the president Mr.
Stevenson spoke as follows:
Now, Mr.. Chairman, l desire Tor
fow minutes to review the statement
of the gentleman from pennsylvania
IMr. Templel on June 10. page 1,57o
of the Congressional Record. he chal-
lepges the statement of the secretary
OF state that there is no precedent FOR
the demand, made by the senate on
the president for partially compieted
treaty to be laid before it. He cites
csrtain instances where the president
has consulted the senate during the
course of the negotiations, but these
instances were the voluntary act OF the
president, and not yielding by him 10
the attempted coercive action or the
senate. Let us look at the cases cned:
First the Mexican treaty, (Ex. Jour.
WI n 1907 Report of Charles Sum-
ner chairman Foreign Relations COM
mittee: "In a dispatch dated at Mex,
leo June 29, 1861, Mr.. Corwin lncloseo
to Mr.. Seward the project or a treaty
between the United States and Mexico
nv which the United States was TO leno
TO Mexico s5,O00,000." Page 123, the
president, by his message OF December
II. 1861. submitted the draft OF TINS
treaty to the senate for their adVlce;
afterwards by another message Oh
January "a, 1852, he calls their atten-
tion to it in the following language.
Have therefore sumbitted TO the sen
ate request for it's advice upon the
Question pending by treaty making a
loan to Mexico which Mr.: Corwin
thinks will in any case be expedlent.
So it/was pending by treaty nego-
tiated BY Mr.. Corwin, then in Mexico
and was amended by the senate. IL
was also a financial matter ultimately
to be submitted to congress, whose
action was necessary to complete It,.
But the president submitted 1t. The
senate did not call for it.
Second. AS to the convention with
the Dominican republic, the presi-
dents message says (EX. Jour-, Vol.
XVI. %. 1881: 1.-The advice and con-
sent of the senate to the transfer, upon
the terms proposed in the draft OF
convention with the Dominican repup-
lie, are requested"
Evidently the convention had peen
agreed on between our representatives
and the republic. The agreement was
not being remodeled and changed over
night, but was a convention awaiting
ratification.
Third. The reciprocity treaty was
Great Britain and Canada eek. Jour,
D. 355. Vol. XIX) Gen. Grants message
opens: 1.-The plenipotentiary Of Her
Britanic Majesty at Washington mas
submitted to the secretary OF state for
my consideration a draft OF a treaty
for the reciprocal regulation or the
commerce and trade between s tne
United States and Canada, etc. ana
he asks that the senate give its con-
sent in such form as is proposed py
the British plenipotentiary or In sucn
other more acceptable form as the
senate may prefer"
It was a treaty already agreed on by
the other power and satisfactory to the
government, subject to approval by
the senate. 1t was discussed and re-
jected with closed doors, and in all
respects treated as a treaty. The Re
cord, page 502, volume 10, states at the
end Of the vote: THE doors were
opened" So these cases were all on
practically completed treaties.
Fourth. President Polk. in 1S46, sent
an incomplete proposed treaty to the
senate. 1t advised that it be con-
cluded, and 1t was so concluded and
ratified again. Evidently all 1t lacked
was the signatures, as it was concluded
as approved by the senate, and certain
ly no material change in the text was
made after senatorial approval. or 1t
would have failed Of ratification. A
treaty reduced to form is concluded
by the signatures of the high contract
ing parties. So the cases cited by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania lMr.
Templel seem to all be cases where
the treaty was agreed on but not con-
cluded and the advice of the senate
was voluntarily sought by the presl-
dent, except those early cases py
WASHINGTON. Three Of these cases are
Indians and one with the regent OF AL
giers. Washington and Jefferson con-
structed the constitution to mean that
the senate's advice and consent was
TO be taken pari passu with the ne
eotiations. but in these cases it was
proved so impracticable that he aban-
doned it, and when he nominated Jay
TO negotiate the treaty with Great
Britain he declined to give even the
cited. two of attempted treaties with
subjects Of negotiation. though there
was an unsuccessful attempt on the
mart of some of the senators to get
the information. The author, Crandall'
"Treaties, their making and enforce
ment." says. at page SO:
These first attempts Of tine executive
TO FOLLOW out lIS eNIuSlli iillSA1iNf W
the provisions of the constitution IN
consulting the senate prior to the open
ing Of the negotiations have been fol-
lowed only in exceptional instances.
The Jay treaty was the first treaty
with any foreign power and Marion
Mills Miller, the editor Of The Life
and Works of Abraham Lincoln, IN
volume of Great American Debates
page SO, says as to the former attempt
cd treaties, cited by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania [Mr. Temple]:
The president had in person attend
ed the senate and requested their ad-
vice as to the terms he was about 10
propose. In this mode Of proceeding
serious difficulties had arisen, and on
reconsideration it has been deemed
most consistent with the constitution
not to consult the senate in formal
manner until treaty had actually been
made. The senate, therefore, in tins
instance was not previously consulted
by the president as to the terms OF
ypith Craat Rritoin This has