The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1919-07-10
Hamilton On The
.TTeaty-MakingP Power
To the Editor Of the Sun

A great deal is said as to any pow
er the United States Senate may
have in the making OF treaties. II
is not uncomon to hear public men
talk as IL the only earthly thing that
the United States Senate has to do
about treaty is to take 1t as II is
handed to them by the chief execu-
tive and approve 1t.
In his day Alexander Hamilton
knew hat the constitution In, -, lcd
in its various grants of powers to
the executive and legislative depart
ments and he went to the trouJ,g 30
explain to the people who were ad-
opting the constitution in this state
what his ideas were. The Fedetal-
list contains his views on the t.'eaiy
making power which seem TO inji.
cate that his idea OF the constltu.
ton was that It would give to The
Senate actual work to do in the
making of a treaty. In number rs
of the Federalist papers, written bv
Hamilton, he said:
'The President is to have power,
by and with the advice and consent
OF the Senate, to make treaties, pro-
vided two thirds of the Senator's
present concur. Though this proyl-
sion has been assailed on different
grounds, with no small degree of We
hemence. | scruple not to declare
my firm persuasion that 1t is one OF
the best digested and most unexcep-
tionable parts of the plan. o.
ground OF objection is the trite topic
o. the intermixture OF powers, some
contending that the President ought
alone to possess the prerogative of
making treaties; others that il ought
to have been exclusively deposited III
the Senate With regard
to the intermixture OF powers, | shall
rely upon the explanations hereto
fore given OF the true sense OF The
rule upon which that objection Is
founded, and shall take II for gran,
led as an inference from them that
the union OF the executive with the
Senate. in the article OF treaties, is
no infringement of that rule.
II venture to add that the par
lticular nature OF the power OF max
ing treaties indicates a peculiar pro.
priety in that union. Though several
writer's on the subject OF government
place that power in the class OF exc
cutive authorities yet this is evident
ly an arbitrary opposition. for II we
attend carefully to its operations IL
will be found to partake more o! the
legislative than the executive char
acter, though il does not seem strict
ly to fall within the definition of
either. The essence OF the Legislative
authority Is to enact laws, or, in 9TH
er word, to prescribe rules for The
regulation of society, while the *.
ecution of the laws and the employ
ment of the common strength, eth
er for this purpose or for tho com
mon defence, seem 10 comprise all
the functions of the executive mag,
istrate.
The power OF making treaties Is
plainly either the one or the other
1t relates neither to the execution OF
the subsistlng law nor to. the enact
ment OF the new ones; and still less
TO the exertion of the common
strength. It's objects are contrasts
with foreign nations which have the
force OF law but derive 1t from the
obligations OF good faith. They are
not rules prescribed by the sover,
eign to the subject but agreements
between sovereign and sovereign
power in question seems therefore
10 form a distinct department, and
to belong, properly. neither to the
Legislative nor TO the executive, The
qualities elsewhere detailed as indis
pensable TO the management OF for
affSn m npotiationo notnt nut tha owe