CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Pebite on Mr. LmngfWs refohition continued.
Thurfd»y, March 17..
[Mr. Trace's Speech Concluded.!
Tbe remarks of the gentleman from. Virginia,
(Mr. Giles.) tb?t he, and those who advocated the
£al l opinions, by conilant afTociation and thinking
on one fide only, had become life pulpit reafoners,
inattentive to the weight «hd force of what might
be said in opposition, might bejuft 'ln application
ac
.•a f .
with
ed,
ition
him,
ftuuauij iuc gentleman had
not been in habiti of hearing it often denied or
advocated. He thoughts Angular, that in a dis
cussion of this nature there should be a resort to
the British constitution, and flill more so, that a
very exceptionable part W it should be claimed ;
could any man seriously with that treaties, generally
made in some critical period of national affairs, as
ttr being fettled, with a view to exilting circum
itances, should in a length of time afterwards, be *
fubjeft to the confidera'.ion of any other branch of
the government, who could not know many of the
motives, for a partieakr cad it may have? Those
who thought with him on thisfubjeft, he said, had
been accused of a design to give up the exercise of
rights properly veiled in them, by the Constituti
on, to the President and Senate—and this was cal
led facrificing the rights of the peoplehe tho't
it not the firfl time, he had heard a ftrugglc for
power, dignified by the name of a virtuous attempt 1
to protest the liberties of mankind. Could it be 1
supposed that he, or any other man, could wish to
relign rights, given by the Constitution ? Power, it '
was said, was intoxictaing ; but it mult be a Cngu- 1
lar operation of the human mind, under the fafcina- '
ting influence of power, to seek every opportunity 1
to give it up, and become a slave. He wished gen- '
tlemen to apply their own maxim, of the intoxica- 1
tion of power, to the prefeiit ttruggle and dif- '
eern, on which fide its influence will molt probably !
carry tbem. He asked why a parallel was drawn 1
between this House and the British Haufe of Com- I
mons ? i
In that country, the immediate representatives 5
of the people, h?d been for a Jong time obtaining c
privileges from an hereditary executive and nobles, v
which by themhad been usurped. In this country, 1
the Executive and Senate were the Representatives '
«>f the people, possessing powers exactly marked out b
and defined, by a written Constitution : and the r
attempt to give an alarm, agamft the despotism of f
the President and Senate, by comparing them with n
King and Lords, could not, on any principle, be n
proper, delicate, or justifiable. °
He had often heard before he came into the go-
veroment and since, that we had a Constitution, ®
giving portions of power, crawly defined, and that n
■ if we thought, it might even become beneficial to li
tbe people, to fake a conilru&ive latitude, in the °
exereife "of power, yet to step off of the written,
and defined limits given ws, would be improper in
the extreme: this doctrine, although used on occa
sions, which in his opinion, were inapplicable, 8
teas weighty and important. He asked gentlemen al
to reflect, in what way this power, now contended
forj was to be obtained ? Was it found in the Con- a(
dilution, or by aconftrudion, which, if not diredlly
in violation of terms, was nearly so ? P
He said it had been asserted, that a writer under S 1
the signature of Publius, In.a series of papers called tr
the Federalist, had been quoted as favoring this
do&rine of associating the House of Representatives
in the formation of treaties. He said it was an un- in
Founded assertion: what that author had said upon
the fubjeft was contained in two chapters; the tb
irft begins with page 201, and the other in page b»
272, both of the 2d vol.—He requested gentlemen hi
to read those two chapters, and he was much raif- of
taken if all would not acknowledge that the opini- tr
ons of the Federalist were not to associate the al:
House of Representatives with the President in th
■ the making of treaties. What was said in page to
133 of the fame vol. he would notice in tbe other 'tt
branch of the argument. th
But gentlemen had said, if this extensive right ta
mud be abandoned, yet a constitutional check re* in
mains with the House of Representatives, to defeat —
all treaties, which may require appropriations of th
money to carry them into effect. If this was called so
a right of co-operation in making treaties, he did du
not understand it ; to fay, a payment of debt was
part of a contract, and a refufal to pay, made void to
the corHiaft, was to him perfectly unintelligible, cu
He co»fider<d a treaty, bargain or contradt, com- foi
pleat, when made by the President and Senate m;
and if money was necessary to carry it into effedt, fei
it did not invalidate the contrail to refufe an ap- qu
propriation ; it was only faying, the nation had ha
made a.coptiaft, and then refufed to fulfil it. He th,
requested a few miuutes indulgence on the fubjedt uf<
of appropriations, which Was the second and iaft to
yiew he had proposed to take of tbe fubje&. of
Gentlemen bad exclaimed with some warmth, thi
(' ate we to be machines perfectly at command of T1
President and Senate?—and are appropriations to dei
be made, without exercising any discretion." mi
He contideied this House in all legislative a£ts to t.u<
/. p&fSefa a- full and unlimited discretion, with some tiv
• fcw point out. 'A bill th<
comes under the rtmfideisriun of this House, to de
"ettablifh trading houses with the Indian tribes tui
Full -and perfect discretion to accept or refufe ij *|to
certainly veiled in this House. Suppose they, in rHi
vcaocurtcnce with the other branches, .pass tbe bill, Isjti
and employ an agent, with a promise contained in ths
the fame bill to p;iy him one thousand dollars for the
certain services, and"this agent renders the services afi
aril produces his account* i: is well known he can- mij
not be paid without an appropriation by law. Can
any man £ay, thai i 1 considering the bill of appro, ed
priatiei), » cpwpfcu discretion i*.Wt to pass cr not? fait
— Would it be called a correct idea, to atTert, that a
, man was poffeffedof full and complete d!fcretio:i to
embrace truth or falfehood, after both were dif
-2 tinftly held up to his view J Would.rix>t the truth
force his acceptance? Suppose there vyas a clause
jrd con^'tut '°* fubjedliiig the United States 10
a suit, and suppose afuit inllituted, and judgment
rendered against them, would this House fay, be
fore we appropriate monies to pass this judgment,
nia we w '" '°°k lntot ' ,e merits of the and if the I
t^e deeifion is not, in our opinion, grounded on proper 1
testimony, we will refufe *u appropriation ? Or I
e'rs° wou ,he y the sum of the judgment has now 1
. J become an obligation on us, declared to befuch by f
; OD the constituted authority, and we .are bound ii) good I
conscience, anVt f (,» mIM tn'jnirii. C
C . priate ? The t
had been ackr
ftltut,on 1 !
1( j . to approprfate (
ion °W'£ at ' on 'i ar i £
j m conftitutionall} t
iad' '*' ( ® t ' lere iva ' '1$ v
ol Dey of Algiers, contracting to pay hirn an annui- b
iif- ty of 12,000 sequins : Suppose ten years hence the b
t House of Representatives should not think proper p
t to appropriate this sum—war Would be the confer p
lf j . quence ; and in this iexercife of discretion, as it was p
n called', one branch of the government would have n
a £ it completely *1 its power to deelare war. The c<
difficulty would not reft here, for by taking this g
b e ground, the Senate will have the fame power df re- o
tufing appropriations, and they exclusively make n
[j e war—whereas the constitution has given that power n
i>fe to Congress, with a view, that each House should u
|a j be a check on the other. If the House fbould be ri
Q r,. lieve at any time, it was better to go to war with tt
[t j_ the Algerines, than pay the annuity, their duty
a j_ would be to inflitute a bill of the kind ;if the Sets
3 > t nate agree, a treaty can undoubtedly thus be an-
r Qr nulled; but it the Senate negative the bill, theda- n;
t *ty of this House would become very llrang, if not e\
j s£ irrefiflable, to appropriate. di
to Mr. Tracy (aid he would not detain the commit- ill
tec any longer than to hint at what w|9 said of a 01
.(j, fentencein page 133, of .the Fed«i)ift., He con
ceived that laws might become neceflaj-y, in the th
t various exigencies of a government, in consequence 01
n of treaties being made, that might be called fane
:a. tioning them, and yet not so immediately connect- tr
ed with taem, as to preclude a full or nearly a full ht
jy and complete discretion, whether to pass them or li
vn not —but he could not agree, that in the aft of ap- w
n . propriation, which might be the oqly desideratum s b
in a treaty, that a full and tomplete discretion to 6f
es appropriate or not was left to any one or all-branch- lal
es of the government. He acknowledged if a treaty bu
, Sj was unconditional, it. was then not a contract of to
binding force, and of course contained no obliga- w<
es tion of any kind whatever—if a treaty was so terir- th
ut ble in itfelf and manifefl in its confeqences,s would P°
, e ruin the nation, no argument could be drawn from ba
D f such a statement; to ellablifh general rules. Tbe th
1, moral law had said, we shall not kill, and yet a man he
>s ma y he placed in such a iituation, as tliat he not tra
only may but it becomes his duty to kill—-Could it gu
be said, a general right to kill is proved by this
eonceffion ? But could gentlemen seriously fay, we
now wanted these papers, mentioned in the refolu- bu
0 tion, to assist us in determining upon tht quejtjon ed
ie of appropriation ? He thought not.- He supposed
,v the firfl extensive and unlimited rigbt of iuterftring
n in the making a commercial treaty could alone jnf.
tify the call, and he believed that ground mnfl be lay
r, g' ,cn up- He said his colleagues (Meffis. Smith ral
„ and Grifwold) had asserted no other doitrines than ;
J such as he now advocated, and yet they had been en<
accused of faying, that this House had no will of th<
y their own, but must in all cases implicitly obey the 'ht
President and Senate. The fiouflrudtion he had rel
r given to the constitution he believed to be just, and tie:
j trusted he could be under no neceflity of declaring nat
s the purity of his intentions, as he did not doubt
s that every member of the House was guided in the fro
„ invt(ligation by the purefl motives. all
ti Mr. S. Smith said, that at the present stage of me
e the discussion, little was left but gleanings, and to
e bear testimony againfl a doctrine that appeared to U1
1 him big with consequences fatal to the true interefls a ' r<
'- of this country.—He would not purfuethe fophif- ref l
• try of the gentleman last up (Mr. Tracy) through tha
t all its windings and turnings, he would only observe b >'
1 that the gentleman had read some and quoted much ,he
t to prove that treaties, were the fupremc .law r a doc-,
r trine that was admitted by all, that is wheri under
the authority of the United States—Ha also had he !
t taken much pains to convince us, that a contrast be- t l u '
. ing made by authority of congress for 1000 dollars, ene
t —money ought and would be appropriated to pay ano
f the contractor.—Does any one deny this to be
I found Doctrine ? Yet he thought he had seen con- Ind
1 du£t which might be construed againfl it. 0,1
» He said the resolution requested certain papers
1 to be laid before the house. What had been the inv "
cuflom of the house heretofore ? Invariably to ask waa
• for all and every paper that might lead to infor- ex P
■ mation. He well recolleCted that in 1793, a great 1,10
, ferment had arisen in the public mind, in Confe- la y'
■ quence of the proclamation of neutrality (which den
I had always appeared to him to he a wife measure) of ;
: that on the meeting of Congress a great number of
ufeful papers relative to our situation with refpeft con
to foreign nations were submitted ; some of them tob;
of a most confidential nature, relating to treaties mtii
, then depending—particularly that with Spain.— wot
the President was not aftaid to place his confi- but
dence ,jn that house ; and he was right, the public envi
mind was reflored to quiet, and the people of Ken- the
tucky (then restless) were fatisfied that the execu- «f <
nve were doing everything irt^eirjfOwer'to'o&'tain was
the free navigation of the Miffifippi. J The ',Prefi- if t
dent went farther, he sent a special agent to Kenl hou
tucky to communicate to that government the true It w
bnc of conduit then pursuing for their welfare— }
the public mind been less disturbed on the tent
hte treaty, than in 1793? he thought not, and fifh,
that every paper which would tend lofatisfy that inte
the treaty was expedient, or to give information on said
a fubjeft that must be discussed before that house, be f
might with propriety be asked for.
A gentleman from Vermont ( Mr. Buck) repeat- all 1
edby another from South Carolina (Mr. Smith) o f t
laid that to vote for this resolution would be treason S sn
at a ■ rain ft the laws and con dilution. 'Why thi3 liarfh
:i to language ? Did it lead to a discovery of tiuth ?
dif- Where did thsfe gentlemen fiad that definition of
uth treason ? Not in the conltitdtion ; for there it was
iufe properly defined.
:10 A gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Smith)
lent had said that none of the various town meetings
be- relative to the treaty, had asked for papers ; the
ent, various legiflaiures who had judged ot the treaty
the had they requested papers ? did the gentleman mean
iper this as good reason why that house should not alk
Or for them ; if he did—it was cert?iniy argument
low not worthy of refutation. Another gentleman
iby from South Carolina (Ms. Harper) had said, the
ood houfc might inllitute an enquiry into the conduct
>rn. of the envoy, and he challenged the oppofers of
1 the treaty on that ground ; it may inveftigatethe
I treaty itfclf. Mr. Smith would alk whether the
./it; i papers were not neceflary to such enquiry and tp
al j inch investigation. The fame gentleman laid, that
, if th'efe papers were neceflary, he would demand
them as a right not a(k for them in the milk and
water style proposed. Here the gentleman felt
iui- bold. But, this has not been the custom. It had
the been usual and he hoped always would be, to ap
per proach the Chief Magistrate of the Union, with
ife T proper refpedt and decorum. To alk for the pa- (
vas pers, he added 1 , was unconftitution&l, because ,un- (
ave neceflary; he might as well have endeavored to
'he convince by facing—lt it fo —because it is fa. A <
his gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Grifwold) had <
re- opposed the palling of the resolution in a mallerly \
ike manner. He had never, at any time, listened to a- j
/tr ny inSn in that house with greater pleasure. But, .
jld upon re-examining what he heard,he found the me- (
je rits of the orator lay in the ingenuity, not in <
ith ttrength of his reasoning. c
ity From the papers Mr. Smith said, gentlemen had 1
taken a ground that appeared alarming, viz, *
in. " That the President and two thirds of the Se-
|j. natemay by the aid of a treafy, do any thing and f
lot every thing not morally impoflible (provided they t
do not infringe on the constitution) and that the a
it- immsdiate representatives forming this house, have 1
a only to be infoimed thereof, and to obey." r
in- Let uspaufe, said he, for a moment and alk was
he this pofiible ? Could this be the fair conftruftion of
ce our so much boasted constitution ? If it should be,
c- lie would not regret the services rendered his coun
try during the late glorious revolution, nor the part v
jll he had taken to promote the adoption of the Con- 1
or ftitution ; nor w«uld he, by inflammatory speeches c
p. within, nor his.actions without doors, do any thing
m that fltould tend to dellroy the harmony then sub- c
to fitting, or to disunite a people whom nature and re- v
h- lative wants seemed to have conn»<£ted together ; n
ty but, he would endeavor, in a constitutional manner, e
of to obtain amendments to the constitution which 1
a- would prevent the evil in future. But, said he, is ''
r- there occasion for amendments to the treaty making e
Id power ? He thought not. Thef-e were checks and c
m balances fuflicient in the constitution, to prevent e
)e the evils that might arise out of it. He added,that 0
ln he could offer-nothing new, but would pursue the '
>t train of reasoning begun by a gentleman from Vir-
it ginia (Mr. Madison.) b
is In the Bth fe&ion of the ift article of thecon-
re ( titutio.n,Congrefs have power to lay duties, &c.&c. 0
4- but all duties lhall be uniform throughout the Unit- 11
,n ed States ;
d Can reguhte trade with foreign nations; g
g Can eftablith an uniform rule of naturalization. p
f. Congress then, although they have the power to ft;
,e lay taxes and duties, and to make laws of natu- fa
h ralization, are bound to make them uniform ; and w
n in another article are prevented from giving a prefer- g
n ence by any regulation of commeree or revenue to w
>f the ports of one flat# over those of another. But hi
e the treaty making power is not so confined :it may u
d relieve one of our ports from this uniformity of du- m
d ties, or one of the ftatcs from the uniformity of th
g naturalization. For explanation it may relieve d<
it goods imported in British bottoms into New-York, di
e from the one tenth extra duty, and let it remain on m
all the other ports of the Union. But, fay gentle- re
if 'fen, it is unfair to reason against the use of power ct
aby its probable abuses—he thought it advifeable to th
0 guard against abuses—he allied, has this abufc not tli
s already taken place ?he thought it had. Not with U
■_ refpeft to a port of theconfequence of New. York ; m
1 that would have been too palpable. On the lakes[
e by the 3d article of the treaty, goods imported to
, the territory in that quarter in British bottoms,were ", C
fubjefted to no higher duty than goods imported in ' 1
r American vefiels to the Atlantic ports. Here,faid "
j he, appeared a departure from that uniformity re- «r
. quired by the constitution ? here appeared a prefer- ,
, ence given to the ports of one state over those of
r another, and yet gentlemen contended, that this
. house have no right to enquire into the business
. Indeed so delicate was one gentleman (Mr. Buck)
on the fubjeft, that he opposed committing the C
s Algerine treaty, left it fliould eftablilh a claim to ->
. mve,ligation ! It was true, the trade on the lakes p
. was small ; but it would increase, and thus (if the r
. explanation given to the third article be just) al- °,
t though Congress were very wifely reftridied, when ,
. laying duties, to make them uniform, yet the Prefi
-1 d * nt and Senate would be capable, by the assistance
I of a foreign power, to dellroy that uniformity.
Again, he said, the treaty-making power, as fle
: contended for, may prevent the exportation of rice, ec |
1 tobacco, fifh, or any other articlc, and that House
1 mult not interfere, mult not enquire. But this bB
would be said to be the abuse of pawer. True ; l>c
• b«t it will be found by the 12th articlc, that the
: envoy agreed that we should pass laws to prevent ev<
■ the export ef all Weft-India goods. Nay. even Al
• of cotton, one of the obje£b of our growth. It
' w as true, the Senate did not conf«nt to this. But v '^
■ if they had, and the Prefidei't had ratified it, that be
house, it was contended, must have passed the laws. the
It would have had no option. ' anj
Again, he said, th« treaty making power as cob
tended for, may prevent the export of rice, tobacco, he
' hfh, or airy other article, and that house must not hin
interfere, must not enquire. But this would be He
laid to be the abuse of power. True ; but it will if h
be found by the 1 zth article, that the envoy agreed eve
i pass lawS to P revent export of mei
i I L l' a & ? ods - Na y> even cotton, one he
of the objects of our growth. It was true, the thii
aenatc did net coolest to this. But if tbey bad, sub
liarfh and the President had ratified it, that house
uth ? contended, niuft hare passed the laws. l t '
an of have had no option.
t was Again, Mr. Smith said, Congress pallida j
his opinion a wife law) granting a bounty on th,- f! '
nitll) cry, as a nursery for seamen, and another for Dro '
tings ting navigation, by reftritfions .on foreign bottn
. t he Swppofc a power jealous of our rapid incrofe of n"'
reaty g?. I *"' by a treaty repeal those la W! - W0 ".7
mean £' s *°" fe ha / c r '£ ht » Squire the reason why'
lt alk Gentlemen fay «o ; but that the fensti would be ~'
r f'fcto content to such a treaty. And yet it will?
ment f oimd the law giving advantages to American veiled
:m f n and laying an extra dnty on tonnale
, the vvilj bc virtually repealed by the treaty, which' ,\ V J '
dua right to the Bm.lh to comnervail and precluL V,
rs of „ d( ates ,r Qm legidating further On that fiihie-"
ethe 3 ' h . c tr ." t > r has "°J touched the fi/hery bill j
the if' °"ght, it is contended, to have fpl!oww
id to eH f°w I. a , The Ulh J e<3 ' ma ) r tllua ' he Mlow
ed, laid he, under the treaty malting power, until eve
that nr power people tp Congreis, would be
d offi 2 Up ' rog^rsjg
felt He then acted, what could flop the treaty cower
had construed ? he trusted that house would ; and a«
a P" j Was . PPJ tJlc uI) J was brought forward
with f er ll l e prefidcncy of the greatest man on earth, be
■ aa- C ? U f 1 rme eftabllf hed whilst he was at the helm
P of the nation, would carry so much weieht with : ■
.un- that it would probably never be again difpLd. - '
to But, laid he, are thof* papers secret ?No j Thev
A are known to thirty Senators, then- lecmarv u
had clerl "> to all the officers of government,, and to those
etly 1 ™ embei » ol t h '? house who chose ta read them,
oa- J^7T km r> W , h l re " ', he necessit y
But, beC , aufe il was more proper
Z V m °re refpedlful to tjiemfrlves ; thev would form a '
me- document which the members might quote in fuppor t
it in of their arguments, when the treaty came under dif
cuffion ; otherwise. they might be called to order, or
h a d their quotations denied. For instance, suppose he lhould^
assert that the envoy had no power to esseS a comraer
g cial treaty ; that he w?.s only to try what rerms reia
and UVe * co "l m C r bt obta ™«l, but pofitivelv
prohibited troro figmng any thing until it lhouldfi.fi
hey be seen by the President. Suppose he wen further
the and ffiould fay, that the figfiature of the envoy com!
,ave mitted ths country to a fiwation so delicate, as in fame
measure compelled the senate to content, and tfae Pre
was lident to ratify ; what would be the tonfequetice ?
. -f Why some member might deny it, and the one ajTer
tion would stand againlt the other.
,Un! A gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Sedg
3art w| ck) had applied his arguments to three points.
; on . id, That she doctrine of that hoiife having any
hes check or controul over treaties entered into by the
; n g President and Senate was new, never befpre hfard
[ub- o{ ' . anJ never ment ' one d in the different conventions *
re _ which adopted the constitution. 2d, That th»Se.
er nate was composed of men, the most virtuous and
nerj en, 'ghtened ; men who had always been forward in
lich tfle hour oi the greatest danger j'chofen by the c
, it le<ft of the people ; by_ the legislators of the differ
ing en . t " 3tes ! not an 'gnorant herd who might be
and cooled, flatrcred and deceived—riot even' by the
ent «nhghtentd citizens cf America. 3d, Thai the
hat oppofi l ' oll arofc not from the provisions in the trea
the but because it was made with the Bvitifh—
,'ir. From the firfl point he had be<n completely driveß
by a gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Brent) who
on- P rovec 'J l3 ' the doctrine was not novel, but as
old as the constitution, and had been generally ad
nit- roitted in the convention.
On the fecojid poiur, no pcrfcn the
good qualities of the Senate, but without any dif-,
1. paragement to the Senators from Massachusetts, he
to Ihouldbe at no loss to find two gentlemen from the
tu- fame state of equal abilities, and of patiiotilm as
ind well tfied, as those gentlemen, and he presumed the
"er- gentleman would not disagree with' him, when he
to was informed that he would probably, fix his eye on
Jut him as one The gentleman said, uho an we that
lay wejbould ttittmpt to judge over the heads of those wife
iu- men ; <wt It/bo are colleßed from the remote corners of
of the Union ? We, said Mr. S. are the immediate
:ve delegates of ths people, cnllefled from the diffeijtnt
rk, diftrifts of the Union, to aid and nffift the wife
on men above (lairs in making whqlefpme l§ws, and to
le- retain those privileges giten to rhis house by the
" er constitution, which he trusted they would hand to
to their fuecefTors inviolate. He then took 3 view ot
lot the members who came from the remote parts of the
ith Union, and declared them to be men of found judg
k ; ment and real abilities.
to P°' nt was a yeryferious charge indeed,
■re 00 '°' 3 that the oppafition made, was out to
the instrument, but because it wns made wWh.Brw
lid ' gentleman aflts why a similar oppofi
re. tlon ' never been made to the treaty with France ?
sr . Why this language ? Can such refledions assist in
"of the discover y of the truth?' \\ as the gentleman
lis aware k° w this might be retorted ? Didherefleft
iome gentlemen of as little temper as himfelf
might have said that such a treaty would not have
he been ky tbc ei,vo r Wl, h any other nation,
to - n ° r con^nte d to by the Senate ? Nay, he might,
• cs y er y ii'titable, have said, that if it had not been
h c Britilh it would not have been fttpported on the floor
of that house, and might have quoted, as proof,
en l ' le . g reat delicacy of" certain gentlemen on the reso
lution relative to American .seamen imprefTed by
the British.
ce
But it was with .pleasure he had seen that no re
as e< -*' on » no insinuation, no threats had been,utter
ed by any gentleman on that fide of the question
k which he had espoused. He hoped that nothing
,j g bst fair arguments would be adduced. Ifhefhould
, , be in the minority it wonld be his duty, and he would
le * (as a republican ought to do) acquiesce in what
nt ever might.be the determination of the mijoi«y.
, n As to the treaty with France, it wanrwide 1 before
the formation of our conftitotion, which iifely'pro-
Jt vided that all engagements heretofore made, Ihotlld
a j be binding on the new goverhrrte'nt j ofcourfe hei
s< ther the President and Senatt, nor that house had
any power'over it.
i T Mr. Smith then Hated that he did not mean, and
5, he hoped he (hould not be understood to preclude
)t himfelf from voting to carry the treaty into effefl*
ie He held himfelf #pen to convf&i'on on that fubje<9,
11 if he fhouldfind that the fame was expedient, (whot
d ever might be his opinion at present on the inftru
)f ment, and in truth he did not think ?t good,) yet
ie he wouldkeep himfelfatfullliberty to aft as he might
ie think most to the intereftof this country, when thaj
1, fubje£t Ihould «ome before ;he house.