CONGRESS. HO USE OF REF R E SENTATtVES, Friday, March 18. Debate on Mr. LiTtugft»n'i resolution continued. Mr. Livhigjlm'c Jpeech continued. The portions had been/*fTuraed, differing not materially in the powar ascribed to treaties,' but distinguished chiefly by the mode of applying this By some it was contended, that the intcrference of the Lcgiflature was neceflary in some iriftance« r but that the treaty operated by way of moral obli gation, to enforce the necessary steps to give it va lidity ; and that though there u a phyiical power of retufal, yet it ought in no cafe to operate again (I the superior obligation. Others had attested, that treaties being the su preme law, might operate diredly, without the in tervention of any other body. That where e*ift ing legislative a&s opposed their execution, the treaty was paramount.and cotlld repeal them. These positions were in fad the fame, because if a treaty was at all events to have effe&, it was per fectly immaterial whether it operated dire&ly by its own power or indiie&ly by the instrumentality of another boUy; both he thought equally subver sive of the principles of the government; but the iirft was moil degrading to the legislative dignity. Nor could he discover 'from what part ef the Con stitution it was inferred .j wherever in that instru ment a duty was imposed, it was clearly and expli citly a (Tig tied, as io cafe of the PreGdenPs compeit fatian, that of the Judges and many other inftan ees. It h not then to be conceived, that lo im portant an obligation as this fhouid have been left -to implication. If it had been intended so to .an nihilate this discretion the fame language would have been used. 41 Congress shall pass laws to car ry every treaty into effect," bat nothing of this kind appears. Again, if it had bein intended to make treaties paramount over laws; it-would feenf to have beenrtbe more simple mode to havedifpen ■fed with their interference. Why leave a phantom of discretion, an unreal mockery of power in the bands of the Legislature. In order to get rid of this difficulty some gentlemen fisem willing to allow a species of violation, but it was a pittance that would be scarcely worth accepting. In cases of extreme necessity, and ia others where from corrup tion or other good cause the compadt is void, this House, they lay, may refufe to carry it into effe&. In the firft cafe where it is impojfible to give efficacy, to a treaty, the power of refufing it was surely of little value. Andwhen'thecoropaft is void in itfclf, the liberty of not being bound by it would scarcely be contended For. If thelubjeft were lefk serious.Mr. 1,, said, one would be tempted tofmile, at the efforts that aTe made to reconcile the eonfti tutional predcjlination, contended for with the free agency of discretion. 'It was as difficult to be un derstood, as the most entangled theological contro versy, and like mod disputants in thatfcieace, they concluded with anathemas against all who could not comprehend or would not believe them. We have a discretion whether to at& or not, fay they ; but we are under an obligation to aft, and if we do not, i we are guilty of treifon and rebellion. This was \ the fame kind of discretion a man has whether he will commit murder or let it alone ; he may do it, but if he does he -will be hanged—this was a worse alternative than that generally called Holfon's choice —that was, " this or nothing but here we are told, •«' do this, or be hanged for a traitor." So that hereafter when any one intended to express an inevitable necessity, he would call it CongrtJJitnal discretion. If then the treaty does net operate by way of obligation on the Legislative power, let us, said Mr. Ltvlngftoa, examine, whether as is contended, " a treaty is paramount to a law, and can repeal it, though it itfclf cannot beafted on by the Legisla tive power," this he said was the most important question, that bad ever been agitated within those •walls.—lt evidently tended to the substitution of a foreign power, in lieu of the popular branch, it was replete with the most fetious evils. He could ne ver suppose so great and pernicious an absurdity, was contemplated by the Conftitutipn, but if fjich was the true conftruftion, greit as tlie evil was, we mult submit, until it coold be legally amended. The Constitution gave all Legislative power io the Congress of the United States, veiled the power of making treaties in the President and Senate ; and declared that the Constitution, the laws made in pursuance thereof; and treaties made under the authority of the "United States, /hould be thafu premelaw of theland. He had always considered the order in whichthis enumeration was made as descriptive of the relative authority of each. Ift. The Constitution which no other aft could operate on. 2d. The laws made in pursuance thereof. 3d. Treaties, when they contradicted neither; for if no weight was given to this argument, treaties would be superior, both to the Constitution and the laws, as there is no reftriftion w'»h refpeft to them as i« the cafe of laws, that they * e made pursuant to the Constitution.—He did not believe gentlemen would contend for this absurdity, they must therefore re fer to the order of the enumeration to measure the relative effect of the Conftitutiun, laws and treaties. If the objects of legislation, and of treaty compact would be kept diftinft, no question would arile, there would be no pretext for interference, but they could not ; almost «very objedt of legislation might also become that of couipaft with a foreign pqwer. He then read the enumeration of powers veiled incongrefs, and said, that many of these had alrea-. dy become the objects of treaty—many more pro bably would be, and the whole directly or indirect ly, were liable to be embraced by it. If then all, or even any one of these objed* may be regulated by treaty, without any interference of law, the cpijftiuition, said M,r. L. has contained the evident ahfurdity of submitting the fame object at the fame tiir'e lathe controul of two diftinft powers. An absurdity tßat couldupt; be deftipyed- but b* sup :" t ■' poling that—lt was intended these different pow-i eis (houid operate under this constitution as they I do in that of England. So that every treatyope ratingon obje£ls submitted to the legiflativc power ihould receive its fanftion before it took effect— This conftru&ion would reconcile all the parts of | thje instrument to each other ; whereas other would set them at-variance, and by the House of reprefentatives.of all the (hare in Le gislation. This was not reafoning,-he said from an abuse of power - : If it was properly vcfted in the President and Senate, it was not only permitted but it was their duty to tife it, and no one could call the of a-conftitutional right, an abi/fe of power. He admitted, that if the text w«re*x plicit, reafomng from consequence was a bad mode, but as that was not pretended in the prefeilt cafe, , it would he well to -weigh the serious evils that it tended the conftruftion gentlemen fef\r~ And to .enquire whether there is more dasjjst in j trailing the representatives of the people witji a check on all treaties relating to those oljje&s, which are Specially vcfted 'in them bythe constitution, than in making those representatives subservient to (he will of twentyone men, who may be leagued with a foreign power ? In looking for the true conftruAion of this in strument we fhovild cenfider the state of things at the time it was proposed and adopted. The op position it >met was well known, and the power •given to the Senate and frefldent, was considered as one great cause of opposition. Itcannot-be sup posed as the sentiments of the people were known by the framers of the conftitmio'n, that they would have propafed arty plan mofe energetic than the government of Grea' Britain. * But it was probable, Mr,' Livingfton (aid, that the treaty power was intended to be placed in the-Prefident and-Senate to the fame extent only in which it existed ta the executive of G. Britain. The word* of our constitution on this point were the fame made use of by the British writers in de fining the corresponding power in their government. —And it seemed evident that some ofC it* 5 features {and this was none of the lead prominent) were drawn from that original. He was happy ihit the parallel was not perfect in other jnftadacif He thought it completely so in this, aad that Hie prac tice, therefore, of that govemraent would in fbme lead to the true conftrudlion of this. A. ware of the weight of .precedents drawn from En. glifh history, gentlemen endeavored to weaken them by a very ingenious .argument :—■" The British constitution, fay they, is not written, it informed of usages ; if you prove, therefore, that it i» the u(eg£ for Briti(h Parliament* to fanftion treaties, you prove it to be their constitution, Eiutyou dw not prove it to be ours." It was true, Mr. Li vingfton observed, that the English constitution was formed partly of immemorial usages ; bat it was also true, that those usages were collected th books of authority, and th.at the different powers of go vernment were generally designated, so that the leading points in their constitution were as well known and defined as they were in that -of Ame rica. It had been (hewn, by a reference ta writers of the belt authority, that by the Conftitetion of England the power of making all treaties was in the "King ; but as the power of making all laws was in the Parliament, this latter, as the greater pow er, controuled the former, whenever it affedied qb je<fts of legislation. Thus, in the conftttutien of the United States, (he contended) the power of making treaties, that is all treaties, is relied in the President and Senate—but as all legt/lative power is -vcfted in Congress, uo treaty operating upon any objeSs of legislation can takeeffe& until it receives the fan&ion of Congress. The praflice, too, was the fame. The King asserted his right of making and completing treaties, by not only concluding but-ratifying them, before they were submitted to Parliament, bat he believed no commercial treaty was proclaimed as the'law of the land before it had received the fan&ion of Parliament. Indeed it was impossible in any country, and under any con stitution, where the legislative and treaty-making powers are lodged in different bands, that any other confhufh'on can be given, without -running into the absurdity he had before hinted at, of making two different powers supreme over the fame objedt at the fame time. Our ideas had been confounded by referring to the practice of governments where the two powers were united, and where a ratifica tion gave the consent of both. If, then, there was a perfect analogy between thi powers vested in the crown in England, .and thai delegated to the President and Senate in America on the fobjeft of treaties ; and if the Parliament by virtue of its general Legj/lative authority wa in the pra&ice of giving or withholding its fan&ioi to treaties concluded by the King, it was but a fail inference to fay, that the fame discretion existed it Congress. Some inftancfs of the exercise of this power by Parliament had been before quoted by other*. The inexecution of the treaty of Utrecht in consequence of Parliamentary opposition, and the difficulties with which tbe commercial treaty with France was carried through the House of Commons, in 1787, had been already noticed. He would mention two other precedents, drawn from the fame source, equally ftrikiog, or ptthaps mote so, at the course of proceeding there followed, was preei&ly that which was proposed by the refolatiop in debate.— The fitft was the proceeding on the.barrier treaty, taken from the fth Vol. Pari, Debates, p. 43 — where the House of Commons began by a resolution to address the Queen, " that all inJlru'dionswA or ders giwra to the Plenipotentiaries that tranfaded the barrier treaty, and also all treaties mentioned atad referred to in the said treaty, might be laid be fore the house, except Rich treaties as they already had." We are told in the subsequent page, that on tbe 13th, (that is) only two days after the le- Tjneft, " Mr. Secretary St, John prefeated to rhe House, by her Majefty'i command, a copy of the inftru&ions to the Duke of Marlboro' and Lord Townfend, about the barrier treaty, extraQi of let ten from Mr. Boyle to Lord Towniend eencern ing the said treaty, also a copy ef the preliminary articles figired at the Hague; the titles of which copies and extracts of letters were referred to the committee of the whole h«ufc. Afttr this it was i cfolved to present an address to her MajeftyJ tliat the letters written by Lord Townfeod • to Mr. Boyle, the Secretary of State, dated the lit and 26th November, 1709, might be laid before the Hoafe, which Mr. Secretary St John accordingly did on the 14th February." After having obtain ed the papers, Mr. L. laid, the House of Com mons proceeded to the conlideration of the treaty in committee of the whole, and voted, I ft, that the treaty contained articles deftrudlive to the trade and iuterell of Great-Britain ; 2d, that the nego* ciator had asked without authority ■; 3d, that the advisers and negociators were enemies to the Queen and kingdom. The treaty being thus obftru&ed, the States Ge neral remonstrated to the Queen on the fubjeA, but confeious that the Parliament were only exer cising a constitutional power, they make no com plfints in rheir memorial of any breach of faith, thaugh the treaty had been ratified—They entervin to. the merits of the treaty, offer to negooiate on the obnoxious articles, and conclude with " in treating the continuance of her Majesty's friend fhtp." This in fiance, then, said -Mr. L, is complete to (hew the propriety of a call for papers by the House of Commons ; a ready compliance on the part ps the crown, a deliberation on a ratified treaty, a re ijefttdn of it, and an acquiescence on the .part of the foreign nation,, without remenftrancc. The other inftanee was an address ( in the year 1714,' requelling that " the treaties of peace and commerce between her Majesty and the King of Spaift, and the inftru&ions givento her Majesty's ambafladors thereupon, together with the copies of the King of Spain's ratifications of the said treaties, and the prcliminari s signed by the Lord Lexing ton and the Marquis of Bcdmar at Madrid, and all other agreements and ftiptilations which had been made concerning the commerce between Great-Bri taiu and indly, An account of what en gagements of guaranty her Majesty has entered into by virtue of any treaty with any foreign .prince or (late from tbeyear 171©. And, 3dly, an account of what inltances had been used by her Majesty for the rcitonng the Catalans their amient privileg es, and all letters relating thereunto. And then it was resolved, to take into ?Hrther conlideration the rntffage that day sent from the Lords upon Thursday next following.'" Objections had been raffed to this cenftru&ion, drawn from three different fourees. i . From the prevalent conftru&ioii at the time of eftablifhingthe constitution. .2. From the pra&ice of the government since that- period. 3. From the present ideas entertained by the people of the United State*. -As to the coraftruftion generally received when :he cor.ftitution was adopted, Mr. Livingfton did not conceive it to be conclusive, even if admitted to be contrary to that now contended for; because he believed we were now as capable at leall of deter mining meaning of that instrument as the conventions were—they were called in haste, they were heated by party, and many adopted it from expediency, without having fully debated the dif ferent articles. But he did not believe the general cinftruftion at that time differed from the one he had adopted. A member from Virginia, (Mr. Brent) had (hewn, by recurring to the debates in the Convention of that state, and to other contem poraneous productions, thai the fratnersand friends to the constitution con&rued it in in the manner that we do ; whilst its enemies endeavored to ren der it odious and unpopular by endeavouring 1 to fix on it the contrary conftrudion. And as the friends to the constitution were the moll numerous, we ought rather to take the .explanation ysder irfeich a majority accepted the constitution, as the true one, than to look for it in the bug-bears by which anti-fcderalifm endeavoured to prevent its adoption. Livingftan's fpeecb to bt continued.J Friday, May 6. Mr. Richard Sprigg, jun, from Maryland, yef tcrday took hit feat in the house, in the place of Mr. Duval, some time ago resigned. 'Petitions praying the British treaty to be carried into effect, were presented by Meflrs. Bradbury, Bourne, D. Foster, S. Lyman, Brent, Wadfwortb, Read, Williams, Van Alen, Sprigg, jun. Ruther ford, Gilbert, and Hartley. A bill fur the relief of Sylvanns Bourne, was twice read, and ordered to be engrailed for a third .reading. The bill malting provision for certain debts of the United States, was read a third timeand parted. The blank for the sum which the President was en titled to borrow on loan irredeemable for a number of years, was filled up with five millions. The bill for repealing that part of the aft relative to the Diftri& Court of Pennsylvania being held al ternately at Philadelphia and York-Town, was read the third time and pafled. Me(Tr», Sedgwick, Dearborn and Varmmt ob. tained leave of abfenee for the remainder of the ses sion. Mr.; S. Smith laid A resolution to th« flowing effect .upon the table : "■ Resolved that therebe allowed andpaid for the yew 4 796 to the fecretarie* of the treafary and war department, the treasurer, comptroller, audi tor, register, pwveyor anctattorney general, per oent on their rcipc&ive salaries, in addition thereto.'*. The houfc took up the order of the day, and re solved itfelf into a committee of the whole, Mr. Bourne in the chair, on the report of the committee to whom was referred the message of the President relative to the territory of the United States south of the «ver Ohio. The lefolution recommended to the consideration of the howfe by that committee (and the propriety of adopting or reje&ing which was the fubjeft of debate yeftcrday and today,) was in the following words ; " Resolved, That by the authenlicated docu ments accompanying the message from the Presi dent of the United States to this house, on the |Bth day of the prefcnt month, and by the ordinance of bearing datethe 13th of July 1787, and bys iawofthe Uriittd States passed on the a6thof May 1790, it appears that the citizen* of that part #£«> »{fr: of the United States wh Ich has been called the ter ritory of the United States fouth,of the river Ohio, and which is now formed into a (late, under a re publican form of government, by the name of Te neffee are entitled to all the rights and privileges to which the citizens of other states in the Union, are -entitled utrder the contfitutioaof the United States, and that the date ofTencflee is hereby declared to be one of the iixteen United States of America/' It appears by the ordinance of Congress pa?ed in July, 1787, and by a law patted on the 26th of May, 1790, that the people of this territory were entitled to be become one of the states of the uaioa when they fliouW amount to 60,000 free male in habitants ; and the temporary Government conceiv ing that number s were there at present, had pasTed an a£t for taking a census, by which it appears, there are upwards of 67,000, be'fides about 15';ooof negroes ; they have, therefore, proceeded to form themselves into a Hate, under the nanjie of the state of Teneffee, and request to become a member of the Union, and to fend repiefentativfs t» Congress according to their population. The President, fame time ago, sent the documents which he had receiir ed from thence, to congress, giving it as his opi nion that the state of Teneflee fhonld be admitted into the union. That meflage was referred to a fe left committee, who reported the above resolution. It was obje&ed by members opposed to the reso lution, that, before that state could be admittedints the unfon, it (hould firft be declared a (late by Con gress, and the number of its inhabitants ascertained under the direction of Congress ; and that it was pot fuf&cient for the state to declare itfelf entitled. Some objections were also made to their conftit'u tion, and to the manner of taking the census. It was aflerted on the otlier hand, that the fact ef there being 6i»,ooo free male inhabitants was fufEeient to entitle them to become a state of the Union : t'hat the census having been taken by the legiflaiure of the ft ate (the governor and conncil of which were appointed by the President of the United States) was as good authority as they coufd wilh, and fhat they ought not to be too ftri&i with refpeft to forms, but admit the citizen# of that i» untry to all the rights of freemen. After feveiaf propositions being offeied in place of the refoiution reported by the committee, which were not received, Therefolution of the feleft cotnmiltee p4fled,by " yea* and nays, *s feiHows . ¥ E A S. MefTrs. Bailey, Baird, Baldwin, Benton, Bloupf, Brent, Bryan, Burgt(s, Claiborne, Clopton, Crabb, Fjnaley, Franklin, Gallatin, Gillefpie, ' Giles, Gregg, Hampton, Harnfon, Harper, Havens, Heifter, Hollaud, Jackson, Locke, W. Lyman, Maclay, Macon, Madrfon, Moore, "New, Nicholas, Orr, Page, Preft'on, Read, Rutherford, I. Smith, Sprigg, Tatem, Van Cortlandt, Venable— 42. NAYS. Mefirs. Bonrnr, Bradbury, Cliriftie, Coit, Dent, A- Poller, D. Foster, Gilbert, Glenn, Goodrich, Grifwold, Hartley, Henderfon, Hillhoufe, Hind man, Kitchell, Leonard, S. Lyman, Malbone, Sedgwick, Sitgreaves, Jer. Smith, N. Smith, Isaac Smith, Wm. Smith, Thatcher, Tracy, Van Alen> Wadfworth, Williams— 50. A meflage was received from the Pref/dent, in forming the house that he had approved and Ggn*d the following acts, viz, an aft authorising a loan for the city of Washington ; an aft for making further provision relative to Revenue Cutters ; an a& declaring consent to an aft of the state of Ma ryland, appointing an Health Officer at Baltimore and teethe several a6ls for carrying the treaties with Spain, Great Britain, Algerines, .and thein dian Tribes, into tffedl. Adjourned. •MRS. MARSHAL'S NIGHT. NEW THEATRE. On Monday E»cnirg, May g, will' be presented a celcbratcd Tragedy, never performed here, called Alexander the Great. Or, THE RIVAL QUEENS. Alexander, Mr. Moreton. Hepheftion, Mr. Warrell, jun. Lyfimachus, Mr. Maiftali. Caffander, Mr Green. Polyperchon, .Mr. Darley, ju». Philip, Mr. Morgan. C lit us, Mr. Whitlock, •; •• Mr. Warrell. PcrdicCas, Mr. Beetc. Eumenes, Mr. Francis. Slave, \ Mr. Mitchell. : - . Roxana, Mr». Shaw. Syfigambii, Mrs. Rowfon. Paralatis, Mis« Willems. Statira, Mrs, Marltiall. in act II the grand Triumphal intry of Mexiniir ir.to Babylon, at t&id:d ty_hu Gtncnti, Captains, &e with banners, trophies, (ic,, The Vocal Parts by Messrs. Marshall, Darley jun. Warrfcll, T. Waricll, Mitchell*) Solomon—Mrs. Oldnnxou. M«s. Wanell, Mrs. Bates, Miss Willems, Mrs. Solomon, Mfs. Hervev, Mrs, Gillingham, Mrs. Doctor, Mifi Melbourne, Mr*. De Marque. To which will be added a grand serious Pantomime) ncvet performed here, called The Deserter of Naples. As performed at the Theatres Covent Garden, Drury Lans, and the Royalty, upwards of 200 nights. General, S,g. Doflor. Ruffe", Mr. Wanell. Henry, Mr Marshall. Skirmish, Mr. Bates. Simkin, Mr- Francis. _ J" lor ' , Mr. Bliffett. Onicers, Meilrs. Darley, jun* Warrell, jun. Mitchell) Beeti. Margaret, Mrs. Rowlon. J en °yt_ __ Miss Mi 'bourne. Mrs. Marshall. Villagers, Messrs. Morgan, Solomon, T. Warrell—Mifs Wil lems, Mrs. Bates, Mrs. Harvey, Mrs. Solomon, tylrs. g f > Mrs. Gillingham, Mrs Do£lor. &c. In act 11. a Jotemn military procejfion to the execution of Henry, The Pantomime under the dire&ion of Mr, Francis. Ticket* to be had at the usual places, and of Mrs. Marshall No. 23 north Ninth street. Wednesday, a comedy, never performed here, called SUCH THINGS ARE, written by the authoreis of Every one has his Fault, With A MOGUL TALI, or, The Def- CCI I-« *!?, Balloon—For ihe Benefit of Mr. Darley. K*S Night will be on Friday. One Dollar—PlT, Three-Fourths of a Dollar— tnd GALLERY, Haifa Dollar. Places for the Boxes to be taken of Mr. Wells, at the Fron of the Theatre: No money or tickets to be returned; nor any person, 00 any account wfeatfocver, admitted behind the scenes.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers