The Treaty Power

■VVhsD tliis cosnSry wm onder British dominafion, tho troaty-making power inhered to tho crowo. When tho colonies deolared tlieir ndependeiioo, the rigbt to make treaties whs deelarcd a riht of the Stiiteg. When t ba nrtiolea of c.onfederation wc.rc entered into, "the United States in CVriiire assombled," as the style then was, had the solt) right to make troatien, anti trith the adoption of the preacnt Constitution tho power was thns ecttlod : "No State shnll enter into nny treaty" (Art 1., sec. 10, par. 1); and "he [the President shnll have " power, bv nd with the adviccand con 'sent of tho 8enRte, to mako treaties, " provided two-thirds of tho Senators " presont concur" (Art. II., feo. 2, par. 1). 8uch being the present settlement, it will be perceired thst the House id entirely oxcluded from nny participaron in the making of troatieB - unies? indeed tho raising of the money bu n participation - nnd this exclusión the House hos alwayg taken bard. Tho real or.cnsirn of this discontent is probably tl-at the exclusión is feit ns a badge of inforiority; but tho rensou niiht frequontly avoweci is that, as tho lluuse has tlusolé rigbt to origínalo inoney bitl, it ghould bo consulted iti thu formation of troaties, whioh almost ïl'waya reiuire appropriatior.8 to carry them out. Sueh at least was the argument mainly relied od, at tbo time of the framing of the Federal Gonstitution, in favor of an extensión of tho trenty-makinr power to tho House ; and at various tiiHOS sinee Üio wine pround lina bee:i ftroiijfly tuken in Ootigressional debate The rcaeon of tho argument doos not appear very sound when it is ennsidured that the Eoglish Ui)inmona also liavo to find the inoney for tri ■atii1, ainl yot are exoluded from nny sliare in making tbem ; but, ïuch as ihe argument is, it was oooe much reliad apon, especially at the opening of the groat debate on the ndiuitfgion of Texas - tbe original adiniseion, we mean, of oouroe, and oot the dÍ8graceful absnnïi it-s and oppmsiónf in that name of a later day. As thnt debate went od, liowover, tho House changed i!s ground, dííoverd that a joiut resolution wa8, ín a caso of ainxx - tion. as good as a titatv, and by a joint resoluti'Xi bronght Texas in. This same procedure, as now nppears is nifditated in the cana of Sun Duiningo at the present duy, Mr. Butler nioving tho resolu tion and the House evinoïog a temper whioh indicatos its paspnge. Worfl 'he Senate what it. ence was, it.would stand on ita sola power of tre;ity-mnkine, and aot permit tlie end t be llrjs ob'ained per amlage ; but, bs ii is, the joint resnlution, if it come up itorta tbe IJonse, is pretty sure of a pae&nse. With sueh passage, the circunivention of the treaty power, by joint resolution 3 nlmost a fixed faet; since, if a joint resolution to nnues is as good as a treaty to onnex, why should not other joint resolutiona toother onds heretofore attained by treaty bo as eSectual to sucb ends as treatiesV With thia principie once fixed, the treaty power, as ostablished in the Constitution, ueeds nothing but tbe overthrow of the Iudian treuty system, up to which tho House is aleo nioving, to beconie olmoet aHogetber, if not absolute'y, tul. Ferbaps eueh a step inight bo hihly conducive to simpliaity f but ho-x fur tho even move desirablo adjunctg of treaty inaking, eeerecy, and skill would be conversed is a matter that burdly anything but actual experienoe can detertoine,