The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, Fourth Congress, First Session Page: 31
[754], [xvii] p.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
31
HISTORY OF CONGRESS.
32
Senate.] Presentation of
answer on the presentation of it—a complete and
perfect answer. He communicated his answer to
the Senate. Then was it proper, he asked, that
the Executive should be requested to make a se-
cond answer, and nearly in the same words? The
President, in his answer, expressly says, that he
speaks not only his own sentiments, but those of
the citizens at large, including, no doubt, the Se-
nate. In this situation of the transaction nothing
can be proper to be done by the Senate but to ex-
press their opinion of the propriety of his answer ;
and this would bo accomplished by adopting the
substance of the resolution, after striking out the
words proposed.
There could be (he concluded, by observing) no
diffeicnce of feeling in the Senate on the occa-
sion. The only difference was in the mode of ex-
pressing it, and he inclined, for the reasons given,
to that which was the object of the motion for
striking out.
Mr. Ellsworth was also of opinion that the
subject divided itself into two distinct parts. The
first object was an expression of the pleasure of
the Senate at this new evidence of the friendship
of France, and joining with the President in all
the feelings he had expressed on the occasion,
This would be effectually done by entering on the
Journals the resolution as proposed to be amend-
ed. The President received the flag and an-
swered, then communicated the transaction to the
Senate.
It appeared, by the papers communicated, he
contended, that there was no connexion between
the letter of the Committee of Public Safety and
the flag. He would not say that both were not
very important transactions, but they were dis-
connected. The letter was written much ante-
cedent to the sending of the flag—it was written
in '94, and was intended to close a correspond-
ence. The correspondence began by an address
from the Convention, while Robespierre was an
active member of it. This address was to Con-
gress : the President transmitted it to each
House, and they sent it back to the Executive, re-
questing he would answer it, with expressions of
the friendly dispositions of the United States to-
wards France. The resolutions of the Houses
and the letter of the Executive were transmitted
through Mr. Monroe. The letter now in the view
of the Senate is in answer to that, and closes the
complimentary correspondence, if it ever can
close. Propriety did not require another word
from the Senate ; indeed, decency did not admit
it, for it could not be contended that the corre-
spondence should be kept up ad infinitum.
As to the flag, how can it require an answer
from the Senate ? It was not presented to them
by the French Minister, but to the President,
who had answered, not only for himself, but for
the citizens of the United States; and he im-
agined it would not be contended that the mem-
bers of the Senate were not citizens.
It is not advanced, he said, that the President
did not express the sentiments of the Senate in the
answer to the Minister; on the contrary, his
words are borrowed in this resolution. But it is
Colors of France. [Januauy, 1796.
wished he should answer again in the same strain,
and this was, in his opinion, neither necessary nor
even proper.
Mr. Ellsworth next combated the resolution
as originally offered as unconstitutional. Nothing,
he contended, could be found in the Constitution
to authorize either branch of the Legislature to
keep up any kind of correspondence with a foreign
nation. To Congress were given the powers of
legislation and the right of declaring war. If au-
thority beyond this is assumed, however trifling
the encroachment at first, where will it stop ? It
might he said, that this was a mere matter of ce-
remony and form, and, therefore, could do no
harm. A correspondence with foreign nations
was a business of difficulty and delicacy—the
peace and tranquility of a country may hinge w
it. Shall the Senate, because they may think it
in ono case trifling, or conceive the power ought
to be placed in them, assume it ? If it was not
specially delegated by the Constitution, the Senate
might, perhaps, but it is positively placed in the
hands of the Executive. The people who sent
us here, (said Mr. E.,) placed their confidence in
the President in matters of this nature, and it
does not belong to the Senate to assume it.
So forcibly, he said, were both Houses impress-
ed with the impropriety of the Legislature cor-
responding with any foreign Power, that, when
it was announced to them that the unfortunate
Louis XVI. had accepted the Constitution of '89,
the communication was sent back to the Presi-
dent, with a request that he would answer it on
their behalf, with congratulations and best wishes.
But even this, he considered, they had not strict-
ly a right to do. It. was only saving appearances.
Neither branch had a right to dictate to the Pre-
sident what he should answer. The Constitu-
tion left the whole business in his breast. It was
wrong to place him in the dilemma of disobliging
the Legislature or sacrificing his own discretion.
But if such practices had inadvertently been fol-
lowed, it was full time to recede from them.
He recapitulated, in a few words, and con-
cluded, by observing, that should the motion for
striking out prevail, members would still be in or-
der to amend the [resolution, if they chose, by ad-
ding to the warmth of expression it already con-
tained.
Mr. Butler considered the situation into which
the member up before him seemed desirous that
the Senate should be placed, as highly degrading;
they were to be deprived of the right of express-
ing their own sentiments, they were to have no
voice, no will, no opinion of their own, but such
as it would please the Executive to express for
them.
The only fault he found in the resolve was, that
it was not full and expressive enough. He ob-
served, that it appeared the studied desire of one
part of the House to cut off all communication be-
tween the people of the United States and the peo-
ple of the French Republic. Their representatives
are now told, that they can have no will, no voice,
but through the Executive. Their constituents
never intended that they should be placed in this
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Gales, Joseph, 1761-1841. The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, Fourth Congress, First Session, book, 1855; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc29469/m1/14/: accessed April 23, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.