reaties
lately concluded with the Dey and Regency of Algiers, the King of
Great Britain, the King of Spain, and certain Indian tribes north-west
of the Ohio."
This motion produced a warm altercation. The members of the majority
complained loudly of the celerity with which it had been made, and
resented the attempt to blend together four treaties in the same
resolution, after the solemn vote entered upon their journals,
declaratory of their right to exercise a free discretion over the
subject, as an indignity to the opinions and feelings of the house.
After a discussion manifesting the irritation which existed, the
resolution was amended, by changing the word "treaties" from the
plural to the singular number, and by striking out the words "Dey and
Regency of Algiers, the King of Great Britain, and certain Indian
tribes north-west of the river Ohio," so that only the treaty with the
King of Spain remained to be considered.
Mr. Gallatin then objected to the words "provision ought to be made by
law," as the expression seemed to imply a negative of the principle
laid down in their resolution, that the house was at perfect liberty
to pass, or not to pass, any law for giving effect to a treaty. In
lieu of them, he wished to introduce words declaring the expediency of
passing the necessary laws. This amendment was objected to as an
innovation on the forms which had been invariably observed; but it was
carried; after which, the words "with good faith," were also
discarded.
The resolution thus amended was agreed to without a dissenting voice;
and then, similar resolutions were passed respecting the treaties with
Algiers, and with the Indians north-west of the Ohio.
[Sidenote: Upon the bill for making appropriations to carry into
execution the treaty with Great Britain.]
This business being despatched, the treaty with Great Britain was
brought before the house. The friends of that instrument urged an
immediate decision of the question. On a subject which had so long
agitated the whole community, the judgment of every member, they
believed, was completely formed; and the hope to make converts by
argument was desperate. In fact, they appeared to have entertained the
opinion that the majority would not dare to encounter the immense
responsibility of breaking that treaty, without previously
ascertaining that the great body of the people were willing to meet
the consequences of the measure. But the members of the oppositi
|