g treaties, see pp. 320, 350, 360.

The power to make treaties was confided to the president originally
because it had been the custom for the executive to possess the
treaty-making power. But it is defensible on other grounds. Some treaties
need to be considered secretly. This could hardly be done if congress were
the treaty-making power. But the president and the cabinet can consider
the matter in secret. Then promptness is sometimes needed, as in case of a
treaty to close a war. Promptness may prevent useless loss of life. If
congress had to be summoned, valuable time would be taken. As two-thirds
of the senators present must agree to the provisions of the treaty, the
president cannot misuse the power granted in this provision.

When the treaty necessitates the raising of money, the house of
representatives is generally consulted, also. In fact, if the house
opposed such a treaty it is questionable whether it could be carried out.
In each of the three great purchases of territory the president consulted
congress before making the purchase.

[2] The nominations are made in writing, and the senate may either confirm
or reject the nominees. The person or persons confirmed are then appointed
by the president. When a nominee is rejected, the president generally
sends in a new nomination.

This mode of appointment is thus defended by Alexander Hamilton, in the
_Federalist:_ "The blame of a bad nomination would fall upon the president
singly and absolutely. The censure of rejecting a good one would lie
entirely at the door of the senate; aggravated by the consideration of
their having counteracted the good intentions of the executive. If an ill
appointment should be made, the executive for nominating, and the senate
for approving would participate, though in different degrees, in the
opprobrium and disgrace."

It will be noted in this connection that, while in the state most of the
officers are elected, in the general government all officers except the
president and vice-president are appointed.

In Washington's administration the question was raised, can the president
remove officers without the consent of congress? And it was decided that
the president can remove all officers whom he can appoint. Judges, who
hold for life, are of course excepted. During Johnson's administration,
the power of the president in this direction was declared to be exactly
equal to his power of appointment,--that is, if the consent of the s