The Federalist #64
The Federalist No. 64
The Powers of the Senate
Independent Journal Wednesday, March 5, 1788 [John Jay]
To the People of the State of New York:
IT IS a
just and not a new observation, that enemies to particular persons, and
opponents to particular measures, seldom confine their censures to such things
only in either as are worthy of blame. Unless on this principle, it is difficult
to explain the motives of their conduct, who condemn the proposed Constitution
in the aggregate, and treat with severity some of the most unexceptionable
articles in it.
The second section gives power to the President, "by
and with the advice and consent of the senate, to make treaties,
PROVIDED TWO THIRDS OF THE SENATORS PRESENT CONCUR."
The power of making treaties is an important one,
especially as it relates to war, peace, and commerce; and it should not be
delegated but in such a mode, and with such precautions, as will afford the
highest security that it will be exercised by men the best qualified for the
purpose, and in the manner most conducive to the public good. The convention
appears to have been attentive to both these points: they have directed the
President to be chosen by select bodies of electors, to be deputed by the people
for that express purpose; and they have committed the appointment of senators to
the State legislatures. This mode has, in such cases, vastly the advantage of
elections by the people in their collective capacity, where the activity of
party zeal, taking the advantage of the supineness, the ignorance, and the hopes
and fears of the unwary and interested, often places men in office by the votes
of a small proportion of the electors.
As the select assemblies for choosing the President, as
well as the State legislatures who appoint the senators, will in general be
composed of the most enlightened and respectable citizens, there is reason to
presume that their attention and their votes will be directed to those men only
who have become the most distinguished by their abilities and virtue, and in
whom the people perceive just grounds for confidence. The Constitution manifests
very particular attention to this object. By excluding men under thirty-five
from the first office, and those under thirty from the second, it confines the
electors to men of whom the people have had time to form a judgment, and with
respect to whom they will not be liable to be deceived by those brilliant
appearances of genius and patriotism, which, like transient meteors, sometimes
mislead as well as dazzle. If the observation be well founded, that wise kings
will always be served by able ministers, it is fair to argue, that as an
assembly of select electors possess, in a greater degree than kings, the means
of extensive and accurate information relative to men and characters, so will
their appointments bear at least equal marks of discretion and discernment. The
inference which naturally results from these considerations is this, that the
President and senators so chosen will always be of the number of those who best
understand our national interests, whether considered in relation to the several
States or to foreign nations, who are best able to promote those interests, and
whose reputation for integrity inspires and merits confidence. With such men the
power of making treaties may be safely lodged.
Although the absolute necessity of system, in the conduct
of any business, is universally known and acknowledged, yet the high importance
of it in national affairs has not yet become sufficiently impressed on the
public mind. They who wish to commit the power under consideration to a popular
assembly, composed of members constantly coming and going in quick succession,
seem not to recollect that such a body must necessarily be inadequate to the
attainment of those great objects, which require to be steadily contemplated in
all their relations and circumstances, and which can only be approached and
achieved by measures which not only talents, but also exact information, and
often much time, are necessary to concert and to execute. It was wise,
therefore, in the convention to provide, not only that the power of making
treaties should be committed to able and honest men, but also that they should
continue in place a sufficient time to become perfectly acquainted with our
national concerns, and to form and introduce a a system for the management of
them. The duration prescribed is such as will give them an opportunity of
greatly extending their political information, and of rendering their
accumulating experience more and more beneficial to their country. Nor has the
convention discovered less prudence in providing for the frequent elections of
senators in such a way as to obviate the inconvenience of periodically
transferring those great affairs entirely to new men; for by leaving a
considerable residue of the old ones in place, uniformity and order, as well as
a constant succession of official information will be preserved.
There are a few who will not admit that the affairs of
trade and navigation should be regulated by a system cautiously formed and
steadily pursued; and that both our treaties and our laws should correspond with
and be made to promote it. It is of much consequence that this correspondence
and conformity be carefully maintained; and they who assent to the truth of this
position will see and confess that it is well provided for by making concurrence
of the Senate necessary both to treaties and to laws.
It seldom happens in the negotiation of treaties, of
whatever nature, but that perfect secrecy and immediate despatch
are sometimes requisite. These are cases where the most useful intelligence may
be obtained, if the persons possessing it can be relieved from apprehensions of
discovery. Those apprehensions will operate on those persons whether they are
actuated by mercenary or friendly motives; and there doubtless are many of both
descriptions, who would rely on the secrecy of the President, but who would not
confide in that of the Senate, and still less in that of a large popular
Assembly. The convention have done well, therefore, in so disposing of the power
of making treaties, that although the President must, in forming them, act by
the advice and consent of the Senate, yet he will be able to manage the business
of intelligence in such a manner as prudence may suggest.
They who have turned their attention to the affairs of
men, must have perceived that there are tides in them; tides very irregular in
their duration, strength, and direction, and seldom found to run twice exactly
in the same manner or measure. To discern and to profit by these tides in
national affairs is the business of those who preside over them; and they who
have had much experience on this head inform us, that there frequently are
occasions when days, nay, even when hours, are precious. The loss of a battle,
the death of a prince, the removal of a minister, or other circumstances
intervening to change the present posture and aspect of affairs, may turn the
most favorable tide into a course opposite to our wishes. As in the field, so in
the cabinet, there are moments to be seized as they pass, and they who preside
in either should be left in capacity to improve them. So often and so
essentially have we heretofore suffered from the want of secrecy and despatch,
that the Constitution would have been inexcusably defective, if no attention had
been paid to those objects. Those matters which in negotiations usually require
the most secrecy and the most despatch, are those preparatory and auxiliary
measures which are not otherwise important in a national view, than as they tend
to facilitate the attainment of the objects of the negotiation. For these, the
President will find no difficulty to provide; and should any circumstance occur
which requires the advice and consent of the Senate, he may at any time convene
them. Thus we see that the Constitution provides that our negotiations for
treaties shall have every advantage which can be derived from talents,
information, integrity, and deliberate investigations, on the one hand, and from
secrecy and despatch on the other.
But to this plan, as to most others that have ever
appeared, objections are contrived and urged.
Some are displeased with it, not on account of any errors
or defects in it, but because, as the treaties, when made, are to have the force
of laws, they should be made only by men invested with legislative authority.
These gentlemen seem not to consider that the judgments of our courts, and the
commissions constitutionally given by our governor, are as valid and as binding
on all persons whom they concern, as the laws passed by our legislature. All
constitutional acts of power, whether in the executive or in the judicial
department, have as much legal validity and obligation as if they proceeded from
the legislature; and therefore, whatever name be given to the power of making
treaties, or however obligatory they may be when made, certain it is, that the
people may, with much propriety, commit the power to a distinct body from the
legislature, the executive, or the judicial. It surely does not follow, that
because they have given the power of making laws to the legislature, that
therefore they should likewise give them the power to do every other act of
sovereignty by which the citizens are to be bound and affected.
Others, though content that treaties should be made in
the mode proposed, are averse to their being the supreme laws of the
land. They insist, and profess to believe, that treaties like acts of assembly,
should be repealable at pleasure. This idea seems to be new and peculiar to this
country, but new errors, as well as new truths, often appear. These gentlemen
would do well to reflect that a treaty is only another name for a bargain, and
that it would be impossible to find a nation who would make any bargain with us,
which should be binding on them
absolutely, but on us only so long and so far as we may think proper to
be bound by it. They who make laws may, without doubt, amend or repeal them; and
it will not be disputed that they who make treaties may alter or cancel them;
but still let us not forget that treaties are made, not by only one of the
contracting parties, but by both; and consequently, that as the consent of both
was essential to their formation at first, so must it ever afterwards be to
alter or cancel them. The proposed Constitution, therefore, has not in the least
extended the obligation of treaties. They are just as binding, and just as far
beyond the lawful reach of legislative acts now, as they will be at any future
period, or under any form of government.
However useful jealousy may be in republics, yet when
like bile in the natural, it abounds too much in the body politic, the eyes of
both become very liable to be deceived by the delusive appearances which that
malady casts on surrounding objects. From this cause, probably, proceed the
fears and apprehensions of some, that the President and Senate may make treaties
without an equal eye to the interests of all the States. Others suspect that two
thirds will oppress the remaining third, and ask whether those gentlemen are
made sufficiently responsible for their conduct; whether, if they act corruptly,
they can be punished; and if they make disadvantageous treaties, how are we to
get rid of those treaties?
As all the States are equally represented in the Senate,
and by men the most able and the most willing to promote the interests of their
constituents, they will all have an equal degree of influence in that body,
especially while they continue to be careful in appointing proper persons, and
to insist on their punctual attendance. In proportion as the United States
assume a national form and a national character, so will the good of the whole
be more and more an object of attention, and the government must be a weak one
indeed, if it should forget that the good of the whole can only be promoted by
advancing the good of each of the parts or members which compose the whole. It
will not be in the power of the President and Senate to make any treaties by
which they and their families and estates will not be equally bound and affected
with the rest of the community; and, having no private interests distinct from
that of the nation, they will be under no temptations to neglect the latter.
As to corruption, the case is not supposable. He must
either have been very unfortunate in his intercourse with the world, or possess
a heart very susceptible of such impressions, who can think it probable that the
President and two thirds of the Senate will ever be capable of such unworthy
conduct. The idea is too gross and too invidious to be entertained. But in such
a case, if it should ever happen, the treaty so obtained from us would, like all
other fraudulent contracts, be null and void by the law of nations.
With respect to their responsibility, it is difficult to
conceive how it could be increased. Every consideration that can influence the
human mind, such as honor, oaths, reputations, conscience, the love of country,
and family affections and attachments, afford security for their fidelity. In
short, as the Constitution has taken the utmost care that they shall be men of
talents and integrity, we have reason to be persuaded that the treaties they
make will be as advantageous as, all circumstances considered, could be made;
and so far as the fear of punishment and disgrace can operate, that motive to
good behavior is amply afforded by the article on the subject of impeachments.
PUBLIUS
Previous Next
Index
|