Gentlemen of the Senate:

UNITED STATES, February 15, 1796.

Herewith I transmit, for your consideration and advice, a treaty of peace and amity, concluded on the 5th day of last September by Joseph Donaldson, jr., on the part of the United States, with the Dey of Algiers, for himself, his Divan, and his subjects.

The instructions and other necessary papers relative to this negotiation are also sent herewith, for the information of the Senate.

Gentlemen of the Senate:

GO WASHINGTON.

UNITED STATES, February 26, 1796.

I send herewith the treaty concluded on the 27th of October last between the United States and Spain by their respective plenipotentiaries.

The communications to the Senate referred to in my message of the 16th of December, 1793, contain the instructions to the commissioners of the United States, Messrs. Carmichael and Short, and various details relative to the negotiations with Spain. Herewith I transmit copies of the documents authorizing Mr. Pinckney, the envoy extraordinary from the United States to the Court of Spain, to conclude the negotiation agreeably to the original instructions above mentioned, and to adjust the claims of the United States for the spoliations committed by the armed vessels of His Catholic Majesty on the commerce of our citizens.

The numerous papers exhibiting the progress of the negotiation under the conduct of Mr. Pinckney, being in the French and Spanish languages, will be communicated to the Senate as soon as the translations which appear necessary shall be completed.

GO WASHINGTON.

UNITED STATES, March 1, 1796.

Gentlemen of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:

The treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation concluded between the United States of America and His Britannic Majesty having been duly ratified, and the ratifications having been exchanged at London on the 28th day of October, 1795, I have directed the same to be promulgated, and herewith transmit a copy thereof for the information of Congress.

GO WASHINGTON.

UNITED STATES, March 8, 1796.

Gentlemen of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:

I send herewith, for the information of Congress, the treaty concluded between the United States and the Dey and Regency of Algiers.

GO WASHINGTON.

ކ

UNITED STATES, March 15, 1796. Gentlemen of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:

By the ninth section of the act entitled "An act to provide a naval/ armament" it is enacted "that if a peace shall take place between the United States and the Regency of Algiers, that no further proceedings be had under this act."

The peace which is here contemplated having taken place, it is incumbent upon the Executive to suspend all orders respecting the building of 17 the frigates, procuring materials for them, or preparing materials already obtained, which may be done without intrenching upon contracts or agreements made and entered into before this event.

But inasmuch as the loss which the public would incur might be considerable from dissipation of workmen, from certain works or operations being suddenly dropped or left unfinished, and from the derangement in the whole system consequent upon an immediate suspension of all proceedings under it, I have therefore thought advisable, before taking such a step, to submit the subject to the Senate and House of Representatives, that such measures may be adopted in the premises as may best comport with the public interest.

GO WASHINGTON.

UNITED STATES, March 25, 1796.

Gentlemen of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:

I send herewith, for your information, the translation of a letter from the minister plenipotentiary of the French Republic to the Secretary of State, announcing the peace made by the Republic with the Kings of Prussia and Spain, the Grand Duke of Tuscany, and the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel, and that the republican constitution decreed by the National Convention had been accepted by the people of France and was in operation. I also send you a copy of the answer given by my direction to this communication from the French minister. My sentiments therein expressed I am persuaded will harmonize with yours and with those of all my fellow-citizens.

GO WASHINGTON.

UNITED STATES, March 29, 1796.

Gentlemen of the House of Representatives:

I send herewith a copy of the treaty of friendship, limits, and navigation, concluded on the 27th of October last, between the United States and His Catholic Majesty. This treaty has been ratified by me agreeably to the Constitution, and the ratification has been dispatched for Spain, where it will doubtless be immediately ratified by His Catholic Majesty.

M P-VOL 1—13

This early communication of the treaty with Spain has become necessary because it is stipulated in the third article that commissioners for running the boundary line between the territory of the United States and the Spanish colonies of East and West Florida shall meet at the Natchez before the expiration of six months from the ratification; and as that period will undoubtedly arrive before the next meeting of Congress, the House will see the necessity of making provision in their present session for the object here mentioned. It will also be necessary to provide for the expense to be incurred in executing the twenty-first article of the treaty, to enable our fellow-citizens to obtain with as little delay as possible compensation for the losses they have sustained by the capture of their vessels and cargoes by the subjects of His Catholic Majesty during the late war between France and Spain.

Estimates of the moneys necessary to be provided for the purposes of this and several other treaties with foreign nations and the Indian tribes will be laid before you by the proper Department.

GO WASHINGTON.

UNITED STATES, March 30, 1796.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

With the utmost attention I have considered your resolution of the 24th instant, requesting me to lay before your House a copy of the instructions to the minister of the United States who negotiated the treaty with the King of Great Britain, together with the correspondence and other documents relative to that treaty, excepting such of the said papers as any existing negotiation may render improper to be disclosed.

In deliberating upon this subject it was impossible for me to lose sight of the principle which some have avowed in its discussion, or to avoid extending my views to the consequences which must flow from the admission of that principle.

I trust that no part of my conduct has ever indicated a disposition to withhold any information which the Constitution has enjoined upon the President as a duty to give, or which could be required of him by either House of Congress as a right; and with truth I affirm that it has been, as it will continue to be while I have the honor to preside in the Government, my constant endeavor to harmonize with the other branches thereof so far as the trust delegated to me by the people of the United States and my sense of the obligation it imposes to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" will permit.

The nature of foreign negotiations requires caution, and their success must often depend on secrecy; and even when brought to a conclusion a full disclosure of all the measures, demands, or eventual concessions which may have been proposed or contemplated would be extremely impolitic; for this might have a pernicious influence on future negotia

tions, or produce immediate inconveniences, perhaps danger and mischief, in relation to other powers. The necessity of such caution and secrecy was one cogent reason for vesting the power of making treaties in the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, the principle on which that body was formed confining it to a small number of members. To admit, then, a right in the House of Representatives to demand and to have as a matter of course all the papers respecting a negotiation with a foreign power would be to establish a dangerous precedent.

It does not occur that the inspection of the papers asked for can be relative to any purpose under the cognizance of the House of Representatives, except that of an impeachment, which the resolution has not. expressed. I repeat that I have no disposition to withhold any information which the duty of my station will permit or the public good shall require to be disclosed; and, in fact, all the papers affecting the negotiation with Great Britain were laid before the Senate when the treaty itself was communicated for their consideration and advice.

The course which the debate has taken on the resolution of the House leads to some observations on the mode of making treaties under the Constitution of the United States.

Having been a member of the General Convention, and knowing the principles on which the Constitution was formed, I have ever entertained but one opinion on this subject; and from the first establishment of the Government to this moment my conduct has exemplified that opinionthat the power of making treaties is exclusively vested in the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and that every treaty so made and promulgated thenceforward became the law of the land. It is thus that the treaty-making power has been understood by foreign nations, and in all the treaties made with them we have declared and they have believed that, when ratified by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, they became obligatory. In this construction of the Constitution every House of Representatives has heretofore acquiesced, and until the present time not a doubt or suspicion has appeared, to my knowledge, that this construction was not the true one. Nay, they have more than acquiesced; for till now, without controverting the obligation of such treaties, they have made all the requisite provisions for carrying them into effect.

There is also reason to believe that this construction agrees with the opinions entertained by the State conventions when they were deliberating on the Constitution, especially by those who objected to it because there was not required in commercial treaties the consent of two-thirds of the whole number of the members of the Senate instead of two-thirds of the Senators present, and because in treaties respecting territorial and certain other rights and claims the concurrence of three-fourths of the whole number of the members of both Houses, respectively, was not made necessary.

It is a fact declared by the General Convention and universally understood that the Constitution of the United States was the result of a spirit of amity and mutual concession; and it is well known that under this influence the smaller States were admitted to an equal representation in the Senate with the larger States, and that this branch of the Govern. ment was invested with great powers, for on the equal participation of those powers the sovereignty and political safety of the smaller States were deemed essentially to depend.

If other proofs than these and the plain letter of the Constitution itself be necessary to ascertain the point under consideration, they may be found in the journals of the General Convention, which I have deposited in the office of the Department of State. In those journals it will appear that a proposition was made "that no treaty should be binding on the United States which was not ratified by a law," and that the proposition was explicitly rejected.

As, therefore, it is perfectly clear to my understanding that the assent of the House of Representatives is not necessary to the validity of a treaty; as the treaty with Great Britain exhibits in itself all the objects. requiring legislative provision, and on these the papers called for can throw no light, and as it is essential to the due administration of the Government that the boundaries fixed by the Constitution between the different departments should be preserved, a just regard to the Constitution and to the duty of my office, under all the circumstances of this case, forbids a compliance with your request.

GO WASHINGTON.

Gentlemen of the Senate:

UNITED STATES, March 31, 1796.

The treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation between the United States and Great Britain requiring that commissioners should be appointed to fix certain boundaries between the territories of the contracting parties, and to ascertain the losses and damages represented to have been sustained by their respective citizens and subjects, as set forth in the fifth, sixth, and seventh articles of the treaty, in order to carry those articles into execution I nominate as commissioners on the part of the United States:

For the purpose mentioned in the fifth article, Henry Knox, of Massachusetts;

For the purpose mentioned in the sixth article, Thomas Fitzsimons, of Pennsylvania, and James Innes, of Virginia; and

For the purposes mentioned in the seventh article, Christopher Gore, of Massachusetts, and William Pinckney, of Maryland.

GO WASHINGTON.