this house; that the addresses which have been made with such variety of
forms, and with so great dexterity in some of them, to all that is
prejudice and passion in the heart, are either the effects or the
instruments of artifice and deception, and then let them see the subject
once more in its singleness and simplicity....

"The doctrine has been avowed, that the treaty, though formally
ratified by the executive power of both nations, though published
as a law for our own by the president's proclamation, is still a
mere proposition submitted to this assembly, no way
distinguishable, in point of authority or obligation, from a motion
for leave to bring in a bill, or any other original act of ordinary
legislation. This doctrine, so novel in our country, yet so dear to
many precisely for the reason, that in the contention for power,
victory is always dear, is obviously repugnant to the very terms,
as well as the fair interpretation of our own resolution (Mr.
Blount's). We declare, that the treaty-making power is exclusively
vested in the president and senate, and not in the house. Need I
say that we fly in the face of that resolution, when we pretend
that the acts of that power are not valid until we have concurred
in them. It would be nonsense, or worse, to use the language of the
most glaring contradiction, and to claim a share in a power which
we at the same time disclaim, as exclusively vested in other
departments. What can be more strange than to say, that the
compacts of the president and senate with foreign nations are
treaties without our agency, and yet, that those compacts want all
power and obligation until they are sanctioned by our concurrence.
It is not my design, in this place, if at all, to go into a
discussion of this part of the subject. I will, at least for the
present, take it for granted that this monstrous opinion stands in
little need of remark, and, if it does, lies almost out of the
reach of refutation."

After discussing the subject of bad faith on the part of the United
States, in refusing to execute the treaty, with a clear and
comprehensive view of the obligations of nations, Mr. Ames continued:--

"I shall be asked, why a treaty so good in some articles, and so
harmless in others, has met with such unrelenting opposition? and
how the clamors again