effected twenty days after the period fixed by the treaty. President Tyler submitted the matter to the Senate. The Senate, by resolution, January 13, 1845, simply agreed to an extension of time, and declared that an exchange made prior thereto should be deemed and taken to have been regularly made. On the exchange of ratifications, June 2, 1852, of a treaty with San Salvador signed January 2, 1850, which did not take place within the time. specified, a proviso was signed declaring that the convention should not be binding until the Senate had sanctioned the exchange. In order to effect the exchange of the ratifications of the recent reciprocity treaty with Cuba within the time stipulated, a constructive exchange was resorted to. On notification that the Cuban exchange copy had in good form been placed in transmission, the exchange copy of the United States was delivered to the Cuban minister in Washington, and a protocol signed reciting the fact of the exchange.

(b) The President.-Although treaty negotiations are conducted through the Secretary of State,3 they originate legally with the President. Treaties are signed by the Secretary of State, as well as by other agents, and the ratifications are exchanged on the authority of powers

1Ex. Journal, vol. vi, pp. 363, 379.

'Ibid., vol. viii, p. 437; vol. ix, p. 144.

The Department of Foreign Affairs was established by the act of Congress of July 27, 1789. By the act of Sept. 15, 1789, the name was changed to Department of State. I Stat. at L., 28, 68. Gouverneur Morris had introduced in the Federal Convention, Aug. 20, propositions providing for a Council of State in which there was to be a Secretary of Foreign Affairs, appointed at the pleasure of the President, to whom should be given, among other duties, the preparing of plans of treaties and the examining of such as might be transmitted from abroad. Doc. Hist. of the Const., vol. iii, p. 566.

conferred by the President.'

is not delegated.

The power of ratification.

As all treaties must receive this final ratification, the President may at will, so far as depends on his constitutional power, withhold from the Senate a treaty already negotiated. Of treaties thus withheld the MonroePinckney treaty with Great Britain of December 31, 1806, a treaty with Mexico signed March 21, 1853, relative to a transit way across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, an extradition convention with Colombia signed March 30, 1872, a convention with Switzerland signed February 14, 1885, for the protection of trade-marks, and the convention adopted in April, 1890, by the First International American Conference for the establishment of a tribunal of arbitration, are examples. Or the treaty may be submitted, accompanied with recommendations for amendments. President Pierce in submitting on February 10, 1854, the Gadsden treaty of December 30, 1853, recommended certain amendments. President Cleveland in submitting, July 5, 1888, an extradition treaty signed May 7, 1888, with Colombia, called attention to changes suggested by the Secretary of State.3 On December 16, 1845, President Polk communicated to the Senate an extradition treaty, signed January 29, 1845, with Prussia and certain other German states, and

'According to section 243 of the standing instructions to diplomatic officers of the United States, "a written international compact between a diplomatic representative of the United States and a foreign government" may, in case of urgent need, be made in the absence of specific instructions and powers: but it is to be expressly stated in the instrument that it is signed subject to the approval of the signer's govern

ment.

'Richardson's Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. v, p. 229. Ibid., vol. viii, p. 615.

at the same time suggested a modification of Article III, in which it was stipulated, contrary to the rule then consistently maintained by the United States, that the contracting parties should not be bound to deliver up their own citizens. The Senate having failed to make the amendment in its resolution of June 21, 1848, advising the ratification, the President, for this as well as for other reasons, refused to ratify the treaty.'

So also treaties may be withdrawn from the consideration of the Senate either to effect changes by negotiation or to terminate proceedings on them. A treaty with Belgium, signed November 4, 1884, regulating the right of succession to and the acquisition of property, was withdrawn from the Senate by President Arthur by a message of February 17, 1885, and was not resubmitted. President Cleveland in messages of March 13, 1885, and March 9, 1893, requested the return of treaties concluded by his predecessors-November 18, 1884, with Spain for commercial reciprocity; December 1, 1884, with Nicaragua relative to the construction of an interoceanic canal; December 4, 1884, with the Dominican Republic for commercial reciprocity; an article signed June 2, 1884, with the Argentine Confederation supplementary to the treaty of commerce of July 27, 1853; and the Hawaiian annexation treaty signed February 14, 1893.3 President Roosevelt, in a message of

1Ex. Journal, vol. vii, pp. 7, 433. In his message to the Senate, July 28, explaining the reasons for his refusal to ratify, he laid special stress on the failure of the Senate to remedy Art. III, but added also as a sufficient justification the then recent reorganization of the German states. Ibid., p. 462.

* Ibid., vol. xxiv, p. 474.

'Richardson's Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. viii, p. 303; vol. ix, p. 393.

December 8, 1902, requested the return of a commercial convention with the Dominican Republic signed June 25, 1900, together with an additional article thereto, and a convention with Great Britain signed January 30, 1897, relative to the demarcation of the Alaskan boundaries. Instances of withdrawals for the purpose of making slight changes are quite numerous. The convention with Spain, signed August 7, 1882, supplementary to the extradition convention of January 5, 1877, was returned for verbal changes at the request of the Secretary of State made to the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations.'

3 AGREEMENTS CONCLUDED BY THE EXECUTIVE INDEPENDENTLY OF THE SENATE

On April 6, 1818, President Monroe submitted to the Senate an arrangement, terminable on six months' notice, reached with Great Britain by the exchange of notes, April 28 and 29, 1817, limiting the naval forces to be maintained on the Great Lakes. He asked the Senate to consider whether it was such an arrangement as the Executive was competent to enter into by the powers vested in him by the Constitution, or such an one as required the advice and consent of the Senate. The Senate by a resolution of April 16 (two-thirds the Senators present concurring) approved and consented to the arrangement and recommended "that the same be carried into effect by the President." An act approved February 27, 1815, had authorized the President to cause all armed vessels on the lakes, except such as in his opinion were necessary for the execution of the revenue laws, to be dismantled and sold, or laid up;3 and under Ibid., vol. iii, pp. 132, 4.

1Ex. Journal, vol. xxiii, p. 565. '3 Stat. at L., 217.

the authority of this act he had, immediately upon the exchange of notes, and prior to any action by the Senate thereon, proceeded to give effect to the agreement.' President Buchanan, in submitting to the Senate, February 9, 1860, an agreement with Venezuela signed January 14, 1859, for the settlement of claims of citizens of the United States growing out of their expulsion by the Venezuelan authorities from the Aves Islands, observed that "Usually it is not deemed necessary to consult the Senate in regard to similar instruments relating to private claims of small amount when the aggrieved parties are satisfied with their terms." In the present case it was thought advisable on account of the instability of the Venezuelan government to give the agreement a formal ratification with the advice and consent of the Senate. Claims conventions of this nature are not usually submitted to the Senate.3

'House Doc. 471, p. 14, 56th Cong. 1st Sess.

Ex. Journal, vol. xi, p. 142.

'Of important agreements for the settlement of claims of American citizens against a foreign government, made and carried into effect without consultation with the Senate, the following examples may be noted: the agreement with Spain reached by exchange of notes Feb. 11 and 12, 1871, providing for a commission for the settlement of claims of citizens of the United States against Spain for injuries committed by Spanish authorities in Cuba; the protocol of Aug. 7, 1874, with Colombia for the settlement by arbitration of claims of citizens for the seizure of the Montijo; protocols with Hayti, May 28, 1884, May 24, 1888, and Oct. 18, 1899; with Brazil, Sept. 6, 1902; with the Dominican Republic, Jan. 31, 1903; with Chili, May 24, 1897; with Guatemala, Feb. 23, 1900; with Mexico, Mar. 2, 1897; with Nicaragua, Mar. 22, 1900; with Peru, May 17, 1898; with Salvador, Dec. 19, 1901; with Venezuela, Feb. 17, 1903; with Russia, Aug. 26, Sept. 8, 1900, submitting to arbitration the claims for the detention of American schooners by Russian cruisers; and the agreement with Mexico signed May 22, 1902, submitting to arbitration, in accordance with the provisions of The Hague Convention, the Pious Fund claim.