290 BURR— THE TREATY-MAKING POWER [April 20. 



duties on imports are to be regulated, either by imposing or remitting, in- 

 creasing or decreasing them, without the sanction of an act of Congress; and 

 that the extension of the term for the operation of the original treaty or 

 convention with tlie government of the Hawaiian Islands, proposed by the 

 supplementary convention of December 6, 1884, will not be binding on the 

 United States without like sanction, which was provided for in the original 

 treaty and convention, and was given I)y act of Congress.""^ 



The report does not seem to have been adopted by the Hotise, and 

 no Act of Congress extending the provisions of the treaty of 1875 

 was passed.^* 



In 1897, the tariff act known as the Dingley Act was passed. By 

 the third section thereof the act purported to " atrthorize " the 

 president to negotiate commercial reciprocity agreements on certain 

 articles therein enumerated, and provided that he might suspend 

 after the making of such agreement the operation of the tariff act. 

 The fourth section purported to prescribe the method and effect of 

 such agreements. It provided that whenever the president " by and 

 with the advice and consent of the Senate . . . , shall enter into 

 commercial treaty or treaties '" concerning duties " and when any 

 such treaty shall have been duly ratified by the Senate and approved 

 by Congress, and proper proclamation made accordingly, then and 

 thereafter the duties" shall be accordingly collected. 



In 1902, Senator Cullom reviewed in the Senate the history of 

 the exercise of the treaty-making power His speech is marked by 

 its accurate fulness and persuasive logic, and thus concludes : 



" The authority of the House [of Representatives] in reference to 

 treaties has been argued and discussed for more than a century, and has 

 never been settled in Congress and perhaps never will be. The House, 

 each time the question was considered, insisted upon its powers, but never- 

 theless has never declined to make an appropriation to carry out the stipula- 

 tion of a treaty, and I contend that it was bound to do this, at least as much 

 as Congress can be bound to do anything when the faith of the nation had 

 been pledged. And this appears to me to be the only case in which any 

 action by the House is necessary, unless the treaty itself stipulates, expressly 

 or by implication, for such Congressional action. ""- 



'"^Congressional Record, Vol. 18, Part HI., p. 2721. Language given 

 Vol. 35, Part H., p. 1182. 



^ U. S. Stat, at Large, Vol. 30, pp. 203-4. 

 ^Congressional Record, Vol. 35, Part H.. p. 1083. 



