of valuable and curious gifts, and the exchange of them with the presents given in return by the Japanese was attended with much ceremony."

After the treaty with Persia of 1866 was concluded, the preamble of which has just been quoted, the American minister to Turkey, who signed it, wrote the secretary of state as follows: "You are aware of the fact that the Ottoman and Persian Governments always expect to receive presents from the Christian powers with whom they negotiate treaties, when the ratifications of such treaties are exchanged. The treaty made with Turkey cost the United States some fifty thousand dollars. A much less sum would, in my opinion, suffice to satisfy the Persian officials. I learn that Spain, upon the exchange of ratifications of a treaty made by her with Persia, gave presents to the amount of twelve thousand dollars. I do not think that our Government should give less.

"I would suggest the following present: a diamond snuff-box of the value of four thousand dollars, for the Shah, and a few good specimens of improved American firearms, he being very fond of hunting; to Mirza Agbra Khan, the Grand Vizier, a diamond snuff-box to the value of three thousand dollars; Farrukh Khan, with whom the treaty was negotiated, another of the same value. To Mirza Ahmed Khan, the Persian chargé at Constantinople, a diamond snuff-box to the value of two thousand dollars. To Melkhom Khan, who was also engaged in the negotiation of the treaty and was instrumental in forming it, a present of the value of one

1 Foster's American Diplomacy in the Orient, 50, 141, 163.

thousand dollars, besides backshishes to the different attachés of the Persian legation, who all expect them. A less amount than fifteen thousand dollars will not suffice."

It appears that the amount appropriated by Congress for this purpose was ten thousand dollars, and that it was duly expended for presents at the exchange of ratifications. Again, in 1875, $10,800 were appropriated from the national treasury for presents to the Turkish officials upon the conclusion of the treaty of naturalization of 1874. The larger portion went to the Turkish minister of foreign affairs, who signed the treaty, and the other recipients were the son of the minister, the under-secretary, the counselor and dragoman of the ministry, the grand master of ceremonies of the court, and eight or ten other subordinate officials and servants. The expenditure, however, proved a poor investment for the United States, for after the treaty was ratified and proclaimed, the Turkish government declined to be bound by it, because of a misunderstanding as to one of its stipulations, the facts respecting which will be stated in the next chapter.

1 Mr. Spence to Secretary of State, December 22, 1856; Mr. Morris to Secretary of State, February 25, 1862, MSS. Department of State.

CHAPTER XIII

RATIFICATION OF TREATIES

AFTER a treaty has been negotiated and duly signed, it must be ratified by the governments respectively which are parties to it before it can have binding effect. The constitution or established practice of each country determines the method of ratification. In the United States it is the act of the President, "by and with the advice and consent" of the Senate, by a two thirds vote of that body, as provided by the Federal Constitution. In Great Britain it is said to be the sole prerogative of the sovereign, but we shall see that, before a treaty can have effect in the British Empire, in many cases the participation of the Parliament is necessary. In Germany, France, and most other constitutional countries a treaty requires the concurrence of the legislative bodies for its ratification; but certain kinds of treaties are excepted from this requirement.

Upon the receipt by the secretary of state of the counterpart of the treaty belonging to our government, the President sends this original counterpart to the Senate for its consideration and action, but it is within the power of the President, if he sees fit, to withhold a negotiated and signed treaty from the Senate. Precedents for this course are found, among others, in the action of President Jefferson withholding from the Senate

the treaty negotiated in London in 1806 by Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney, and the withholding of that of Mr. Hise with Nicaragua in 1849. So, also, the president has the power to withdraw a treaty from the Senate at any time before it is finally acted upon by that body, even though submitted by his predecessor. Instances of this kind are the withdrawal by President Cleveland in 1885 of the conventions sent in by President Arthur for a commercial reciprocity with Spain and for the construction of a Nicaraguan interoceanic canal, as well as the Hawaiian annexation treaty in 1893, sent to the Senate by President Harrison.

The framers of the Constitution of the United States followed the systems of government of the day in making the Federal Executive the medium of communication with foreign powers, but in one important particular they made a radical departure from the existing practice of nations. In joining the Senate with the Executive in the negotiation and confirmation of treaties, they introduced a popular factor into the relations of the new nation with the powers of the world, destined to work an important change in international affairs. And in requiring that all treaties should secure the vote of two thirds of the Senate, the framers of the Constitution emphasized their conviction that the Executive should enter into no stipulations with a foreign power which did not command the support of a large majority of the people of the United States.

It is an interesting fact that when the occasion arose for the first time to put in operation the clause of the Constitution that the President" shall have power,

by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties," Washington, who had been the President of the Constitutional Convention, sent a message to the Senate informing that body that on the next day at an hour named he would go in person to the Senate Chamber" to advise with them [the Senate] on the terms of the treaty to be negotiated." 1

Previous to this notification the Senate had appointed a committee "to confer with him on the mode of communication between the President and the Senate respecting treaties and nominations."2 It seemed to be taken for granted that the Constitution contemplated oral communication or personal conference between them as to treaties when their ratification was under consideration. In reply to the inquiry of the committee, the President wrote: "In all matters respecting treaties, oral communications seem indispensably necessary, because in these a variety of matters are contained, all of which not only require consideration, but some may undergo much discussion, to do which by written communications would be tedious without being satisfactory." 3

It was also considered proper that the President

1 1 Annals of Congress, 67. The message is as follows:

NEW YORK, August 24, 1789. Gentlemen of the Senate: The President of the United States will meet the Senate in the Senate Chamber at half past eleven o'clock to-morrow to advise with them on the terms of the treaty to be negotiated with the Southern Indians.

1 Messages of the Presidents, 61.

GO. WASHINGTON.

2 11 Washington's Writings, 417; 1 Annals of Congress, 66.

3 11 Washington's Writings, 417.