been repudiated by the President, but new letters of credence were sent to Mr. Rush, his course was approved, and gratification was expressed that the United States had thereby been the first to recognize the new republic. The recognition of the second Empire in 1852 was effected by new instructions and a new credence to Mr. Rives, the minister then at Paris, and the Republic of 1870 similarly. The recognition of the Kingdom of Samoa in 1880 and of the Republic of Brazil in 1889 are also examples of recognition accorded in this manner.19 The most recent example is that of the recognition extended to the revolutionary government of Russia on March 22, 1917, when Ambassador Francis addressed the Council of Ministers as follows:

I have the honor, as the Ambassador and representative of the Government of the United States accredited to Russia, to state, in accordance with instructions, that the Government of the United States has recognized the new Government of Russia, and I, as Ambassador of the United States, will be pleased to continue intercourse with Russia through the medium of the new Government.20

Recognition through some express declaration may be accorded even before entering into any sort of diplomatic treaty, or commercial relations with the Powers so recognized, and in this method, as in all the others, the act of recognition has been the act of the President. Thus the German Empire was recognized by the United States through a letter from the President to the Emperor, March 16, 1871. In like manner, Roumania was recognized as a principality through a letter of August 15, 1878, from the President to Prince Charles, and as a kingdom through the formal congratulations of the President to the King.21 The independence of the Kongo Free State was recognized in 1884 through a formal proclamation to that effect issued by Secretary of State Frelinghuysen, acting under the authority of the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate.22

This method has also been the one most recently used by President Wilson in extending recognition to the new states that have grown out of the great war. Czecho-Slovakia was thus recognized Sep.

19 Sen. Doc. No. 40, op. cit., 2-3, 4, 14.

20 N. Y. Times Current Hist. Mag., VI, 293.

21 Sen. Doc. No. 40, op. cit., 8-9.

22 Text of declaration in Supplement to this JOURNAL, III, 5-6.

tember 2, 1918, through an announcement issued by Secretary Lansing, in which, after reciting that the Czecho-Slovaks had taken up arms against the common enemy and had organized a supreme political authority, it was declared:

The Government of the United States recognizes that a state of belligerency exists between the Czecho-Slovaks thus organized and the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires. It also recognizes the Czecho-Slovak National Council as a de facto belligerent government, clothed with proper authority to direct the military and political affairs of the Czecho-Slovaks. The Government of the United States further declares that it is prepared to enter formally into relations with the de facto government thus recognized for the purpose of prosecuting the war against the common enemy, the Empires of Germany and Austria-Hungary.23

The Polish Provisional Government was in like manner accorded complete recognition on January 26, 1919, when Secretary Lansing, by direction of President Wilson, sent a formal declaration to that effect to Paderewski, the Polish Prime Minister and Secretary for Foreign Affairs.24 Similarly, the new state of Jugo-Slavia was recognized on February 7, 1919, when Secretary Lansing issued a formal statement, "welcoming" the union of the Jugo-Slavs; 25 Finland was recognized on May 5, 1919; 26 while the latest recognition is that of the Armenian Republic on April 24, 1920.27

The uniform practice thus shows that recognition has been in the United States the act of the President, and there can be no question of the President's constitutional right, under his powers to negotiate treaties and to receive and send diplomatic agents, to accord such recognition, the Senate sharing in this right when it is exercised by the despatch of accredited agents.28 The question remains, however,

23 Official U. S. Bulletin, Sept. 3, 1918.

24 Ibid., Jan. 30, 1919; Pol. Sci. Quar., XXXIV, Supp., 70 (Sept., 1919).

25 N. Y. Times Current Hist. Mag., IX, 492 (Mar., 1919). Secretary Lansing supplemented this statement on Feb. 17th with a message to Dr. Trumbitch, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Serbia and head of the Serbian delegation to the Peace Congress, saying that the United States had decided to recognize "the Union of the Serb, Croat, and Slovene peoples.” Ibid., X, 222 (May, 1919). 26 Pol. Sci. Quar., XXXIV, Supp., 128 (Sept., 1919).

27 See statement of Secretary Colby in N. Y. Times, Apr. 25, 1920.

28 Cf. Corwin, The President's Control of Foreign Relations, 71. It should be remarked that the President might appoint a minister to a foreign state during a

whether this power of the President is exclusive, or whether Congress enjoys an independent or concurrent power of recognition, or whether there are circumstances that might at least demand consultation with Congress before extending recognition.

The exclusive power of the President to accord recognition seems not to have been disputed, nor any right of Congress in that regard to have been asserted, until 1811. President Madison, in his message of November 5th of that year, expressed an interest in the revolutionary movements begun in South America,29 which portion of the message was in the House of Representatives referred to a select committee.30 This committee, upon making inquiries, secured from Secretary of State Monroe the information that the provinces of Venezuela had declared their independence in 1810, and that other South American provinces were in a revolutionary state. The committee thereupon, on December 10, 1811, reported a joint resolution. as follows:

Whereas, several of the American Spanish provinces have represented to the United States that it has been expedient for them to associate and form federal governments upon the elective and representative plan, and to declare themselves free and independent: Therefore be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That they behold with friendly interest the establishment of independent sovereignties by the Spanish provinces in America, consequent upon the actual state of the monarchy to which they belonged; that, as neighbors and inhabitants of the same hemisphere, the United States feel great solicitude for their welfare, and that, when those provinces shall have attained the condition of nations by the just exercise of their rights, the Senate and House of Representatives will unite with the Executive in establishing with them, as sovereign and independent states, such amicable relations and commercial intercourse as may require their legislative authority.31

recess of the Senate, and thus accord recognition without the consent of the Senate even by this method. The necessity for a later confirmation of the appointment would not operate as a delay of recognition, nor would a refusal to confirm amount to a withdrawal of recognition-it would merely require an appointment agreeable to the Senate.

29 Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, I, 494.

30 Annals of Congress, 12th Cong., I, 335.

31 Ibid., 428; Am. State Papers, For. Rel. III, 538. Italics throughout are the author's.

There was here no positive assertion of any right with respect to recognition, but the language seems significant as tending towards the assertion of such a right, and at least there was an attempt to convey a promise from Congress of recognition in the future. As a matter of fact, no action was taken on the resolution, and the matter was dropped for several years, probably because of the War of 1812. By 1817 several more of the South American provinces had declared their independence and were clamoring for recognition, and on October 25th of that year President Monroe, in a memorandum to his Cabinet, submitted the following questions, among others:

Has the Executive power to acknowledge the independence of new states whose independence has not been acknowledged by the parent country, and between which parties a war actually exists on that account?

Will the sending, or receiving a minister, to a new state under such circumstances be considered an acknowledgment of its independence? Is such acknowledgment a justifiable cause of war to the parent country? Is it a just cause of complaint to any other Power?

Is it expedient for the United States, at this time, to acknowledge the independence of Buenos Ayres, or of any other part of the Spanish dominions in America now in a state of revolt?

32

These questions indicated that the President had some doubts, not only as to the expediency of recognition at that time, but also as to the Executive power in that regard, and especially under circumstances involving complications with Spain. Though it seems to have been agreed that the Executive was competent to extend recognition, it was also decided that it would be inexpedient to acknowledge the independence of any of the provinces at that time, and this apparently led some members of Congress to conclude that the determination was taken, "professedly to the end that Congress might take the lead in the matter." Some point was also given to this belief by the assertion of the President himself that it was not expedient to take the step "without the certainty of being supported in it by the public opinion, which, if decidedly favorable to the measure, would be manifested by measures of Congress." 33

This somewhat hesitant and uncertain attitude of the President with regard to his own powers probably greatly encouraged the

32 Writings of James Monroe, VI, 31.

33 Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, IV, 71.

proponents of Congressional rights and authority in respect to recognition. Clay mounted what John Quincy Adams called "his South American great horse," and early in December announced his intention to move the recognition of Buenos Ayres, and probably of Chile, a move concerning which Adams wrote: "Mr. Calhoun pronounced himself most decisively against the measure; I had done the same before, and the President now, after some hesitation, did the same.'' 34 The casual references to South American affairs in Monroe's message of December 2, 1817,35 brought forth two resolutions in the House, one by Clay, proposing an inquiry to determine what legal provisions might be necessary to insure the neutrality of the United States in the contest between Spain and her colonies, the other by Robertson of Louisiana, calling upon the President for information "relative to the independence and political condition of the provinces of Spanish America." Both resolutions were adopted without opposition,36 and indicated at least a growing interest on the part of Congress in the movement for the recognition of the revoited colonies.

These preliminaries paved the way for the first discussion in Congress of the right of recognition, which occurred in 1818. Clay began the contest March 24th, when he moved to insert into the appropriation bill then under consideration a provision for the sum of $18,000, "as the outfit and one year's salary of a minister to be deputed from the United States to the independent provinces of the River Plata, in South America." 37 Clay's attention was probably called to the doubtful constitutionality of his measure in that it proposed to recognize the independence of these provinces before the Executive had acted, for on the following day he redrafted the amendment to read as follows: "For one year's salary, and an outfit to a minister to the United Provinces of the Rio de la Plata, whenever the President shall deem it expedient to send a minister to the said United Provinces, a sum not exceeding eighteen thousand dollars."' 38 Clay spoke at length for the provision as thus changed. He at first claimed for Congress no exclusive or independent power of recognition, arguing merely that Congress had a concurrent power through

34 Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, IV, 28.

35 Richardson, Messages and Papers, II, 13.

36 Annals of Congress, 15th Cong., 1st sess., I, 401-404, 406-408.
37 Ibid., 15th Cong., 1st sess., II, 1468.

38 Ibid., 1500.