Dr. Leib's patriotic speech, addressed to the House of Representatives of Pennsylvania, February 24, 1796 : throwing light on the most important proceedings of the federal government ; touching on the treaty with Great Britain ; and many other subjects, which materially concern every true friend to his country.

  • Leib, Michael, 1761-1822.
Date:
1796
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Dr. Leib's patriotic speech, addressed to the House of Representatives of Pennsylvania, February 24, 1796 : throwing light on the most important proceedings of the federal government ; touching on the treaty with Great Britain ; and many other subjects, which materially concern every true friend to his country. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the National Library of Medicine (U.S.), through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the National Library of Medicine (U.S.)

    17/32
    ( *! ) Aefit be more virtuous or more beneficial in nations thaw in individuals ? Why mould that which every man of an elevated mind would difdain in his per- fonal character, be entitled to more lenity and tole- ration, if undertaken by him as minifter of ftate ?— Who is there that fees, that this inextricable laby- rinth was artfully invented, left people mould un- dcrftand their own alFairs, and uudcrftanding become inclined to Conduct them ? With refpect to treaties it is to be fufpectcd, that they are in all inftanccs fu- perfluous. But, if public engagements ought to be entered into, what eflential difference is there be- tween the governments of two countries endeavour- ing to over-reach each other, and the bsyer and fel- ler in any private tranfadion adopting a fnnilar proceedingi But if this is an infecurity, how muchftronger does it appear in giving the forma- tion of treati-s to fmaller bodies, where influence and corruption may be more eafily cxercifed, and the public good be made fubfervient to individual iutereft or private ambition ? A body finall and permanent as the Senate, ought leaft of all to be trufted with extraordinary powers ; for it is the permanency of the Britiih Parliament that makes it a minifterial engine, and the permanency of the Se- nate, and its relation with the Prefident, are infu- perablc objections to committing the formation of treaties to them alone. The checks of the different branches of the government upon each other in the formation of laws, have occafioned volumes of pane- gyricks ; but what becomes of fuch checks, when the moft important of all laws, treaties, are to be formed ? Here the Prefident and Senate, who have been aptly compared to man and wife, are to be the only checks upon each other, and the immediate Reprcfcntatives of the people are to have no voice in treaty legiflation ! A law which can be repealed at the will of the nation, requires the concurrence C of