|
that only Congress has the authority to decide whether to place the nation in a state of war. Here's a sample of their thoughts on the matter:
Hamilton described Congress’s power to make war as “the peculiar and exclusive province of Congress, when the nation is at peace, to change that state into a state of war.”
Hamilton also wrote: “While, therefore, the legislature can alone declare war, can alone actually transfer the nation from a state of peace to a state of hostility, it belongs to the “executive power” to do whatever else the law of nations, cooperating with the treaties of the country, enjoin in the intercourse of the United States with foreign powers. In this distribution of authority, the wisdom of our Constitution is manifested. It is the province and duty of the executive to preserve to the nation the blessings of peace. The legislature alone can interrupt them by placing the nation in a state of war.”
In a special message to Congress on Foreign Policy (Dec. 6, 1805), President Jefferson remarked, “Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war . . .”
Jefferson again: “The idea seems to gain credit that the naval powers combined against France will prohibit supplies even of provisions to that country. Should this be formally notified I should suppose congress would be called, because it is a justifiable cause of war, and as the Executive cannot decide the question of war on the affirmative side, neither ought it to do so on the negative side,”
In a letter to General William Moultrie (Aug. 28, 1793), President Washington wrote: “The constitution vests the power to declare war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.”
Madison wrote: “In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department.”
Madison also wrote: “‘The president shall be commander in chief of the army and navy of the United States, and of the militia when called into the actual service of the United States.’ There can be no relation worth examining between this power and the general power of making treaties. And instead of being analogous to the power of declaring war, it affords a striking illustration of the incompatibility of the two powers in the same hands. Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, whether a war ought to be commenced, continued, or concluded.”
And in a message to Congress urging war against Great Britain (June 14, 1812), President Madison wrote: “Whether the United States shall continue passive under these progressive usurpations and these accumulating wrongs, or, opposing force to force in defense of their national rights, shall commit a just cause into the hands of the Almighty Disposer of Events, avoiding all connections which might entangle it in the contest or views of other powers, and preserving a constant readiness to concur in an honorable reestablishment of peace and friendship, is a solemn question which the Constitution wisely confides to the legislative department of the Government.”
In the Pennsylvania ratifying convention, James Wilson argued (Dec. 7, 1787): “This system will not hurry us into war; it is calculated to guard against it. It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such distress, for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large.”
|