The treaties with certain Indian nations, which were laid before you with my message of the 25th May last, suggested two questions to my mind, viz: 1st, Whether those treaties were to be considered as perfected, and, consequently, as obligatory, without being ratified? If not, then, 2dly, Whether both, or either, and which of them, ought to be ratified? On these questions I request your opinion and advice. You have, indeed, advised me "_to execute and enjoin an observance of_" the treaty with the Wyandots, &c. You, gentlemen, doubtless intended to be clear and explicit; and yet, without further explanation, I fear I may misunderstand your meaning: for if by my _executing_ that treaty you mean that I should make it (in a more particular and immediate manner than it now is) the act of Government, then it follows that I am to ratify it. If you mean by my _executing it_ that I am to see that it be carried into effect and operation, then I am led to conclude, either that you consider it as being perfect and obligatory in its present state, and therefore to be executed and observed; or that you consider it to derive its completion and obligation from the silent approbation and ratification which my proclamation may be construed to imply. Although I am inclined to think that the latter is your intention, yet it certainly is best that all doubts respecting it be removed. Permit me to observe, that it will be proper for me to be informed of your sentiments relative to the treaty with the Six Nations, previous to the departure of the Governor of the Western Territory; and therefore I recommend it to your early consideration. GEO. WASHINGTON. _September_ 17, 1789. _Ordered_, That the President's message be committed to Messrs. CARROLL, KING, and READ. FRIDAY, September 18. The Senate entered on executive business. Mr. CARROLL, on behalf of the committee appointed yesterday, reported as follows: The committee, to whom was referred a message from the President of the United States of the 17th September, 1789, report: