FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   592   593   594   595   596   597   598   599   600   601   602   603  
604   605   606   607   608   609   610   611   612   613   614   615   616   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   >>   >|  
. 580, 598-599 (1884). The repealability of treaties by act of Congress was first asserted in an opinion of the Attorney General in 1854 (6 Op. Atty. Gen. 291). The year following the doctrine was adopted judicially in a lengthy and cogently argued opinion of Justice Curtis, speaking for a United States circuit court in Taylor _v._ Morton, 23 Fed. Cas. No. 13,799 (1855). The case turned on the following question: "If an act of Congress should levy a duty upon imports, which an existing commercial treaty declares shall not be levied, so that the treaty is in conflict with the act, does the former or the latter give the rule of decision in a judicial tribunal of the United States, in a case to which one rule or the other must be applied?" Citing the supremacy clause of the Constitution, Justice Curtis said: "There is nothing in the language of this clause which enables us to say, that in the case supposed, the treaty, and not the act of Congress, is to afford the rule. Ordinarily, treaties are not rules prescribed by sovereigns for the conduct of their subjects, but contracts, by which they agree to regulate their own conduct. This provision of our Constitution has made treaties part of our municipal law. But it has not assigned to them any particular degree of authority in our municipal law, nor declared whether laws so enacted shall or shall not be paramount to laws otherwise enacted. * * * [This] is solely a question of municipal, as distinguished from public law. The foreign sovereign between whom and the United States a treaty has been made, has a right to expect and require its stipulations to be kept with scrupulous good faith; but through what internal arrangements this shall be done, is, exclusively, for the consideration of the United States. Whether the treaty shall itself be the rule of action of the people as well as the government, whether the power to enforce and apply it shall reside in one department, or another, neither the treaty itself, nor any implication drawn from it, gives him any right to inquire. If the people of the United States were to repeal so much of their constitution as makes treaties part of their municipal law, no foreign sovereign with whom a treaty exists could justly complain, for it is not a matter with which he has any concern. * * * By the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, power is conferred on Congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and to lay
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   592   593   594   595   596   597   598   599   600   601   602   603  
604   605   606   607   608   609   610   611   612   613   614   615   616   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

treaty

 
States
 

United

 

Congress

 
treaties
 

municipal

 
Constitution
 

foreign

 

sovereign

 

people


clause

 

question

 

conduct

 

regulate

 

opinion

 

Justice

 

enacted

 
Curtis
 

distinguished

 

assigned


stipulations
 

solely

 
degree
 
public
 

declared

 

paramount

 

expect

 

require

 
authority
 

consideration


exists

 
justly
 

complain

 

repeal

 

constitution

 

matter

 

conferred

 

commerce

 

nations

 

article


section

 

concern

 

eighth

 

inquire

 

exclusively

 
Whether
 

action

 
arrangements
 

internal

 

government