s no limitation to the exercise of the power, save such
restrictions as arise from the constitution, as to the subjects on
which it is to act; nor is there any participation of the power,
with any other branch of the government, in any way alluded to.

Am I borne out in this declaration by the clause referred to? That
I am, seems to me susceptible of demonstration. To the President
and Senate has been imparted the power of making treaties. Well,
what is a treaty? If a word have a known signification by the
common consent of mankind, and it be used without any qualification
in a law, constitution, or otherwise, the fair inference is that the
received import of such word is intended to be conveyed. If so, the
extent of the power intended to be granted admits of no difficulty.
It reaches to those acts of courtesy and kindness, which
philanthropy has established in the intercourse of nations, as well
as to treaties of commerce, of boundaries, and, in fine, to every
international subject whatsoever. This exposition is supported by
such unequivocal authority, that it is believed it will not be
questioned. I, therefore, infer that it will be readily yielded,
that in regard to the treaty, in aid of which this bill is
exhibited, the treaty-making power has not exceeded its just limits.
So far we have proceeded on sure ground; we now come to the pith of
the question. Is the legislative sanction necessary to give it
effect? I answer in the negative. Why? Because, by the second
clause of the sixth article of the constitution, it is declared that
all treaties made or which shall be made, under the authority of the
United States, shall be the supreme law of the land. If this clause
means anything, it is conclusive of the question.

If the treaty be a supreme law, then whatsoever municipal regulation
comes within its provisions must _ipso_ _facto_ be annulled--unless
gentlemen contend there can be at the same time two supreme laws,
emanating from the same authority, conflicting with each other, and
still both in full vigor and effect. This would indeed produce a
state of things without a parallel in human affairs, unless indeed
its like might be found in the history of the Popes. In one
instance, we are told, there were three at one time roaming over the
Christian world, all claiming infallibility, and denouncing their
anathemas against all who failed to yield implicit obedience to
their respective mandates, when to co