Class jJKa4J- 
 Rnnlc lA A 
 
 g g| 
 
( h r-,^ 
 
 
 THE 
 
 Constitution 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Uiq-ITED STATES. 
 
^' / /- o^ 
 
 f 
 
 !*■ 
 
 sS 
 
 ^ 
 
 # 
 
 # 
 
 %^ 
 

 THE 
 
 CONSTITUTIOISr 
 
 John p. G. Miller, 
 AttOfMy ^ Coumellor at Lam, 
 
 Street, 
 SAN FRANCISCO, CAL 
 
 UNITED STATES 
 
 AIOfOTATED BY 
 
 ROBEUT DESTT, 
 I 
 
 Author of "Federal Procedure," "Federal Citations," 
 ** Commerce and Navigation," "Sliipping 
 and Admiralty," etc. 
 MERVYU J. SAMUELS 
 
 ATT O R N E Y- AT ~ L AW 
 
 1013 UNION i:AyiNG3 B/.HK BUILDING, 
 ^ SAN FRANCISCO: 
 
 SUMNER WHITNEY & CO. 
 
 1881. 
 
JK 
 
 
 COPYRIGHT 
 BY SUMNEK WHITNEY & CO. 
 
 1879. 
 
 
 1^'C 
 
 Bacon & Company, Printers, 
 San Francisco, Cal. 
 
I 
 
 i 
 
 PEEFAOE 
 
 In the preparation of this work the author has endeav- 
 ored to furnish all the authorities derived from the decis- 
 ions of the Supreme Court and the various Circuit and 
 District Courts of the United States, as well as of the 
 courts of last resort of the several States, touching the 
 points which have been the subject of controversy since 
 the adoption of the Constitution, and down to the time of 
 publication of this volume. The points decided have been 
 condensed as much as possible, leaving to the reader the 
 opportunity to consult the decisions in which such points 
 have been discussed by references to the authorities con- 
 sulted. The notes will, it is believed, furnish a full and 
 complete and at the same time a ready index to the points 
 . which have been called in question for the last hundred 
 
 years. 
 
 EOBEUT DESTY. 
 
 September, 1879. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PBBAMBLE. 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 Sko. 1.— Legislative power vested in Congress. . 
 
 Senate and House of Legislature. 
 Seo. !8.— 1. Representatives, election of. 
 
 qualification of electors. 
 
 2. Qualifications of members. 
 
 3. Apportionment of Representatives. 
 
 of direct taxes. 
 Census to be taken decennially. 
 Ratio of representation. 
 
 4. Vacancies in I epresentation. 
 
 Executive to order election to fill. 
 
 5. House to choose its own officers. 
 
 to have sole power of impeachment. 
 Seo. 3.— 1. Senate, of what composed. 
 
 Senators, how and when chosen, 
 each to have one vote. 
 
 2. Senators to be divided into tlireo classes. 
 
 first class to vacate in two years, 
 second class in four years, 
 third class at end of sixth year, 
 one-third to be chosen every second year, 
 vacancies diu-ing recess to be temporarily filled. 
 
 3. Qualifications for Senator. 
 
 thirty years of age. 
 nine years a citizen, 
 to be inhabitant of State for ■which chosen. 
 
 4. Vice-President to be President of Senate. 
 
 to have no vote except in case of a tie. 
 
 5. Senate to choose other officers. 
 
 to choose President pro tern, in absence of Vice* 
 President. 
 
 6. Senate to have sole power to try impeachments. 
 
 when so sitting, to be on oath or affirmation. 
 Chief Justice to preside on trial of President, 
 concurrence of two-thirds n ecessary for conviction. 
 
 7. Judgment on conviction, extent of. 
 
 not to operate against trial according to law. 
 Seo. 4:.— 1. Time and mode of elections to be fixed by State Legisla- 
 tures. 
 Congress may alter State regulations, 
 except as to the place of elections. 
 2. Congress to assemble at least once a year. 
 
 meeting to be on first Monday of December, 
 unless otherwise appointed by law. 
 Seo. 6.— 1. Each house to judge the elections, returns, and qualifica- 
 tions of its members, 
 majority to constitute a business quorum. 
 
 t73 
 
8 CONTENTS. 
 
 Art. I, Sec. 5,— Continued. 
 
 smaller number may adjourn and compel at- 
 tendance. 
 
 penalties may be prescribed for non-attend- 
 ance. 
 
 2. Each house may determine rules of its proceedings. 
 
 may punish for disorderly behavior, 
 with concurrence of two-thirds may expel. 
 
 3. Each house shall keep a journal of proceedings. 
 
 may publish the same. 
 
 yeas and nays to be entered on desire of one- 
 fifth. 
 
 4. Neither house shall adjourn for more than three days with- 
 
 out consent of the other, 
 nor to any other place than that in which 
 they are sitting. 
 Sec. 6.— 1. Compensation for services to be fixed by law. 
 
 to be paid out of U. S. Treasury. 
 Members to be privileged from arrest during the session- 
 except for treason, felony, and breach of peace. 
 to be privileged in going to and returning 
 
 from tiie sessions. 
 for speech or debate not to be questioned else- 
 where. 
 2. No member to be eligible for a civil office imder Govern- 
 ment created or increased in emoluments 
 during his term. 
 no person holding U. S. office to be eligible as 
 a member. 
 HBO. '7.— 1. Bills for raising revenue to originate in the House ; but the 
 Senate may propose or concur with amendments. 
 
 2. Every bUl to be presented to the President for his ap- 
 
 proval, 
 if returned, objections to be entered on the 
 
 journal, 
 and to be reconsidered. 
 on concurrence of two-thirds, the bill to be 
 
 sent to other house. 
 if approved by two-thirds, to become a law. 
 the vote of both houses to be by yeas and nays, 
 names of members voting to be entered on 
 
 journals. 
 if bill not returned by President in ten days, 
 to be a law, unless Congress, by adjournment, 
 prevent the return. 
 
 3. Concurrent resolutions to be presented to the President ex- 
 
 cepton question of adjourmnent. 
 
 if disapproved, requho two-thh-ds 
 
 to pass them. 
 
 5B0. 8.— 1. Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, 
 
 imposts, and excises. 
 
 to pay debts and provide for common defense 
 
 and general welfare. 
 all duties, imposts, and excises to be imiform. 
 2. to borrow money on credit of U. S. 
 
 8. to regulate commerce 
 
 with foreign nations, 
 among the several States, 
 and with the Indian tribes. 
 
 4. to establish uniform rule of naturalization, and 
 
 uniform laws on subject of bankruptcies. 
 5" to coin money and regulate its value, and fix 
 
 the standard of weights and measures. 
 
CONTENTS. 9 
 
 Art. I, Sec. 6.— Continued. 
 
 6. to provide for punishment of counterfeiting 
 
 securities and coin of U. S. 
 
 7. to establisli post-offices and post-roads. 
 
 8. to promote progress of science and useful arts 
 
 by securing to autliors and inventors exclu- 
 sive riglits. 
 
 9. to constitute tribunals Inferior to Supreme 
 
 Court. 
 
 10. to define and punish piracies and felonies on 
 
 high seas, and offenses against law of na- 
 tions. 
 
 11. to declare war, 
 
 grant letters of marque and reprisal, 
 and make rules concerning captures. 
 
 12. to raise and support armies. 
 
 appropriations to be limited to two years. 
 
 13. to provide and maintain a navy. 
 
 14. To make rules for government of land and naval forces. 
 
 15. To provide for calling forth the militia. 
 
 to execute laws, suppress insurrections, etc. 
 
 16. To provide for organizing and arming the militia. 
 
 and for governing them when in employ of 
 
 Govenmient. 
 authority of States as to appointment of olfi- 
 
 cers reserved, 
 also as to disciplining militia. 
 
 17. To exercise exclusive legislation over seat of government. 
 
 and over sites of public works or buildings. 
 
 18. To make aU laws necessary and proper to carry out its 
 
 powers. 
 Seo. 9.— 1. Migration or importation of slaves, restriction of. 
 tax or duty may be imposed. 
 2. Habeas corpus not to be suspended except. 
 8. No bill of attainder or ex post facto law to be passed. 
 
 4. No direct tax unless in proportion to census. 
 
 5. No tax or duty on exports from any State. 
 
 6. No preference to be given in commerce or revenue to 
 
 ports of any State. 
 no entry, clearance, or duties on vessels 
 bound to or from States. 
 
 7. Money to be drawn only on appropriations made by law. 
 
 statements of receipts and expenditures to be pub- 
 lished. 
 
 8. No title of nobility to be granted. 
 
 no officer to accept presents from foreign powers. 
 SkO' lO.— 1. No State to enter into any treaty, alliance, or confedera- 
 tion. , . , 
 or grant letters of marque and reprisal, 
 or coin money. 
 or emit bills of credit, 
 or make anything but gold and silver a legal 
 
 tender, 
 or pass any bill of attainder, 
 or ex post facto law. 
 or law impairing obligation of contract, 
 or grant any title of nobility. 
 2. No State, without consent of Congress, shall lay any 
 imposts or duties, 
 except absolutely necessary. 
 and the net produce to be for use of Gov- 
 ernment. 
 and the laws subject to revision of Congress. 
 
10 COIO'ENTS. 
 
 Art. I, Sec. 10. —Continued. 
 
 3. No State, witlioiTt consent of Congress, to lay duty on 
 tonnage. 
 or keep troops or ships of war in time of 
 
 peace. 
 or enter into any agreement or compact with 
 
 other States, or with a foreign power, 
 miless actually invaded or in Imminent dan- 
 ger. 
 
 ARTICLE n. 
 
 Sec. 1.— 1. The executive power is vested in a President. 
 
 his term of ofiace shall be four years, 
 the term of ofiace of Vice-President shall 
 
 he the same, 
 they shall be elected together. 
 'J. Each State shall appoint Presidential electors. 
 
 to be in number equal to the whole number of 
 
 their Senators and Representatives. 
 no Senator or Representative or public U. S. 
 ofacer shall be an elector. 
 
 3. Manner of voting by electors. 
 
 Repealed. See Xllth Amendment. 
 
 4. Congress may determine time of choosing electors. 
 
 and the day of their meeting to elect, 
 to be the same throughout the U. S. 
 
 5. Natural-born citizens alone eligible for President. 
 
 to have attained the age of thirty-five, and 
 been fourteen years a resident. 
 
 6. The Vice-President to assume the duties of President in 
 
 case of his death, resignation, etc. 
 
 Congress may by law provide for the case of death, resig- 
 nation, etc., of the President. 
 
 and declare what officer shall then act. 
 
 7. The compensation of the President shall not be increased 
 
 or diminished duruig his term of 
 ofiace. 
 and he shall not receive during that pe- 
 riod any other emolument. 
 
 8. Oath or affirmation of President. 
 
 SBC. a.— 1. Presidentshall be CommanderinChiefof Army and Navy. 
 
 and of the Militia of the several States, when 
 in service of the U. S. 
 
 may require written opinions of executive of- 
 ficGrs 
 
 may grant reprieves and pardons, except in im- 
 peachments. 
 
 2. By and with consent of Congress, may make treaties. 
 
 and shall nominate and appoint Ambassadors, etc. 
 and all other officers whose appointments are not 
 
 otherwise provided for. 
 Congress may vest appointment of uif erior officers 
 
 as they think proper. 
 
 3. President may fill vacancies during recess of Senate. 
 Seo. 3.— President to give information of state of the Union. 
 
 to recommend measures to Congress. 
 
 on extraordinary occasions may convene Congress. 
 
 in case of disagreement may adjourn Congress. 
 
 to receive Ambassadors and Ministers. 
 
 to take care that the laws are admmistered. 
 
 to commission all officers of the U. S. 
 
CONTENTS. 11 
 
 Art. II.— Continued. 
 
 Seo. 4.— President and Vice-President to be removed on Impeach- 
 ment for treason, bribery, or high crimes. 
 
 AETICLB III. 
 
 tJEO. 1.— Judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court and inferior 
 
 Courts, to be established by Congress. 
 
 Judges to hold office during good behavior. 
 
 compensation not to be oiminished during 
 continuance in office. 
 Seo. ».— 1. Jurisdiction to extend to all cases arising under the Con- 
 stitution, laws, and treaties. 
 
 to all cases affecting Ambassadors, Ministers, 
 and Consuls. 
 
 to all cases of admiralty and maritime juris- 
 diction. 
 
 to controversies to which the U. S. is a party. 
 
 to controversies between two or more States. 
 
 between a State and citizens of another State. 
 
 between citizens of different States. 
 
 between citizens of the same State claiming 
 lands under grants of different States. 
 
 and between a State, or its citizens, and for- 
 eign States, citizens, or subjects. 
 
 2. Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction 
 
 in all cases affecting Ambassadors, Ministers, or 
 Consuls. 
 
 and cases in which a State is a party. 
 
 and appellate jurisdiction both as to law and 
 fact, under regulations to be made by Con- 
 gress. 
 
 3. Trials of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, to be 
 
 by jury, 
 to be had in State where crime has been committed, 
 when not committed within a State, to be where 
 Congress may direct. 
 Seo. 3.— 1. Treason consists in levying war against, or adhering to 
 enemies of the U. S., giving them aid and 
 comfort. 
 no conviction unless on testimony of two wit- 
 nesses. 
 or on confession in open Court. 
 2. Congress may declare the punishment for treason. 
 
 no attainder shall work corruption of blood or 
 forfeiture beyond the life of the party at- 
 tainted. 
 
 AUTICLE IV. 
 
 Seo. 1.— Full faith and credit to be given to public acts, records, and 
 judicial proceedings of States. 
 Congress may prescribe the manner of their proof, 
 and the effect thereof. ■ 
 Seo. S.— 1. Citizens of each State are entitled to the privileges and 
 immunities of citizens in the several States. 
 
 2. Fugitives from justice to be delivered up to State having 
 
 jurisdiction of the crime. 
 
 3. Fugitives from service or labor to be delivered up. 
 
 Seo. 3.— 1. New States may be admitted by Congress, but they can- 
 not be formed within the jurisdiction of a State without 
 consent of its Legislature. 
 
12 CONTENTS. 
 
 Art. ry, Sec. 2.— Continued. 
 
 nor by the junction of two or more States without consent 
 of States concerned and of Congress. 
 2. Congress may dispose of and make rules and regulations 
 for territories or other property belonging to the U. S. 
 Claims of the U. S. or of a State not to be prejudiced. 
 SBO. 4.— a republican form of government guaranteed to each State, 
 and protection of each against invasion, 
 and against domestic violence. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 Congress may propose amendments, when deemed neces- 
 sary. 
 
 or on application of two-thirds of the State Legis- 
 latures. 
 
 convention to be called. 
 
 to be ratified by Legislatures or conventions of 
 three-fourths of the States. 
 
 no State, without its consent, can be deprived of 
 its equal suffrage in the Senate. 
 
 ARTICLE VI. 
 
 1- ^ existing liabilities are valid against the U. S. 
 
 2. The Constitution, laws, and treaties are the supreme law 
 
 of the land, 
 - .„ ^ judges in every State bound thereby. 
 
 3. All oflacers, executive, legislative, and judicial, both Fed- 
 
 eral and State, to be bound by oath or affir- 
 mation to support the Constitution. 
 no religious test shall be required as a qualifi- 
 cation to any office. 
 
 ARTICLE Vn. 
 
 The ratification of nine States sufficient. 
 
 Attestation clause. 
 
 Signatures. 
 
 AMENDMENTS. 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 Congress can make no law respecting religion. 
 
 or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, 
 or the right to peaceably assemble and petition for 
 
 P6QP6SS* 
 
 ARTICLE II. 
 ^"^rin^e? ^^ People to keep and bear arms shall not be 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 No soldier to be quartered in any house without the consent 
 of the owner. 
 nor in time of war but in a manner prescribed by 
 
CONTENTS. 13 
 
 AETICLE IV. 
 
 The right of security against searches and seizures shall not 
 be violated. 
 , warrants on probable cause to be supported by 
 oath or afllrmation. 
 the place, person, and thing to be described in the 
 warrant. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 Presentment or indictment before grand jury essential to 
 
 trial for crime, 
 except as to land or naval forces or militia in 
 
 time of war. 
 no person to be put twice in jeopardy, 
 nor be compelled to be witness against himself, 
 nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property 
 
 without due process of law. 
 nor shall private property be taken for public 
 
 use without compensation. 
 
 AETICLE VI. 
 
 In criminal trials, accused shall have the right to a speedy 
 
 and public trial, 
 by a jury, of State and district where crime was 
 
 committed, 
 and to be informed of the nature and cause of 
 
 and to be confronted with witnesses against him. 
 
 and to have compulsory process for witnesses in 
 his favor. 
 
 and to have the assistance of counsel for his de- 
 fense. 
 
 AETICLE Vn. 
 
 In civil actions, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved 
 where the value in controversy exceeds twenty dol- 
 lars, 
 facts tried by jury are re-examinable only according 
 to the rules of common law. 
 
 AETICLE Vni. 
 
 Excessive bail shall not be required. 
 
 nor excessive fines imposed. 
 
 nor cruel nor imusual punishments inflicted. 
 
 AETICLE IX. . 
 
 The enmneration of rights not to disparage others retained 
 by the people. 
 
 AETICLE X. 
 
 Powers not delegated nor prohibited to the States are re- 
 served to the States or to tlie people. 
 Desty ' Fed. Con.— 3. 
 
14 CONTENTS. 
 
 ARTICLE XI. 
 
 The judicial power not to extend to actions against a State 
 by citizen of another State, or of a foreigji State. 
 
 ARTICLE XII. 
 
 Presidential electors to meet in their respective States. 
 
 and vote hy ballot for President and Vice-Presi- 
 dent, 
 the ballots for each office to be distinct, 
 distinct lists to be made, signed, certified, and 
 
 transmitted to the President of the Senate, 
 the President of the Senate to open the certifi- 
 cates In presence of both houses of Congress, 
 and the votes shall then be coimted. 
 the person having the greatest number of votes 
 
 shall be President, 
 if there be no majority the House of Represent- 
 atives shall elect from those having the high- 
 est number, not exceeding three, 
 the votes shall be taken by States, each State 
 
 having one vote. 
 a quorum shall consist of a representation from 
 
 two-thirds of the States. 
 a majority of all the States necessary to a choice, 
 if the House neglect to choose a President, the 
 
 Vice-President shall act as such, 
 the person having tlie greatest number of votes 
 for Vice-President shall be Vice-President, 
 if it be a majority of the electors, 
 if not such majority, then the Senate shall 
 choose the Vice-President from the two high- 
 est on the list, 
 a quorum shall consist of two thirds of the 
 
 whole number of Senators. 
 a majority shall be necessary for a choice, 
 constitutional ineligibility for President ren- 
 ders a person iuehgible for Vice-President. 
 
 ARTICLE XIII. 
 
 Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except for crime, 
 shaU exist in tlie United States. 
 Congress may enforce this article. 
 
 ARTICLE XIV. 
 
 Sec. 1.— All persons born or naturalized in the U. S. are citizens of 
 the U. S. and of the State where they reside. 
 States cannot abridge the privileges and immu- 
 nities of citizens, 
 nor deprive any person of life, liberty, or prop- 
 erty without due process of law. 
 nor deny to any person the equal protection of 
 the law. 
 Seo. ».— Representatives shall be apportioned according to the whole 
 number of persons in each State, exclud- 
 ing Indians not taxed, 
 but when the right to vote is denied to male 
 citizens over twenty-one, the basis of 
 representation shall be reduced accord- 
 ingly. 
 
CONTENTS. 15 
 
 Art. XIV, Sec. 2.— Continued. 
 
 except for participation in the rebellion or 
 for other crimes. 
 Skc. 3.— Persons engaged in insurrection or rebellion having previ- 
 ously taken the oath to support the Constitution 
 of the U. S. are cUsqualifiecl f rom holding office. 
 Congress may by a two-third vote of each house re- 
 move the disability. 
 Seo. 4.— The validity of the public debt of the U. S., authorized by 
 law, shall not be questioned, 
 debts or obligations incurred in aid of rebellion are ille- 
 gal and void, 
 claims for loss or emancipation of any slave are illegal 
 and void. 
 Sec. 5.— Congress shall have power to enforce these provisions. 
 
 ARTICLE XV. 
 
 Sec. 1.— The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied or abridged 
 on account of race, color, or previous condition of servi- 
 tude. 
 
 Sec. ».— Congress shall have power to enforce this article. 
 
 y 
 
 F 
 
 
<l5k 
 
ConstitutioiL 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNITED STATES. 
 
 We the People of the United States, in Order to 
 form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure 
 domestic Tranquility, provide for the common de- 
 fence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the 
 Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, 
 do ordain and establish this Constitutiojst for the 
 United States of America. 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 Section". 1. All legislative Powers herein granted 
 shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, 
 which shall consist of a Senate and House of Repre- 
 sentatives. 
 
 Section. 2. ^The House of Representatives shall be 
 composed of Members chosen every second Year by 
 the People of the several States, and the Electors in 
 each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for 
 Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State 
 Legislature. 
 
 2 No Person shall be a Representative who shall not 
 have attained to the Age of twenty-five Years, and 
 been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and 
 who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that 
 State in which ho shall be chosen. 
 
Art. I, Sec. 3 constitution. 18 
 
 3 [Representatives and direct Taxes shall be appor- 
 tioned among the several States which may be included 
 within this Union, according to their respective Num- 
 bers, which shall be determined by adding to the 
 whole Number of free Persons, including those bound 
 to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians 
 not taxed, three-fifths of all other Persons.] The 
 actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years 
 after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United 
 States, and within every subsequent Term of ten 
 Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. 
 The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one 
 for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have 
 at Least one Representative ; and until such enumera- 
 tion shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall 
 be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode- 
 Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut 
 five, New- York six. New Jersey four, Pennsylvania 
 eight, Delaware one, Maryland six^ Virginia ten, North 
 Carolina five. South Carolina five, and Georgia three. 
 
 4When vacancies happen in the Representation from 
 any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue 
 Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies. 
 
 ^The House of Representatives shall chuse their 
 Speaker and other Officers ; and shall have the sole 
 Power of Impeachment. 
 
 Section. 3. iThe Senate of the United States shall 
 be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen 
 by the Legislature thereof, for six Years ; and each 
 Senator shall have one Vote. 
 
 2 Immediately after they shall be assembled in Con- 
 sequence of the first Election, they shall be divided 
 as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of 
 the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the 
 Expiration of the second year, of the second Class at 
 the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third 
 Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one- 
 third may be chosen every second Year ; and if Vacan- 
 cies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the 
 
19 CONSTITUTION Art. I, Sec. 4 
 
 Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive 
 thereof may make temporary Appointments until the 
 next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill 
 such Yacancies. 
 
 2 No Person shall be a Senator who shaU not have 
 attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine 
 Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall 
 not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for 
 which he shall be chosen. 
 
 4 The Vice President of the United States shall be 
 President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, un- 
 less they be equally divided. 
 
 ^The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also 
 a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice 
 President, or when he shall exercise the Office of 
 President of the United States. 
 
 6 The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Im- 
 peachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they 
 shall be on Oath or Affirmation. Wlien the President 
 of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall 
 preside : And no Person shall be convicted without 
 the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present. 
 
 '^Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not ex- 
 tend further than to removal from Office, and disquali- 
 fication to hold and enjoy any Office of honor. Trust 
 or Profit under the United States : but the Party 
 convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to 
 Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, ac- 
 cording to Law. 
 
 Section. 4. ^The Times, Places and Manner of 
 holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, 
 shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature 
 thereof ; but the Congress may at any time by 
 Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the 
 Places of chusing Senators. 
 
 2 The Congress shall assemble at least once in every 
 Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday 
 in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a dif- 
 ferent Day. 
 
Art. I, Sec. 7 constitution. 20 
 
 SECTfON. 5. ^Eacli House shall be the Judge of the 
 Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Mem- 
 bers, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum 
 to do Business ; but a smaller Number may adjourn 
 from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the 
 Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and 
 under such Penalties as each House may provide. 
 
 2 Each House may determine the Rules of its Pro- 
 ceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, 
 and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a 
 Member. 
 
 2 Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceed- 
 ings, and from time to time publish the same, except- 
 ing such Parts as may in their Judgment require 
 Secrecy ; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of 
 either House on any question shall, at the Desire of 
 one fifth of those present, be entered on the Journal. 
 
 ^Neither House, during the Session of Congress, 
 shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for 
 more than three days, nor to any other Place than that 
 in which the two Houses shall be sitting. 
 
 Section. 6. ^The Senators and Representatives shall 
 receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascer- 
 tained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the 
 United States. They shall in all Cases, except Trea- 
 son, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged 
 from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of 
 their respective Houses, and in going to and returning 
 from the same ; and for any Speech or Debate in either 
 House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place. 
 
 2 No Senator or Representative shall, during the 
 Time for which he was elected, be appointed- to any 
 civil Office under the Authority of the United States, 
 which shall have been created, or the Emoluments 
 whereof shall have been encreased during such time ; 
 and no Person holding any Office under the United 
 States, shall be a Member of either House during his 
 Continuance in Office. 
 
 Section. 7. ^All Bills for raising Revenue shall 
 
21 CONSTITUTION. Alt. I, SCC. 8 
 
 originate in the House of Representatives ; but the 
 Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on 
 other Bills. 
 
 2 Every Bill which shall have passed the House of 
 Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become 
 a Law, be presented to the President of the United 
 States ; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he 
 shall return it, with his Objections to that House in 
 which it shall have originated, who shall enter the 
 Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to 
 reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds 
 of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be 
 sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, 
 by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if ap- 
 proved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a 
 Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses 
 shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names 
 of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be 
 entered on the Journal of each House respectively. 
 If any Bill shall not be returned by the President 
 within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have 
 been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in 
 like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Con- 
 gress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in 
 which Case it shall not be a Law. 
 
 3 Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the 
 Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representa- 
 tives may be necessary (except on a question of Ad- 
 journment) shall be presented to the President of the 
 United States ; and before the Same shall take Effect, 
 shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by 
 him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and 
 House of Representatives, according to the Rules and 
 Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill. 
 
 Section. 8. ^The Congress shall have Power To lay 
 and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay 
 the Debts and provide for the common Defence and 
 general Welfare of the United States ; but all Duties, 
 Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the 
 United States ; 
 
Art. I, Sec. 8 constitution. 22 
 
 2 To borrow Money on the credit of the United 
 States ; 
 
 3 To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and 
 among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes ; 
 
 4 To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, 
 and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies 
 throughout the United States ; 
 
 5 To coin Money, regulate the Yalue thereof, and of 
 foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and 
 Measures ; 
 
 *»To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting 
 the Securities and current Coin of the United States ; 
 
 '^To establish Post Offices and post Roads ; 
 
 ^To promote the Progress of Science and useful 
 Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and 
 Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writ- 
 ings and Discoveries ; 
 
 '-•To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme 
 Court ; 
 
 10 To define and punish Piracies and Felonies com- 
 mitted on the high Seas, and Ofiences against the Law 
 of Nations ; 
 
 11 To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Re- 
 prisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land 
 and Water ; 
 
 12 To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation 
 of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than 
 two Years ; 
 
 I'To provide and maintain a Navy ; 
 
 14 To make Rules for the Government and Regula- 
 tion of the land and naval Forces ; 
 
 i^To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute 
 the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and 
 repel Invasions ; 
 
 16 To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplin- 
 ing, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them 
 as may be employed in the Service of the United 
 States, reserving to the States respectively, the Ap- 
 pointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training 
 
23 CONSTITUTION. Art. I, Sec. 9 
 
 the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by 
 Congress ; 
 
 i'^ To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases what- 
 soever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles 
 square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and 
 the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the 
 Government of the United States, and to exercise like 
 Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of 
 the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall 
 be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, 
 dock- Yards, and other needful Buildings ; — And 
 
 IS To make all Laws which shall be necessary and 
 proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Pow- 
 ers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution 
 in the Government of the United States, or in any 
 Department or Officer thereof ; 
 
 Section. 9. -^The Migration or Importation of such 
 Persons as any of the States now existing shall think 
 proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Con- 
 gress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred 
 and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such 
 Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each'Person. 
 
 2 The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall 
 not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion 
 or Invasion the public Safety may require it. 
 
 2 No Bill of Attainder or expost facto Law shall be 
 passed. 
 
 ^No Capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, 
 unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration 
 herein before directed to be taken. 
 
 5 No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported 
 from any State. 
 
 6 No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of 
 Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over 
 those of another : nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, 
 one State, be obliged to enter, cl^ar, or pay Duties in 
 another. 
 
 ^No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but 
 in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law ; and 
 
Art. II, Sec. 1 constitution. 24 
 
 a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and 
 Expenditures of all public Money shall be published 
 from time to time. 
 
 8 No Title of ISTobility shall be granted by the United 
 States : and no Person holding any Office of Profit or 
 Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the 
 Congress, accept of any present. Emolument, Office, or 
 Title, of any kind whatever, from any Eang, Prince, 
 or foreign State. 
 
 Section. 10. ^No State shall enter into any Treaty, 
 Alliance, or Confederation ; grant Letters of Marque 
 and Reprisal ; coin Money ; emit Bills of Credit ; 
 make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in 
 Payment of Debts ; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex 
 post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of 
 Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. 
 
 2 No State shall, without the Consent of the Con- 
 gress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, 
 except what may be absolutely necessary for executing 
 it's inspection Laws : and the net Produce of all Duties 
 and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, 
 shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United 
 States ; and all such Laws shall be subject to the 
 Revision and Controul of the Congress. 
 
 2 No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, 
 lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of 
 War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement 
 or Compact with another State, or with a foreign 
 Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or 
 in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay. 
 
 ARTICLE. IL 
 
 SBCTioisr. 1. 1 The executive Power shall be vested in 
 a President of the United States of America. He 
 shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, 
 and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the 
 same Term, be elected, as follows 
 
 2 Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the 
 
25 CONSTITUTION. Art. II, Sec. 1 
 
 Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, 
 equal to the whole number of Senators and Repre- 
 sentatives to which the State may be entitled in the 
 Congress : but no Senator or Representative, or Per- 
 son holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the 
 United States, shall be appointed an Elector. 
 
 ^l" The electors shall meet in their respective States, 
 and vote by ballot for two Persons, of whom one at 
 least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with 
 themselves. And they shall make a List of all the 
 Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for 
 each ; which List they shall sign and certify, and 
 transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the 
 United States, directed to the President of the Senate. 
 The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of 
 the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the 
 Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The 
 Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be 
 the President, if such Number be a Majority of the 
 whole Number of Electors appointed ; and if there be 
 more than one who have such Majority, and have an 
 equal Number of Votes, then the House of Repre- 
 sentatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of 
 them for President ; and if no Person have a Majority, 
 then from the five highest on the List the said House 
 shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in 
 chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by 
 States, the Representation from each State having one 
 Vote ; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a 
 Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, 
 and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to 
 a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the 
 President, the Person having the greatest Number of 
 Votes of the Electors sJiall be the Vice-President. But 
 if there should remain two or more who have equal 
 Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the 
 Vice-President, "] 
 
 This Clause has been superseded by the twelfth 
 amendment, p. 35. 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— is. 
 
Art. II, Sec. 2 constitution. 26 
 
 4 The Congress may determine the Time of chusing 
 the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give 
 their Votes ; which Day shall be the same tliroughout 
 the United States. 
 
 ^No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a 
 Citizen of the United States, at the time of the adop- 
 tion of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office 
 of President ; neither shall any Person be eligible to 
 that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of 
 thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident 
 within the United States. 
 
 6In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, 
 or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge 
 the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same 
 shall devolve on the Yice President, and the Congress 
 may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, 
 Resignation, or Inability, both of the President and 
 Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act 
 as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, 
 until the Disability be removed, or a President shall 
 be elected. 
 
 "^The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his 
 Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be en- 
 creased nor diminished during the Period for which 
 he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive 
 within that Period any other Emolument from the 
 United States, or any of them. 
 
 ^Before he enter on- the Execution of his Office, he 
 shall take the following Oath or Affirmation : — ' ' I do 
 solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully exe- 
 cute the Office of President of the United States, and 
 wiU to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and 
 defend the Constitution of the United States. " 
 
 Section. 2. i The President shall be Commander in 
 Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, 
 and of the Militia of the several States, when called 
 into the actual Service of the United States ; he may 
 require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Offi- 
 cer in each of the executive Departments, upon any 
 
27 CONSTITUTION. Art. II, Sec. 4 
 
 Subject relating to the Duties of their respective 
 Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves 
 and Pardons for Offences against the United States, 
 except in Cases of Impeachment. 
 
 2 He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and 
 Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two 
 thirds of the Senators present concur ; and he shall 
 nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent 
 of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other pub- 
 lic Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme 
 Court, and all other Officers of the United States, 
 whose Appointments are not herein otherwise pro- 
 vided for, and which shall be established by Law : but 
 the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of 
 such inferior Officers as they think proper, in the 
 President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the 
 Heads of Departments. 
 
 ^The President shall have Power to fill up all Va- 
 cancies that may happen during the Recess of the 
 Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire 
 at the End of their next Session. 
 
 Section. 3. He shall from time to time give to the 
 Congress Information of the State of the Union, and 
 recommend to their Consideration such Measures as 
 he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on 
 extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or 
 either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between 
 them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he 
 may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think 
 proper ; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public 
 Ministers ; he shall take Care that the Laws be faith- 
 fully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers 
 of the United States. 
 
 Section. 4. The President, Vice President and all 
 civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed 
 from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, 
 Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misde- 
 meanors. 
 
Art. Ill, Sec. 3 constitution. 28 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 Sectioi^. 1. The judicial Power of the United 
 States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in 
 such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to 
 time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the 
 supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their OfGices 
 during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, 
 receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall 
 not be diminished during their Continuance in Office. 
 
 Section. 2. ^The judicial Power shall extend to all 
 Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Consti- 
 tution, the Laws of the ' United States, and Treaties 
 made, or which shall be made, under their Authority ; 
 — to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public 
 Ministers and Consuls ; — to all Cases of admiralty and 
 maritime Jurisdiction ; — to Controversies to which 
 the United States shall be a Party ; — to Controversies 
 between two or more States ;— between a State and 
 Citizens of another State ; — between Citizens of differ- 
 ent States, — between Citizens of the same State claim- 
 ing Lands under Grants of different States, and 
 between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign 
 States, Citizens or Subjects. 
 
 2 In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public 
 Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State 
 shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original 
 Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, 
 the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, 
 both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and 
 under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. 
 
 3 The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Im- 
 peachment, shall be by Jury ; and such Trial shall be 
 held in the State where the said Crimes shall have 
 been committed ; but when not committed within any 
 State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the 
 Congress may by Law have directed. 
 
 Section. 3. i Treason against the United States, 
 shall consist only in levying War against them, or in 
 
29 coNSTiTUTiOK. Art, IV, Sec. 3. 
 
 adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Com- 
 fort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless 
 on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt 
 Act, or on Confession in open Court. 
 
 2 The Congress shall have Power to declare the Pun- 
 ishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall 
 work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during 
 the Life of the Person attainted. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. 
 
 Section. 1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in 
 each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial 
 Proceedings of every other State, And the Congress 
 may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which 
 such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, 
 and the Effect thereof. 
 
 Section. 2. iThe Citizens of each State shall be 
 entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in 
 the several States, 
 
 2 A Person charged in any State with Treason, Fel- 
 ony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be 
 found in another State, shall on Demand of the execu- 
 tive Authority of the State from which he fled, be 
 delivered up to be removed to the State having Juris- 
 diction of the Crime. 
 
 ^No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, 
 under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, 
 in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be 
 discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be 
 delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such 
 Service or Labour may be due. 
 
 Section. 3, ^New States may be admitted by the 
 Congress into this Union ; but no new State shall be 
 formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other 
 State ; nor any State be formed by the Junction of 
 two or more States, or Parts of States, without the 
 Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned 
 as well as of the Congress, 
 
Art. VI CONSTITUTION, 30 
 
 2 The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and 
 make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the 
 Territory or other Property belonging to the United 
 States ; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so 
 construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United 
 States, or of any particular State. 
 
 SECTioisr. 4. The United States shall guarantee to 
 every State in this Union a Republican Form of Gov- 
 ernment, and shall protect each of them against Inva- 
 sion ; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the 
 Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) 
 against domestic Violence. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses 
 shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to 
 this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legis- 
 latures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a 
 Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in 
 either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, 
 as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the 
 Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or 
 by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or 
 the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the 
 Congress ; Provided that no Amendment which may be 
 made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred 
 and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and 
 fourth Clauses in the Nijith Section of the first Article ; 
 and that no State, without its Consent, shall be de- 
 prived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. 
 
 ARTICLE VI. 
 
 ^AU Debts contracted and Engagements entered 
 into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be 
 as valid against the United States under this Constitu- 
 tion, as under the Confederation. 
 
 2 This Constitution, and the Laws of the United 
 States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof ; and 
 
31 coNSTiTUTiaN. Signers 
 
 all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the 
 Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme 
 Law of the Land ; and the Judges in every State shall 
 be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or 
 Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. 
 
 3The Senators and Rej)resentatives before mentioned, 
 and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and 
 all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United 
 States and of the several States, shall be bound by 
 Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution ; but 
 no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualifica- 
 tion to any Office or public Trust under the United 
 States. 
 
 ARTICLE YIL 
 
 The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, 
 shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Consti- 
 tution between the States so ratifying the Same. 
 
 Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the 
 States present the Seventeenth Day of September 
 in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred 
 and Eighty seven, and of the Independance of the 
 United States of America the Twelfth In Wit- 
 ness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our 
 Names, G^ : WASHINGTON— 
 
 Presidt. and Deputy from Virginia 
 
 New Hampshire. 
 John Langdon Nicholas Gilman 
 
 Massachusetts. 
 Nathaniel Gorham Rufus King 
 
 Connecticut. 
 Wm. Saml. Johnson Roger Sherman 
 
Signers coNSTtTUTioN. 32 
 
 New York. 
 Alexander Hamilton 
 
 New Jersey. 
 
 WiL : LiYiNGSTON" Wm. Paterson 
 
 David Brearley Jojsta: Dayton 
 
 Pennsylvania. 
 
 B. Franklin Thos. Fitzsimons 
 
 Thomas Mifflin Jared Ingersoll 
 
 RoBT. Morris James Wilson 
 
 Geo. Clymer Gouv Morris 
 
 Delaware. 
 
 Geo : Bead Richard Bassett 
 
 Gunning Bedford Jun Jaco : Broom 
 John Dickinson 
 
 Maryland. 
 
 James McHenry Danl. Carroll 
 
 Dan of St Thos Jenifer 
 
 Virginia. 
 John Blair — James Madison Jr. 
 
 North Carolina. 
 Wm. Blount Hu Williamson. 
 
 RiCHD. DOBBS SpAIGHT 
 
 South Carolina. 
 
 J. RuTLEDGE, Charles Pinckney 
 
 Pierce Butler. 
 Charles Cotesworth Pinckney 
 
33 CONSTITUTION. Am. IV 
 
 Georgia. 
 William Few Abr Baldwin 
 
 Attest WILLIAM JACKSON Secretary 
 
 ARTICLES IN ADDITION TO, AND AMENDMENT OF, THE 
 CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
 PROPOSED BY CONGRESS, AND RATIFIED BY THE LEG- 
 ISLATURES OF THE SEVERAL STATES PURSUANT TO 
 THE FIFTH ARTICLE OF THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION. 
 
 [ARTICLE I.] 
 
 Congress shall make no law respecting an establish- 
 ment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise 
 thereof ; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the 
 press ; or the right of the people jDeaceably to assem- 
 ble, and to petition the Government for a redress of 
 grievances. 
 
 [ARTICLE II.] 
 
 A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the secu- 
 rity of a free State, the right of the people to keep and 
 bear Arms, shall not be infringed. 
 
 [ARTICLE in.] 
 
 No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in 
 any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in 
 time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. 
 
 [ARTICLE lY.] 
 
 The rigl^t of the people to be secure in their per- 
 sons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable 
 searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no 
 
Am. VII CONSTITUTION. 34 
 
 Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, sup- 
 ported by Oath, or affirmation, and particularly describ- 
 ing the place to be searched, and the persons or things 
 to be seized. 
 
 [ARTICLE v.] 
 
 No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or 
 otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or 
 indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in 
 the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in 
 actual service in time of War or public danger ; nor 
 shall any person be subject for the same offence to be 
 twice put in jeopardy of life or limb ; nor shall be 
 compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against 
 himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, 
 without due process of law ; nor shall private property 
 be taken for public use, without just compensation. 
 
 [ARTICLE YL] 
 
 In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy 
 the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial 
 jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall 
 have been committed, which district shall have been 
 previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of 
 the nature and cause of the accusation ; to be con- 
 fronted with the witnesses against him ; to have com- 
 pulsory process for obtaining Witnesses in his favor, 
 and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. 
 
 [ARTICLE YIL] 
 
 In suits at common law, where the value in contro- 
 versy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by 
 jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury 
 shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the 
 United States, than according to the rules of the com- 
 mon law. 
 
35 CONSTITUTION. Am XII 
 
 [ARTICLE Yin.] 
 
 Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive 
 fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments 
 inflicted. 
 
 [ARTICLE IX.] 
 
 The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain 
 rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage 
 others retained by the people. 
 
 [ARTICLE X.] 
 
 The powers not delegated to the United States by 
 the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, 
 are reserved to the States respectively, or to the 
 people. 
 
 [ARTICLE XI.] 
 
 The Judicial power of the United States shall not 
 be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, 
 commenced or prosecuted against one of the United 
 States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or 
 Subjects of any Foreign State. 
 
 [ARTICLE XII.] 
 
 The Electors shall meet in their respective states, 
 and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, 
 one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of 
 the same state with themselves ; they shall name in 
 their ballots the person voted for as President, and in 
 distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, 
 and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted 
 for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- 
 President, and of the number of votes for each, which 
 lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed 
 to the seat of the government of the United States, 
 directed to the President of the Senate : — The Presi- 
 
Am. XIII, Sec. 1. constitution. 36 
 
 dent of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate 
 and House of Representatives, open all the certificates 
 and the votes shall then be counted ; — The person 
 having the greatest number of votes for President, 
 shall be the President, if such number be a majority 
 of the whole number of Electors appointed ; and if no 
 person have such majority, then from the persons hav- 
 ing the highest numbers not exceeding three on the 
 list of those voted for as President, the House of 
 Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, 
 the President. But in choosing the President, the 
 votes shall be taken by states, the representation from 
 each state having one vote ; a quorum for this purpose 
 shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds 
 of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be 
 necessary to a choice. And if the House of Repre- 
 sentatives shall not choose a President whenever the 
 right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the 
 fourth day of March next following, then the Vice- 
 President shall act as President, as in the case of the 
 death or other constitutional disability of the Presi- 
 dent. The person having the greatest number of votes 
 as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if 
 such number be a majority of the whole number of 
 Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, 
 then from the two highest numbers on the list, the 
 Senate shall choose the Vice-President ; a quorum for 
 the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole 
 number of Senators, and a majority of the whole num- 
 ber shall be necessary to a choice. But no person 
 constitutionally ineligible to the office of President 
 shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United 
 States. . 
 
 ARTICLE Xni. 
 
 Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servi- 
 tude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the 
 party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within 
 the United States, or any place subject to their juris- 
 diction. 
 
37 coKSTiTUTiON. Am. XIV, Sec. 3 
 
 Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce tliis 
 article by appropriate legislation. 
 
 ARTICLE XIV. 
 
 Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the 
 United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, 
 are citizens of the United States and of the State 
 wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce 
 any law which shall abridge the privileges or immuni- 
 ties of citizens of the United States ; nor shall any 
 State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, 
 without due process of law ; nor deny to any person 
 within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 
 
 Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned 
 among the several States according to their respective 
 numbers, counting the whole number of persons in 
 each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when 
 the right to vote at any election for the choice of 
 electors for President and Vice President of the United 
 States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and 
 Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Leg- 
 islature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabit- 
 ants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, 
 and citizens of the United States, or in any way 
 abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other 
 crime, the basis of representation therein shall be re- 
 duced in the proportion which the number of such 
 male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male 
 citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. 
 
 Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Repre- 
 sentative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice 
 President, or hold any office, civil or military, under 
 the United States, or under any State, who, having 
 previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or 
 as an officer of the United States, or as a member of 
 any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial 
 officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the 
 United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or 
 Destt Fed. Con.— 4. 
 
Am. XV, Sec. 2 constitution. 38. 
 
 rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort 
 to the enemies thereof. Bat Congress may by a vote 
 of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. 
 
 Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the 
 United States, authorized by law, including debts in- 
 curred for payment of pensions and bounties for services 
 in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be 
 questioned. But neither the United States nor any 
 State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation in- 
 c rred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the 
 United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipa- 
 tion of any slave ; but all such debts, obligations and 
 claims shall be held illegal and void. 
 
 SECTioisr 5. The Congress shall have power to en- 
 force, by appropriate legislation, the provisions 'of this 
 article. 
 
 ARTICLE XV. 
 
 Section 1. The right of citizens of the United 
 States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the 
 United States or by any State on account of race, 
 color, or previous condition of servitude. 
 
 SECTION 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce 
 this article by appropriate legislation. 
 
Constitution xS= United States. 
 
 Constitutional construction. — A constitution is an 
 instrument of government, made and adopted by the peo- 
 ple for practical purposes, ^ and can only operate'prospect- 
 ively.2 It should be construed so as best to subserve the 
 great objects for which it was made.^ Like every other 
 grant it is to have a reasonable construction according to 
 the import of its terms, 4 as defined in the vocabulai'v of 
 the nation which adopted it. 5 Courts of justice cannot 
 give it a strained construction, and they are not autlior- 
 ized to so construe any clause as to defeat its obvious ends 
 when another construction, equally accordant with the 
 words and sense, will enforce and protect them.' So, 
 where words admit of different intendments, that must 
 be selected which is most consonant to the object in view.^ 
 It should be so construed as to give effect to its different 
 clauses, as far as possible reconcile them, and not let tlieir 
 seeming repugnancy destroy them/J It is not to be con- 
 strued technically, ^0 but must receive a practical con- 
 struction.^! Perhaps the safest rule of interpretation is to 
 look to the nature and objects of the particular jiowers, 
 duties, and rights, with all the lights and aids of contem- 
 porary history, and to give to the words of each clause such 
 operation and force as is consistent Avith its legitimate 
 meaning, !2 and not nullify or evade them by astute verbal 
 criticism without regard to the aim and objects of the in- 
 strument, and the principles on which it is based. ^" Courts 
 can only construe the powers granted, they cannot inquire 
 into the policy or principles which induced the grant. ^-^ 
 
 1 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 2 Chicago v. Rumsey, 87 111. 385. 
 
 3 North Riv. S. Co. v. Livincfston, 3 Cow. 713; 1 Hopk. 150; Hayne r. 
 Powers, 39 Barb. 427; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 4 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; 7 Cranch, 727. 
 
 5 Kunzler v. Kohaus, 5 Hill, 317; PacUeford v. Mayor &c. 14 Ga. 433. 
 
 6 Law V. People, 87 111. 385. 
 
 7 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 539. 
 
 r39i 
 
40 CONSTRUCTION. 
 
 8 Aldrich v. Kinney, 4 Conn. 380. 
 
 9 Coliens V. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264; Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch. 
 138. 
 
 10 People V. Dawell, 25 Mich. 247 ; Dorman v. State, 34 Ala. 216. 
 
 11 Railroad Co. v. Peniston, IB Wall. 5. 
 
 12 Prigg V. Commonwealtli, IG Peters, 539. 
 
 13 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282. 
 
 14 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wlieat. 304; 7 Cranch, 727. 
 
 Construction of terms. — Although the spirit of the 
 Constitution is to be respected not less than its letter, yet 
 the spirit is to be collectefl chiefly from its Avords.i The 
 argument from inconvenience cannot prevail over plain 
 words or clear reason; but a construction which would 
 necessarily occasion public or j)rivate mischief must yield 
 to a construction which will occasion neither. 2 So, a con- 
 struction long carried into practice, though not sanctioned 
 "by judicial authority, is worthy of great consideration; 3 
 so, great weight is attached to contemporaneous exposi- 
 tion,'^ or where the commencement of the practice was 
 almost coeval with tlie adoption of the instrument. ^ A 
 case within the words of a rule must be within its opera- 
 tion, unless something in the literal construction is so ob- 
 viously absurd or mischievous, or so repugnant to the 
 general spirit of the instrument, as to justify an exception.^ 
 Words are to be taken in their natural and obvious sense, 
 and not in a sense unreasonably restricted or enlarged. ''' 
 Adherence to the letter must not be had in opposition to 
 the reason and spirit of the enactment, and to effectuate 
 the object intended, it may be proper to deviate from the 
 usual sense of the words. ^ Every word must have its 
 due force and appropriate meaning, and no word should 
 be rejected as supertiuous orunmeaning,^ and care should 
 be taken to reconcile words apparently discordant, in such 
 a manner as to give, if possible, meaning to every word.^" 
 The same words have not necessarily the same meaning 
 when found in different parts of the instrument, and the 
 peculiar sense in which a word is used is to be determined 
 by tlie context,-! unless the meaning is completely ascer- 
 tained. ^^ Affirmative words are often in their operation 
 negative of other objects than those affirmed, but they 
 should not be construed negatively v/liere they have full 
 operation without such construction, i^ The exception of 
 a thing from the general words proves that the thing ex- 
 cepted would be within the general clause had the excep- 
 tion not been made.^* 
 
 1 Sturges V. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122. 
 
 2 Ex parte Griffin, Chase, 364; 25 Tex. Supp. 623. 
 
PREAMBLE. 41 
 
 3 Martin v. Hunter, I Wheat. 304; McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 
 316; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; 3 Serg. & R. 169; Briscoe v. Bank 
 of Ky. 11 Peters, 257; Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299; Adams v. 
 Story, 1 Paine, 79; Hicks v. Hotchkiss, 7 Johns. Ch. 297; Metropolitan 
 Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 4 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
 5 Martin tu Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; 
 Ogden i'. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Prigg v. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 
 539; Jack v. Martin, 12 Wend. 311; 14 Wend. 507. 
 
 6 Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518; Aldrich v. Kin- 
 ney, 4 Conn. 380. 
 
 7 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 
 
 27N. Y. 400. 
 
 8 Aldrich v. Kinney, 4 Conn. 380. 
 
 9 Holmes w. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540: Hitchcock «?. Aiken, 1 Caines,4»>; 
 
 State V. Scott, 9 Ark. 270. 
 
 10 Curtis V. Gibbs, 2 N. J. 405. 
 
 11 Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 1; Wheaton v. Peters. 8 
 Peters, 531. 
 
 12 U. S.v. Butr, 2 Whart. Cr. Cas. 573. 
 
 13 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264; Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch. 
 137. 
 
 14 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 488; 4 Johns. Ch. 150: 
 Brown v. State, 12 Wheat. 419. 
 
 PREAMBLE. 
 
 We, the people of the United States, in order to form a 
 more perfect .union, establish justice, insure domestic tran- 
 quilUty, proi-idefor the common defense, promote the general 
 loelfare, and secure the blessings of libertg to ou7'scl'ves and 
 our 'posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for 
 the United States of America. 
 
 The people of the United States.— The body of 
 electors composing the State, i people and citizens being 
 synonymous terms, both describing the political body 
 who form the sovereignty, hold the power and conduct 
 the Government through their representatives, the sover- 
 eign people, every citizen being a constituent member.'^ 
 Freemen of color were a part of the people.^ The people 
 of the United States had the power to invest the General 
 Government with all the powers they might deem proper 
 and necessary, and to prohibit to the States the exercise 
 of any powers incompatible with the objects of the general 
 compact,^ and to resume or modify the powers granted.^ 
 
 1 Penhallow v. Doane, 3 Dall. 93. 
 
 2 Scott V. Sandf ord, 19 How. 404. 
 
 3 Scott V. Sandf ord, 19 How. 573, per Curtis, J.; U. S. v. R odes, i 
 Abb. U. S. 41; North Carolina v. Manuel, 4 Dev. & B. 20. 
 
42 PREAMBLE. 
 
 4 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 325. 
 
 5 McCulloch V. Maryland. 4 Wheat. 404. 
 
 .More perfect union. — This phrase recognizes a polit- 
 ical body known as the United States. i " In order to form 
 a more perfect union ' ' by substituting a National Govern- 
 ment, actiiig with ample powers directly upon the citizen, 
 instead of the Confederate Government, which acted with 
 powers greatly restricted, and only upon the States.^ It 
 is the union of States under a common constitution which 
 forms the distinct and greater jjolitical unit designated as 
 the XJnited States,^ by a compact made by tiie people of 
 (he United States to govern themselves as to general ob- 
 jects in a certain' manner; 5 a government emanating from 
 the people;^ the creation of their will, and existing only 
 by their will ; " and for certain jjuri^oses, a consolidated 
 government; « a body politic and corporate. ^ It is a Gov- 
 ernment of delegated jjowers alone, limited in number 
 but not in degree, and sujjreme witliin the scope of its 
 delegated iDOwers,io with absolute sovereignty to the ex- 
 tent of its powers, 11 the sovereignty being separate and 
 distinct from State sovereignty, i^ the State constitutions 
 being limitations on sovereign powers already existing, i^ 
 
 1 Texas V. White, 7 Wall. 727. 
 
 2 Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 463 ; McCuUoch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 
 31'd; Khode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Peters, 657; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 
 SaU. S.fwO. 
 
 3 Lane Co. p. Oregon, 7 Wall. 71; Collector v. Day, 11 Wall. 125. 
 
 4 Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 721. 
 
 5 Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 463. 
 
 G McCulIoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316. 
 
 7 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
 8 North River S. Co. v. Livingston, 3 Cowen, 713. 
 
 Duncan v. U. S. 3 Wheat. 181; U. S. v. Tingey, 5 Peters, 128; U. S. 
 V. Bnulley, 10 Peters, 343; Neilson v. Lagow, 12 How. 108; Dixon v. TJ. 
 S. I Brock. 177; U. S. v. Maurice, 2 Brock. 109; U. >S. v. Lane, 3 McLean, 
 365; Stearns v. U. S. 2 Paine, 301; Dikes v. Miller, 25 Tex. Supp. 290. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 550 ; McCuUoch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 
 316; Scott V. Sandford. 19 How. 393; Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 506; 
 Lano Co. v. Oregon, 7 Wall. 76. 
 
 11 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 407. 
 
 1? Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; McCuUoch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 
 3Ki; Gibbons v. Ogden.9 Wheat. 190; Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 506; 
 Newell V. People, 7 N. Y. 93; People v. N. Y. Cent. R. R. Co. 24 N. Y. 
 4^3; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 411. 
 
 13 Ohio Life Ins. Co. v. Debolt, 16 How. 428. 
 
PKEAMBLE. 43 
 
 To provide for the common defense is an abso- 
 lute right of every nationality, i The Constitution was 
 "ordained and established" by "the people" for them- 
 selves, and their own government, and not for the govern- 
 ment of the individual States ;'^ and not by the States, but 
 by the people of the United States, ^ acting through dele- 
 gates by wliom they were represented,^ and resulted nei- 
 ther from the majority of the people nor of the States. *> 
 It did not go into effect until the first Wednesday in 
 March, 1789. « 
 
 1 Ex parte Coupland, 26 Tex. 393. 
 
 2 Barron v. Baltimore, TJ^eters, 343; Withers v. Biickley, 21 How. 84; 
 Twitcliell V. Common wealtii, 7 Wall. 326; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 
 550. 
 
 3 Cliisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 463; Martin w. Hunter, I Wheat. 324; 
 Banks v. Greenleaf, 6 Call, 277. ■ 
 
 4 Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 569; Barron v. Baltimore, 7 Peters, 
 243. 
 
 5 Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199; Chisholm v. Georgia, 3 Dall. 419. 
 
 6 Owings V. Speed, 5 Wheat. 420. 
 
 Powers of government.— The Federal Government 
 is one of enumerated powers i — of delegated powers.^ 
 The sovereignty of Congress, thougli limited to sjiecilic 
 objects, is plenary as to tliose objects," and supreme in its 
 sphere.'^ The powers of government in the United States 
 and in the States are separate and distinct, although they 
 may act on the same subject:^ but in case of conflict, that 
 of the United States Government is supreme. ^^ The Gov- 
 ernment is constituted with its legislative, judicial, and 
 executive departments, to act directly on the people with- 
 out the intervention of tlie State governments. < The pow- 
 ers of Congress are not exclusive except where the Consti- 
 tution expressly in terms so provides, or where they are 
 prohibited to the States, or wiiere there is a direct repug- 
 nance or incompatibility in their exercise by the States. ^ 
 The exercise by a State of a concurrent power must yield 
 when it contiicts with, or is repugnant to, congressional 
 legislation. y 
 
 1 Mcculloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316 ; Gibbons v. Ogden. 9 
 Wheat. 1. 
 
 2 Briscoe v. P.k. of Ky. 11 Peters, 257; 7 J. J. Marsh. 349. 
 
 3 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. 
 
 4 McCulloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316 ; Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 
 Wheat. 738 ; Frasher v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 273; .Ibleman v. Booth, 
 21 How. 506; Fifield v. Close, 15 Mich. 505 ; State v. Garton, 32 Ind. 1; 
 State V. Gibson, 36 Ind. 389; People t'. Brady, 40 CaL 19S; Lane Co. t'. 
 Oregon, 7 Wall. 76; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308; 
 Bradwell v. State, 16 Wall. 130; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 203. 
 
Art. I, § 2 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 44 
 
 5 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; GibDonsr. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 
 1; Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 
 419: Weston V. Charleston, 2 Peters, 449; Dobbins'?;. Commrs. Lrie Co. 16 
 Peters, 435 ; Collector v. Day, 11 Wall. 113 ; National Bank v. Common- 
 wealth, 9 Wall. 353; Sweatt v. Boston &c. K. R. Co. 5 Bank Reg. 249; 
 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282; Tarble's Case, 13 Wall. 397. 
 
 6 Tarble's Case, 13 Wall. 397; Matter of Farrand, 1 Abb. U. S. 146. 
 
 7 Ex parte Stephens, 70 Mass. 559. 
 
 8 Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386 ; U. S. v. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 389; Sturges 
 V. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 193 ; Peck's Trial, 86 : U. S. v. Fisher, 2 
 Cranch, 358; 1 Wash. C. C. 4; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 49; 3 Serg. & 
 R. 179 ; Willson v. Blackbird &c. Co. 2 Peters, 245; New York v. Miln, 
 11 Peters, 103; Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540; Groves v. Slaugh- 
 ter, 15 Peters, 503 ; Prigg v. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 627; Passenger 
 Cases, 7 How. 555; McVeigh v. U. S. 11 Wall- 259: U. S. v. New Bedford 
 Bridge, 1 Wood & M. 432; Commonwealth v. O'Hara, 1 Bank. Reg. Sup. 
 20 ; Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 Johns. 568 ; Groves t?. Slaughter, 15 Peters, 
 504. But see The Chusan, 2 Story, 465; Golden v. Prince, 3 Wash. C, C. 
 313. 
 
 9 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1 ; Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; 
 Worcester v. Georgia, C Peters, 515; Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540; 
 II. S. V. Hart, Peters C. C. 390; U. S. v. New Bedford Bridge, 1 Wood & 
 M. 418; Commonwealth v. Kimball, 24 Pick. 359. 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 legislative depahtment. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Legislative power, Congress. 
 
 Sec. 1. All legislative powers herein (/ranted shall he 
 vested in a Congress of the United States, lohich shall consist 
 of a Senate and House of Representatives. 
 
 The branches of tlie Government are distinct and 
 independent, and cannot encroach upon each other. i The 
 political power is not subject to judicial interference. ^ 
 
 1 Hayburn's Case, 2 Dall. 409, note. 
 
 2 PuUan v. Kinsinger, 2 Abb. U. S. 110; Ralston v. Oursler, 12 Ohio 
 St. 105. 
 
 Section '2. 
 House of Representatives. 
 
 1. Members, when and by whom chosen. 
 
 2. Qualifications. 
 
 3. Apportionment of Representatives, and direct taxes. 
 
 4. Vacancies. 
 
 5. Speaker. Impeachment. 
 
 Sec. 2. The House of Representatives shall he composed 
 of memhers chosen every second year hy the people of the 
 several States, and the electors in each State shall have the 
 qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous 
 branch of the State Legislature. 
 
45 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Art. I, § 2 
 
 Electors. — Citizenship does not of itself give the right 
 to vote, nor the want of it prevent a State from conferring 
 the right. 1 
 
 1 Scott V. Sandford, 1!) How. 404. 
 
 2iVb ^y&'i'son shall he a Representative who shall not have 
 attained to the age of tioenty-five years, and been seven years 
 a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when 
 elected, he an inhabitant of that State in which he shall he 
 chosen. 
 
 Qualifications. — The qualification of age is not neces- 
 sary for membership, but a qualification of long citizen- 
 ship and of residence.! An inhabitant is a bona fide mem- 
 ber of the State, subject to all the requisites of law, and 
 entitled to all privileges and advantages under the law ;2 
 actual residence is not essential, 3 as if a person bo a min- 
 ister resident at a foreign j)ort.4 No additional qualifica- 
 tions can rightfully be required by the States. ^ The in- 
 eligibility of the member elect gives no claim to the 
 next highest candidate. ^ 
 
 1 Smith's Case, 1 Am. L. J. 459. 
 
 2 Bailey's Case, Clark & H. 411. 
 
 3 Piggott's Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1864-5, 464. 
 
 4 Forsyth's Case, Clark & H. 497; Key's Case, Id. 224; Kainsay v. 
 Smith, Id. 23. • 
 
 5 Barney y. McCreery, Clark & H. 176; Turney ?;. Marshall, Cont. 
 
 EI. Cas. 1864-5, 167. 
 
 6 In re Corliss, 16 Am. L. R. 15; Smith v. Brown, Cont. El. Cas. 
 1865-71,395; Blakey v. GoUaday, Id. 417; Christy's Case, Id. 464; Jones 
 V.Mann, Id. 471. 
 
 ^Representatives and direct taxes shall he apportioned 
 among the several States which may he included loithin this 
 Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be 
 determined by adding to the ivhole number of free persons, 
 including those bound to service for a term of years, and 
 excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons. 
 The actual enumeration shall be made loithin three years 
 after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, 
 and loithin every subsequent term of ten years, in such man- 
 ner as they shall by laio direct. The number of Representa- 
 tives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each 
 State shall have at least one Representative ; and until such 
 enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire 
 shall be entitled to choose three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode 
 
Art. I, § 2 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 46 
 
 Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, 
 Neio York six, Neio Jersey Jmir, Pennsylvania eight, Deia- 
 ivare one, Maryland six. Virginia ten, North Carolina five, 
 South Carolina five, and Georgia three. 
 
 Construction. — This clause was not intended to create 
 an exemption of any State from its due share of the bur- 
 den, or to make taxation dependent on representation, 
 but to furnisli a standard for tlie apportionment of each 
 on the States. 1 It is expressly conlined to the States, and 
 creates no necessity for extending the tax to the District 
 of Columbia or the Territories, ^ where direct taxes are to 
 be in i3roiiortion to the census.^ The term '' direct taxes " 
 does not include a tax on notes of State banks, nor on 
 incomes.'^ The "succession tax" is not a ''direct tax," 
 but an impost or excise. ° "Direct taxes" include cap- 
 itation taxes and taxes on land.*^ The eighth census as to 
 apportionment did not take effect till March, 1863.'^ 
 
 1 Lougliborough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. 
 
 2, Loughborough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. 
 
 3 Loughborough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. 
 
 4 Pacific Insurance Co. v. Soule, 7 Wall. 446; Veazie Bank?;. Fenns, 
 8 Wall. 54(3; Clark v. Sickel, 14 Int. Rev. Rec. 6. 
 
 5 Scholeyi;. Rew, 23 Wall. 331. 
 
 (> Hylton 0. U. S., 3 Dall. 171; Scholey tJ. Revv, 23 Wall. 347; License 
 Tax Cas., 5 Wall. 477. 
 7 Lowe's Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1864-5, 418. See Article 1, Sec. 9 (4), 
 
 ^When vacancies happen in the representation from any 
 State, the executive authority thereof shall issue writs of elec- 
 tion to fill such vacancies. 
 
 Vacancies may be created by death, resignation, or 
 removal, or by the acceptance of an incompatible office.^ 
 A resignation sent to the governor of a State is sufficient. ^ 
 The executive may issue writs for a new election without 
 waiting to be informed by the House that a vacancy ex- 
 ists. 3 A member with the governor's certilicate is not 
 permitted to take his seat before the organization of the 
 House. ^ The seat of a Senator holding inider executive 
 appointment is vacated if the legislature fails to elect.^ 
 
 1 People V. Carrique, 2 Hill, 93; Powell w. Wilson, 16 Tex. 60; Bien- 
 court V. Parker, 27 Tex. 562. 
 
 2 Edward's Case, Clark & H. 92; Mercer's Case, Ibid. 44; Bledsoe's 
 Case, Ibid. 869. 
 
 3 Mercer's Case, Clark & H. 44. 
 
 4 New Jersey Case, Cout. El. Cas. 1864-5, 19. ' 
 
 5 Williams' Case, Cont. El. 1864-5, 612; Phelps' Case, Ibid. 613. 
 
47 SENATE. Art. I, § 3 
 
 ^ The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker 
 and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeach- 
 ment. 
 
 Section 3. 
 
 Senate. 
 
 1. Senators. 
 
 2. Divided into classes. Vacancies. 
 
 3. Qualifications. 
 
 4. President of Senate. 
 
 5. Other officers. 
 
 6. Impeachment. 
 
 7. Judgment on impeachment. 
 
 Sec. 3. 1 The Senate of the United States shall he cotn- 
 posed of tioo Senators from each State, chosen by the legis- 
 lature thereof for six years; and each Senator shall have one 
 vote. 
 
 ^Immediately after they shall be assemhled in consequence 
 of the first election, they shall be divided as equally as ')nay 
 be into three classes. The seats of the Senators of the first 
 class shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year, of 
 the second class, at the expiration of the fourth year, and of 
 the third class, at the expiration of the sixth year, so that one- 
 third may be chosen every second year; and if vacancies 
 happen by resignation, or otherwise, during the recess of the 
 legislature of' any State, the executive thereof may make 
 temporary appointments until the next "tneeting of the legis- 
 lature, uihich shall then fill such vacancies. 
 
 The executive of a State cannot appoint a Senator to fill 
 a vacancy during the recess of the legislature, 
 Lanman's Case, Clark & H. 871. 
 
 ^ No person shall be a Senator loho shall not have attained 
 to the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the 
 United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabit- 
 ant of that State for ivhich he shall be chosen. 
 
 A Senator must be a male citizen, i and nine years a cit- 
 izen at the commencement of the term. 2 The State can- 
 not add to the qualifications prescribed in the Constitu- 
 . tion.3 One who was a resident of the United States at the 
 close of the Revolutionary War, and an alien, was not 
 qualified to sit in the U. S. Senate.^ 
 
 1 Gallatin's Case, Clark & H. 851. 
 
 2 Gallatin's Case, Clark & H. 851 ; Shield's Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1864-5, 
 606. 
 
 3 Trumbull'4 Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1864-5, 618. 
 
 4 Gallatin's Case, Clark & H. 851. 
 
Art. I, § 4 CONGRESS. 48 
 
 '^ Tlie Vice-President of the United States shall he Presi- 
 dent of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be 
 equally divided. 
 
 ^ The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a 
 President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice-President, 
 or lohen he shall exercise the office of President of the United 
 States. 
 
 6 The Senate shall have the sole poioer to try all imjpeach- 
 ments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall he on oath 
 or affirmation. When the President of the United States is 
 tried, the Chief Justice shall 2Jreside. And no person shall 
 he convicted icithout the concurrence of two-thirds of the 
 members present. 
 
 Form of oath, see Chase's Trial, p. 12. 
 
 "' Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend fur- 
 ther than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold 
 and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or j^^ofit under the 
 United States ; but the party convicted shall nevertheless be 
 liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punish- 
 ment, according to law. 
 
 Section 4. 
 Congress. 
 
 1. Elections for Senators and Representatives. 
 
 2. Sessions of Congress. 
 
 Sec. 4, '^The times, places, and manner of holding elections 
 for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each 
 State by the legislature thereof; hut the Congress may at any 
 time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the 
 places of choosing Senators. 
 
 Elections to Congress.— When the legislature shall 
 have failed to prescribe the "times, places, and manner," 
 the governor may give notice of the times and places of 
 elections,! but he cannot delegate to another the power to 
 fix the time. 2 When the constitution fixes the day of 
 election, an act fixing a different day must yield; ^ other- 
 wise as to the place of election.^ The failure of Congress 
 to exercise its power in no way impairs the_ force oi the 
 constitutional grant. ^ The State may regulate the elect- 
 
49 CONGRESS, Art. I § 4 
 
 ive franchise,^ and it is only when discrimination at elec- 
 tions is made as to race, color, or condition, that Congress 
 can. interfere. '^ The act of the Delaware legislature re- 
 quiring a ballot to contain two names, one not a resident 
 of the same county with the voter, is constitutional. ^ The 
 Oregon constitution fixes the time of election of Repre- 
 sentative beyond the control of the Legislature. ^ A Ter- 
 ritory is not entitled to a Representative as a State until 
 admitted, although a constitution has been adopted, i'' 
 The term of a Delegate ^xpires with the Congress in 
 which he took his seat.i^ j3ut erecting a Territory into a 
 State does not necessarily vacate the seat of the Dele- 
 gate. 12 The failure of a legislature to provide for a va- 
 cancy or election to fill it, is cured by the governor's proc- 
 lamation for it. ^3 A vacancy by an executive appointed 
 to the Senate again becomes a vacancy when the State 
 legislature, subsequent to such appointment, meets and 
 adjourns without electing. I't Such appointee has a right 
 to sit till his successor is elected or appointed and pre- 
 sents his credentials. 15 An election on the general ticket 
 is valid, 1"^ and a tie vote is to be determined by Congress 
 and not by State authorities. I'i' 
 
 1 Hoge's Case, Clark & H. 135. \^' 
 
 2 Graffln's Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1864-5, 464. V 
 
 3 SMel V. Thayer, Cont. El. Cas. 1864^, 349. j^ 
 
 4 Baldwins. Trowbridge, Const. El. Cas. 1865-71,46. *-' i 
 
 U. S. ?;. Reese, 92 U. S. 218. A^ ^ «0^ C' 
 
 8 Latimer v. Patton, 1 Cong. El. Cas. 69. 3* ^t^ cr 
 
 9 Shiel V. Thayer, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 349. ^^ ^ 
 
 10 Conway v. U. S. 1 Nott & H. 68. *^ ^^ 
 
 11 Doty V. Jones, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 16. ^ 
 
 12 Fearing's Case, 1 Cong. El. Cas. 127. * (^^ 
 
 13 Hoge's Case, 1 Cong. El. Cas. 349. ^ 
 
 14 Williams' Case, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 612; Phelps' Case, Ibid, 613. 
 
 15 Winthrop's Case, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 607. 
 
 16 Phelps & Cavanaugh's Case, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 248; New Hampshire 
 Case, Ibid. 47. 
 
 17 Reed & Cosden's Case, 1 Cong. El. Cas. 353. 
 
 2 The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, 
 and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December^ 
 unless they shall by laio appoint a different day. 
 
 Besty Fed. Con.— 5. 
 
 >" 
 
 5 Quinn's Case, 12 Int. Rev. Rec. 151. , ,^j? 
 
 6 Burch's Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1865-71, 205. >^ 
 
Art. I, § 5 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 50 
 
 Section 5. 
 
 Powers of Houses of Congress. 
 
 1. Judges of qualifications of tlieir own members. Quorum. 
 
 2. Rules of proceeding. Expulsions. 
 
 3. Journals. 
 
 4. Adjournments. 
 
 Sec. 5. '^Each lionise shall he the judge of the elections, 
 returns, and qualifications of its own members, and a majority 
 of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a 
 smaller number may adjourn f£om day to day, and m,ay be 
 authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in 
 such maimer and under such penalties as each House may 
 ■provide. 
 
 Qualifications of members. — Whether a Senator has 
 beeu regularly elected is a question exclusively for the 
 Senate. 1 Members elected for an extra or special session 
 must give way to regularly elected members for that Con- 
 gress."-^ The House is to judge of the election of its mem- 
 bers, and the returns are only j9?'ma facie evidence of elec- 
 tion. 3 A State law requiring votes to be returned within a 
 certain time is directory only,* and if not so returned 
 are to be counted, if opportunity is had to count them.^ 
 The refusal of the executive of a State to grant a certifi- 
 cate of election will not prejudice the right to a seat.^ 
 The certificate may be followed by another under a 
 changed condition of the facts. '^ A certificate may issue 
 on an amended return of votes, ^ and a suj)plementary re- 
 turn is entitled to be received. ^ The governor may re- 
 voke the certificate for fraud, ^o One holding a certificate 
 from the governor of a Territory, given in lieu of a former 
 certificate superseded for fraud, is entitled to his seat.n 
 The territorial government must be in existence before a 
 Delegate can be admitted. 12 A certificate of the governor 
 of a Territory issued in violation of law is not even prima 
 fade evidence. ^3 y/j,g qualifications of m,embers being fixed 
 by the Constitution, additions cannot be required by State 
 legislation or other acts.i* If the House is unable to de- 
 cide which of two is entitled to his seat, it must be de- 
 clared vacant. ^5 One who was allowed io take his seat 
 on a prima facie case, but was afterwards ousted by a. 
 competitor rightfully elected, cannot be deemed to have 
 been a member of Congress, i^ 
 
 1 Anonymous, 12 Fla. 686. 
 
 2 GeLlson & Claiborne's Case, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 9. 
 
 3 Chrismanv. Anderson, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 328; Spauldingt?. Mead, 1 
 Ibid. 157. 
 
51 POWERS OP CONGRESS. Art. I, § 5 
 
 4 Brockenborough v. Cabell, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 79. 
 
 5 Richard's Case, 1 Cong. El. Cas. 95. 
 
 6 Richard's Case, Clark & H. 95 ; Clement's Case, Cont. El. Cas. 
 1864-5, 366. 
 
 7 Wallace v. Simpson, Cont. El. Cas. 1865-71, 552. 
 
 8 Sleeper v. Rice, Cont. El. Cas. 1864-5, 472. 
 
 9 Archer v. Allen, 2 Cong. El.. Cas. 169; Brockenborough ». Cabell, 
 Ibid. 84. 
 
 10 Morton V. Daily, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 403. 
 
 11 Morton v. Daily, 2 Cong. El. Cas. 403. 
 
 12 Smith's Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1864-5, 109; Babbitt's Case. Ibid. 116; 
 Messervey's Case, Ibid. 146. 
 
 13 Colorado Case, Cont. El. Cas. 1865-71, 164. 
 
 14 Barney v. McCreery, 1 Cong. El. Cas. 167 ; Turney v. Marshall, 2 
 Cong. El. Cas. 167; TrumbuU's Case, Ibid. 618. 
 
 15 Letcher v. Moore, 1 Cong. El. Cas. 715. 
 
 16 Bowman v. Coffroth, 59 Pa. St. 19, 
 
 , 2 Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, 
 punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, loith the 
 C07icurrence of tioo-thirds, expel a member. 
 
 Rules of its proceedings. — An express power to 
 make laws was not necessary to enable the legislature to 
 make them.i The express grant of power to punish for a 
 contempt dOes not exclude the power to punish others 
 than members of their own body,^ in secret as in open 
 session. 3 The implied power to punish for contempt shall 
 not extend beyond its known and acknowledged limit of 
 fine and imprisonment, but tlie imprisonment must termi- 
 nate with the adjournment. 4 The power to punish for 
 disobedience and contempt is a necessary incident to the 
 power to require and compel attendance. ^ The warrant 
 to commit for contempt may be served anywhere within 
 the boundaries of the United States, ^ and it need not set 
 forth the facts constituting the alleged contempt," the 
 legislative body being the only judge of its own privileges 
 and contemj)ts.8 A member may be expelled for any mis- 
 demeanor which, though not punishable by statute, is in- 
 consistent with the trust and duty of a member. ^ 
 
 1 McCuUoch V. Moryland, 4 Wheat. 316. 
 
 2 Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 204; Bolton v. Martin, 1 Dall. 296; Nu- 
 gent's Case, 1 Amer. Law J. 139. 
 
 3 Nugent's Case, 1 Amer. Law J. 139. 
 
 4 Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 204. 
 
 5 Stewart v. Blaine, 1 McAr. 453; Anderson i;, Dunn, 6 Wheat. 204; 
 Wickelhausen v. Willett, 10 Abb. Pr. 164. 
 
Art. I, § 6 COMPENSATIOK OF MEMBERS. 52 
 
 6 Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 204. 
 
 7 Ex parte Nugent, 1 Amer. Law J. N. S. 107. 
 
 8 Ex parte Nugent, 1 Amer. Law J. N. S. 107. 
 
 9 Smith's Case, 1 Hall Law J. 459. 
 
 s Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and 
 from time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as 
 m,ay in their judgment require secrecy ; and the yeas and 
 nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, 
 at the desire of onefifih of those present, be entered on the 
 Journal. 
 
 Journal.— A journal is a public record, of which courts 
 may take judicial notice, i The journal cannot he kept 
 secret unless the f)roceedings are secret. The holding of 
 a secret session by either House is in its discretion. ^ 
 
 1 Brown v. Nash, 1 Wyo. 85. 
 
 2 Nugent's Case, 1 Am. L. J. N. S. 139. 
 
 '^Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, 
 without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three 
 days, nor to any other place than that in lohich the two Houses 
 shall be sitting. 
 
 Section 6. 
 Compensation and duties of members. 
 
 1. Compensation of members. Privileges of Senators and Represen- 
 
 tatives. 
 
 2. Ineligibility to United States offtces. 
 
 Sec. 6. ^The Senators and Representatives shall receive a 
 compensation for their services, to be ascertained by laio, and 
 paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall 
 in all cases, except treason, felony, and breach of the peace, 
 he privileged from arrest during their attendance at the ses- 
 sion of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning 
 from the same ; and for any speech or debate in either House, 
 they .shall not be questioned in any other place. 
 
 Privilege from arrest.— Arrest implies corporal re-- 
 straint. i The privilege from arrest could not be surren- 
 dered without endangering the public as well as the 
 private independence of the member. 2 It extends to ju- 
 dicial as well as mesne process, and a person arrested is 
 entitled to his discharge on the privilege afterwards 
 acquired, 3 but there is no privilege from the service or 
 
53 INELIGIBILITIES. Art. I, § 6 
 
 obligation of a subpoena in a criminal case.^ It applies to 
 a delegate from a Territory as well as to a member from 
 a State. 5 One who goes to Washington duly commis- 
 sioned is privileged, though it be subsequently decided by 
 Congress that he is not entitled to a seat.^ The privilege 
 is to be taken strictly, and be allowed only daring attend- 
 ance on Congress, or while actually on the journey to or 
 from the seat of Government." It is limited to a conven- 
 ient and reasonable time in addition to the actual session.^' 
 Members are privileged not only from arrest, but also 
 from a service of summons or other civil process while in 
 attendance on their public duties. ^ The privilege applies 
 to speech or debate in either House,!*' but does not cover 
 its publication by a member, ii 
 
 1 Wooley V. Butler, 1 Bank. L. T. 35. 
 
 2 Bolton V. Martin, 1 Dall. 296; Coffin v. Coffin, 4 Mass. 1. 
 
 3 Cox V. McClenaclian, 3 Dall. 478; Nones v. Eclsall, 1 Wall. Jr. 183. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Cooper, 4 Dall. 341. 
 
 5 Doty V. Strong, 1 Pinney, Wis. 88. 
 
 6 Dunton v. Halstead, 4 Pa. L. J. 237. 
 
 7 Lewis u. Elmendorf, 2 Johns. Cas. 222; McCuUoch j;. Maryland, 4 
 Wheat. 316. 
 
 8 Hoppin V. Jenckes, 8 R. I. 453. 
 
 9 Coxe V. McClenachan, 3 Dall. 478; Geyer v. Irwin, 4 Dall. 107; 
 Nones v. Edsall, 1 Wall. Jr. 191. 
 
 10 Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 215. 
 
 11 Coffin V. Coffin, 4 Mass. 1. 
 
 2 Wo Senator or Representative shad, during the time for 
 lohich he loas elected, be appointed to any civil office under the 
 authority of the United States, lohich shall have been created, 
 or the emolutnents vjhereof shall have been increased during 
 such time ; and no person holding any office under the United 
 States, shall be a member of either House during his continu- 
 ance in office. 
 
 Incompatible offices. — The appointment to a second 
 incompatible office is not absolutely void, but the first 
 office is ipso facto vacated, i The acceptance by a member 
 of any office under the United States after a member has 
 taken his seat, operates as a forfeiture of his seat,^ but 
 continuance in an office after election to Congress, and 
 until taking his seat, is not a disqualification if a resigna- 
 tion is made prior to taking his seat. 3 The acceptance of 
 a military appointment vacates the seat.^ A person hold- 
 
Art. I, § 7 ENACTMENT OP LAWS. 54 
 
 ing two compatible offices is not precluded from receiving 
 the salaries of both.s 
 
 1 People V. Carrique, 2 Hill, 93; Biencourt v. Parker, 27 Tex. 558. 
 
 2 Van Ness' Case, Clark & H. 122. 
 
 3 Hammond v. Herrick, Clark & H. 287; Earle's Case, Ibid. 314; 
 Muniford's Case, Ibid. 316. 
 
 4 Baker's Case, Cont. El. Cas, 1864-5, 92; Yell's Case, Ibid. 94; Bying- 
 ton 17. Van Lever, Ibid. 395; Stanton v. Lane, 2 Ibid. 637. 
 
 5 Converse v. U. S. 21 How. 463; Brown's Case,9 Opin. Att. Gen. 508. 
 
 Section 7. 
 Enactment of laws 
 
 1. Revenue bills. Where to originate . 
 
 2. Manner of passage. How passed without President's approval. 
 
 3. Orders, resolutions, and votes. President's approval. 
 
 Sec. 7. '^All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the 
 House of Representatives ; hut the Sena.te may propose or 
 concur ivith amendments as on other bills. 
 
 Revenue. — The House has the sole power to originate 
 bills for taxation. 1 A bill establishing rates of postage 
 is not a bill for raising re venue. 2 
 
 1 S. & V. R. R. Co. V. Stockton, 41 Cal. 165. 
 
 2 U. S. V. James, 13 Blatchf. 207. 
 
 ^ Every bill lohich shall have passed the House of Represen- 
 tatives and the Senate shall, before it become a laio, be pre- 
 sented to the President of the United States ; if he approve 
 he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, loith his objec- 
 tions, to that House in which it shall have originated, loho 
 shall enter the objections at large on their Journal, and pro^ 
 ceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two- 
 thirds of that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be 
 sent, together loiih the objections, to the other House, byivhich 
 it shall iikeivise be reconsidered, and if approved by tioo-thirds 
 of that House, it shall become a law. But in all such cases 
 the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, 
 and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill 
 shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. 
 If any bill shall not be returned by the President loithin ten 
 days {Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to 
 him, the same shall be a laio, in like manner as if he had 
 signed it, unless the Congress by their adjournment prevent 
 its return, in lohich case it shall not be a laio. 
 
55 ENACTMENT OF LAWS. Art. I, § 7 
 
 Course of proceeding by which a bill becomes a 
 law.i The President must receive the bill ten entire days 
 before adjouxnment, or it will not become a law.^ If the 
 President approves the bill he shall sign it ; he need not 
 indorse on tl-,e bill the word "approved," nor need he 
 date it.3 A bill becomes a law either by the signing of 
 the bill by the President, or by his retaining it for ten days 
 without signing^ Every bill approved by the President 
 takes effect as a law only by such approval and from the 
 time of such approval ;^ but the legislature may prescribe 
 the very moment, in the future, after the approval, when 
 the law shall take effect,^ and when no time is lixed, it 
 takes effect from its date." As to when a law takes effect, 
 there are no parts or divisions of a day.^ but fractions of 
 a day may be allowed when substantial justice requires 
 it.'J In ca-e of doubt the time should be construed favor- 
 ably to the citizens. 1" An act compared by the proper 
 officer, approved by the President, and enrolled in the 
 Department of State, cannot afterwards be impugned by 
 evidence to alter or contradict it.^^ Courts take judicial 
 notice of a general statute — it is not to be xjroved as an 
 issue of fact.^"-^ 
 
 1 McCuUocli V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 412. 
 
 2 Hyde v. ^Viiite, 24 Tex. 145. 
 
 3 Gardner v. Collector, 6 Wall. 499. 
 
 4 Gardner v. CpUector, 6 Wall. 499. 
 
 5 In re Richardson, 2 Story, 571. And see Gardner v. Collector, 6 
 Wall. 499. 
 
 6 In re Rinhardson, 2 Story, 571. 
 
 7 Mattliews v. Zane, 7 Wheat. 164; In re Ankrim, 3 McLean, 285; 
 Warren Manuf. Co. v. Etna Ins. Co., 2 Paine, 501. 
 
 8 Matt, of Wellman, 20 Vt. 661 ; Arnold v. U. S., 9 Cranch, 119; 1 Gall. 
 348. 
 
 9 In re Wynne, 1 Chase, 227 ; 4 Bank Reg. 5 ; In re Ankrim, 3 McLean, 
 285; In re Richardson, 3 Story, 571. Biit see U. S. v. Williams, IPaine, 
 261; Welhnan's Case, 20 Vt. 661 ; In re Howes, 21 Vt. 619. 
 
 10 In re Richardson, 2 Story, 571. 
 
 11 Thompsons' Case, 9 Op. Att. Gen. 3. 
 
 12 Gardner v. Collector, 6 Wall. 499. 
 
 3 Every order, resolution, or vote to lohicJi the concurrence of 
 the Senate and House of Representatives may he necessary 
 {except on a question of adjournment) shall he presented to 
 the President of the United States; and hefore the same shall 
 take effect, shall he approved hy him, or, heing disapproved hy 
 him, shall be repassed by two-thirds of the Senate and House 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS ov congress, 56 
 
 of Representatives, according to the rules and limitations 
 prescribed in the case of a bill. 
 
 Construction. — This clause does not apply to a pro- 
 posal for amendment to the Constitution.^ A joint res- 
 olution approved by the President, or duly passed with 
 his approval, has the effect of a law.- 
 
 1 Hollingsworth v. Virginia, 3 Dall. 378. 
 
 2 Kesolutions of Congress, 6 Op. Att. Gen. 680. 
 
 Section 8. 
 Powers of Congress. 
 
 1. Taxes, duties, etc. Common defense and general welfare. 
 
 2. To borrow money. 
 
 3. To regulate commerce. 
 
 4. Naturalization. Bankruptcies. 
 
 5. Cokiiiig money. Weights and measures. 
 
 6. Punishment of counterfeiting. 
 
 7. Post-of&ces and post-roads. 
 
 8. Patents and copyrights. 
 
 9. Courts. 
 
 10. Piracy and other offenses. 
 
 11. To declare war, etc 
 
 12. Raising army. 
 
 13. Navy. 
 
 14. Army and navy regulations. 
 
 15. Militia. Insurrections, etc. 
 
 16. Organizing, arming, and disciplining militia. 
 
 17. Exclusive legislative power over seat of Government, forts, etc. 
 
 18. To make laws necessary to carry powers into effect. 
 
 Sec. 8. '^The Congress shall havepoioer to lay and collect 
 taxes, duties, imposts and- excises, to imtj the debts and x>ro- 
 vide for the common defense and general loelfare of the 
 United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be 
 uniform throiighout the United States. 
 
 Legislative powers. — Powers actually granted must 
 be such as are expressly given, or given by necessary im- 
 plication, i The existence of a power should not be denied 
 because it may be abused by its exercise, nor should it be 
 presumed that abuses will take place. ^ Legislative pow- 
 ers mvist be construed and applied with reference to the 
 purposes for which the Constitution was made,^ and when 
 the general purpose of the instrument is ascertained, the 
 language is to be construed, as far as possible, as subserv- 
 ient to that purpose.'^ They are to be exercised in discre- 
 tion. ^ The question of power does not depend on degree 
 to which it may be exercised. ^ The existence of a power 
 may be fairly -deduced from more than one of the sub- 
 stantive powers expressly defined upon them all com- 
 
57 POWERS OF CONGRESS Art. I, § 8 
 
 bined.s The powers conferred upon Congress must be 
 regarded as relative to each other, and all means for a 
 common end.s The exception from a power marks its 
 existence. 9 When Congress have the power to do the 
 , same act by virtue of distinct powers, they may exercise 
 which they please; and when they profess to act under 
 one power there is no necessity to resort to another, i" 
 No power in itself substantive can be exercised or con- 
 travened by action under an incidental power. '^ Al- 
 though Congress cannot enable a State to legislate, it 
 may adopt State legislation. i^ With respect to subjects 
 of legislation either expressly or impliedly delegated, 
 Congress possesses an omnipotence equal to that of any 
 other supreme legislative body,"^^ ^md no distinction can 
 be made between the nature of the power and the nature 
 of the subject on which that power may operate. i"^ The 
 Constitution does not forbid Congress to pass laws impair- 
 ing the obligations of contracts. ^^ j^n act of Congress 
 passed for the purpose of impairing the obligation of a 
 contract would be void; but if the primary object of the 
 act is within any of its granted powers it is valid, i*^ Con- 
 gress may consent to a second trial of a claim against the 
 United States, although judgment thereon has been ren- 
 dered in favor of the Government, i" 
 
 1 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 326; 7 Cranch, 727. 
 
 2 Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 
 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 3 McCall V. McDowell, Deady, 254 ; 1 Abb. U. S. 212. 
 
 4 ShoUenberger v. Brinton, 52 Pa. St. 9. 
 
 5 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 326; 7 Cranch, 727. 
 
 6 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wlieat. 419; Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 326; 
 7 Cranch, 727; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 7 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457 ; 11 Wall. 682. 
 
 8 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457; 11 Wall. 682. 
 
 9 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. 
 
 10 N. R. Steamboat Co. v. Livingston, 3 Cowen, 713; Thayer v 
 Hedges, 23 Ind. 141 ; SchoUenberger v. Brinton, 52 Pa. St. 9. 
 
 11 Thayer v. Hedges, 23 Ind. 141. 
 
 12 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. 
 
 13 Metropolian Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 14 Cooley v. Fortwardens, 12 How. 299. 
 
 15 Satterlee v. Matthewson, 2 Peters, 380; Legal Tender Cases, 12 
 Wall. 457; In re Smith, 8 Bank. Keg. 407; 5 McLean, 158; Evans «. Eaton, 
 Peters C. C. 322. 
 
 16 Evans v. Eaton, 3 Wheat. 356; 7 Wheat. 358; Peters C. C. 322; Legal 
 Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457; Bloomer v. Stolley, 5 McLean, 158; Hague 
 V. Powers, 39 Barb. 427; George v. Concord, 45 N. H. 434; Metropolitan 
 Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400; ShoUenberger v. Brinton, .52 Pa. St. 9. 
 
 17 Nock-i'. U. S. 2Ct. CI. 451. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 68 
 
 Taxation is an incident of sovereignty.^ It is the act 
 of laying on a tax, or imposing burdens or charges on per- 
 sons or property, 2 and attaches on all persons and prop- 
 erty within the jurisdiction. ^ The power is necessarily 
 co-extensive with the territory of the United States, oper- 
 ating on all persons belonging to the body politic, ^ and 
 applicable to the utmost extent. ^ It is an express grant 
 to Congress,*' supreme and independent of State control, ^ 
 the only limitation being that "duties, imposts, and ex- 
 cises" shall be "uniform." ^ "Duties" and "imposts" 
 are synonymous, and exclusively refer to articles imported 
 fromforeign countries.'^ " Uniform" means the same du- 
 ties at all ports in the States and Territories, and that in- 
 come taxes and excises sliall operate alike, including the 
 District of Columbia.!^ The power of taxation includes 
 the power to enact internal revenue laws, ii The taxing 
 power cannot be invoked in aid of enterprises strictly pri- 
 vate,!^ nor for those purposes which are within the exclu- 
 sive power of the individual States. i^ The words "wel- 
 fare of the United States" do not authorize the taxa- 
 tion of means necessary for the exercise of State govern- 
 ments ; i'^ so Congress cannot tax the revenues of a munici- 
 pal corporation, i5 nor impose an income tax on the sala- 
 ries of State officers, 16 nor require a revenvie stamp on 
 process in State courts, i" but it may impose a succession 
 tax. 18 Congress may adopt any appropriate means for 
 carrying these powers into effect, as, to build custom- 
 houses, employ revenue cutters, appoint collectors and 
 other officers, take official bonds, establish needful bu- 
 reaus, prescribe time and manner of payment, rent or 
 build warehouses, define crimes and their j)unishment, 
 and provide for their prosecution, i'-' Congress may im- 
 pose a tax on the salaries of civil officers, except those 
 whom Congress has no constitutional power to tax.^o It 
 has general power to impose a tax on business such as 
 distilling, and impose penalties and forfeitures. ^i 
 
 1 Dobbins v. Commissioners of Erie Co. 16 Peters, 435. 
 
 2 Knowlton v. Rock Co. 9 Wis. 418. 
 
 3 Dobbins v. Commissioners of Erie Co. 16 Peters, 435. 
 
 4 Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Peters, 514. 
 
 5 McCulloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316 ; S. & V. R. R. Co. v. Stock- 
 ton, 41 Cal. 166. 
 
 6 McCulloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316. 
 
 7 Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 516; Ward v. Maryland, 12 WaU. 427. 
 
 8 Hylton •;;. U. S. 3 Dall. 171 ; Gibbons v. Garden, 9 Wheat. 199; Li- 
 cense Tax Cases, 5 W\'ill. 462 ; U. S. v. Singer, 15 Wall. Ill; Scholey i;. 
 Rew, 23 Wall. 348; Attorney-General v. Winnebago L. & F. P. R. Co. 11 
 
59 
 
 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 Wis. 35; Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533; Sav. & L. Soci. v. Austia, 
 46 Cal. in; People v. Reynolds, 10 111. 12; People v. Salomon, 51 111. 54. 
 
 9 Hvlton V. U. S. 3 Dall. 177; U. S. v. Tappan, 11 Wheat. 419; Wood- 
 ruff V. Parliani, " Wall. 123; Hinson v. Lott, 8 Wall. 143. 
 
 10 Loughborough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. See U.S. v. Riley, 5 Blatchf . 
 264. w- 
 
 11 Matt of Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 334. ,, ' 
 
 12 Loan Asso. v. Topeka, 20 Wall. 663 ; In re Mayor of N. Y. ll'^ohns. 
 80 : Broadhead v. Milwaukee, 19 Wis. 624; Stockton A'-.Y, R.,B;,Co. v. 
 Stockton, 41 Cal. 173. '-> ;., 
 
 13 Gibbons 1). Ogden, 9 Wheat. 199. f"^" '-' "' 
 
 14 Collector v. Day, 11 Wall. 125 ; U. S. v. Railroad Co.'l? Wall. 322; 
 Sweatt V. Boston <tc. R. R. Co. 5 Bank. Reg. 24S. J • 
 
 15 U. S. V. Railroad Co. 17 Wall. 334. - v i' 4^-/ 
 
 16 Dobbins v. Commrs. Erie Co. 16 Pet. 435rFi;8edman v.S^X 10 
 Blatchf. 330 ; Collector v. Day, 11 WaU. 125 ; LegiUo Tender G^Sfes, 12 
 Wall. 457. ^:,. ,._>--; ' 
 
 17 Fineld v. Close, 15 Mich. 505 ; Tucker v. Potte*,:35 Conrv,^«.' 
 
 18 Sc\).oley t). Rew, 23 AVall. 331. .>.' ,,^._y 
 
 19 U. S. w. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 49. 
 
 20 T£vx on Salaries, 13 Op. Att. Gen. 161. 
 
 21 V.h. V. McKinley, 4 Brewst. 246. 
 
 State power of taxation.— By the Revolution the 
 powers of Government devolved upon the people of the 
 United States. 1 The power of taxation herein conferred 
 does not operate as a prohibition on the States, it is a 
 power concurrent in the National and State Governments. ^ 
 The taxing power of the State is an attribute of sover- 
 eignty, and exists independent of the Constitution of the 
 CJnited States. ^ The power is supreme, unless the sub- 
 ject be beyond the borders of the State, or as to property 
 within tlie State, but ceded to the United States, and 
 within their separate and exclusive jurisdiction, and this 
 supremacy cannot be questioned by the judiciary .-i Ex- 
 cept as restricted by the Constitution, States have full 
 power of taxation over all subjects, 5 and over aliens 
 e<iually with citizens. « States are only excluded from 
 taxation of the means and instruments employed by the 
 General Government in the exercise of its functions,'^ or 
 the instruments, emoluments, or persons, and the neces- 
 sarv and proper means to execute its sovereign power, » 
 but though these are exempt, yet the States may tax the 
 property of Government agents.^ A State cannot tax 
 United States property within its limits, lo nor the com- 
 pensation of a United States officer ;ii but a State may 
 tax the salary of a post-office clerk, 12 So, a party who 
 obtains a license to trade from the Government is not an 
 officer. 13 A State cannot tax public moneys devoted to 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OP CONGEESS. 60 
 
 its appropriate purposes, i* nor money in the treasury, nor 
 precious metals in the mint, nor the lots, structures, ships, 
 materials of war, or other property devoted to the public 
 purposes of the United States, is nor can it tax internal 
 revenue stamps. i^ These exemptions depend upon the 
 effect of the tax, whether it will hinder the efficient exer- 
 cise of the powers of the Government, i" but not to a tax 
 which only remotely affects the efficient exercise of the 
 powers of the Government, i^ To make a tax void the 
 absence of all possible public interest must be clear and 
 palpable. 19 A State may levy a tax to pay the commuta- 
 tion of persons drafted into the military service,-*^ or to 
 pay bounties to volunteers. 21 So, a State may tax shares 
 of a railroad to which Congress has extended aid, or 
 may tax the gross receipts of railroads, 22 and may pro- 
 vide for collecting taxes in gold or silver only.^" 
 
 1 McCulloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316: Dartmouth Coll. v. Wood- 
 ward, 4 Wheat. 518; Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; Ogden v. Saunders, 
 12 Wheat. 213; Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 47. 
 
 2 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 571; Perveer v. Comm., 5- Wall. 475; Ham- 
 ilton Comp. Mississippi, 6 Wall. 639; Sweatt v. Boston &c. K. -R. Co., 5 
 Bank. Reg. 248; Van Allen v. Assessors, 3 Wall. 585. 
 
 3 McCulloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Lane Co. v. Oregon, 9 Wall. 
 77; Raili-oad Co.«. Peniston, 18 Wall. 29; Nathan «;. Louisiana, 8 How. 
 73; People v. Coleman, 4 Cal. 46. 
 
 4 McCulloch ». Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Gibbons t). Ogden, 9 Wheat. 
 199; 17 Johns. 488; 4 Johns. Ch. 150; People v. New York, 2 Black, 620; 
 2 Wall. 200: 3 Id. 573; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 538; Ward v. Maryland, 
 12 "Wall. 427; PuUan v. Kinsinger, 2 Abb. U. S. 112; U. S. t?. Ames, 1 
 Wood.&M.76; Russell v.N. Y.,2 Denis, 461; State Treasurer!;. Wright, 
 28 111. 509; People v. Hawley, 3 Mich. 330; Fifield v. Close, 16 Mich. 505; 
 People i;. Mayor &c. of Brooklyn, 4 N. Y. 425; Scovil ?;. Cleveland, 1 
 Ohio St. 126; Maloy w. Marietta, 11 Id. 638; Weister?;. Hade, 52Pa. St. 
 474; Ai-mington v. Barnet, 15 Vt. 749; Mayor &c. v. Lord, 18 Wend. 126. 
 
 5 Lane Co. v. Oregon, 7 Wall. 71; Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall. 430; 
 Loan Asso. v. Topeka, 20 Wall. 669; Bates v. Cooper, 5 How. 115; Pullen 
 V. Kinsinger, 2 Abb. U. S. 110; Gashweller v. Mcllvoy, 1 A. K. Marsh. 
 84; Rexford v. Knight, 15 Barb. 627; Rubothom v. McClure, 4 Blackf. 
 505; Hawkins v. Lawrence, 8 Id. 226; Bradley v. N. Y. &c. R. R. Co. 21 
 Cal. 304; Clark v. Saybrook, 21 Conn. 313; Russell v. N. Y. 2 Denio, 461; 
 People V. Commrs. 5 Demo, 401; Raleigh &c. Co. v. Davis, 2 Dev. & B. 
 451; Swan W.Williams, 2 Mich. 442; Baker v. Johnson, 2 Hill, 342; Peo- 
 ple V. Hayden, 6 Ibid. 359; McCormick v. Town ot La Fayette, 1 Ind. 48; 
 Canal Co. v. Ferris, 2 Ibid. 331 ; People v. Wells, 12 Ibid. 102 ; Jackson v. 
 Winn, Litt. 322; Mason v. Kennebec &c. Co. 31 Me. 215; People v. M. S. 
 R. R. Co. 3 Met. 496; Smith v. McAdam. Ibid. 506; Charlestown &c. R. 
 R. Co. V. Middlesex, 7 Met. 78; Mount Wash. R. R. Co.'s Petition, 30 N. 
 H. 135; Bank of Chenango v. Brown, 26 N. Y. 467; Ligat v. Common- 
 wealth, 19 Pa. St. 456; Yost's Report, 17 Id. 524; Mayor of Pittsburgh v. 
 Scott, 1 Pa. St. 309; Bio .dgood v. Mohawk Co. 18 Wend. 9; Mercer v. 
 Mc Williams, Wright, 132; Bennington v. Park, 50 Vt. 178. 
 
 6 Fratz's Appeal, 52 Pa. St. 367. 
 
 7 McCulloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Van Allen v. Assessors, 3 
 Wall. 585; Austin v. Aide men, 7 Wall. 699; Banks v. Mayor, 7 Wall. 16; 
 Hamilton Comp. v. Massachusetts, 6 Wall. 639; Dobbins v. Commrs. of 
 
61 POWERS OF CONGKESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 Erie Co. 16 Peters, 435; People v. Commrs. of Taxes, 4 Wall. 244; 35 N. 
 Y. 423; Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Waeat. 738. 
 
 8 Dobbins v. Commrs. of Erie Co. 16 Peters, 435; 7 Watts, 513. 
 
 9 Railroad Co. v. Peniston, 18 Wall. 5. 
 
 10 Anonymous, 9 Opin. Att. Gen. 291. 
 
 11 Dobbins v. Commissioners, 16 Peters, 435; 7 Watts, 513. 
 
 12 Melclier v. Boston, 50 Mass. 73. 
 
 13 State V. Bell, Phill. (N. C.) 76. 
 
 14 Comm. V. Morrison, 2 A. K. Marsh. 75. 
 
 15 City V. CliurcWU, 33 N. Y. 693; 43 Barb. 550. 
 
 16 Palfrey v. Boston, 101 Mass. 329. 
 
 17 Kailroad Co. v. Peniston, 18 Wall. 5; National Bank v. Comm. 9 
 Wall. 353; Waite v. Dowley, 9 Ch. L. N. 263; Dobbins v. Commrci. 16 
 Peters, 435; 7 Watts, 513. 
 
 18 Kailroad Co. v. Peniston, 18 Wall. 5. 
 
 19 Brodhead v. Milwaukee, 19 Wis. 624; Stockton & V. R. R. Co. v. 
 Stockton, 41 Cal. 173; Schenley v. Alleghany, 25 Pa. St. 128. 
 
 20 Freeland v. Hastings, 10 Allen, 570; Wagner v. Collector, 31 N. J. 
 190. 
 
 21 Booth V. Woodbury, 32 Conn. 118; Coffman v. Keightley, 24 Ind. 
 509; Board v. Ji>earss, 25 Ind. 110; Winchester v. Corrinna, 55 Me. 9; 
 Comer v. Folsom, 13 Minn. 219; Wilson v. Bruckman, 13 Minn. 441; 
 State V. Jackson, 31 N. J. 189; S.tate v. Demarest, 32 N. J. 528; Speer v. 
 Directors, 50 Pa. St. 150 ; Ahl v. Gleim, 52 Pa. St. 432. But see Ferguson 
 V. Landram, 1 Bush, 548. 
 
 22 Woodruff v. Parham, 8 Wall. 123. 
 
 23 State Treasurer v. Wright, 28 111. 509 ; Whiteaker v. Haley, 2 Or. 128. 
 
 ^To borrow money on the credit of the United States. 
 
 The power to borro"w includes the power to issue 
 the requisite securities or evidences of debt for the money 
 borrowed,! or for capital and commodities of which money 
 is the representative,"^ and to issue treasury notes under 
 the various acts of Congress,^ their issue being an ex- 
 change of credit for money or property .-4 Congress may 
 constitutionally authorize the emission of bills of credit, 
 and by suitable enactments may restrain the circulation, 
 as money of any notes not issued by itself.'^ In issuing 
 paper promises to circulate as currency their makers are in 
 effect borrowing on the credit of these promises. ^ Money 
 is gold and silver, or the lawful circulating medium of the 
 country, including bank-notes.''' " On the credit " author- 
 izes the issue of bills or notes by the Government to circu- 
 late as money, without providing for repayment of the 
 money borrowed at any particular day, or with interest, ^ 
 and to charter national banks, ^ and issue notes intended 
 to circulate as money. lo Congress may restrict the circu- 
 lation of any notes not issued under its authority.!^ 
 
 Destt Fed. Con.— S. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 62 
 
 1 Hamilton Comp. v, Massachusetts, 6 Wall. 639; Hague «. Powers, 
 39 Barb. 427; Thayer z;. Hedges, 22 lud. 282; Van Husan t;. Kanouse, 13 
 Mich. 303; Greorge v. Concord, 45 N. H. 434; Metropolitan Bank v. Van 
 Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 2 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 3 Thorndyke v. U. S. 2 Mason, 18; Pennsylvania Cases, 52 Pa. St. 1^ 
 100; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 4 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 5 Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533. 
 
 6 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 7 Mann v. Mann, 1 Johns. Ch. 236. 
 
 8 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 9 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 5 Wheat. 316 ; Osbornt;. Bank of U. S. 9 
 Wheat. 738; Weston v. Charleston, 2 Pet. 449. 
 
 10 Bank v. Supervisors, 7 AVall. 26. 
 
 11 Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533, 
 
 Legal tenders. — There is no express grant of power 
 to make a credit currency a legal tender in payment of 
 debts;! ][)ut the authority is necessarily imi)lied,2 as a 
 means to the exercise of the functions of government-^ 
 If in the judgment of Congress it be necessary, in order to 
 enhance the credit of tlie Government promises, it may 
 make them a legal tender ;4 in all but cases excepted by 
 law,s it is a necessary incident to sovereignty. ^ The 
 power is not subject to mutations, but is the same in 
 peace or in war.''' The power is not to be resorted to ex- 
 cept upon extraordinary occasions or public exigencies of 
 great importance. ^ A statute making treasury notes a 
 legal tender is valid, ^ and though they are only the reiDre- 
 sentatives of money,!*^ they may be made a substitute for 
 coin. 11 The provisions of the act rendering them legal 
 tender applies to antecedent as well as subsequent con- 
 tracts,!'^ but they are not legal tenders on a contract spe- 
 cifically i)ayable in gold and silver coin,i3 nor as to the 
 payment of taxes, but only private debts.!* ^ law of 
 Congress to change the currency in which a contract may 
 be discharged does not impair the obligation of the con- 
 tract. ^^ A contract may be satisfied by payment of what 
 is a legal tender at the time the debt falls due.!^ The 
 first legal tender act was in favor of foreign coin.!^ 
 
 1 Hepburn v. Griswold, 8 Wall. 603; 2 Duval, 29. 
 
 2 Lick V. Faulkner, 25 Cal. 404. 
 
 3 Banks V. The Mayor, 7 Wall. 16. 
 
 4 Wood V. BuUer, 6 Allen, 516; Schoenberger v. Watts, 10 Am. Law 
 Reg. 653; Hague v. Powers, 39 Barb. 427; Lick v. Faulkner, 25 Cal. 404; 
 Reynolds v. Bank of Indiana, 18 Ind. 467; Thayer?;. Hedges, 23 Ind. 141; 
 Brown v. Welch, 26 Ind. IIG; Hontrager v. Bates, 18 Iowa, 174; Van 
 Husent). Kanouse, 13 Mich. 303; Warnibold v. Schlicting, 16 Iowa, 243; 
 
63 POWERS OP CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 Riddlesbarger v. McDaniel, 38 Mo. 138; Verares v. Giboney, Ibid. 458; 
 Maynardv. Newmau, 1 Nev. 271; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 
 N. Y. 40.9; .Shollenberger v. Brinton, 52 Pa. St. 100; Carpenter v. North- 
 field Bank. 3:) Vt. id; Breitenbach v. Turner, 18 Wis. 140; Warner v. 
 Sauk Co. 20 Wis. 494. 
 
 5 Brown??. Welch, 26 Ind. 116. 
 
 7 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457; 11 Wall. 682. 
 
 8 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457; 11 Wall. 682. 
 
 9 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457; 11 Wall. 682; Dooley v. Smith, 13 
 Wall. 604; Railroad Co. i;. Johnson, 15 Wall. 195; Hague v. Powers, 39 
 Barb. 427; Lick v. Faulkner, 25 Cal. 404; Curiae v. Abadie, 25 Cal. 502; 
 Kierski v. Matthews, 25 Cal. 591; Latham v. U. S. 1 Ct. CI. 149; 2 Ibid. 
 573; Jones w. Marker, 37 Ga. 503; Black t>. Lusk, 69 111. 70; 18 Ind. 467; 
 Thayer v. Hedges, 23 Ind. 141; Hintrager v. Bates, 18 Iowa, 174; George 
 V. Concord, 45 N. H. 434; Shollenberger v. Brinton, 52 Pa. St. 100; Mur- 
 ray V. Gates, 52 Barb. 427. 
 
 10 Griswold v. Hepburn, 2 Duval, 46. 
 
 11 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 426. 
 
 12 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400; Rodes v. Brouson, 
 34 N. Y. 649; Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457, overruling Hepburn v. 
 Griswold, 8 Wall. 607, on this point. See Willard v. Tayloe, 8 Wall. 557; 
 Jones V. Harker, 37 Ga. 503. 
 
 13 Bronson v. Rodes, 7 Wall. 229; Butler v. Horwitz, Ibid. 258; Dew- 
 ing V. Sears, 11 Wall. 379. 
 
 14 Lane Co. v. Oregon, 7 Wall. 81 ; Whitaker v. Haley, 2 Oreg. 128; Ill- 
 inois V. Wright, 28 III. 509. 
 
 15 Fair v. Marsteller, 2 Cranch, 20; Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat. 370; U. 
 S. V. Robertson, 6 Peters, 644; Metropolitan Bauk v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 
 400. 
 
 16 U. S. V. Webster, 2 Ware (Dav.) 48; Shollenberger v. Brinton, 52 
 Pa. St. 46. 
 
 17 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 424. 
 
 Taxation of securities.— The power to borrow money 
 includes the power to exempt national securities from State 
 taxation. 1 So, a State cannot tax stocks issued by the 
 General Government for loans. 2 This immunity from tax- 
 ation covers all Government securities, as certiticates of 
 indebted ness,3 or United States bonds,* or the income de- 
 rived from interest paid on United States bonds, ^ or for- 
 eign-held bonds; but a State law imposing a tax on 
 bonds and stocks of a foreign corporation, owned in the 
 State, is valid;" so. States may tax estates though com- 
 posed of United States securities, ^ but not the capital of 
 a corporation Avhere the capital is invested in stocks or 
 bonds of the United States.'-^ Where franchises are taxed 
 and not property, the capital stock may be taxed, al- 
 though it consists of United States securities.!'^ States 
 cannot tax treasury notes used as currency without per- 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF COKGRESS. 64 
 
 mission of Congress, ^ nor money lent and stocks or bonds 
 received therefor. ^'^ States cannot tax national banks 
 nor their notes, i3 but Congress may permit States to tax na- 
 tional banks. 1^ States may tax the shares held by indi- 
 viduals in a national bank,^^ although its capital may be 
 invested in bonds of the United States, is but not except 
 by permission of Congress, i" nor when shares in State 
 banks are exempt. i^ States may tax the dividends de- 
 clared to holders of stock of national banks, i^ or the per- 
 centage of the deposits of a bank.-^^ Congress may wSub- 
 ject the shares of corporation stock of national banks to 
 State taxation, notwithstanding the capital is invested 
 in national securities, -^ on the condition that it tax the 
 shares of banks of its own creation. ^^ 
 
 1 Bank of Commerce v. New York, 2 Black, 629; Bank Tax Cases, 2 
 Wall. 200; Van Allen v. Assessors, 3 Wall. 573; People ■;;. Commissioners, 
 4 Wall. 244; 7 Wall. 2(3; Bradley v. People, 4 Dall. 45!); Hamilton Comp. 
 V. U. S., 6 Wall. 63iJ; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400; 
 Society for Savings v. Coite,G Wall. 604; Austin v. The Aldermen, 7 
 WaU. 699; Weston v. Charleston, 2 Pet. 449. 
 
 2 Weston 1). Charleston, 2 Pet. 449; Harp. 340; Bank t;. Commission- 
 ers, 2 Black. 620; Opinion of Justices, 53 N. H. 634. Cow^ra, People t; . 
 Commissioners, 26 N. Y. 163; 37 Barb. 635. 
 
 3 Banks v. Mayor, 7 Wall. 23; Banks v. Supervisors, 7 Wall. 26; State 
 V. Haight, 24 N. J. 128. Contra, People v. Gardner, 48 Barb. 608. 
 
 4 Chicago v. Lunt, 52 111. 414; Bank v. Commissioners, 2 Black, 620; 
 Newark City Bank v. Assessor, 30 N. J. 31. 
 
 5 Bank of Ky. v. Comm., 9 Bush, 46; Opinion of Justices, 53 N. H. 
 534. 
 
 6 Railroad Co. v. Jackson, 7 Wall. 262; Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania, 
 1 ) Wall. 300 ; State Tax on For. Held Bonds, 15 Wall. 325. Contra, Maltby 
 V. Reading &c. R. R. Co., 52 Pa. St. 140; Susquehanna &c. Can Co. i'. 
 Comm., 72 Pa. St. 72; Delaware R. R. Co. v. Comm., 66 Pa. St. 64; Pitts- 
 burgh &c. R. R. Co. V. Comm., 66 Pa. St. 73; 3 Brewst, 355. 
 
 7 People V. Commissioners, 4 Wall. 259; Van Allen ?>. Assessors, 3 
 Wall. 573; Thompson v. Pao. R. R. Co., 9 Wall. 579; Tappan v. Merch. 
 Bank, 19 Wall. 501; Bm-eau Co. v. Chicago &c. R. R.,44 111. 229; Railroad 
 Co. V. Peniston, 18 Wall. 5; National Bank v. Commissioners, 9 Wall. 
 353; Worthington v. Sebastian, 25 Ohio St. 1 ; Great Barrington v. Berk- 
 shire, 33 Mass. 572; McKen v. Northampton, 49 Pa. St. 519. 
 
 8 Strode v. Commonwealth, 52 Pa. St. 181. 
 
 9 Bank v. Commissioners, 2 Black, 620; Whitney v. Madison, 23 Ind. 
 331; Interna. Assu. Co. v. Commissioners, 28 Barb. 318; Mech. Bank v. 
 Bridges, 30 N. J. 112; St. Louis B. & S. Asso. v. Lightner, 42 Mo. 421. 
 
 10 Society of Sav. v. Coite, 6 Wall. 594; Provident Inst. v. Massa- 
 chusetts, 6 Wall. 611; Hamilton Comp. ». Massachusetts, 6 Wall. 632. 
 
 11 Bank v. Supervisors, 7 Wall. 26; Montgomery Co. v. Elston, 32 Ind. 
 27; Home v. Green, 52 Miss. 452. 
 
 12 Weston V. Charleston, 2 Pet. 449; Bank of Commerce v. New York, 
 2 Black, 620; Bank Tax Cases, 2 Wall. 200. 
 
 13 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Osborn v. Bank of U. S., it 
 Wheat. 738; Bank of Commerce ?;. New York, 2 Black, 620; Bank Tax 
 
65 ^POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 Cases, 2 Wall. 200; Pittsburgh v. National Bank, 55 Pa. St- 45; Collins v. 
 Chicago, 4 Biss. 472. 
 
 14 Van Allen v. Assessors, 3 WaU. 573: 33 N. Y. 161; State v. Haight, 
 31 N. J. 399; Frazer v. Seibern, 16 Ohio St. 614; Mintzer v. Montgomery, 
 54 Pa. St. 139; Austin v. Boston, 96 Mass. 359; City v. Churchill, 43 Barb. 
 650; People v. Barton, 44 Barb. 148; People v. Commissioners, 4 Wall. 
 244; 35N. Y. 423; National Bank?;. Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 353; First 
 National Bank v. Douglass Co., 3 Dill. 298, 330; Wright v. Stilz, 27 Ind. 
 338; Hubbard v. Supervisors, 23 Iowa, 130. 
 
 15 National Bank v. Comm., 9 Wall. 353; People v. Bradley, 39 UL 
 130; St. Louis Na. Bank v. Papin, 4 Dill. 29; Bulow v. Charleston, 1 Nott 
 & McC. 45; Stetson v. Bangor, 56 Me. 274; State v. Haight, 31 N. J. 399; 
 State V. Hart, 31 N. J. 434. 
 
 16 People V. Commissioners. 4 Wall. 259; Wright v. Stilz, 27 Ind. 238; 
 St. Louis B. & S. Asso. v. Lightner, 47 Mo. 421. Contra, Whitney v. 
 Madison, 23 Ind. 331. 
 
 17 People V. Assessors, 44 Barb. 148. 
 
 18 Bradley v. People, 4 WaU. 459 ; National Bank i'. Comm. 9 WaU. 353. 
 
 19 State V. CoUector, 2 Bailey, 654. 
 
 20 Society of Sav. v. Coite, 6 WaU. 594. 
 
 21 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Weston v. Charleston, 2 Pet. 
 449; CoUector v. Day, 11 Wall. 123; Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall. 427; Vaa 
 Allen ;;. Assessors, 3 WaU. 593. 
 
 22 Lionberger v. House, 9 Wall. 468. 
 
 •^ To regulate commerce loith foreign nations, and among the 
 several States, and with the Indian tribes. 
 
 Commerce.T-Commerce is a unit, every part of which 
 is indicated by the term.i It refers to trade ^ or traffic, 
 and exchange of commodities.^ It is more, it is inter- 
 course, -^ and includes the buying and selling of exchange.*^ 
 It is not limited to the mere buying and selling, but com- 
 prehends entire commercial intercourse, ^ for the purposes 
 of trade, '^ whether by land or water, ^ and includes commu- 
 nication by telegraph. 9 Transportation is essential to 
 commerce ; i" the transportation of articles of trade from 
 one State to another; ^i the transportation for gain or pur- 
 chase, or exchange of commodities, i'^ or of passengers, ^^ 
 on railroads through the several States, or between the 
 States, ^4 and is co-extensive with the subject to which it 
 relates 15 it includes navigation as well as traffic, ^^ navi- 
 gation being only one of its elements, i" and comprises the 
 control of all navigable waters accessible from a State 
 other than that in which they lie, is and obstacles or bur- 
 dens laid on it are regulations of commerce, ^9 and State 
 statutes imposing the same on interstate commerce are in 
 conflict. 2*^ A tax on freight taken out of or brought into 
 aa State is invalid. ^i So, a State law laying a distinct tax 
 I on a foreign corj)oration for transportation of goods in 
 trains from State to State is unconstitutional. 2"^ 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. I 66 
 
 1 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 438; 4 Johns. Ch. 150, 175; 
 Lin Sing v. Washburn, 20 Cal. 534. 
 
 2 XJ. S. V. Bai]ey, 1 McLean, 234. 
 
 3 TheDanielBall, 10 Wall. 557; 1 Brown, 193. 
 
 4 McCullofh V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; G-ibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 
 1; 17 Johns. 438; 4 Johns. Oh. 150; Groves v. Slaughter, 15 Peters, 449; 
 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; U. S. v. Holliday, 3 Wall. 417; 
 Mitchell V. Steelman, 8 Cal. 363; People v. Brooks, 4 Denio, 469; N. R. 
 Steamboat Co. v. Livingston, 3 Cowen, 713; Moor v. Veazie, 32 Me. 343; 
 Corfield v. Coryell, 4 Wash. C. C. 371. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Holliday, 3 Wall. 417. 
 
 6 People V. Brooks, 4 Denio, 459; State v. Del iware &c. R. R. Co. 30 
 N. J. 473. 
 
 7 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 AVheat. 1 ; 17 Johns. 488. 
 
 8 State Freiijht Tax Cas. 15 Wall. 275; Clinton Bridge Case, 10 Wall. 
 454: 1 Woolw. 150; 16 Am. Law Reg. N. S. 149. 
 
 9 West. U. Tel. Co. v. Atlantic & P. T. Co. 5 Nev. 102; Pensacola Tel. 
 Co. ■/;. W. U. T. Co. 2 Woods, 643. 
 
 10 State Freight Tax Cas. 15 Wall. 275 ; Ward ?;. Maryland, 12 Wall. 418 ; 
 Welton V. Mo. '91 U. S. 275; Henderson v. Mayor &c. 92 U. S. 259; Rail- 
 road Co. V. Husen, Mb U. S. 473. 
 
 11 State Freight Tax Cas. 15 Wall. 275. 
 
 12 State Freight Tax Cas. 15 Wall. 275; Welton v. State, 91 U. S. 275; 
 55 Mo. 288; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282. 
 
 13 People V. Raymond, 34 Cal. 492. 
 
 14 Piek V. Chicago &c. R. R. Co. 6 Biss. 182; State Freight Tax Cas. 15 
 Wall. 232. 
 
 15 Lin Sing v. Washburn, 20 Cal. 534. 
 
 16 McCuIloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 
 1; 17 Johns. 488; 4 Jolms. Ch. 150, 175; U. S. v. Coombs, 12 Peters, 72; 
 Cooley V. Portwardens, 12 How. 319; N. R. Steamboat Co. v. Livingston, 
 3 Cowen, 713; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282; 45 Mass. 282; The Wilson v. 
 U. S. 1 Brock. 423; People t). Brooks, 4 Denio, 469; Chapman i;. Miller, 2 
 Spears, 769; South Carolina v. Georgia, 93 U. S. 4. 
 
 17 Clinton Bridge Case, 10 Wall. 454; Woolw. 150; 16 Am. Law Reg. 
 N. S. 149. 
 
 18 The Thomas Swan, 6 Ben. 45. But not to waters not navigable 
 streams— Groton v. Hurlburt, 22 Conn. 183. 
 
 19 State Freight Tax Cas. 15 Wall. 232; Ward v. Md. 12 Wall. 418, 
 Welton V. Mo. 91 U. S. 275; Henderson v. N. Y. 92 U. S. 259; Chy Lung 
 V. Freeman, Ibid. 275; Railroad Co. v. Husen, 95 U. S. 470. 
 
 20 Hall V. DeCulr, 95 U. S. 433; Welton v. Missouri, 91 U. S. 282; Coun- 
 cil Bluffs V. Kansas &c. R. R. Co. 45 Iowa, 338. 
 
 21 State Freight Tax Cases, 15 Wall. 232. 
 
 22 Erie R. R. Co. ?;. New Jersey, 2 Vroom, 531. 
 
 Power of Congress to regulate. — To regulate means 
 to establisli rules by which it is to be governed: ^ to regu- 
 late the external commerce of the nation, as well as that 
 among the several States;'-^ the object of the provision 
 being to get rid of conflicting commercial interests, and to 
 effect a union of all the people into one nation. ^ " With 
 foreign nations " means with citizens and subjects of for- 
 
67 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 edgn governments,* and includes all the means by wliicli 
 it may be carried on, whether by free navigation of waters 
 of the several States, or by land across them;^ and 
 "among" may be restricted to that commerce which con- 
 cerns imore than one State. ^ The power is complete in 
 itself, with no limit other than that prescribed, 'i and may 
 operate on any and every subject of commerce to which 
 the lei^islative discretion may extend, and embraces manu- 
 factures, bullion, coin, or any other thing. 8 It authorizes 
 all appropriate legislation as will secure convenient and 
 safe navigation of all the waters of the United States, 
 whether requiring the removal of obstructions, or subject- 
 ing vessels to inspection laws.'-* It may change the chan- 
 nel or outlet of a bay, or may otherwise improve naviga- 
 tion, lo The degree and extent of the prohibitions can 
 only be adjusted by the discretion of the ISTational Gov- 
 ernment. ^^ It comprehends the control of all navigable 
 waters accessible from outside the State, i"2 with authority 
 to order their improvement, '3 and i^revent obstructions on 
 the navigable waters between the States.^* as in the erec- 
 tion of bridges. 15 It may iDrevent the obstruction of any 
 navigable stream which is a means of cominerce between 
 any two or more States, ^^^ and keep open navigable riv- 
 ers. ^'^ The jurisdiction of the General Government ex- 
 tends so far as is necessary for commercial purposes. ^^ A 
 law authorizing the building of a bridge is a regulation of 
 commerce, and within the power conferred on Congress. 19 
 A State cannot authorize a material obstruction in a chan- 
 nel of a navigable tributary of the Mississippi.-^ A State 
 may improve navigation, and charge a reasonable toll for 
 sucta purpose, in the absence of Congressional legisla- 
 tion, 21 because it is within the reserved police powers of 
 the State ; 22 but the jDolice powers of a State cannot ob- 
 struct foreign commerce, or interstate commerce, -^ and 
 that which cannot be done directly cannot be done in- 
 directly .^■i The navigable waters of the United States and 
 of the State distinguished. ^5 It is within the police power 
 of a State to authorize the channel of a river to be turned 
 and straightened to protect from inundation. ^6 A stream 
 is not navigable unless so for some general and useful 
 purpose.-" 
 
 1 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Jolins. 488; 4 Johns. Ch. 150, 175. 
 
 2 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; People v. Huntington, 4 N. Y. 
 Leg. Obs. 187; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282. 
 
 3 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 508. 
 
 4 U. S. t? . Holliday, 3 Wall. 417 ; Flauuagan v. Philadelphia, 22 Pa. 219. 
 
 5 Pennsylvania v. Wheeling &c. Bridge, 18 How. 421; Columbus Ins. 
 Co. V. Peoria Br. 6 McLean, 70; Col. Ins. Co. v. Curlenius, Ibid. 209; 
 
Art. I, § S POWERS OF CONGRESS. 68 
 
 Jollv V. Terre Haute D. Co. 6 McLean, 237; U. S. v. R. R. Br. Co. Ibid, 
 Sisrcoi-fiekl V. Coryell, 4 Wash. C. C. 388; Cook v. Pennsylvania, 6 Ain, 
 Law Reg. 378. 
 
 6 Veazie v. Moor, 14 How. 568; Passaic Bridges. 3 Wall. 782; The 
 Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557; 1 Brown, 193; U. S. v. Dewitt, 9 Wall. 45. 
 
 7 Gibbons v. Ogden.O Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 488; Pollard v. Hagan, 3 
 How. 230 ; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 396 ; State v. Kennedy, 19 La. An. 397. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Marigold, 9 How. 560. 
 
 9 The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557; 1 Brown, 193. 
 
 10 Wisconsin v . Duluth, 6 Am. Law Reg. 58 ; .South Carolina v . Georgia, 
 D3 U. S. 4. 
 
 11 U. S. V. The William, 2 Am. L. J. 255. 
 
 12 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1 ; 17 Johns. 488; Corfield v. Coryell, 4 
 Wash. C. C. 371; Gilman v. Philadelphia, 3 Wall. 713. 
 
 13 South Carolina v. Georgia, 93 U. S. 4. 
 
 14 Works V. Junction R. R. 5 McLean, 426; Railroad Co. v. Richmond, 
 19 Wall. 584. 
 
 15 Pennsylvania v. Wheeling &c. Co. 18 How. 423. 
 
 16 Works V. Junction R. R. Co. 5 McLean, 526; Jolly r. Terre Haute 
 Co. 6 Ibid. 237; Devoe v. Penrose F. B. Co. 3 Am. L. J. 79. 
 
 17 U. S. V. New Bedford Br. Co. 1 Wood. & M. 401. 
 
 18 Jolly V. Terre Haute Co. 6 McLean. 241 ; Palmer v. Cuyahoga Co. 3 
 McLean, 226; Spooner v. McConnell, 1 McLean, 337; Hogg v. ZanesviUe 
 Co. 5 Ohio St. 416. 
 
 19 Clinton Bridge Case, AVoolw. 150. 
 
 20 Columbus Ins. Co. v. Curtenius, 6 McLean, 219. 
 
 21 Wisconsin Riv. Imp. Co. v. Manson, 43 Wis. 255; Thames Bank v. 
 Lovell, 18 Conn. 511; Kellogg v. Union Co. 12 Conn. 26; McReynolds i'. 
 Smallhouse, 8 Bush, 447. 
 
 22 Willson V. Blackbird Co. 2 Peters, 245; Gilman v. Philadelphia, 3 
 Wall. 743. 
 
 23 Railroad Co. v. Huzen, 95 U. S. 473, disapproving Yeazel v. Alexan» 
 der, 5S 111. 254. 
 
 24 Wayman v. Southard, 10 Wheat. 1; Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 
 419; Missouri v. North, 27 Mo. 479. 
 
 25 The Moiitello, 11 Wall. 411. 
 
 26 Green v. Swift, 47 Cal. 536. 
 
 27 Groton v. Hurl'urt, 22 Conn. 186. 
 
 ■What it embraces. — It embraces all instruments by 
 which commerce may be carried on,i and all the immedi- 
 ate vehicles and agents, for all purposes 2 — vessels, as well 
 as the articles they bring,^ and the persons who conduct 
 it; 4 and includes the power to prescribe rules for the 
 shipping of seamen,^ and for the regulation of seamen in 
 the merchant service, "^ or to regulate contracts, or extin- 
 guish liens, and the shipping of seamen or navigation of 
 foreign vessels,'^ or to the regulation and qualification of 
 pilots 8 — but the passage of acts regulating pilots does not 
 release pilots from a penalty incurred under a State law.^ 
 
69 POWKRS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 It includes the power to pass a recording act for the se- 
 curity and protection of persons dealing in vessels. i*^ It 
 extends to persons as well as to property ; ^ to the regula- 
 tion of vessels carrying passengers, whether steam or other 
 vessel; 12 to the passage of laws to encourage immigration, 
 or for the admission of citizens and subjects of foreign na- 
 tions; ^3 ibnt it confers no power to declare the status of 
 persons — the power ceases when they arrive. i^ It in- 
 cludes the power to prohibit immigration or the importa- 
 tion of persons, 15 or the importation of slaves, i^ or to pun- 
 ish persons who hold or sell slaves imported, i" It in- 
 cludes commerce carried on by corporations as well as 
 individuals, 18 and the power to impose embargoes i' and 
 to jDunish for crimes on stranded vessels. 20 The power to 
 regulate commerce includes all the means necessary to 
 the execution of such power, as the power to build and 
 maintain light-houses, piers, breakwaters, to employ rev- 
 enue cutters, cause survey of coasts, rivers, and harbors, 
 to appoint all necessary officers at home and abroad, and 
 prescribe their duties and fix terms of office and compen- 
 sation, and to define and jiunish crimes relative to com- 
 merce. 21 
 
 1 Welton V. State, 91 U. S. 275; 55 Mo. 288. 
 
 2 Mitchell V. Steelman, 8 Cal. 363. 
 
 3 The Wilson v. U. S. 1 Brock. 423. 
 
 4 Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299. 
 
 5 Tlie Barque Chusan, 2 Story, 455. 
 
 6 Ex parte Tool, 2 Va. Cas. 276. 
 
 7 The Barque Chusan, 2 Story, 455. 
 
 8 Cooley y. Port Wardens , 12 How. 299 ; Cisco v. Roberts, 6 Bosw. 494; 
 Dryden v. Commonwealth, 16 B. Mon. 598; Edwards v. Panama, 1 Or. 
 418. 
 
 ■ 9 Sturgis V. Spofford, 45 N. Y. 446. 
 
 10 White's Bank v. Smith, 7 Wall. 646; Blanchard v. The Martha 
 Washington, 1 Cliff. 463 ; Foster v. Chamberlain, 41 Ala. 156 ; Mitchell v. 
 Steelman, 8 Cal. 3fi3; Shaw v. McCandless, 36 Miss. 296. 
 
 11 Lin Sing v. Washburn, 20 Cal. 534. 
 
 12 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wat. 1 ; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282; 45 Mass.; 
 People V. Raymond, 34 Cal.; Murphy v. North T. Co., 15 Ohio St. 
 
 13 Lin Sing v. Washburn, 20 Cal. 534. 
 
 14 Lemmon v. People, 20 N. Y. 607 ; 26 Barb. 270. 
 
 15 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; The Wilson v. U. S., 1 Brock. 423: 
 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282; People v. Downer, 7 Cal. 169. 
 
 16 U. S. V. Gould, n Am. L. Reg. 525; U. S. v. Haun, Id. 663. 
 
 17 U. S. V. Gould, 8 Am. L. Reg. 525; U. S. v. Haun, Id. 663. 
 
 18 Paul V. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168. 
 
 19 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 488; 4 Johns. Ch. 150, 175; 
 U. S. V. The William, 2 Hall's L. J. 272. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS 70 
 
 20 U. S. V. Coombs, 12 Pet. 72. 
 
 21 U. S. V. Coombs, 12 Pet. 72; U. S. v. Holliday, 3 Wall. 407; U. S. v. 
 Rhodes, 1 Abb. tJ. S. 50. 
 
 Exclusiveness of powers of Congress.— The mere 
 
 grant of commercial power does not forbid the States 
 from passing laws to regulate commerce — States have a 
 concurrent power on this subject.^ Where the regulation 
 of commerce requires a uniform rule, the power of Con- 
 gress is exclusive ; but where it requires rules in different 
 localities, the States may legislate, in the absence of con- 
 gressional legislation, 2 as in case of the erection of 
 bridges,^ or dams across navigable streams,* or pilot reg- 
 ulations,^ or the regulation of fares and freights. ^ It is 
 for Congress to determine when its full power shall be 
 brought into activity,'^ and when it legislates the States 
 are absolutely prohibited from interfering. 8 Where the 
 subject is national and admits of only one plan of regula- 
 tion, the power of Congress is exclusive,'-^ and no part can 
 be exercised by the States, lo as in the regulation of for- 
 eign commerce and commerce among the States ;ii in such 
 cases the States cannot interfere by additional or auxiliary 
 legislation. 1'^ The design and object of this grant of power 
 was to establish uniformity among the several States, and 
 prevent unjust and invidious distinction s.i^ A State 
 statute in conflict with a congressional regulation of com- 
 merce is unconstitutional. 1* When a statute invades the 
 domain of legislation belonging exclusively to Congress, 
 it is void. 15 fpiie commercial power is not so exclusive as 
 to prevent States from enacting laws necessary to internal 
 police. IS 
 
 1 Cooley V. Port Wardens, 12 How. 319; People v. Coleman, 4 Cal. 46. 
 
 2 Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299; Gilman ij. Philadelphia, 3 
 Wall. 713; Ex parte.McNeill, 13 Wall. 240; Pound t). Turck, 95 U. S. 462; 
 Mitchell V. Steelman, 8 Cal. 363; Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35; People 
 V. C. P. R. K. Co., 43 Cal. 404. 
 
 3 Gilman v. Philadelphia, 3 Wall. 713; Clark v. Sohier, 1 Wood. & M. 
 373; U. S. V. Ames, 1 Wood. & M. 76; U. S. v. New Bedford P>ridge, 1 
 Wood. & M. '503. 
 
 4 Willson V. Blackbird Br. Co., 2 Pet. 245; Pound v. Turck, 95 U. S. 
 463. 
 
 5 Cooley V. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299. 
 
 6 Piek V. Chicago &c. R. R. Co.. 94 U. S. 178; Winona &c. R. R. Co. 
 V. Blake, 94 U. S. 180. 
 
 7 TJ. S. V. New Bedford Bridge, 1 Wood. & M. 421; U. S. v. Coombs, 
 12 Pet. 72; N. Y. v. Miln, 11 Pet. 155; Gilman v. Philadelphia, 3 Wall. 
 713. 
 
 8 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 219; Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat 
 419; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283. 
 
 9 Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299. 
 
71 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § S 
 
 10 Gibbons v. Ogrlen, 9 Wheat. 1; Gi'oves v. Slaughter, 15 Pet. 504; 
 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283. 
 
 11 Sherlock v. Ailing, 93 U. S. 99; Hall v. Be Cuir, 95 Id. 498; Railroad 
 Co. V. Husen. 95 U. S. 465; N. R. S. Co. v. Livingston, 3 Cow. 13; People 
 V. Broolcs, 4 Den. 4(3:); Council Bluffs &c. R. R. Co., 45 Iowa, 338. 
 
 12 The Chusan, 2 Story, 455; Sinnot v. Davenport, 22 How. 227. 
 
 13 Veazie v. Moor, 14 How. 568; Welton v. State, 91 U. S. 273. 
 
 14 Sinnot v. Davenport, 22 How. 227 ; Blanchard v. The Martha Wash- 
 ington, 1 Cliff. 473; Ex parte Ah Fong, 3 Sawy. 145. 
 
 15 Henderson v. The Mayor, 92 U. S. 259. 
 
 16 Commrs. of Pilotage v. The Cuba, 28 Ala. 105. 
 
 Passengers. — A State cannot impose on shipmasters 
 burdensome conditions to the landing of passengers, i nor 
 can it enforce laws regulating the arrival of passengers 
 from a foreign port.'^ A State law imposing a tax on i")assen- 
 gers arriving from a foreign port is unconstitutional and 
 void.3 So, a State law to discourage Chinese immigration 
 is in violation of this provision. "^ So, a State law au- 
 Ithorizing the seizure and imprisonment of free negroes 
 brouglit to the State from abroad, is void.^ So, a tax on 
 passengers or goods passing through a State is invalid. ^ 
 A tax on passengers leaving a State, though not in con- 
 flict with tills provision, is nevertlieless void, as it is in- 
 consistent with the objects for which tlie Federal Govern- 
 ment was established, and the rights conferred on the 
 Government and the people.''' The extent of the power of 
 a State to exclude a foreigner is limited to its police pow- 
 ers. Whatever is beyond the right of self-defense is ex- 
 clusively within the jurisdiction of the General Govern- 
 ment. ^ 
 
 1 Henderson v. Mayor &c. of N. Y. 92 U. S. 259. 
 
 2 Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U. S. 275. 
 
 3 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 349; People v. Raymond, 34 Cal. 492; 
 State V. S. S. Constitution, 42 Cal. 589. 
 
 4 Lin Sing v. Washburn, 20 Cal. 534. 
 
 5 Elkison v. Deliesseline, 2 Whart. Cr. Cas. .56; Anonymous, 1 Opin. 
 Atty. Gen. 659. But see Anonymous, 2 Opin. Atty. Gen. 426. 
 
 6 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283; Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35. But 
 see Smith v. Marston, 5 Tex. 432; Indiana v. Am. Express Co. 7 Biss., 
 227; State Tax on R. Gross Receipts, 15 Wall. 284; Railroad Co. v. Ma- 
 ryland, 21 Wall. 456; Freight Tax Cases, 15 AVall. 232. 
 
 7 Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 48. 
 
 8 In re Ah Fong, 3 Sawy. 145; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 343. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 72 
 
 Police powers of States.— Private interests must be 
 made subservient to the general interest of the commu- 
 nity,! so the power of States over police regulations is 
 supreme.2 A State law intended as a regulation of po- 
 lice is not a regulation of comraerce,^ but the police 
 power cannot be extended over interstate transportation 
 of the subjects of commerce. * A State may regulate the 
 position of vessels in her harbors or rivers, ^ or may regu- 
 late the speed of steamers or railroad trains. ^ States 
 may prohibit the introduction of slaves,'^ or exclude j^au- 
 pers, criminals, diseased or infirm persons, and j^ersons 
 afflicted with contagious diseases, ^ and may exact a bond 
 to indemnify from expense of maintaining passengers 
 after arrival; ^ but to exclude passengers who are in pos- 
 session of their faculties, and neither paupers nor crim- 
 inals, is a regulation of commerce which the State cannot 
 exercise. 10 go, a State cannot legislate to prevent the im- 
 portation of cattle during certain seasons of the year, this 
 being more than an exercise of its police powers; ^i but it 
 may regulate the introduction of game during certain 
 months ; 12 "but forbidding the exportation of game, law- 
 fully killed within the State, is unconstitutional. -^s x 
 State may forbid the sale of an illuminating liquid below 
 a certain standard, i^ or regulate the use of explosives and 
 dangerous oils and substances, i^ or may remove the 
 same. 16 The police power extends to the protection 
 of the lives, limbs, health, comfort, morals, and quiet of 
 all persons, and the protection of all property in the 
 State.17 This clause does not interfere with the rights of 
 States to enact inspection, quarantine, and health laws, 
 as well as laws regulating internal commerce, is or com- 
 merce local in its character, i^ as requiring the master of a 
 vessel to report the names, ages, and origin of passen- 
 gers.20 Inspection laws are not burdens on trade, nor 
 unjust discriminations, so long as they are reasonable; -i 
 but a statute requiring vessels to furnish statements of 
 the name and owner is void as to United States vessels.22 
 So, a statute relating to the survey of sea-going vessels 
 is a regulation of commerce, and void.^s 
 
 1 Slaughter Housfe Cases, 16 Wall. 62; Commonwealth v. Alger, 7 
 Gush. 84; Taunton v. Taylor, 116 Mass. 254; Watertown v. Mayo, 109 
 Mass. 315. 
 
 2 Slaughter House Cases, 16 Wall. 62; Bartemeyer v. Iowa, 18 WaU. 
 138. 
 
 3 Smith V. Maryland, 18 How. 71; New York v. Miln, 11 Peters, 102. 
 
 ^„^ ^Railroad Co. v. Husen, 95 U. S. 465. Contra, Yeazel «. Alexander, 58 
 111. 254. 
 
 5 Vanderbilt v. Adams, 7 Cow. 348. 
 
73 POWERS OF COKGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 6 People V. Jenkins, 1 Hill, 460 ; Toledo &c. Co. v. Deacon, 63 111. SI. 
 
 7 Groves v. Slaughter, 15 Peters, 449; Osborn v. Nicholson, 1 Dill. 235. 
 
 8 Passenorer Cases, 7 How. 283; Moore v. Illinoi:"., 14 How. 13; State 
 V. S. S. Constitution, 42 Cal. 578; Lemmou v. PeoiDle, 20 N. Y. 607; 26 
 Barb. 270. 
 
 9 Candler v. Mayor of New York, 1 Wend. 403; State v. S. S. Consti- 
 tution, 42 Cal. 578; Henderson v. The Mayor, 92 U.S. 265; Passenger 
 Cases, 7 How. 572. But see New York v. Staples, 6 Cow. 170. 
 
 10 State V. S. S. Constitution, 42 Cal. 578. 
 
 11 Railroad Co. y. Husen,fl5 U. S. 465; S. C. 6 Am. L. E. 265, denying 
 YeazeH'. Alexander, 58 111. 254; Stevens v. Brown, Ibid. 283; Wilson v. 
 Kansas C. St. J. & C. E. R. 60 Mo. 184; Husen v. Hauuihal & St. J. K. R. 
 Co. 60 Mo. 226; Mercer u. Kansas C. St. J. & C. R. R. Co. 60 Mo. 3y7; 
 Chicago &c. R. R. Co. v. Gassaway, 71 111. 570; Somerville v. Maries, 58 
 111. 371. 
 
 12 State V. Randolph, 1 Mo. App. 15. 
 
 13 State V. Saunders, 19 Kans. 127. 
 
 14 Patterson v. Kentucky, 11 Chic. L. N. 183; 7 Am. L. R. 83. 
 
 15 Slaughter House Cases, 16 Wall. 36; U. S. v. Dewitt, 9 Wall. 41. 
 
 16 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 617. 
 
 17 Munn v. IlUnois, 94 U. S. 147; Toledo &c. Co. v. Jacksonville, G7 111. 
 37; Ex parte Shrader, 33 Cal. 279; Davis v. Central R. R. Co. 17 Ga. 323. 
 
 18 Gibbons t\ Ogden,9 Wheat. 1; New York v. Miln, 11 Peters, 102; 
 Conway v. Taylor, 1 Black, 633; State v. Fosdick, 21 La. An. 256. 
 
 19 State V. S. S. Constitution, 42 Cal. 578. 
 
 20 New York v. Miln. 11 Peters, 131. 
 
 21 People V. Harper: 11 Chic. L. N. 191. 
 
 22 Sinnot v. Davenport, 22 How. 227; Foster v. Davenport, 22 How. 
 244. Contra, Connnrs. of Pilotage v. The Cuba, 28 Ala. 185. 
 
 23 Foster v. Master &c. of N. O. 94 U. S. 246. 
 
 Internal commerce of State. — A State may regu- 
 late its own internal commerce; ^ it may grant exclusive 
 privilege of navigating an unnavigable stream wholly 
 within the State, on condition of rendering it navigable.^ 
 States may legislate as to roads, ferries, canals, etc., when 
 they do not interfere with the free navigation of the wa- 
 ters of the State, for purposes of interstate commerce ;3 
 but they cannot pass laws imposing a toll on logs and 
 lumber floating down a stream running into another 
 State.* They may regulate the person and thing within 
 their own jurisdiction, notwitli standing the regulation 
 may have a bearing on commerce, ^ as the erection of 
 wharves, which are subservient of commerce. ^ They may 
 prescribe regulations for warehouses,'^ and fix rates of 
 charges for storing, handling, and shipping goods. ^ or 
 pass laws for the regulation of pilots, in the absence of 
 congressional acts on that subject. ^ They may issue char- 
 ters to bridge, turnpike, and canal companies,!'^ and may 
 grant exclusive rights, ^i Bridges are in the same cate- 
 Destt Fed. Con.— '7. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 74 
 
 gory with ferries, and are within the State power under 
 her inspection laws, 12 and although they cannot authorize 
 obstructions to navigable waters, i3 in the absence of 
 legislative restrictions, they may bridge an internal navi- 
 gable river, i-^ The abridgment of a right, unless in conflict 
 with the Constitution or laws of the United States, is an 
 affair between the Government and the State. is States 
 may authorize the construction of a drawbridge across 
 navigable streams. I6 The power of Congress to authorize 
 a bridge across a public river navigable from the sea is 
 paramount. 1" Not everything which affects commerce 
 amounts to a regulation of it; is so a State may require 
 railroads to fix and post up the rates of freight," or may 
 fix a maximum rate of charges for transportation, -'^ or 
 may levy a tax on the gross receipts, '-i or may impose 
 conditions in the charter requiring a bonus or portion of 
 the earnings to be paid to the State. 22 a State law which 
 prescribes the rates for different classes of railroads is not 
 in conflict. 23 A corporation is amenable to the police 
 powers of the State,2i and this includes railroad corpora- 
 tions.25 It may require roads to be fenced, 26 may super- 
 vise tracks and switches, time trains, regulate rails, the 
 safety of beams, number of employee^, regulate speed, 
 etc. ;2T or may impose penalties on conductors, and re- 
 quire stoppage at way stations. 28 
 
 1 .Wilson -y. Kansas C. St. J. & C. B. R. R. Co. 60 Mo. 184: Pennsyl- 
 vania, tn Wheeling & B. Br. Co., 18 How. 432; The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall, 
 rf 'q^ S"^^i?' ^^*'' The Montello, 11 Wall. 411; Peik v. Chicago &c. 94 
 U. S. 164; Pensacola T. Co. v. Western U. T. Co. 96 U. S. iT U. S. v. 
 New Bedforcl Bridge 1 Wood & M. 410; People v. Piatt, 17 Johns. 195: 
 Scott ?;. Willson, 3 N. H. 321; Canal Coiums. v. People, 5 Wend. 448 
 People 17. Rensselaer & S. R. R. Co. 15 Wend. 113. ' 
 
 2 Veazie v. Moore, 14 How. 568. 
 
 1 Wood^l m''4?7^'^^^^^' ^ ^^^^' ^' ^' ^' ^ ' ^' ^* ^' ^^^ Bedford Bridge, 
 
 4 Carson River L. Co. v. Patterson, 33 Cal. 334. 
 
 5 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 548; Sherlock v. Ailing, 93 U. S. 99; St. 
 Louis V. McCoy, 18 Mo. 233; 'Lewis v. Bofflnger, 19 &o 13- Wilson v 
 K^isas C. St. J. &. C. B. R. R. 60 Mo. 198; Williams v. Bk. of Michigan! 
 / vvenu. 639. 
 
 6 Stevens v. Walker, 15 La. Co. 577; The Ann Ryan, 7 Pen. 23. 
 
 7 Munn v. Illinois, 94 TJ. S. 113; Chicago &c. v. Iowa, 94 U. S. 155. 
 HUnSTbid 155^^'^' ^^ ^^'^^'' *^™<^'^' »^ U. S. 113; Chicago &c,v. 
 
 w'^nn^m?^ni^«^*'^o'^^^?;i V^ How. 299; Gilmau V. Philadelphia, 3 
 Wall. 713; Master v. Ward, 14 La. An. 289; Master v. Morgan, Ibid. 595. 
 
 B?idgJ!?N! h!35^^^^' ^ *^'"^^^^'^' ^'5 Piscataqua Br. v. New Haven 
 
 Nirth'^&%''-T?"p^°' ^^ytieat. 19; People v. Babcock, 11 Wend. 586; 
 JNortn Kiver S. B. Co. v. Livingston, 3 Cow. 733. 
 
75 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 12 Gilman v. Philadelphia, 3 Wall. 726; People v. Rensselaer & S. B. 
 R. Co. 15 Wend. 113. 
 
 13 Pennsylvania v. Wheeling Bridge Co. 13 How. 518. 
 
 14 Willson V. Blackbird C. M. Co. 2 Peters, 250; Silliman v. Hudson 
 River Br. Co. 4 Blatchf. 411. 
 
 15 Willson V. Blackbird &c. Co. 2 Peters, 245; Woodman v. Kil- 
 bourne Manuf. Co. 1 Abb. U. S. 163. 
 
 16 Gibbons v. Ogden, !) Wheat. 203; Pennsylvania v. Wheeling &c. 
 Bridge Co. 13 How. 607; Silliman v. Hudson River Br. Co. 1 Black. 
 582; 4 Blatchf. 74, 305; Albany Br. Co. 2 Wall. 403; Silliman v. T. W. T. 
 B. Co. 11 Blatchf. 288; Palmer v. Comm'rs. of Cayahoga Co. 3 McLean, 
 226; Pennsylvania v. Rensselaer & S. R. R. Co. 15 Wend. 113. 
 
 17 Silliman v. Hudson River Br. Co. 4 Blatch. 83, 409; N. R. Steam- 
 boat Co. V. Livingston, 3 Cow. 713; People v. Rensselaer <fcc. R. R. Co. 
 15 Wend. 113. 
 
 18 Del. R. R. Tax, 18 Wall. 232; South Carolina v. Charleston, 4 
 Rich. 289; State Tax on R. R. Gross Receipts, 15 Wall. 284. 
 
 19 Railroad Co. v. Fuller, 17 Wall. 568; State Tax on R. R. Gross 
 Receipts, 15 Wall. 284; Mimn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 135. 
 
 20 Ruggles V. People, II Chic. L. N. 204; Ohio &c. R. R. Co. v. McClel- 
 land. 25 ill. 140; Galena &c. Co. v. Loomis, 13 111. 548; Galena &c. Co. v. 
 Dill, 22 111. 204; Chicago &c. Co. v. Iowa, 94 U. S. 155; Chicago &c. Co. v. 
 Ackley, Ibid. 179. 
 
 21 Reading R. R. Co i>. Pa. 15 Wall. 284 ; State Tax on Gross Receipts, 
 15 Wall. 284. 
 
 22 Railroad Co. v. Maryland, 21 Wall. 456. 
 
 23 Chicago <fcc. R. R. Co. v. Attorney-General, 9 West. Jur. 347. 
 
 24 Ruggles V. People, 11 Chic. L. N. 204; Galena <fcc. R. R. Co. v. 
 Loomis, 13 111. 548; Galena &c. R. R. Co. v. Dill, 22 111. 204; Ohio <fcc. R. 
 R. Co. V. McClelland, 25 111. 140. 
 
 25 Chicago &c. R. R. Co. v. Iowa, 94 U. S. 155; Winona &c. R. R. Co. 
 V. Blade, Ibid. ISO; Davidson v. State, 4 Tex. Ct. App. 545. 
 
 26 Thorpe u. Rutland &c. R. R. Co. 27 Vt. 140. 
 
 27 Thorpe v. Rutland &c R. R. Co. 27 Vt. 140; Hegeman v. Western 
 R. R. Co. 16 Barb. 353; Chicago &c. Co. v. Reidy, 66 111. 43; Chicago «fec. 
 Co. V. Haggerty, 67 111. 113. 
 
 28 Davidson v. State, 4 Tex. Ct. App. 545. 
 
 State authority over fisheries.— On the Revolution 
 the people of each State became sovereign over the navi- 
 gable waters and the lands under them within the limits 
 of the State,! with the right of eminent domain over the 
 same. 2 The title to the soil under tide-waters of newly- 
 acquired territory vests in the State after its admission 
 into the Union. ^ States may regulate the planting and 
 growth of oysters within their territorial limits, * and make 
 laws regulating commerce in them, which will not be re- 
 pugnant, although the vessel may be enrolled and licensed 
 as a United States vessel. ^ The grant of power in this 
 clause does not include the control over fisheries; a State 
 may protect or regulate all fisheries within its borders. ^ 
 The admission of new States gives them the same abso- 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 76 
 
 lute rights as other States, notwithstanding the title was 
 originally in the United States.''' 
 
 1 Martin v. Wadclell, 10 Peters, 419; Smith v. Maryland, 18 How. 74; 
 Pollard?). Hagau, 3 How. 212; Mayor &c.v. Eslava, 9 Port. 577 ; Duval 
 V. McLoskey, 1 Ala. 708; Kemp v. Thorp, 3 Ala. 291; Pollard v. Files, 3 
 Ala. 47. 
 
 2 Pollard V. Hagan, 3 How. 212; Martin v. Waddell, 16 Peters, 367; 
 Bossell V. Jersey Comp. 15 How. 426. 
 
 3 Weber v. Harbor Commrs. 6 Chic. Leg. N. 408. 
 
 4 Smith V. Maryland, 18 How. 71; MeCready v. Virginia, 94 U. S. 391. 
 
 5 Smith V. Maryland, 18 How. 74. 
 
 6 Martin v. Waddell, 16 Peters, 419; U. S. v. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 337; 
 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 556; Bennett v. Boggs, Bald. 76; The Martha 
 Anne, Olcott, 22 ; Smith v. Maryland, 13 How. 71 ; Dunham v. Lamphire, 
 3 Conn. 268; Russell v. Asso. of The Jersey Co. 15 Ho >v. 426; Weston v. 
 Sampson, 8 Cush. 347; Peck v. Lockwood, 5 Day, 22; Arnold v. Mundy, 
 1 Halst. 1 ; Stuttsman v. State, 57 Ind. 119; Parker v. Cutler M. Corp. 20 
 Me. 353; Corfield v. Coryell, 4 Wash. C. C. 371; Fleet v. Hegeman, 14 
 
 - Wend. 42 ; Commonwealth v. Weatherhead, 110 Mass. 175 ; State v. 
 Hockett, 2y Ind. 302 ; Gentile v. State, Ibid. 409. 
 
 7 Woodman v. Kilbourne Manuf. Co. 1 Abb. U. S. 164; Pollard v. 
 Hagan, 3 How. 212; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; Pennsylvania v 
 Wheeling &c. Br. 18 How. 421; Gilman v. Philadelphia, 3 Wall. 713. 
 
 State taxation. — States may impose a license tax 
 on foreign corporations. i A statute controlling opera- 
 tions of foreign insurance comi^anies is not a regulation 
 of commerce;^ so, an ordinance imposing a city tax is not 
 a violation of the Constitntion,^ even though the business 
 extends beyond the limits of the State; ^ so, a State law 
 imposing a tax on brokers dealing in foreign exchange is 
 not in conflict. s Giving a license by a municix)al corpora- 
 tion is not a regulation of commerce.*^ State license acts 
 are not unconstitutional. '^ A State may levy a tax on bus- 
 iness and persons within its limits; ^ so' it may tax raih-oad 
 property and telegraph lines within its limits;'-^ may tax 
 professions, occupations, and trades ; lo may regulate and 
 license the practice of law.^i- A tax by a State on its own 
 corporations, or their property or franchises, is not in con- 
 flict,^- "although the capital be invested in shii^ping.is 
 When Congress has not interposed to protect the property 
 of persons and corporations emx^loyed in Go^'^ernment 
 service from taxation. State taxation is not obnoxious, i'^ 
 A tax on water-craft in which goods are sold by retail is 
 valid, although the goods were brought from another 
 State. 15 
 
 1 Paul V. Virginia, S Wall. 168; Liverpool Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts, 
 10 Wall. 576; Louisiana v. Lathrop, 10 La. An. 398; Louisiana v. Ogden, 
 10 La. An. 402; Louisiana v. Fosdick, 21 La. An. 434. 
 
 2 Paul V. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168; Insurance Co. v. New Orleans, 1 
 Woods, 89; Home Ins. Co. v. Augusta, 93 U. S. 116. 
 
77 POWERS OF COXGKESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 3 Home Ins. Co. v. Augusta City, 93 U. S. 116. 
 
 4 Osborne v. mobile, 16 Wall. 482. And sec Home Ins. Co. v. Au.'justa, 
 93 U. S. 116. 
 
 6 Nathan v. Louisiana, 8 Hov/. 73. 
 
 6 CWlvei-s V. People, 11 Mich. 43; People v. Bahcock, 11 Wend. 53G. 
 
 7 License Cases, 5 How. 504. 
 
 8 Nathan ■;;. Louisiana, 8 How. 73. 
 
 9 Peoi^le t'. C. P. K. R. Co. 43 Cal. 398; Thompson v. Pacific Pw E,. 
 Wall. 579'. 
 
 10 Nathan v. Louisiana, 8 How. 73: Missouri v. North, 27 Mo. 430; 
 Biddle v. Commonwealth, 13 Serg. & R. 405. 
 
 11 Bradwell v. State, 16 Wall. 139; Cohen v. Wright, 22 Cal. 1.^-4; 
 Aikin v. State Board of Health, 11 Chic. L. N. 35. 
 
 12 Delaware R. R. Tax Case, 18 Wall. 232. 
 
 13 Berney v. Tax Collector, 2 Bailey, 654; South Carolina v. Charles- 
 ton, 4 Rich. 289. 
 
 14 Lane Co. v. Oregon, 7 Wall. 77; National Bank v. Commonwealth, 
 9 Wall. 353; Thomson v. Pac. R. R. Co. 9 Wall. 5'Jl. 
 
 15 Harrison v. Mayor, 11 Miss. 581. 
 
 Licenses.— A license for the sale of goods, if imposed 
 on all i^ersons engaged in the same business, is not incon- 
 sistent Avith this provision ; 1 but a license tax discriminat- 
 ing against products of other States is in conflict;- so, a 
 State cannot impose a license tax on a traveling agent from 
 other States. a Although letters-patent grant exclusive 
 rights to make and vend, yet the State may regulate the 
 use of that right as to merely internal commerce or police. * 
 Although Congress may regulate licenses to carry on 
 trade within a State for internal revenue purposes, yet 
 the power of the State to tax, control, or regulate the bus- 
 iness is not incompatible. 5 Cities may exercise all powers 
 constitutionally conferred on them.^ The United States 
 licenses will not warrant carrying on a business in viola- 
 tion of a State law." State prohibitory laws are. operative 
 against such licenses; 8 so a license under the Internal 
 Keveuue Act is no bar to an indictment under a State 
 law.9 A city council regulating the sale of intoxicating 
 liquors is not unconstitutional ; i" so, a city ordinance ex- 
 acting a license tax for the sale of beer or ale by the cask 
 brought in for sale is not in conflict. 1^ The State may 
 regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors,!^ and require a 
 license for the same,i3 or prohibit the sale altogether. 1* 
 
 1 Dist. of Col. V. Humason, 2 McArth. 162. 
 
 2 Ward V. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 430: Conner v. Elliott, 18 How. 593; 
 AVoodruff V. Parham. 8 Wall. 123; V/elton v. Missouri, 91 U. S. 275; 
 Missouri v. North, 27 Mo. 464. But see Davis v. Dashiel, Phil. N. C. 114. 
 
 3 Walton V. Missouri, 91 U. S. 275; State v. Browning, G2 Mo. 591. 
 
 4 Patterson v. Kentucky, 11 Chic. L. N. 183; 7 Am. L. R. 83. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 78 
 
 5 License Tax Cases, 5 Wall. 462. 
 
 6 Logansport v. Seybold, 59 Ind. 225. 
 
 7 License Tax Cases, 5 "Wall. 470; McGuire v. Commonwealth, 3 
 "Wall. 387; Pervear v. Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 475. 
 
 8 TImrlow v. Massachusetts, 5 How. 504; McGuire v. Common- 
 wealth, 3 Wall. 387; License Tax Cases, 5 Wall. 4G2; Pervear v. Com- 
 monwealth. 5 Wall. 480; Bertholf v. O'Rielly, 18 Am. Law. Reg. N. S. 
 119; Metropolitan Board of Health v. Barrie, 34 N. Y. 657; State v. Al- 
 mond, 4 Am. D. B. 533; California v. Coleman, 4 Cal. 467. 
 
 9 Pervear v. Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 480; Commonwealth v. Owens, 
 114 Mass. 252. 
 
 10 License Tax Cases, 5 How. 624; Downing v. Alexandria, 10 Wall. 
 173; Beall v. State, 4 Blackf. 107; Lunt's Case, 6 Me. 412. 
 
 11 Downham v. Alexander, 10 Wall. 173. See Huntington v. Chees- 
 bro, 57 Ind. 74. 
 
 12 Bartemeyer v. Iowa, 18 Wall. 129; Groversville v. Howell. 70 N, Y. 
 287; O'Dea v. State, 57 Ind. 31. 
 
 13 License Cases, 5 How. 504; 13 N. H. 536; State v. Wheeler, 25 Conn. 
 290; Perdue v. Ellis, 18 Ga. 586; IngersoU v. Skinner, 1 Denio,540; Jones 
 ». People, 14 111. 196; Santo v. Sta'te, 2 Iowa, 165; State v. Donohey, 8 
 Iowa, 396; Corwint'. Kimball, 41 Mass. 359; Corwin v. Clapp, 71 Mass. 
 97; Keller t;. State, 11 Md. 525; State v. Moore, 14 N. H. 451; State v. 
 Peckham, 3 R. I. 289; City v. Ahrens, 4 Strob. 241. 
 
 14 Bertholf v. O'Rielly, 13 Am. Law Reg. N. S. 119; Metropolitan 
 Board of Excise v. Barrie, 34 N. Y. 657; Anderson v. Commonwealth, 
 13 Bush, 485. 
 
 Commerce vritli Indians.— Under tlii!5 power, Con- 
 gress may prohibit all intercourse with Indians, except 
 under a license, i or may punish all crimes committed 
 within the Indian country not within the limits of a 
 State, 2 or may j)rohibit traffic in liquors within or with- 
 out the limits of the State, ^ or may prohibit the introduc- 
 tion of spirituous liquors into a j)lace near an Indian reser- 
 vation, although within the limits of a State.^ The whole 
 intercourse with Indians is vested by the Constitution in 
 the United States,^ although carried on within the limits 
 of a State. 6 Its legislation is in its nature exclusive, and 
 a plea of acquittal in an Indian court under Indian laws 
 for an offense punishable under the laws of the United 
 States is bad." An Indian is not a foreign citizen or sub- 
 ject, » but he may be a resident alien in a State. ^ In all 
 intercourse with foreign nations as to commerce, Indians 
 are considered as within the jurisdictional limits of the 
 United States.i" Indians do not submit themselves to all 
 the laws of a State because they seek its courts for the 
 preservation of rights and the redress of wrongs. ii An 
 Indian may maintain an action in a State court to enforce 
 his right to the enjoyment of property, real or personal. ^^ 
 They may file a bill in equity, on behalf of themselves and 
 the residue of the nation on the reservation, to restrain a 
 
79 POWERS OF CONGKESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 trespass on their land.^s An Indian is liable to be sued 
 in a State court. i** If an Indian dies before the laws of a 
 State are extended over the reservation, a State court may- 
 grant letters of administration on his estate when they are 
 so extended. 15 
 
 1 U. S. V. Cisna, 1 McLean, 254. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Rogers, 4 How. 567; Hemp. 450; U. S. v. Cha-to-kati-na-he- 
 sha. Hemp. 27. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Shaw-Mux, 2 Sawy. 365; U. S. v. Tom, 1 Or. 26, 
 
 4 U. S. V. Forty-three Gallons, 93 U. S. 188. 
 
 5 Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 515. 
 
 6 U. S. V. HoUiclay, 3 Wall. 417; U. S. v. Forty-three Gallons, 93 U. S. 
 188. 
 
 7 U. S. V. Ragsdale, Hemp. 497. 
 
 8 Karrahoo v. Adams, 1 Dill. 344. 
 
 9 Parent v. Walmsley, 20 Ind. 82. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Tobacco Fact. 1 Dill. 265; Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 
 515; Cherokee Na.v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 1; MackeytJ. Coxe, 18 How. 100; 
 U. S. V. Rogers, 4 How. 567; The Kansas Indians. 5 Wall. 737. 
 
 11 The Kansas Indians, 5 Wall. 737. 
 
 12 Lobdell v. Hall, 3 Nev. 507. 
 
 13 Strong V. Waterman, 11 Paige, 607. 
 
 14 Jones v. Eisler, 3 Kan. 134; Murch v. Tomer, 21 Me. 535; Rubi- 
 deaux v. Vallie, 12 Kan. 28. 
 
 15 Brasher v. Williams, 10 Ala. 630. But see, contra, Dole v. Irish, 2 
 Barb. 639; U. S. v, Shanks, 15 Minn. 369. 
 
 Indian tribes. — Congress may exercise its power to 
 regulate commerce with the Indian tribes to the same ex- 
 tent as with foreign nations ; i but commerce cannot be 
 held to apply to the ordinary business transactions be- 
 tween individuals;"^ so, it does not apj)ly to individual 
 sales of land, but is confined to lands held in common by 
 tribes; 3 nor can it invalidate a contract between an Indian 
 and a white man within the limits of a State, and not on 
 an Indian reservation. ^ When the Indian Territory is 
 within the limits of a State, Congress is limited to the 
 regulation of commercial intercourse with such tribes as 
 exist as a distinct community, governed by their own 
 laws, and resting for their protection on the faith of 
 treaties and laws of the Union. 5 If Indians are recog- 
 nized as tribes by the political department, they will be so 
 recognized by the courts. ^ The rights of a tribe as against 
 State laws can only be changed by treaty stipulations or a 
 voluntary abandonment of their tribal organization. 7 An 
 Indian tribe within the limits of a State constitutes a dis- 
 tinct community, in which the laws of the State have no 
 force, and citizens of the State have no right to enter but 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 80 
 
 witli the assent of the tribe, and in conformity with 
 treaties and acts of Congress. 8 Congress may regulate 
 commerce between different tribes, and between individ- 
 ual Indians, and may regulate trade between different 
 tribes as well without as within the Indian country,!" and 
 over tribes on territory not within the limits of a State. ii 
 The tribes referred to are those which are in a condition 
 to determine for themselves with whom they will have 
 commerce. 1'-^ Indians on a reservation within a State are 
 not citizens or members of the body politic, but are con- 
 sidered as dependent tribes, governed by their own usages 
 and chiefs. 13 If an Indian leaves his tribe or nation to 
 take up his abode among white people, he is entitled to 
 all the rights and privileges which belong to an emigrant 
 from any foreign people. -^^ The Indian tribes are herein 
 distinguished from foreign nations and from the several 
 States. 15 Ko Indian tribe can by treaty stijDulate away 
 any part of the sovereignty of a State guaranteed to it on 
 its admission into the Union ; i6 nor can it institute a suit 
 at law in the name of the tribe to recover a reservation 
 held by them in common. i" Their right to the use of the 
 soil can only be divested by the United States. ^^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Cisna, 1 McLean, 254. 
 
 2 Hicks V. Euhartoiiali, 21 Ark. 106. 
 
 3 Murray v. Wooden, 17 Wend. 531. 
 
 4 Hicks V. Euliartonali, 21 Ark. 108; Taylor v. Drew, 21 Ark. 485. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Bailey, 1 McLean, 234; U. S. v. Cisna, 1 McLean, 254; State 
 V. Foreman, 8 Yerg. 256. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Holliday, 3 Wall. 407; Tlie Kansas Indians, 5 Wall. 737. 
 
 7 The Kansas Indians, 5 Wall. 737. 
 
 8 Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 515; TJ. S. v. Cisna, 1 McLean, 254; 
 Blair ». Pathlciller, 2 Yerg. 407; McKay v. Campbell, 3 Sawy. l33. 
 
 9 JJ.B.v. Holliday, 3 Wall. 417 ; U.S. v. Shaw Mux, 2 Sawy. 364 . 
 
 10 U. S. V. Holliday, 3 Wall. 417; U. S. v. Cisna, 1 McLean, 254; U. S. 
 V. Seveloff, 2 Sawy. 317. 
 
 11 Cherokee Tohacco, 11 Wall. 616; 1 Dill. 264. 
 
 12 Moor V. Veazie, 32 Me. 343 ; 31 Me. 360. 
 
 13 Holden v. Joy, 17 Wall. 211; Goodell v. Jackson, 20 Johns. 693; 
 Jackson v. Wood, 7 Johns. 2D0; Strong v. Waterman, 11 Paige, 607. 
 
 14 Scott V. Sandford. 19 How. 393. 
 
 15 Cherokee Na. v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 1. 
 
 16 U. S. V. Forty-three Galls. Whisky, 19 Int. Rev. Rec. 158. 
 
 17 Strong v. Waterman, 11 Paige, 607. 
 
 18 Godfrey v. Beardsley, 4 McLean, 412; McKay v. Campbell, 2 Sawy. 
 133. 
 
81 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 Indian la-ws and customs.— So long as Indians ad- 
 here to their tribal customs and their affairs are managed 
 by agents of the Government, they are not subject to 
 State laws,i but have a right to regulate their own civil 
 policy, their property, contracts, relations between hus- 
 band and wife, and their inheritance. 2 Their usages and 
 customs continue to be their law, although the tribe is on 
 a reservation within the limits of a State. s They may 
 adopt a white man or others into their tribe, and after 
 adoption he is subject to all the burdens and entitled to 
 all the immunities of a native born.'^ In the management 
 of their internal concerns tlie Indians are dependent on 
 no power. 5 A marriage between Indians, valid according 
 to the usages of the tribe, will be deemed valid every- 
 where ; 6 and the right of dissolution will be considered a 
 term of the contract, of which either j^arty may take ad- 
 vantage."^ A marriage between Indians in a State after 
 the tribe has removed from it, must conform to the laws 
 of the State. 8 In the absence of proof the presumption 
 is that in a savage tribe there are no laws regulating' 
 the descent of i^roperty, and that property belongs to 
 the first occupant.''^ The liability of an innkeeper on 
 an Indian reservation within State limits is to be deter- 
 mined according to the laws of the tribe. 1^ The Cherokee 
 Territory is a domestic Territory, and its laws and pro- 
 ceedings stand on the same footing as those of other Terri- 
 tories. ^^ 
 
 1 Eoyer v. Dively, 53 Mo. 510 ; Morgan v. McGliee, 5 Humpli. 13 ; 
 Wall V. Williams, 11 Ala. 826; 8 Ala. 48. 
 
 2 Jones V. Laney, 2 Tex. 342; G-oortell v. Jackson, 20 Johns. 693; Dole 
 V. Irish, 2 Barb. 039; Boyer v. Dively, 58 Mo. 510; Morgan v. McGhee, 
 5 Humph. 13. 
 
 3 Wall V. Williams, 11 Ala. 836 ; 8 Ala. 48 ; Gooclell v. Jackson, 20 
 Johns. 693. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Ragsdale, Hemp. 497. 
 
 5 Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 515. 
 
 6 Wall V. Williams, II Ala. 826 ; 8 Ala. 48 ; Morgan v. McGhee, 5 
 Humph. 13; Johnson v. Johnson, 30 Mo. 72; Boyer -y. Dively, 58 Mo. 510- 
 
 7 Wall V. Williams, 11 Ala. 826 ; 8 Ala. 48. 
 
 8 Koche V. Washington, 19 Incl. 53. 
 
 9 Brashear v. Williams, 10 Ala. 630. 
 
 10 Borland v. Pack, Peck, (Tenn.) 151. 
 
 11 Mackey v. Coxe, 18 How. 100. - 
 
 * To establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and uni- 
 form laios on the subject of banlcruptcies throughout the 
 United States. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 82 
 
 Naturalization is the act of adopting a foreigner and 
 clothing him with all the jorivileges of a native citizen.^ 
 It applies to persons of foreign birth only,^ and not to a 
 free white person 3 born in this country, though of foreign 
 parents, nor to a freeman of color born in the United 
 States^ Indians may be naturalized by authority of Con- 
 gress, like the subjects of any foreign government. ^ Races, 
 tribes, and communities, irrespective of color, have been 
 admitted in mass by a single act of national sovereignty. 6 
 Allegiance on the one side and protection on tlie other 
 constitutes citizenship, ^ and the record of naturaliza- 
 tion is evidence thereof. ^ Naturalization has a retro- 
 active effect, as to forfeitures and title. 9 The power of 
 regulating naturalization is exclusive in the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, i'^ A State cannot make a citizen of the United 
 States ;ii but a citizen of the United States is a citizen of 
 the State where he resides,!^ and his rights of citizen- 
 ship under each government will be different. ^3 States 
 may confer the right of citizenship on any one it thinks 
 proper; but the rights and immunities thereby acquired 
 would be restricted to the State which gave them,i4 The 
 power given to Congress was intended to provide a rule 
 for the action of the States, and not a rule for tlie action 
 of the Federal Government, i^ Congress may fix upon the 
 class of courts which may be invested witli jurisdiction, i^ 
 and no State can confer jurisdiction on any tribunal which 
 does not come witliin the terms of tlie act of Congress ;i^ 
 but a State may prohibit its courts from entertaining pro- 
 ceedings for naturalization. 18 If a State law gives juris- 
 diction to the courts enumerated in the act of Congress, 
 they may entertain proceedings for naturalization, ^-^ and 
 Congress may empower them to naturalize aliens, and 
 give validity to their acts. 21 A State cannot superadd 
 any requisitions before an alien can acquire the privileges 
 and immunities of a citizen,2i \,iix, Congress may deprive 
 an individual of the opportunity to enjoy a right belong- 
 ing to him as a State citizen; yet it cannot deprive him 
 of the right itself .^-^ 
 
 1 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 827; Kiglit of Expatriation, 9 
 Op. Att.-Gen. 359. 
 
 2 Scott V. Sandforcl, 19 How. 419; U. S. v. Eliodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 45; 
 Lyncli V. Clarke, 1 Sand. Cii. 583. 
 
 3 Citizenship, 9 Op. Att.-Gen. 374. 
 
 4 Smith V. Moody, 26 Ind. 299; Anon. 4 Opin. Att. Gen. 147. 
 
 5 Scott V. Sandf ord, 19 How. 393. 
 
 6 People V. Washington, 36 Cal. 658. The Treaty of Washington con- 
 ferred tfie elective franchise on British subjects resident in the dis- 
 puted territory at the time of the Treaty— Opp. Att. Gen. 68 Me. 589. 
 
83 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art, I, § 8 
 
 7 Smith V. Moody, 26 Ind. 305. 
 
 8 Starkie v. Chesapeake Ins. Co. 7 Cranch, 420; Spratt v. Spratt, 4 
 Peters, 393; The Acoi-n, 2 Abb. U. S. 443; In re Clark, 18 Barbour, 444; 
 McCarthy v. Marsh, 5 N. Y. 263; Kitchle v. Putnam, 13 Wend. 524. 
 
 9 Walker v. Villavaso, 6 Wall. 124; Culverhouse i;. Beach, 1 Johns. 
 Cas. 399. 
 
 10 U. S. V. vniato, 2 Dall. 372; Chirac v. Chirac, 2 Wheat, 259; Hous- 
 ton V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 277; Passenger 
 Cases, 7 How. 556; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393; U. S. i>. Rhodes, 1 
 Abb. U. S. 412; Matthews v. Ray, 3 Cranch. C. C. 699; Golden v. Prince, 
 3 Wash. C. C. 313; Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300; North Carolina v. 
 Manuel, 2 Dev. & B. 25; North Carolina v. Newsom, 5 Ired. 253; Lynch 
 ■y. Clarke, 1 Sand. Ch. 583; Commonwealth v. Ives, 18 Peek. 193. The 
 case of Collet w. Collet, 2 Dall. 294, being overruled; but see Crandall 
 V. Connecticut, 10 Conn. 339. 
 
 11 Lanz V. Randall, 4 Dill. 425; 3 Cent. L. J. 688. 
 
 12 Gassies v. Ballon, 6 Peters, 761. 
 
 13 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542. 
 
 14 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 393 ; Ex parte Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443. 
 
 15 Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300. 
 
 16 Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300; Ex parte Beavins, 33 N. H. 89. 
 
 17 New Hampshire v. Whittemore, 50 N. H. 245. 
 
 18 Ex parte Stephens, 70 Mass. 559; Ex parte Beavins, 33 N. H. 89. 
 
 19 Es: parte Ivnowles, 5 Cal. 300; Rump v. Commonwealth, 30 Penn. 
 475. 
 
 20 Morgan v. Dudley, 18 B. Mon. 693; Rump v. Commonwealth, 30 
 Pa. 475. 
 
 21 Commonwealth v. Towles, 5 Leigh, 743. And see Page v. Allen, 58 
 Pa. St. 338. 
 
 22 Huber v. Reily, 53 Pa. St. 112. 
 
 Bankruptcy is the stoppage and breaking up of busi- 
 ness from inability to carry it on.i Tlie word bears a mean- 
 ing co-extensive with insolvency, and is equivalent to that 
 word in the Constitution.- The American system seems 
 to have broken up the distinction between bankruptcy 
 and insolvency .3 It is a condition following upon the 
 commission of certain acts delined by law.4 The word is 
 employed in the Constitution in the plural, as part of an 
 expression "subject of bankruptcies," and over this sub- 
 ject Congress has general jurisdiction.^ The subject of 
 bankruptcies includes the distribution of the property of 
 the debtor and his discharge from his contracts and legal 
 liabilities, as well as incidental matters tending to these 
 ends.6 
 
 1 Sturges V. Crowninshield, 4 Wlieat. 195 ; Ex parte Breneman. 
 Crabbe, 465; Arnold v. Maynard, 2 Story, 354. 
 
 2 Morse v. Hovey, 1 Barb. Ch. 404; 1 Sand. Ch. 187. 
 
 3 Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 198. 
 
 4 Williamson v. Barrett, 13 How. 111. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGKESS. 84 
 
 5 In re Klein, 1 How. 277, note; 2 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 184; In re Silver- 
 man, 4 Bank. Reg. 173; 1 Sawy. 410; 2 Abb. U. S. 243. 
 
 6 In re Silverman, 4 Bank. Eeg. 173; 1 Sawy. 410; 2 Abb. U. S. 243; 
 In re Reiman, 11 Bank. Reg. 21; 13 Ibid. 128; 7 Ben. 455; 12 BlatcM. 562. 
 
 Uniformity. — To come witliin the constitutional pro- 
 vision a bankrupt law must be uniform throughout the 
 United States. i" It is uniform when the assignee takes in 
 each State whatever would have been available to execu- 
 tion creditors. 2 The uniformity recxuired is as to the gen- 
 eral policy and operation of the law, though it may in 
 some minor particulars operate differently in different 
 States. 3 Bankrupt laws are uniform when they allow 
 the exemptions accorded in each State, though the amount 
 of such exemptions may differ. ^ 
 
 1 Bay V. Bardwell, 3 Bank. Reg. 455 ; 97 Mass. 246; In re Dillard, 9 
 Bank. Reg. 8; In re Deckert, 10 Ibid. 1; In re Duerson, 13 Bank. Reg. 
 183; Inre Sliipman, 14 Ibid. 570; Busli u. Lester. 55 Ga. 579; Kittredge 
 V. Warren, 14 N. H. 509. Contra, In re Kean, 8 Bank. Reg. 367; Inre 
 Smith, Ibid. 401; 6 Cli. L. N. 33; In re Jordan, 10 Bank. Reg. 428; In re 
 Smith, 14 Ibid. 295. 
 
 2 In re Ruth, 1 Bank. Reg. Sup. 154; In re Appold, Ibid. 178; Inre 
 Beckerford, 4 Bank. Reg. 59; 1 Dill. 45; In re Jordan, 8 Bank. Reg. 180; 
 In re Deckert, 10 Bank. Reg. 1; 6 Ch. L. N. 310. 
 
 3 In re Jordan, 8 Bank. Reg. 180. 
 
 4 In re Appold, 16 Am. Law. Reg. 624; 1 Bank, Reg. 621. 
 
 Power of Congress.— To the power of Congress on 
 the subject of bankruxotcies there is no limitation; it may 
 act on the whole subject with plenary discretion. i It is 
 without restriction, save in its uniformity;^ the power is 
 general, unlimited, and unrestricted over the subject, ^ as 
 to any particular class of persons, * or whether voluntary 
 or involuntary. 5 The i^ower of Congress extends to ail 
 cases providing for the distribution of the property of the 
 debtor, and to his discharge from his contracts, ^ although 
 it is not necessary that a bankrupt law should provide tor 
 the debtor's discharge." The Constitution does not deny 
 to Congress the power to infringe vested rights, or to vio- 
 late the obligation of contracts; " it may release the debtor 
 from contracts subsisting at the time when the law is 
 passed,^ but it cannot enable States to give a bankrupt ex- 
 emption from debts created antecedently to the passage 
 of the State exemi)tion laws.i^ Yet it has power to deline 
 what and how much of the debtor's i3roperty shall be ex- 
 empt, ii and State exemjDtion laws incontlict must yield. ^^ 
 It may pass a law which will make void an assignment 
 valid under State laws.^^ xhe power to enact implies the 
 power to make the law efficient. -^^ Congress may not only 
 establish uniform laws on the subject, but may commit 
 
85 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 the execution of the system to such Federal courts as it 
 may see fit, and prescribe such modes of procedure as 
 it may deem suitable. i5 The power of Congress is exclu- 
 sive only when exercised, ^^ or when States are expressly 
 prohibited.!'^ 
 
 1 In re Irwine, 1 Pa. L. J. 82. 
 
 2 Kunzler v. Kolians, 5 Hill, 317 ; In re Klein, 1 How. 277; 2 N. Y. 
 Leg. Obs. 184 ; 1 Bank. Reg. 542. 
 
 3 In re Silverman, 4 Bank. Keg. 173; 1 Sawy. 410; 2 Abb. U. S. 243; 
 In re Reiman, 11 Bank. Reg. 21; 13 Ibid. 128; 7 Ben. 455; Thompson v. 
 Alger, 53 Mass. 428. 
 
 4 In re Klein, 1 How. 277 ; 2 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 184 ; In re Cal. Pac. R. R. 
 Co. 11 Bank. Reg. 193; In re Silverman, 4 Ibid. 173; 1 Sawy. 410; 2 Abb. 
 U. S. 243; Morse v. Hovey, 1 Sand. Cb. 187; 1 Barb. Cli. 404; Kunzler v. 
 Kolians, 5 Hill, 317. 
 
 5 In re Klein, 1 How. 277; 2 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 184; State Bank v. Wil- 
 born, 6 Ark. 35; Lalor v. Wattles, S 111. 2^5; Kunzler v. Kohans, 5 HiU. 
 317; Loudi). Pierce, 25 Me. 235; Thompson w. Alger, 53 Mass. 428; Dres- 
 ser V, Brooks, 3 Barb. 429 ; Hastings v. Fowler, 2 Ind. 216 ; Reed v. 
 Vaughan, 15 Mo. 137; Cutter v. Folsom, 17 N. H. 139; McCormick v. 
 Pickering, 4 N. Y. 276; Keen v. Mould, 16 Ohio, 12 ; Rowan v. Holcomb, 
 Ibid. 463; In re Irwine, 1 Pa. L. J. 82. 
 
 6 In re Klein, 1 How. 28; In re Silverman, 1 Bank. Reg. 173; Kunz- 
 ler V. Kohans, 5 Hill, 317 ; Sackett v. Andross, 5 Hill, 327 ; McCormick v. 
 Pickering, 4 N. Y. 282; In re Cal. Pac. R. R. Co. 3 Sawy. 242. 
 
 7 In re Cal. Pac. R. R. Co. 11 Bank. Reg. 193; Van Nostrand v. Barr, 
 2 Bank. Reg. 485; 30 Md. 128. 
 
 8 In re Jordan,' 8 Bank. Reg. 180; In re Kean, Ibid. 368; In re Smith, 
 Ibid. 407; Carpenters. Pennsylvania, 17 How. 463; Legal Tender Cases, 
 12 Wall. 457; Satterlee v. Matthewson, 2 Peters, 380; Evans «;. Eaton, 
 Peters C. C. 322; Bloomer v. Stolley, 5 McLean, 158; Hague v. Powers, 
 39 Barb. 458; Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 110 ; In re Everett, 9 Bank. 
 Reg. 93. 
 
 9 Corner v. Miller, 1 Bank. Reg. 99; In re Klein, 1 How. 277, note; 2 
 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 185; Morse v. Hovey, 1 Barb. Ch. 404; 1 Sand. Ch. 187; 
 Kunzler v. Kohans, 5 Hill, 317 ; Sackett v. Andross, Ibid. 327; Loud v. 
 Pierce, 25 Me. 235 ; Keen v. Mould, 16 Ohio, 12; McCormick w. Picker- 
 ing, 4 N. Y. 276; In re Irwine, 1 Pa. L. J. 82. 
 
 10 Cunn V. Barry, 8 Bank. Reg. 1; In re Dillard, 9 Bank. Reg. 16; In 
 re Everett, 9 Bank. Reg. 93. 
 
 11 In re Reiman, 11 Bank. Reg. 21; 13 Ibid. 128; 7 Ben. 455. 
 
 12 In re Brown, 3 Bank. Reg. 61. 
 
 13 In re Breneman, Crabbe, 456. 
 
 14 RusseU V. Cheatham. 16 Miss. 703. 
 
 15 Sherman v. Bingham,5 Bank. Reg. 34 ; 1 Low. 575 ; Goodall v. Tattle, 
 7 Bank. Reg. 193; 3 Biss. 219; Mitchell i?. Manuf. Co. 2 Story, 648. 
 
 16 Ogden V. Saunders, 9 Wheat. 1 ; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282; Com- 
 monwealth V. O'Hara, 1 Bank. Reg. Supp. 20; In re Brown. 3 Bank. 
 Reg. 61 ; In re Brinkman, 7 Bank. Reg. 425; Martin v. Berry, 37 Cal. 208. 
 
 17 In re Brinkman. 7 Bank. Reg. 425. 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— 8. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 86 
 
 state insolvent laws. — In the absence of congres- 
 sional legislation on the subject of bankruptcies, the States 
 may pass insolvent laws,i if they do not violate the obli- 
 gation of contracts. 2 It is not the mere existence of the 
 power, but its exercise, which is incompatible witli the ex- 
 ercise of the same power by the States.^ The right of the 
 States is not extinguished, but merely suspended by the 
 enactment of a general bankrupt law.* They are not 
 thereby abrogated, they operate until the bankrupt law 
 attaches on the person and property of the debtor,^ and 
 they revive and are in force on the repeal of tlie bankrupt 
 law. 6 If the State court has acquired jurisdiction of a 
 case in insolvency, it may, nevertheless, proceed with the 
 case to its final conclusion, and its action will be valid as 
 if no law upon tlie subject had been passed by Congress.'^ 
 The jurisdiction of the State court attaches from the 
 moment Avhen it makes an order staying creditors from 
 interference with the property of the debtor.*^ But the 
 bankrupt act, as soon as it took effect, ipso facto sus- 
 pended all action upon future cases arising under the in- 
 solvent laws of the State,^ and cases pending where the 
 surrender of the debtor's property had not been ordered. i" 
 So, State laws relating to insolvent corporations were 
 superseded, and State courts could not go beyond decree- 
 ing a forfeiture of their charter. i^ A provision in a State 
 law which prohibits a transfer by an insolvent corporation 
 with intent to give a preference, is superseded, i- An at- 
 tachment law which j)ermits a writ of attachment to issue 
 in cases which would authorize proceedings in bank- 
 ruptcy, is superseded. 13 
 
 1 J5aldwin v. Hale, 1 Wall. 228; Ogclen v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; 
 Farmers & Mechs. Bank v. Smith, 6 Wheat. 131; Stevens v. Brown, 11 
 Bank. Reg. 570; Cook v. Moffat, 5 How. 316; Campbell v. Claurtius, 
 Peters C. C. 484; Suyclam v. Broadnax, 14 Peters, 67; Mather v. Bush, 16 
 Johns. 233; Matt, of Wendell, 19 Johns. 153. 
 
 2 Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 196; Ogden v. Saunders, 12 
 Wheat. 213; Martm v. Berry, 37 Cal. 208; 2 Bank. Reg. 629; Boyle v. 
 Zacharie, 6 Peters, 348; McMillan v. McNeill, 4 Wheat. 209. 
 
 -3 Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 196; Adams v. Storey, 1 Paine, 
 79; Blanchard v. Russell, 13 Mass. 1; Betts v. Bagley, 29 Mass. 572; 
 Pugh V, Russel, 2 Blackf. 394; Alexander v. Gibson, 1 Nott & McC. 480; 
 Farmers' Bank v. Smith, 6 Wheat. 131. But see, contra, Golden v. 
 Prince, 3 Wash. C. C. 313; Mason v. Nash, I Breese, 16; Vanuxem v. 
 Hazelhursts, 1 South. N. J. 192; Olden v. Hallet, 2 South. N. J. 466; Bal- 
 lentine v. Haight, 1 Harr. N. J. 196. 
 
 4 Sturges v. Crowninshield. 4 Wheat. 196; Martin v. Berry, 37 Cal. 
 208; 2 Bank. Reg. 188; Van Nostrand v. Barr, 2 Bank. Reg. 154; 30 Md. 
 128. 
 
 5 Reed v. Taylor, 4 Bank. Reg. 710; 32 Iowa, 209; In re Zeigenfuss, 2 
 Ired. 463. 
 
 6 Lavender v. Gosnell, 12 Bank. Reg. 282; 43 Md. 153. 
 
87 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 7 Martin ». Berry, 2 Bank. Reg. 18S; 37 Cal. 203; Meeldns ?;. Cred- 
 itors, 3 Bank. Reg. 511; 19 La. An. 407; Lavender v. Gosuell, 12 Bank. 
 Reg. 282; 43 Md. 153; Larrabee v. Talbot, 5 Gill. 426; In re Horton,5 
 Law. Rep. 462; In re Judd, Ibid. 32S; Longis v. Creditors, 20 La. Am. 15; 
 Dvvight V. Simon, 4 Ibid. 4)0; .Judd v. Ives, 45 Mass. 401 ; West v. Cred- 
 itors, 5 Rob. La, 261; 8 Ibid. 123; Minot v. Thaclier, 48 Mass. 348. 
 
 R Martin v. Berry, 2 Bank. Reg. 183; 37 Cal. 203; Meekins v. Creditors, 
 3 Bank. Reg. 511; 19 La. An. 511.^ 
 
 9 Corner v. Miller, 1 Bank Reg. 403; Commonwealth v. O'Hara, 1 
 Bank. Reg. Hf; 6 Law Reg. N. S. 765; Perry w.Langley, 2 Bank. Reg. 
 ISO-, 7 Amer. Law Reg. 429; Van Nostrand v. Barr, 2 Bank. Reg. 154; 30 
 Md. 123; Martin v. Berry, 2 Bank. Reg. 188; 37 Cal. 208; Cassard v. 
 Kroner, 4 Bank. Reg. 569; In re Reynolds, 9 Bank. Reg. 50; 8 R. I. 4a'): 
 Rowe V. Page, 13 Bank. Reg. 366; 54 N. H. 190; Shears v. Solhinger, 10 
 Abb. Pr. N. S. 287; Bishop v. Loewen, 1 Pa. L. J. 363; In re Eamos, 2 
 Story, 322; 2 Bank. Reg. 183. The date of the suspension was June 1st, 
 1867; Martin v. Berry, 2 Bank. Reg. 188: 37 Cal. 208; Day v. Bardwelle, 
 3 Bank. Reg. 455; Chamberlain i\ Perlaus, 51 N. H. 336; In re Wynme, 
 Chase, 227. 
 
 10 Fisk V. Montgomery, 21 La. An. 446; West v. Creditors, 4 Rob. La. 
 88; 8 Ibid. 123. 
 
 11 Thornhill v. Bank of Louisiana, 3 Bank. Reg. 110; 5 Ibid. 367; 1 
 Woods, 1; In re Merch. Ins. Co. 6 Bank. Reg. 43; 3 Biss. 162; In re In- 
 dependent Ins. Co. 6 Bank. Reg. 169, 260; 1 Holmes, 103; 2 Low, 97, 187; 
 Piatt V. Archer, 6 Bcnk. Reg. 465 ; 9 Blatchf. 559; Shryock v. Bashore, 13 
 Bank. Reg. 481. 
 
 12 French v. O'Brien, 52 How. Pr. 394. 
 
 13 Tobin v. Trump, 3 Brewst. 288. 
 
 When superseded.— The bankrupt act does not ipso 
 /acio suspend, State laws for the collection of debts. ^ So, 
 a statute for the more effectual appropriation of a, debtor's 
 property is not suspended.-^ So, where debts do not exceed 
 the amount specified in the bankrui3t laws there is no con- 
 flict of laws.^ So the State insolvent law remains in 
 full force in respect to matters over which the bankrupt 
 law declines to take jurisdiction. ^ The bankrupt law does 
 not supersede a State law regulating assignments for the 
 benefit of creditors ;5 sucli a law is not apart of the bank- 
 rupt law,G but an assignment made as a part of the ma- 
 chinery of a State insolvent law is void.'^ A State law 
 to abolish imprisonment on civil process, and whose aim 
 and purpose is simply to liberate the person, is not super- 
 seded,^ nor a law which merely protects the i^erson from 
 imprisonment, although it provides for the distribution of 
 his property, 9 nor a law joroviding for the arrest and pun- 
 ishment of fraudulent debtors, lo A State la'^v providing 
 for the protection of savings banks and their depositors is 
 valid, although j)assed while the bankrupt law was in 
 force. ^1 State laws are operative in all cases which are 
 not within the provisions of the bankrupt law.i^ If any 
 State exemption law is in conflict with acts of Congress, 
 it must yield. 13 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF COKGKESS. 88 
 
 1 Chandler v. Siddle, 10 Bank. Keg. 236; 3 Dill. 477. 
 
 2 Berthelon v. Betts, 4 Hill, 577. 
 
 3 Sliepardson's Appeal, 36 Conn. 23. 
 . 4 Geery's Appeal, 43 Conn. 289. 
 
 5 In re Hawkins, 2 Bank. Reg. 378; 34 Conn. 548; Reed v. Taylor, 4 
 Bank. Keg. 710; 32 Iowa, 209; Maltbie v. Hotchkiss, 5 Bank. Reg. 485: 38 
 Conn. 80; Mayer v. Hellman, 13 Bank. Reg. 440; 91 U. S. 496; Von Hein 
 V. Elkns, 15 Bank. Reg. 194; Ebersole v. Adams, 13 Bank. Reg. 141; 10 
 Bush, 83; Linthicum v. Fenley, 11 Bush, 131. 
 
 6 Cook V. Rogers, 13 Bank. Reg. 97; 31 Mich. 391. 
 
 7 Rowe V. Page, 13 Bank. Reg. 366; 54 N. H. 190; Shryock v. Bashore, 
 13 Bank. Reg. 481; 15 Ibid. 283; 82 Pa. St. 159. 
 
 8 In re Reynolds, 9 Bank. Reg. 50; 8 R. I. 485; In re Rank, Crabbe, 
 493; Shears v. Solhinger, 10 Abb. Pr. N. S. 287; Steehnau v. Mattix, 36 
 N. J. 344 ; Jordan v. Hall, 9 R. I. 218. 
 
 9 Sullivan v. Hieskill, Crabbe, 525; 2 Pa. L. J. 283; Stockwell v. Sil- 
 loway, 100 Mass. 287. 
 
 10 Scully V. Kirkpatrick, 79 Pa. St. 324 ; Gregg v. Hilsen, 34 Leg. Int. 20. 
 
 11 Simpson v. Savings Bank, 15 Bank. Reg. 385; 56 N. H. 466. 
 
 12 Shepardson's Appeal, 36 Conn. 23; Clarke v. Ray, 1 Har. & J. 318. 
 
 13 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 "Wheat. 1; 17 
 Johns. 488; Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540; U. S. v. Hart, Peters C. 
 C. 390; In re Brown, 3 Bank. Re . 255; Commonwealth v. Kimball, 24 
 Pick. 359. 
 
 Validity of State insolvent laws.— State insolvent 
 laws whicli attempt to discharge from all liability for 
 debts contracted previous to discharge, J^ or from contracts 
 of foreign creditors, are repugnant to tliis provision of the 
 Constitution, 2 and to this effect the States are deemed 
 foreign to each other. 3 Such laws can have no extra-ter- 
 ritorial effect so as to operate upon the rights of non-resi- 
 dents of the State,4 Avhether the residents of another State 
 be citizens of the United States or foreigners, unless 
 where a citizen of such other State voluntarily becomes a 
 party to the proceedings ; ^ so, the claim of a citizen of 
 another State will not be barred by a discharge under the 
 State insolvent laws, although the debt was made paya- 
 ble in the State, ^ and this without reference to tlie place 
 where the contract was made.'i' The fact that the original 
 Indebtedness lias been converted into a judgment in no 
 way changes the legal rights and liabilities of the parties. 
 A foreign creditor by suing for a debt in a State court 
 does not adopt its insolvent laws or thereby waive his 
 constitutional immunity ;8 the act of waiving a constitu- 
 tional privilege or immunity must be unequivocal. ^ If 
 the plaintiff was a resident of the State at the time the 
 judgment was entered, his removal from the State before 
 commencement of insolvency proceedings will not bar a 
 
89 POWERS OF CO^iGKESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 release of the debt.i^ A citizen of another State who 
 voluntarily makes himself a party to the proceedings in 
 insolvency, and receives a dividend, abandons his extra- 
 territorial immunity and his claim is barred by the dis- 
 charge, ^ unless the State court has no jurisdiction of the 
 case;-^^ so, a mere appearance to oppose a discharge will 
 not render such discharge a bar to the demand. ^^ A cred- 
 itor makes himself a party to the proceedings by proving 
 his debt; ^"^ so, if a foreign creditor unites in recommend- 
 ing a trustee, he beconies a party to the proceedings. ^^ 
 If a foreign debtor removes to the State where the cred- 
 itor resides and there obtains his discharge, it will be 
 valid against such creditor, lo 
 
 1 Farmers & Mechanics' Bank v. Smith, 6 Wheat. 131: Ogden t?. 
 Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213. 
 
 2 Farmers & Mechanics' Bank v. Smith, 6 Wheat. 131; Suydam v. 
 Broadnax, 14 Peters, 67. 
 
 3 Cook V. Moffat, 5 How. 295; Scott v. Sandford, 1!) How. 393; Been 
 V. Rhea, 5 Tex. 354. 
 
 4 Baldwin v. Hale, 1 Wall. 223 ; 3 Am. Law Reg. IST. S. 462 ; Von Glalni 
 t;.Varrenne,l, Dill. 515; Pratt v. Chase, 44 N. Y. 5;t7; 19 Abb. Pr. 150; 
 Emery t;. Greenough, 3 Dall. 369; McMillan v. McNeill, 4 AVlieat. 200; 
 Ogden V. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Boyle v. Zacharie, G I'eters, 6J5; 
 Boyle V. Turner, 6 Peters, 625; Cook v. Moffatt, 5 How. 2!)5; Baldwin ?■. 
 Hale, 1 Wall. 223; 1 Cliff. 511 ; Oilman v. Lockwood, 4 Wall. 409; Woocl- 
 liullv. Wagner, Bald. 296; Babcock i;. Weston, 1 Gall. 168; Hinkleyt'. 
 Marean, 3 Mason, 88; Campbell v. Claudius, 1 Pet. C. C. 484; Springer 
 V.Foster, 2 Story, 383; Atwater v. Townsend, 4 Conn. 47: Norton v. 
 Cook, 9 Conn. 314: Van Raugh v. Van Arsdahn, 3 Caiues, 154; Collins v. 
 Rodolph, 3 Greene, (Iowa) 299; Pugh v. Russell, 2 Blackf. 394; Smith v. 
 Smith, 2 Johns. 235; Fisher v. Wheeler, 5 La. An. 271; Frcv v. Kirk, 4 
 Gill. & J. 509; Tabor v. Harwood, 5 Har. 42; Proctor v. Moore. 1 Mass. 
 198; Bradford v. Farrand, 13 Mass. 18; Watson v. Bourne, 10 Mass. 337; 
 Fiske t). Foster, 51 Mass. 597; Clak v. Hatch, 60 Mass. 455; Tebbets v. 
 Pickering, 59 Mass. 83; Dinsmore v. Bradley, 71 Mass. 487; Choteau v. 
 Richardson, 94 Mass. 365; Byrdt-. Badger, McAll. 263, 443; Bancher v. 
 Fisk, 33 Me. 316; Potter ^;. Kerr, 1 Md. Ch. 275; Palmer v. Goodv/in, 32 
 Me. 535; Fareira v. Keevil, 18 Mo. ISG; Ballantyne v. Haight, 1 Harr. 196; 
 Vanuxem V. Hazlehursts, 1 South. 550; Whitney v.Whitiug. 35 N. H. 457; 
 Donnelly!). Corbett, 7 N. Y. 500; Beers w. Rhea, 5 Tex. 349; Shelton v. 
 Wade, 14 Tex. 52. 
 
 5 Pratt V. Chase, 44 N. Y. 597 ; 19 Abb. Pr. 150. 
 
 6 Baldwin v. Hale, 1 Wall. 223; Baldwin v. Bank, 1 Wall. 234; 1 Cliff. 
 519; Stevenson v. King, 2 Cliff. 1; Riston v. Content, 4 Wash. C. C. 476; 
 Norton v. Cook, 9 Conn. 314; Anderson v. Wheeler, 25 Conn. 603; Felch 
 V. Bug-bee, 48 Me. 9; Chase v. Flagg, Ibid. 182; Kelley v. Drury, 91 Mass. 
 27; Demeritt v. Exchange Bank, 20 Law Rep. 606; Newmarket Bank v. 
 Butler, 45 N. H. 236; Donnelly v. Corbett, 7 N. Y. 500. 
 
 7 Baldwiuv. Hale, 1 Wall. 223; Poe v. Duck, 5 Md. 1; WooJbridgo 
 V. Allen. 5 J Mass. 470; Savage v. Marsh, 51 Mass. 594. But see Sherrill 
 V. Hopkins, 1 Cow. 103; Raymond v. Mei'chant, 3 Cow. 147. 
 
 8 Worthington v. Jerome, 5 Blatchf . 279; Easterly v. Goodwin, S5 
 Conn. 279; Wyman v. Mitchell, 1 Cow. 316; Watson v. Bourne, 10 Ma:js. 
 337; McCarty v. Gibson, 5 Gratt. 307; Choteau v. Richardson. 94 JMass. 
 365; Hawleyv. Hunt, 27 Iowa, 303; Poe v. Duck, 5 Md. 1; Donnelly v. 
 
Art. I, § 8 rowEEs of congress. 90 
 
 Corbett, 7 N. Y. 500; Wliiniey v. Whiting, 3") N. H. 457; Soiilo v. Chase, 
 3f)N. Y. 342; 1 Abb. Pr. N. S. 48. But see Davidson v. Smith, 1 Biss. 
 346; Betts v. Bagley, 29 Mass. 572. 
 9 Donnelly r. Corbett, 7 N. Y. 500. 
 
 10 Brown v. Bridge, 106 Mass. 563. 
 
 11 Clay V. Smith, 3 Peters, 411; Gardner i>. Lee's Bank, 11 Barb. 558; 
 Joumeay v. Gardner, 65 Mass. 355; Woodbridge v. Wright, 3 Conn, 523. 
 
 12 Agnew V. Piatt, 32 Mass. 417. 
 
 13 Norton v. Cook, 9 Conn. 314; McCarty v. Gibson, 5 Gratt. 307; Col- 
 lins V. Kodolph, 3 Greene, (Iowa) 299. 
 
 14 Blackmau v. Green, 24 Vt. 17. 
 
 15 Jones V. Horsey, 4 Md. 306. 
 
 16 Beal v. Bm-chstead, 64 Mass. 523. And see Babcock v. Weston, 1 
 Gall. 168. 
 
 Validity of insolvency discharge. — If both parties 
 are citizens of the State a discharge will be a bar to the 
 debt, although the contract was made and was to be per- 
 formed in another State ;i so if the parties became citizens 
 of the State before the filing of the petition for discharge ;2 
 so, where both parties were citizens of the same State, a 
 discharge will bar an action upon the contract in another 
 State,3 although the creditor be an alien.^ It will release 
 the debtor from the contract, although the creditor had 
 removed to another State before it was granted. '^ If the 
 indorser and maker of a note reside in the State at the time 
 the discharge is granted, the discharge will bar the debt;^ 
 but if the note was indorsed before maturity to a citizen 
 of another State, by whom it was held at the time of the 
 application for a discharge, it will not release the debtor,'^ 
 but otherwise if it be taken after it is overdue, § unless 
 taken before the filing of the petition. ^ A discharge not 
 valid under the Constitution in the Federal courts is 
 equally invalid in the State courts. i^* 
 
 1 Marsh V. Putnam, 69 Mass. 551. But see Smith v. Mead, 3 Conn, 253. 
 
 2 Hall V. Winchell, 33 Vt. 588. But see Witt v. Follett, 2 Wend. 457. 
 
 3 Hempstead v. Eeed, 6 Conn. 480; Williams v. Guignard, 2 How, 
 (Miss.) 724; Stone v. Tibbetts, 26 Me. 110; Pitkin v. Thompson, 30 Mass. 
 64; Hall v. Boardman, 14 N. H. 38; Wheelock v. Leonard, 20 Pa. St. 440; 
 Urton V. Hunter, 2 W. Ya. 83. 
 
 4 Von Glalm ». Varrenne, 1 Dill. 515. 
 
 5 Brigham v. Henderson, 55 Mass. 430; Converse v. Bradley, Ibid. 
 434; Stoddard v. Harrington, 100 Mass. 87; Stevens v. Norris, 30 N. 
 H. 466. 
 
 6 Wheelock v. Leonard, 20 Pa. St. 440. 
 
 7 Towne v. Smith. 1 Wood & M. 115; 9 Law Rep. 12; Anderson v. 
 Wheeler, 25 Conn. 603; Ballard u. Webster, 9 Abb. Pr, 404; Smith v. 
 Gardner, 4 Bosw. 54; Bancher v. Fisk, 33 Me. 316; Chase v. Flagg, 48 
 Mo. 182; Felch v. Bugbee, Ibid. 9; Braynard v. Marshall, 25 Mass. 194; 
 Savoye v. Marsh, 51 Mass. 594; Houghton v. Maynard, 71 Mass. 552; 
 
91 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § iS 
 
 Eaton V. Sweetser, 84 Ibid. 70, note. But see Bank v. Squires, 8 La. 
 An. 318. 
 
 8 Hall V. Boardman, 14 N. H. 38. 
 
 9 Fessenden v. Willey, 84 Mass. 67. 
 
 10 Oa:den v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Shaw v. Robhins, Ibid, 369; 
 Cook V. Moffat. 5 How. 295; Hammett v. Anderson, 3 Conn. 304; Smith 
 V. Healey,4 Conn. 49; Atwater t). Townsend, Ibid. 47; Frey v. Kirk, 4 
 Gill, tt J. 509; Fisher ?;. Wheeler, 5 La. An. 271; Spear v. Peabody, 10 
 Ibid. 145; Kimberlv v. Ely, 23 Mass. 440; Beers v. Rhea, 5 Tex. 349. lint 
 see Van Hook v. Whitlock, 26 Wend. 40; 7 Paige, 373. 
 
 5 To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreifjn 
 coin, and fix the standard of loeights and measures ; 
 
 Money as here used means gold, silver, and copper 
 coins. 1 ' ■ To coin money " is to mould into form a metallic 
 substance of intrinsic value.- The power was created 
 for tlie purpose of making and preserving uniformity and 
 purity in tlie standard of value. ^ The power to regulate 
 the value of money is exclusive in Congress, "^ and without 
 limitation or restriction ^ as to coining and punishing for 
 tlie i^roduction of a false imitation. '^ It is in the discre- 
 tion of Congress to make gold and silver, or anything else, 
 a legal tender.' The legal tender acts do not lix a stand- 
 ard of value, or regulate money values, or make that 
 money which lias no intrinsic value. ^ The grant of power 
 to coin money is not an implied prohibition against mak- 
 ing treasury notes a legal tender; '^ the power to coin and 
 the power to declare anything a legal tender are distinct 
 liowers.i*^ The grant of power to coin does not make that 
 coin of necessity a legal tender at the ilxed standard. ^^ 
 The power to lix the standard of weights and measures is 
 exclusive in Congress when exercised. ^"^ 
 
 1 Maynard v. Newman, 1 Nev. 271; Thayer v. Hedsres, 22 Tnd. 301; 
 Hasue v. Powers, 33 Barb. 453; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyok, 27 N. 
 Y. 430. 
 
 2 Griswold v. Hepburn, 2 Duval, 29. 
 
 3 U. S. t>. Marigold, 9 How. 567; Campbell v. U. S. 10 Law Rep. 400. 
 
 4 Van Husau v. Kanouse, 13 Mich. 303. 
 
 5 Maynard v. Newman, 1 Nev. 271; George v. Concord, 45 N. H. 434; 
 Shollenberger v. Briuton, 52 Pa. St. 9. 
 
 6 Fox V. Ohio, 5 How. 433. 
 
 7 Alexander v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 220; Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; 
 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264; Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, II 
 Peters. 257 ; Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457 ; Metropolitan Bank v. Van 
 Dyck, 27 N. Y. 427; Norris v. Clymer, 2 Pen. 277; Moor v. City of Read- 
 ! 1 '^ 21 Pa. St. 188; People v. Green, 2 Wend. 274; People v. Constant, 11 
 Wend. 511. 
 
 8 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 553. 
 
 9 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 553. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 92 
 
 10 Thayer v. Hedges, 22 Ind. 282. 
 
 11 Van Husen v. Kanouse, 13 Mich. 303. 
 
 12 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 282; Weaver v. Fegley, 29 Pa. St. 27. 
 
 ^ To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the secur- 
 ities and current coin of the United States ; 
 
 Counterfeiting. — Congress may provide for the puu- 
 ishraent of the offense of passing, uttering, or selling 
 counterfeit coin,i or for bringing in from a foreign country 
 counterfeit coin made in the similitude of United States 
 coins. 2 So Congress m.ay provide for the punishment for 
 counterfeiting foreign coins made current by the laws of 
 the United States.^ ' It is competent for Congress to pro- 
 tect the sacredness of the metallic currency, even if coun- 
 terfeited for an innocent purpose.^ There is a distinction 
 between counterfeiting and uttering false coin. Counter- 
 feiting applies to the act of making, as distinguished from 
 the act of circulating.*^ Tlie former is an offense directly 
 against the Government ; the latter is an offense against 
 the State, and may be j^unished by the laws of the State. ^^ 
 That the power of Congress is not exclusive;' that States 
 have not a concurrent right to provide for punishment ;8 
 that this clause does not prevent a State from passing 
 laws to punish counterfeiting.'-^' A State may impose a 
 penalty upon the act of keeping moulds and tools adapted 
 to counterfeiting, 10 or punish the offense of keeping coun- 
 terfeit coin with the intent to pass the same,ii or for the 
 counterfeiting of a national bank-note ;i2 so a State may 
 punish for a cheat, though the instrument be a base coin 
 in the similitude of a dollar of the United States coin- 
 age, i^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Marigold, 9 How. 560; harmonizing Fox v. Ohio, 5 How. 
 410; tliis power questioned in U. S. v. , 2 Law. Kep. 90. 
 
 2 U. S. t. Mario-old, 9 How. 560; Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 658; 
 Fox V. Ohio, 5 How. 410; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 450. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Gardner, 10 Peters, 618; U. S. v. Brown, 4 McLean, 142; U. 
 S. V. Burns, 5 McLean, 23. 
 
 4 U. S. V. King, 5 McLean, 210. 
 
 5 Campbell v. U. S. 10 Law Rep. 400. 
 
 6 Fox V. Ohio, 5 How. 410; U. S. v. Marigold, 10 Hoav. 560; People v. 
 White, 34 Cal. 183; Harlan t;. People, 1 Doug. Mich. 207; Sizemore v. 
 
 State, 3 Head, 26; State ?;. Antonio, 2 Tread. 776; U. S. r. ,2 
 
 Law Kep. 92. 
 
 7 Fox V. Ohio, 5 How. 410; U. S. v. Marigold, 9 How. 590. 
 
 8 Mattison v. Missouri, 3 Mo. 421, and dissenting opin. ; Fox v. Ohio, 
 5 How. 433. 
 
 9 People V. White, 34 Cal. 183; Fox v. Ohio, 5 How. 410. 
 
93 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 10 state V. Brown, 2 Or. 221. 
 
 11 Sizemore v. State, 3 Head, 26. 
 
 12 State V. Kandall, 2 Ark. 89. 
 
 13 Fox V. Ohio, 5 How. 410; TJ. S. v. Marigold, 9 How. 569; Moore v. 
 People, 14 How. 20. 
 
 " To establish post-offices and post-roads; 
 
 To establish comprehends the renting or building of 
 a house, and the construction and renair of a road, and 
 the appropriation of money for such 'purposes ; i or the 
 making of contracts relating thereto; ^ or to authorize a 
 telegraph company to construct, maintain, and operate 
 its lines along any military or post-road. 3 It is under 
 this provision that Congress has adopted mail regulations, 
 and punished depredations on the mails.* States have 
 concurrent power to punish for a highway robbery of the 
 mail.5 Congress may forbid transportation by "mail of 
 circulars concerning lotteries. 6 A mail contractor must 
 pay the same -feolls as other citizens:'' As to post-roads, 
 the power of Congress is supreme and plenary, intended 
 to embrace everything necessary and i^roper for regulating 
 and transporting the mails,« and is restricted only to such 
 roads as are regularly laid out under the laws of the sev- 
 eral States. 9 The power to establish post-roads is deemed 
 exhausted in the designation of roads on which the mails 
 are to be transported, i'^ A statute interfering with the 
 rights of a telegraph company authorized by Congress to 
 set up its lines along a military or post-road is unconsti- 
 tutional, n Congress may use any means appropriate in 
 the exercise of this power, as appointing postmasters, defin- 
 ing their duties and compensation, providing for carriage of 
 mails,punishing for crimes or obstructions to the service.i'^ 
 
 1 Searight v. Stokes. 3 How. 151 ; Neil v. State, 3 How. 720 ; Dickey v. 
 Turnpike Co. 7 Dana, 113. 
 
 2 Searight v. Stokes, 3 How. 151. 
 
 3 Pensacola Tel. Co. v. Western U. Tel. Co. 96 U. S. 1; 1 Woods, 643. 
 
 4 Stm-tevant v. City of Alton, 3 McLean, 393; U. S. v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. 
 
 U. S. 50. 
 
 5 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 34. 
 
 6 Ex parte Jackson, 96 U. S. 727. 
 
 7 Dickey v. Turnpike Co. 7 Dana, 113. 
 
 8 Dickey v. Turnpike Co. 7 Dana, 113. 
 
 9 Pemi. V. Wheel. & B. Br. Co. 18 How. 421, Dickey t. Turnpike Co. 
 7 Dana, 113. 
 
 10 TJ. S. V. Railroad Br. Co. 6 McLean, 517. 
 
 11 Pensacola Tel. Co. v. Western U. Tel. Co. 96 U. S. 1. 
 
 12 U. S. V. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 50. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OP CONGRESS. 94 
 
 8 To promote the progress of science and useful arts by se- 
 curing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclu- 
 sive right to their respective writings and discoveries ; 
 
 Power defined. — The power granted in this provision 
 is general, and it rests in Congress to say for what time 
 and under what circumstances the patent for an inven- 
 tion shall be granted •,^ it is domestic in its character, and 
 confined within the limits of the United States ; ^ its exer- 
 cise is limited to authors and inventors, ^ and their rights 
 are to be secured for only a limited time.'^ Congress may 
 confer a new and extended term upon the patentee even 
 after the expiration of the first, ^ and may reserve the 
 rights and jjrivileges of assign ees.o There is no constitu- 
 tional restriction on Congress to exercise this power by 
 making special grants; this is a mere question of expedi- 
 ency.'^ The 130 wer of legislation is exclusive in Congress,*^ 
 and States cannot punish frauds done under color of rights 
 held from the United States. 9 
 
 1 Evans v. Jordan, 9 Cranch, 199; 1 Brock. 248; Jordan v. Dobson, 4 
 Fish. 232; Bianeliard v. Sprague, 3 Sum. 535; 2 Story, 164. 
 
 2 Browne v. Duchesne, 19 How. 183; 2 Curt. 371. 
 
 3 Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 Johns. 507. 
 
 4 Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 Johns. 509. 
 
 5 Bloomer v. Stolley, 5 McLean, 158; Blanchard's G-. S. Fact. v. War- 
 ner, 1 Blatclif. 258; Evans •. Robinson, 1 Caro. L. R. 209; Jordan v. Dob- 
 son, 4 Fish. 232; Blanchard v. Haynes, 6 West. L. J. 82. 
 
 6 Blanchard's G. S. Fact. v. Warner, 1 Blatchf. 258. 
 
 7 Bloomer v. Stolley, 5 McLean, 158. 
 
 8 Cranson v. Smith, 37 Mich. 303; State v. Loclcwood, 43 Wis. 403. 
 
 9 Cranson v. Smith, 37 Mich. 309. 
 
 Copyrights. — All authors may obtain copyrights for 
 their books, maps, pictures, and everything printed and 
 first i^ublished in the United States, i but they have no ex- 
 clusive property in a published work except under some 
 act of Congress. 2 The power of Congress cannot be ex- 
 tended to the introduction of new works or inventions," 
 nor does this provision apply to trade-marks, ^ on which 
 Congress is not authorized to legislate under this clause 
 of the Constitution,^ nor does it authorize the protection 
 of a composition which is grossly indecent and tends to 
 corrupt the morals of the people. ^ This provision does 
 not prevent a State from legislating on the same subject 
 in the absence of congressional legislation, 'i^ but no State 
 can in any form interfere with the right of private per- 
 sons under the copyright laws of the United States. § 
 
95 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 1 Wheaton v. Peters, 8 Peters, 591; JoUie v. Jaques, 1 BiatcM. 618: 
 Clayton v. Stone, 2 Paine, 283; Blnns v. Woodruff, 4 Wash. C. C. 48. 
 
 2 Wheaton v. Peters, 8 Peters, 591 ; Dudley v. Mayhew, 3 N. Y. 12. 
 
 3 Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 Johns. 507. 
 
 4 Kodgers v. Phelps, 1 Off. Gaz. 31; Leidersdorf v. Flint, 13 Am. L. 
 Rev. 392. Contra, McLean v. Fleming, « Am. L. Rep. 233. 
 
 5 Leidersdorf v. Flint, 13 Am. L. Rev. 392. And see Duwell v. Boh- 
 mer, 10 Chic. L. N. 35G. 
 
 6 Martinetti v. Maguire, Deady, 216; 1 Abb. U. S. 356. 
 
 7 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 365; Moore v. People, 14 How. 20; Briggs 
 V. Johnson Co. 4 Dill. 151 ; Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 Johns. 507. 
 
 8 Little V. Gould, 2 Blatchf. 165. 
 
 Patent laws. — Patents are granted to promote the 
 progress of science and the useful arts.i The power of 
 Congress on the subject of patents is i^lenary.^ The pro- 
 vision contains no restriction as to cases where the inven- 
 tion has not been known or used by the public. All that 
 is required is that it be an invention. ^ Invention implies 
 originality,'^ the finding out, contriving, or creating some- 
 thing which did not exist before.^ It must be the product 
 of the inventor's mind.c If a patent law is constitutional, 
 it must be enforced without regard to the policy or jus- 
 tice which dictated it." A patent for a medicine does not 
 confer on the patentee the right to prescribe it. 8 A patent 
 for a plan for constructing and drawing lotteries does not 
 authorize the establishment of a lottery contrary to State 
 law.o If a corporation is the owner of a patent, it is not 
 subject to the provisions of a State law relating to foreign 
 corporations. 10 
 
 1 Grant v. Raymond, 6 Peters, 218; Hogg v. Emerson, 6 How. 486: 
 Brooks V. Fish, 15 How. 223; Blanchard v. Sprague, 3 Sum. 535. 
 
 2 Evans v. Eaton, 3 Wheat. 454; 7 Wheat. 356; Evans v. Hettich, 7 
 Wheat. 453; McClurgi;. Kingsland, 1 How. 202; Blanchard v. Sprague, 
 3 Sum. 541. 
 
 3 Evans v. Jordan, 9 Cranch, 199; 1 Brock. 248; Jordan v. Dobson, 4 
 Fish. 232; Blanchard t;. Sprague, 2 Story, 164; 3 Sum. 535. 
 
 4 Blake v. Stafford, 3 Fish. 305. 
 
 5 Ransom v. Mayor of N. Y. 1 Fish. 264; Conover v. Roach, 4 Fish. 16. 
 
 6 Pitts i;. Hall, 2 Blatchf . 234. 
 
 7 Bloomer V. Stolley, 5 McLean, 153. ^*' tuS' -jA»\ 
 
 8 Jordant;. Dayton, 4 Ohio, 294. nq^S /'(f^ '^ ^^■ 
 
 9 Vannini v. Paine, 1 Harring. 65. S fl * aI?^^ 
 
 10 Grover & B. S. M. Co. v. Butler, 53 Iodr454; MowiH^laach. Co 
 V. Caldwell, 54 Ind. 270. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 96 
 
 Rights secured. — The word "secure" does not mean 
 the protection of an acknowledged right, i The right of 
 property in an invention or discovery does not imply the 
 unlimited power of using it ; this is subject to the regula- 
 tion and control of the several States.^ So, the State may 
 regulate the sale of an article that is dangerous, manufac- 
 tured in pursuance of a patented invention; ^ but if the 
 patentee complies with the laws of Congress, an act of the 
 State legislature which attempts to direct the manner in 
 which patent rights shall be sold, is void.* 
 
 1 Wheaton v. Peters, 8 Peters, 591. 
 
 2 Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 Johns. 507; 1 Paine, 45; 4 Hall L. J. 56. 
 
 3 Patterson v. Commonwealth, 11 Bush, 311. 
 
 4 Crittenden y. White, 9 Ch. L. 110; Ex parte Robinson, 4 Fish. 186; 
 HoUida v. Hunt, 70 111. 109; Helm v. First Nat. Bank, 43 Ind. 167. 
 
 9 To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court ; 
 
 The United States courts are distinct and independ- 
 ent of each other, i The power to establish courts and endow 
 them with jurisdiction affords no iDretext for the abroga- 
 tion of any established rule of property; 2 hence the de- 
 cision of the supreme court of a State as a rule of prop- 
 erty is binding on the courts of the United States. ^ 
 
 1 Taylor v. Carryl, 20 How. 583. 
 
 2 Suydani v. Williamson, 24 How. 433. 
 
 3 Jackson v. Chew, 12 Wheat. 162; Beauregard v. N. 0. 18 How. 497; 
 Arguello v. U. S. 539; League v. Egery, 24 How. 366. 
 
 10 To define and punish ^oiracies and felonies committed on 
 the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations ; 
 
 Congress need not define in terms the offense of piracy. 
 It may be left to judicial interpretation.! To define is to 
 enumerate the crimes which shall constitute piracy. 2 Pi- 
 racy is an offense against all nations, and against the 
 United States as well.^ Robbery or forcible depredations 
 on the sea, ammMS /wrandi, is piracy. 4 "High seas" are 
 not only waters of the ocean, but waters on the sea-coast 
 below low- water mark, whether within territorial bounda- 
 ries or not.s The slave trade is not piracy under the law 
 of nations. 6 Congress may punish for attempt to commit 
 mutiny, "^ or for a conspiracy to burn a ship. § 
 
 1 U. S. V. Smith, 5 Wheat. 153; U. S. v. Pirates, Ibid. 184. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Smith, 5 Wheat. 153. 
 
 3 Case of Jose Ferreira dos Santos, 2 Brock. 507. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Smith, 5 Wheat. 153; U. S. v. Palmer, 3 Wheat. 610. 
 
97 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 5 U. S. V. Pirates, 5 Wheat. 184; U. S. y. Wiltberger, 5 Wheat. 76; 
 Waring v. Clarke, 5 How. 441; Howard v. IngersoU, 13 How. 381; U. S. 
 V. Grush, 5 Mason, 2.90; The Harriet, 1 Story, 259; Jones v. Eoot, 6 
 Mass. 435. 
 
 6 The Antelope, 10 Wheat. 66. 
 
 7 U. S. V. Crawford, 1 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 288. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Cole, 5 McLean, 513. 
 
 11 To declare loar, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and 
 make rules concerning captures on land and loater ; 
 
 War is that state in which a nation prosecutes its rights 
 by force. 1 Civil war exists when the regular course of 
 justice is interrupted by revolt, rebellion, or insurrection.-^ 
 "To declare " may be as well by a formal recognition as 
 by a declaration in advance. 3 Congress alone has the 
 power to declare war.* The power to declare war involves 
 the power to prosecute it^ by all means and in any man- 
 ner in which war may be legitimately prosecuted, includ- 
 ing the power to confiscate the property of public ene- 
 mies,6 and the power to make legal treasury notes a legal 
 tender for public and private debts, '^ and the power to 
 acquire territory, either by conquest or by treaty ;S but a 
 war declared by Congress can never be presumed to be 
 waged for the purposes of conquest or the acquisition of 
 territory.^ So, a declaration of war does not of itself 
 enact a confiscation of the property of an enemy within 
 the territory of the belligerent, i'' Congress alone has the 
 power to confiscate the property of an enemy and debts 
 due to an enemy. n The power to declare war includes 
 the power to call the requisite force into service, ^-^ and the 
 authority to transport troops through all parts of the 
 Union by the most expeditious routes. i3 It is not limited 
 to victories in the field and dispersion of the enemy, but 
 carries with it the power to guard against the renewal of 
 the confl.ict, and to remedy evils arising from its rise and 
 progress.!* It extends to all legislation necessary to the 
 prosecution of the war with vigor and success, as sus- 
 pending the writ of habeas corpus,^^ or imposing such con- 
 ditions upon commercial intercourse in time of war as it 
 sees fit, and making a payment for a license a part of the 
 conditions, 16 or creating non-intercourse acts,i" or permit- 
 ting limited commercial intercourse with the enemy, i^ So, 
 an act of Congress emancipating the slaves of those who 
 aid in a rebellion, is valid. i^ Congress may pass an act 
 suspending the Statute of Limitations during the exist- 
 ence of a rebellion. 20 The power to declare war includes 
 the authority to use other means besides those indicated 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— «. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 98 
 
 by its terms. 21 War declared by Congress is not the only 
 war within the contemplation of the Constitution.^^ The 
 power to make rules concerning captures extends to capt- 
 ures within the United States as well as to those that are 
 extra-territorial.23 Until Congress passes laws on the sub- 
 ject of war and reprisals, no private citizen can enforce 
 such rights.24 A belligerent may, by capture, enforce his 
 authority. 25 
 
 1 Prize Cases, 2 Black, 666. 
 
 2 Prize Cases, 2 Black, 667. 
 
 3 Bas V. Tingy, 4 Dall. 37; Talbot v. Seaman, 1 Cranch, 28; G-riswold 
 V. Waddington, 16 Johns. 449. 
 
 4 Prize Cases, 2 Black, 635; The Tropic Wind, 24 Law Kep. 144; Per- 
 kins V. Rogers, 35 Ind. 124. 
 
 5 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400; Legal Tender Cases, 
 12 Wall. 457; Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238. 
 
 6 Miller v. U. S. 11 Wall. 305; Tyler v. Defrees, 11 Wall. 331; Prize 
 Cases, 2 Black, 635; The Ned, 1 Blatchf. Pr. 119; Mrs. Alexander's Cot- 
 ton, 2 Wall. 404. 
 
 7 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457; Dooley v. Smith, 13 Wall. 604; 
 Railroad Co. -y. Johnson, 15 Willi. 195; Lick v. Faulkner, 25 Cal. 404; 
 Curiae ». Abadie, Ibid. 502; Kierski ?;. Matthews, Ibid. 591; Jones v. 
 Harker, 37 Ga. 503; Blackly. Lusk, 69 111. 70; Hague v. Powers, 39 Barb. 
 427; Reynolds v. Bank, 18 Ind. 467; Thayer v. Hedges, 23 Ind. 141; Hint- 
 rager v. Bates, 18 Iowa, 174; George v. Concord, 45 N. H. 434; Shollen- 
 berger v. Brenton, 52 Pa. St. 9. 
 
 8 Sere v. Pitot, 6 Cranch, 332; Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 542; 
 Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 603; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 611. 
 
 9 Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 603; Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 
 571; Stewart ?;. Kahn, 11 Wall. 507. 
 
 10 Brown v. U. S. 8 Cranch, 153. 
 
 11 Brown v. XJ. S. 8 Cranch, 153; Britton v. Butler, 9 Blatchf. 456. 
 
 12 Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238. 
 
 13 Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 36. 
 
 14 Stewart v. Kahn, 11 Wall. 493; White v. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; 39 Ga. 
 306. 
 
 15 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 139. 
 
 16 Hamilton v. Dillon, 21 Wall. 73. 
 
 17 Phelps V. Sowles, 19 Wend. 547. 
 
 18 Hamilton v. DiUon, 21 Wall. 73. 
 
 19 Buie V. Parker, 63 N. C. 131 ; Jacoway v. Denton, 25 Ark. 625. 
 
 20 Stewart v. Kahn, 11 Wall. 507. 
 
 21 Prize Cases, 2 Black, 670. 
 
 22 The Tropic Wind, 24 Law Rep. 144. 
 
 23 Brown v. XJ. S. 8 Cranch, 153. 
 
 24 Brown v. U. S. 8 Cranch, 153. 
 
 25 Lamar v. Browne, 92 U. S. 187. 
 
99 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 12 To raise and support armies, hut no appropriation of 
 money to that use shall he for a longer term than two years; 
 
 The povrer to "raise and support armies " includes all 
 the means by which armies can be raised, by compulsory 
 draft as well as by voluntary enlistment. ^ Each individ- 
 ual can be required to perform military duty without his 
 consent if the demand is made by a proper exercise of the 
 national will;^ and Congress may enact that a person 
 shall be deemed in the military service from the time of 
 tlie draft. 3 In authorizing a national conscrijition, the 
 Constitution ignores the State governments, and any aid 
 rendered by them would be simply as volunteers,-^ the 
 power to raise and support armies being exclusive in Con- 
 gress; ^ but where an act of Congress provides for a draft 
 of men into the army a State may give a bounty to those 
 who volunteer.6 Congress may make such orders and 
 regulations as may be necessary to prevent an evasion of 
 duty by those liable to military'service. " The State power 
 over the militia is subordinate to the power of Congress to 
 raise armies out of the population that constitutes it.s 
 Congress has a constitutional power to enlist minors in 
 the army and navy without the consent of their parents,^ 
 and State courts cannot discharge from enlistments under 
 haheas corpus, ^^ bat State courts may discharge on habeas 
 corpus persons enlisted contrary to acts of Congress, i^ 
 This constitutional power includes the power to provide 
 necessary officers, equipments, and supplies, and to estab- 
 lish military academies. i^ 
 
 1 Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238; In re Griner. 23 Wis. 423. And 
 see Ex parte Couplancl, 26 Tex. 386. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Bainbridge, 1 Mason. 71 ; Ex parte Coupland, 26 Tex. 394. 
 
 3 Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238. 
 
 4 Booth V. Woodbury, 32 Conn. 118. 
 
 5 Ferguson v. Landram, 1 Bush, 548. 
 
 6 Booth V. Woodbury, 32 Conn. 118; Taylor v. Thompson, 42 Ga. 9; 
 Coffman v. Knightly, 24 Ind. 509; Board v. Bearse, 25 Ind. 110; Winches- 
 ter V. Corinna, 55 Me. 9; Wilson v. Burkman, 13 Minn. 441; Comer v. 
 Folsom, 13 Minn. 210; State v. Demarest, 32 N. J. 528; State v. Jackson, 
 31 N. J. 189; Speer i;. Directors, 50 Pa. St. 150; Ahl v. Glenn, 52 Pa. St. 
 324. 
 
 7 AUen v. Colby, 45 N. H. 544. 
 
 8 Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238. 
 
 9 Ex par,te Brown, 5 Cranch C. C. 554; U. S. v. Stewart, Crabbe, 205; 
 Commonweilth v. Murray, 4 Binn. 487; Commonwealth v. Barker, 5 
 Binn. 423; Case of Roberts, 2 Hall L. J. 192; Shirk's Case, 20 Leg. Int. 
 260; U. S. V. Bainbridge, 1 Mason, 71; Commonwealth v. Gamble, 11 
 Serg. & R. 94. But see U. S. v. Wright, 5 Phila. 296; Henderson's Case, 
 
 ; 30 Leg. Int. 187; U. S. v. Rhodes, 10 "Abb. U. S. 43. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS, 100 
 
 10 Tarble's Case, 13 Wall. 397; Matter of Farrand, 1 Abb. U. S. 146; In 
 re Keeler, Hemp. 306; In re Veremaitre, 9 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 129; In re 
 Sifford, 5 Am. Law Reg. 659; In re McDonald, 9 Ibid. 661. 
 
 11 In re Dobb, 9 Am. L. R. 565; Ex parte McDonald, Ibid. 662; In re 
 Wilson, 18 Leg. Int. 316; Comm. v. Carter, 20 Ibid. 21 ; In re Henderson, 
 Ibid. 181; U. S. v. Wright, Ibid. 21; In re FoUis, 19 Leg. Int. 276: In re 
 McCall, Ibid. 108; U. S. v. Taylor, 20 Leg. Int. 284; In ry Hicks, 11 Pitts, 
 L. J. 25; In re Webb, 10 Pitts. L. J. 106; Comm. r. Rogers, Ibid. 178; In 
 re Barrett, 12 Pitts. L. J. 90; In re Stevens, 24 Law Rep. 205; Comm. v. 
 Wright, 3 Grant. 437. Contra, In re Phelan. 9 Abb. Pr. 286; Spangle's 
 Case, 11 Am. L. R. 596; In re Jordan, Ibid. 749; In re Shirk, 3 Grant, 460. 
 
 12 U. S. V. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 50. 
 
 13 To provide and maintain a navy ; 
 
 This grant of power authorizes the Government to buy 
 or build vessels of war, man, arm, and prepare them, and 
 to establish naval academies, i and to j)rovide for punish- 
 ment for desertion and other crimes, and make all need- 
 ful rules for the government of the navy,^ Public ships 
 of sovereigns are deemed extra-territorial, and not sub- 
 ject to the local jurisdiction, ^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 337; U. S. v. Rhodes, 1 Abb, U, S. 50. 
 
 2 Dynes v. Hoover, 20 How. 65. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 390; The Exchange, 7 Cranch, 116. 
 
 14 To make rides for the government and regulation of the 
 land and naval forces. 
 
 Congress may provide for the trial and punishment of 
 military and naval offenses by courts-martial, without 
 reference to the judicial powers of Government, 
 
 Dynes v. Hoover, 20 How. 65; In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 396. 
 
 1° To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws 
 of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions ; 
 
 The po"wer to call out tlie militia is limited to three 
 purposes. 1 Such authority implies no prohibition to em- 
 ploy the army and navy for the same purposes, nor that 
 the militia cannot be used for the sui)pression of a re- 
 bellion as well as an insurrection. 2 This power is a contin- 
 uation of the ijowers enumerated, and a subsidiary grant 
 to the power to declare war, maintain armies and navies, 
 and provide for the common defense. ^ The power to re- 
 pel includes the power to provide against the attempt or 
 danger of invasion;'' it is to be exercised in sudden 
 emergencies, and imder circumstances vital to the exist- 
 
501 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 ence of the Union. » The President is the exclusive and 
 final judge whether the exij^ency has arisen,*^ and Con- 
 gress may delegate him to call out the militia, and 
 make his decision as to the necessity conclusive.'^ The 
 President may make his request direct to the executive 
 of the State, or by order directed to any subordinate offi- 
 cer of the State militia. ^ Congress may make laws to 
 enforce the call and may inflict penalties for disobedience, 
 and erect courts for the trial of offenders,^ but cannot sub- 
 ject State militia to martial law unless in the actual 
 service of the Government. i" It may fix the jDeriod at 
 which the militia enter into service of the United States, 
 and change their character from State to National mili- 
 tia.ii A State may make a law providing for the punish- 
 ment for neglect to obey an order calling forth the mili- 
 tia. 12 When called out and mustered into the service, they 
 become National militia. ^^ The States have concurrent 
 power to call out the militia to aid the General Govern- 
 ment, "-^^ and in certain emergencies to raise troops to suj)- 
 press insurrection, is The authority to suppress rebellion 
 is found in the power to suppress insurrection and carry 
 on war.is When a rebellious State is subdued, Congress 
 has the right to determine and fix the conditions of return- 
 ing peace. 1"^ 
 
 1 KueecUer v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 233. 
 
 2 Texas I'. White, 7 Wall. 700; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyke, 27 
 N. Y. 400; Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238. 
 
 3 Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238. 
 
 4 Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 19. 
 
 5 Luther V. Borden, 7 How. 18. 
 
 6 Martina. Mott, 12 Wheat. W; Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 18; Van- 
 derheyden v. Young, 11 Johns. 150; Duffleld v. Smith, 3 Serg. & R. 590. 
 
 7 Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 19; Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 18. 
 
 8 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 15; 3 Serg. & R. 169. 
 
 9 Commonwealth v. Irish, 3 Serg. & R. 176. 
 
 10 Mills V. Martin, 19 Johns. 7. 
 
 11 Houston D. Moore, 5 Wheat. 15; 3 Serg. & R. 169. 
 
 12 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 15; 3 Serg. &. R. 169. 
 
 13 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 15; 3 Serg. & R. 169; Martin v. Mott, 
 K Wheat. 19. 
 
 14 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 15; 3 Serg. & R. 169. 
 
 15 Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 1. 
 
 16 Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 701 ; Tyler v. Defrees, 11 Wall. 331. 
 
 17 Jacoway v. Denton, 25 Ark. 625; Shorter v. Cohb. 39 Ga. 285, 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 102 
 
 1^ To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the 
 militia, and for governing such part of them as may be 
 employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the 
 States respectively the appointment of the officers, and the 
 authority of training the militia according to the discipline 
 prescribed by Congress ; 
 
 The government of the militia, when in actvial service, 
 is distinct from the power of calling them out."^ Organiz- 
 ing includes the jDower of determining who shall compose 
 the body of the militia, and the power to lix the age 
 necessary to render competent. 2 After the militia has 
 entered into the service of the United States, the authority 
 of the General Government is exclusive, ^ and so far as 
 Congress has provided for their organization, the power 
 of the State is excluded ;* but if Congress neglect to exer- 
 cise this j)ower, States have a concurrent authority to do 
 so,s and so long as the militia are acting under the military 
 jurisdiction of the State to which they belong, the powers 
 over tliem are concurrent in the General and State govern- 
 ments ;C' but the State law is subordinate to the paramount 
 law of the General Government on the same subject.^ 
 Where a State law is to operate on the militia before they 
 are in actual service, it is valid if it does not conflict with 
 the law of Congress, <5 The power of Congress is unlim- 
 ited, except in officering and training the militia, "^ The 
 President must exercise his command of the militia 
 through officers duly appointed.'^ 
 
 1 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wlieat. 1 ; 3 Serg. & R. 169. 
 
 2 Opinions of Justices, 80 Mass. 543. 
 
 3 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1 ; 3 Serg. & R. 160. 
 
 4 Mills V. Martin, 19 Johns. 7; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 51; 3 
 Serg. & E. 16;). 
 
 5 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 58; 3 Serg. & R. 16^); Luther v. Bor- 
 den, 7 How. 1. 
 
 6 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 56; 3 Serg. & R. 169. 
 
 7 Opinions of Justices, 80 Mass. 548. 
 
 1'^ To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases lohatsoever, 
 over such district {not exceeding ten whiles square) as may, by 
 cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, 
 become the seat of the Government of the United States, and 
 to exercise like authority over all jjlaces purchased by the 
 consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same 
 shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, doch- 
 yards, and other needful buildings; and 
 
103 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 District of Columbia. — The inhabitants of the Dis- 
 trict of Columbia are citizens of the United States, and 
 may constitutionally have local legislation. i Congress 
 legislates for the District of Columbia with the same 
 power as the legislative assemblies of the States, 2 and in 
 its exercise it acts as the legislature of the Union,^ and 
 the right of exclusive legislation carries with it the right 
 of exclusive jurisdiction ^ in all cases whatsoever, includ- 
 ing the power of taxation. ^ The failure of Congress to 
 exercise its power in no way imjaairs the constitutional 
 grant. <> This clause may be understood as vesting courts 
 established in the District of Columbia with authority to 
 issue all process necessary to carry its orders into effect." 
 In legislating for the District of Columbia, Congress is 
 bound by the prohibitions of the Constitution.^ The 
 terms of this section are not limited by the principle that 
 representation is inseparable from taxation; taxes may 
 be levied in proportion to the census directed to be taken 
 by the Constitution. ^ Congress may confer uj)on the city 
 of Washington the power to assess for the improvement 
 or repair of public streets, 10 or may provide for the con- 
 struction of an aqueduct drawing its supply of water from 
 the within limits of a State, and the use and occupancy of 
 land for that purpose with permission and consent of such 
 State. 1^ The right to exclusive jurisdiction depends ui^on 
 the contract of pession.^^ When land is isurchased by the 
 United States it cannot be sold without special authority 
 of Congress. ^3 Jurisdiction and authority are limited to 
 the territory purchased,!'^ and in case of retrocession, ju- 
 risdiction and authority are lost.i^ This provision is not 
 applicable to the Territories, i^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 388. 
 
 2 Mattingly v. District of Columbia, 6 Amer. Law Rej?. 405. 
 
 3 Cohens v. .Virginia, 6 "Wheat. 424. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Coryell, 2 Mason, 91 ; Anon. 6 Op. Atty. Gen. 577. 
 
 5 Loughborough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. 
 
 6 Quimi's Case, 12 Int. Rev. Rcc. 151. 
 
 7 U. S. V. Williams, 4 Cranch C. C. 393. 
 
 8 U. S. V. More, 3 Cranch, 160. 
 
 9 Loughborough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. 
 
 10 Willard v. Presbury, 14 Wall. 676. 
 
 11 Reddall v. Bryan, 14 Md. 444. 
 
 12 Scott V. Sandf ord, 19 How. 528. 
 
 13 U. S. V. Railroad Br. Co. 6 McLean, 517. 
 
 14 People V. Godfrey, 17 Johns. 225. 
 
 15 Phillips V. Payne, 92 U. S. 131. 
 
 16 Reynolds v. People, 1 Colo. 179. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 104 
 
 Authority over property ceded.— Property is un- 
 der the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States when 
 situated in tlie District of Columbia, or other places ceded 
 to the United States ; i but the Government may own and 
 use property within the limits of a State without acquir- 
 ing jurisdiction over the territory.'- If the United States 
 merely acquires land from the owner, it holds it in subor- 
 dination to the municipal regulations of the lilace:^ the 
 purchase itself does not oust the jurisdiction or sover- 
 eignty of such State over the lands so purchased. ^ When 
 the Government holds land otherwise than as sovereign 
 it holds it only as an individual, ^ as where land is rented 
 for a temporary purpose, ° but free from State taxation. ' 
 The United States can acquire the right of exclusive leg- 
 islation within the territorial limits of a State only in the 
 mode pointed out in the Constitution; s places for forts, 
 magazines, etc., purchased from individuals, require the 
 consent of the State legislature to give the General Gov- 
 ernment exclusive jurisdiction. ^ Ratification by the State 
 in addition to purchase is necessary to vest full sover- 
 eignty in the United States. ^^ The consent of the State is 
 necessary for no other purpose than to vest plenary juris- 
 diction in the Government, and not to restrict the power 
 of eminent domain. ii An act of the legislature will not 
 confer such jurisdiction unless there is some act of accept- 
 ance on the part of the Government; i^ but after a cession 
 to the United States the State jurisdiction ceases, is and 
 the ordinary laws of a State do not prevail within such 
 territory. 14 The Government has exclusive jurisdiction 
 over the ceded territory, although the act of cession pro- 
 vides that civil and criminal process of State courts may 
 be executed within such territory, is 
 
 1 U. S. V. Ames,l Wood. & M. 76; Perry Manuf. Co. 2 Ibid. 468; 
 Anonymoiis, 9 Opin. Att. Gen. 521. 
 
 2 Kenner v. Bennett, 21 Ohio St. 431. 
 
 3 Coraraonwealtli v. Young, Brightly, 302; U. S. v. Crosby, 7 Crancli, 
 116. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Cornell, 2 Mason, 63; U. S. v. Davis, 5 Ibid. 364; Common- 
 wealth V. Clary, 8 Mass. 72. 
 
 5 Commonwealth v. Younar, Brightly, 302; People v. Godfrey, 17 
 Johns. 225; U. S. v. Traver, 2 Wheel. C. C. 490; People v. Lent, Ibid. 548. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Tierney, 1 Bond, 571 ; Renner v. Bennett, 21 Ohio St. 431. 
 
 7 U. S. V. Weise, 2 Wall. Jr. 72; Commonwealth v. Clary, 8 Mass. 72; 
 Anonymous, 7 Opin. Att. Gen. 628. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Tierney, 1 Bond, 571; People v. Godfrey, 17 Johns. 225; 
 Clay V. State, 4 Kans. 49. 
 
 9 McConnell v. Wilcox, 2 111. 344. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Tierney, 1 Bond, 571; U. S. v. Cornell, 2 Mason, 66; Com- 
 monwealth V. Young, Brightly, 302. 
 
105 POWERS OF CONGRESS. Art. I, § 8 
 
 1 1 Ex parte Hebard, 4 Dill. 384 ; U.S. v. Stahl, McCahon, 206. 
 
 12 People V. Lent, 2 Wheel. C. C. 548. 
 
 13 People V. Godfrey, 17 Jolins. 225; Commonwealth v. Young, 
 Brightly, 302; U. S. v. Cornell, 2 Mason, 66. 
 
 14 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 336; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 360; 
 People V. Godfrey, 17 Johns. 225; Commonwealth v. Clary, 8 Mass. 72: 
 U. S. V. Ames, 1 Wood. & M. 84. 
 
 15 IT. S. V. Cornell, 2 Mason, 66; U. S. v. Davis, 5 Ibid. 356; Common- 
 wealth V. Clary, 8 Mass. 72; Mitchell v. Tibbetts, 34 Mass. 298; U. S. v. 
 Travers, 2 Wheel. C. C. 490. 
 
 State authority.— Except by compact, or the volun- 
 tary legislative action of the State, lands within its limits 
 cannot be withdrawn from its ordinary action, i The State 
 may continue to regulate and punish so far as they have 
 not delegated the power to the General Government; 2 so 
 astocrimes,overwhichthe State has never parted with its 
 jurisdiction. 3 The State authority over crimes exists till 
 Congress extinguishes it by legislation,* but no offenses 
 committed within the limits of territory purchased with 
 the consent of the State can be punished in the State 
 courts. 5 Congress may relinquish jurisdiction over terri- 
 tory acquired from a State without abandoning the use of 
 the property. 6 The authority over purchased sites binds 
 all the United States, and carries with it the right to 
 make that power effectual,'^ and includes the power of 
 taxation. 8 Tlie inhabitants thereon are not citizens or 
 electors of such States,^ nor are they liable to State taxa- 
 tion on account of such residence. 10 Congress has no ex- 
 clusive jurisdiction over land in a State purchased by a 
 corporation created by act of Congress. ^ Jurisdiction 
 over forts and military reservations in Wyoming is exclu- 
 sive in the Federal Government. 12 
 
 1 Lowrey v. Weaver, 4 McLean, 32. 
 
 2 Ex parte BoUman, 4 Cranch, 75; Ex parte Watkins, 3 Peters, 201; 
 Kendall v. U. S. 12 Peters, 524; Pollard v. Hagan, 3 How. 212. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Bevan, 3 Wheat. 388; U. S. v. Stahl, McCahon, 209; U. S. v. 
 Ames, 1 Wood. <fc M. 80; People v. Godfrey, 17 Johns. 225; Clay v. State, 
 4 Kan. 49; Commonwealth v. Clary, 8 Mass. 75; U. S. v. Sa-coo-da-cot, 1 
 Abb. U. S. 383. 
 
 4 In re O'Connor, 37 Wis. 379; People v. Lent, 2 Wheel. C. C. 548. 
 
 5 Commonwealth v. Clary, 8 Mass. 72 ; IT. S. v. Ames, 1 Wood. & M. 76. 
 
 6 Renner v. Bennett, 21 Ohio St. 431. 
 
 7 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 224. 
 
 8 Loughborough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. 
 
 9 Commonwealth V. Clary, 8 Mass. 72; Sinkst'.Reese, 19 OhioSt. 306. 
 
 10 Webster v. Seymour, 8 Vt. 135. 
 
 11 In re O'Connor, 37 AVis. 379. 
 
 ■ 12 Scott V. IT. S. 1 Wyo. 40; Brown v. Hges, Ilnd. 202. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF COXGRESS. 108 
 
 18 To make all laws lohich shall be necessary and proper for 
 carrying into execution the foregoing poioers, and all other 
 poioers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the 
 United States, or in any department or officer thereof. 
 
 Incidental powers. — Necessity is the test of inci- 
 dental power. 1 This clause is au additional power, and 
 not 9j restriction on the powers of Congress."- The word 
 "necessary" does not mean absolutely necessary, nor 
 does itimi)ly the use of only direct means f "necessary" 
 and "proper" are s^'^nonymous,'^ and require that the 
 means should he appropriate ;5 a reasonable construction 
 to the terms should he given. 6 The choice of means to 
 carry the powers of Government into effect is left to Con- 
 gress, which is allowed a wide discretion, but the means 
 must bear some relation to the fitness of things and to the 
 end to be accomplished.'' There must be some relation be- 
 tween the means and the end,^ though the relationship 
 need not be direct and immediate. ^ If there is any rela- 
 tion of the means to the end, the judiciary is limited to 
 the inquiry whether the use of such means is repugnant 
 to any provision of the Constitution, i** The only limit to 
 the power of Congress in the use of means is that they 
 should be appropriate to the end, and if legitimate they 
 are appropriate. ^i This limitation on the means which 
 may be used is not extended to the powers which are con- 
 ferred. ^2 Construction, for the purpose of conferring a 
 power, should be resorted to with great caution ; where 
 they are expressly given, no other or different means can' 
 be implied. 1*^ The Government has the right to employ 
 freely every means, not prohibited, necessary for the ful- 
 fillment of its duties, or for its preservation. i^ So, pvo- 
 visions in an act of Congress, when necessary and proper, 
 are constitutional, i^ 
 
 1 Anderson, v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 215. 
 
 2 McCuUoch V. Mcaryland, 4 Wheat. 316; U. S. v. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 
 358; Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 215; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 
 27 N. Y. 400; Commonwealth v. Morrison, 2 A. K. Marsh. 75; U. S. w. 
 Marigold, 9 How. 560; Mitchell i;. Steelman, 8 Cal. 363; Dickey v. Turn- 
 pike Co. 7 Dana, 113. 
 
 3 McCuUoch (7. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; U. S. v. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 
 358; Metropolitan Bank ?;. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400; Commonwealth v. 
 Lewis, 6 Binn. 270. 
 
 4 Metropolitan Bank t'. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 5 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316. 
 
 6 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 326; Metropolitan Bank ??. Van Dyck, 
 27 N. Y. 400; Commonwealth v. Morrison, 2 A. K. Marsh. 75. 
 
 7 Fisher v. Blight, 2 Cranch, 396; McCuUoch v. Maryland, 4 Wlieat. 
 316; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 73; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 
 27 N. Y. 400; U. S. v. Marigold, 9 How. 560; Lick v. Faulkner, 25 Cal. 404. 
 
107 powEES OF cOiSTGREss. Art. I, § 8 
 
 8 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457. 
 
 9 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457. But see U. S. v. Bailey, 1 Mc- 
 Lean, 234. 
 
 10 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 11 U. S. V. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 49; U. S. v. Fox, 6 Am. L. R,ep. 188, 
 241. 
 
 12 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 484; 4 Johns. Ch. 150, 175. 
 
 13 Ex parte Beavins, 33 N. H. 89. 
 
 14 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457. 
 
 15 U. S. V. Pusey, 6 Bank. Reg. 285. 
 
 Enumeration of means. — The Constitution does not 
 profess to enumerate tlie means by which the power it 
 confers may be executed. i If tlie means are appropriate 
 the necessity is to be determined by Congress alone. -^ If 
 the Constitution guarantees a right, the National Govern- 
 ment is clothed with authority to enforce it.s It is not 
 limited by the express powers granted, but means are 
 given by just and necessary implication.* One method 
 of enforcement may be applicable to one fundamental 
 right, but not to another. 5 A wide discretion to deter- 
 mine what is necessary was left to Congress. ^ The instru- 
 ments of government are its officers — executive, legisla- 
 tive, and judicial — and public buildings occupied for the 
 use of government.'' The j)Ower of creating a corporation 
 is an incident to the powers expressly given, ^ Congress 
 may make or authorize contracts for services. '^ The i^ower 
 to prescribe an oath of office is an incidental power. ^ 
 Congress may make the United States a preferred cred- 
 itor in cases of insolvency, i^ or may exemi^t from State 
 taxation the means employed by Government in the exer- 
 cise of its powers, ^"-^ as nationarsecurities,i3 or on salaries 
 of public officers, i-i or it may levy a tax on State bank- 
 notes in circulation, ^5 or it may provide for ]3unishment 
 of offenses which olDstruct or prevent commerce, '^ or for 
 bringing into the country counterfeit foreign coins,i7 or it 
 may secure the receipt of pensions free from unreason- 
 able tolls and exactions. is 
 
 1 McCuUoch V. Md. 4 Wheat. 316. 
 
 2 McCuUoch V. Md. 4 Wheat. 316; Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 
 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 3 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 539; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. 
 S.542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 4 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 539; Henry v. Lowell, 16 Barb. 
 268. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 6 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 534; Low v. Centr. Pac. R. R. Co. 52 
 Cal. 63. 
 
 7 Sweatt v. Boston &c. R. R. Co. 5 Bank. Reg. 249. 
 
Art. I, § 8 POWERS OF CONGRESS. 108 
 
 8 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Magill t). Parsons, 4 Conn, 
 317. But see Commonwealth v. Morrison, 2 A. K. Marsh. 75. 
 
 9 Thompsons. Pacific K.R. Co. 9 Wall. 579; U. S.«;. Maurice, 2 Brock, 
 96. 
 
 10 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 11 U. S. V. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 358. 
 
 12 Weston v. Charleston, 2 Peters, 449; Thompson v. Pac. R. R. Co. 9 
 Wall, 579; Bank of Commerce v. Tax Commissioners, 2 Black, 620. 
 
 13 Bank of Commerce v. Tax Commrs. 2 Black, 620; Sweatt v. Boston 
 &c. R. R. Co. 5 Bank. Reg. 249. 
 
 14 Sweatt v. Boston &c. R. R. Co. 5 Bank. Reg. 249, 
 
 15 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 543 ; Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533. 
 
 16 U. S. V. Coombs, 12 Peters, 78. 
 
 17 U, S. V. Marigold, 9 How. 560. 
 
 18 V.S.v. Fairchilds, 1 Abh. U. S. 74; U. S. v. Marks, 2 Abb. U. S. 541. 
 
 Enumeration of means. — Any law not prohibited, 
 and in any degree a means conducive to the execution of 
 any or all of the powers of Congress, comes within this 
 clause, as a law creating a national bank,i or a law fixing 
 the rate of interest to be charged by such banks, ^ or pre- 
 scribing a penalty for taking usurious interest, ^ or making 
 provisions which tend to promote the efficiency of such 
 banks,4 as by providing for the safety of remittances by 
 bills or otherwise.5 If it be necessary to render treasury 
 notes a legal tender for all debts, it may do so.^^ Congress 
 may use all known and appropriate means for effectually 
 collecting and disbursing the revenue," or to i^rotect rev- 
 enue collectors, men in postal service, etc.,8 and in case 
 of the death of the collector to provide that the Govern- 
 ment shall be first paid out of his estate.^ So, Congress 
 has power to create, define, and i3unish crimes or offenses 
 Avhen necessary for effectuating the objects of govern- 
 ment, i" The power to punish is incidental to constitu- 
 tional powers of sovereignty, ^i Congress may make laAvs 
 for carrying into execution all the judgments which the 
 judicial department has power to pronounce ;i2 or may 
 regulate proceedings on execution ;^3 or may delegate to 
 courts the power of altering the proceedhigs ; '■•^ or it may 
 prescribe a limitation for actions for damages done under 
 the authority of the President, i^ When a Territory be- 
 comes a State, Congress may designate the court to which 
 records shall be transferred, and how judgments shall be 
 enforced and re vie wed, ^s 
 
 1 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; McCuUoch v. Md. 4 Wheat, 
 316; ]Metropolitan Bk, v. Van Dyck, 27 N. J. 400. 
 
 2 Central Bk. v. Pratt, 115 Mass. 439. 
 
109 LTivriTATiojs- OF powEKs. Art. I, § 9 
 
 • -ft^ i-F^f,^* ^**- ^^- ^- Garliughouse, 22 Ohio St. 492; Centr. Nat. Bk. v. 
 Pratt, 115 Mass. 546; Farmers' Nat. Bank v. Dearing, 91 U. S. 29 Con- 
 tra, First l^at.Bk. v. l,a.mb, 50 N.Y.65d. 
 
 4 Chesapeake Bk. v. First Nat. Bk. 40 Md. 269. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 358; 1 Wash. C. C. 4. 
 
 oa^-vr^?^?l'''?T°lP 9^?^,^' 12 Wall. 539; Metropolitan Bk. v. Van Dyck, 
 27 N. Y. 400; U. S. v. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 358; 1 Wash. C. C. 4. On contracts 
 made before its passage as well as after, Legal Tender Cases, 12 WaU 
 538, overrulmg Hepburn v. Griswold, 8 Wall. 603. 
 
 7 Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 272; Sweatt v. Boston H. & E. 
 B. E. Co. 5 Bank Reg. 249. 
 
 8 Dugan ?;. U. S. 3 Wheat. 179; U. S. v. Bevans, Ibid. 388; The Ex- 
 o^^^?T^'J branch, 116; 2 Peters, 439; Osborn v. Bk. of U. S. 9 Wheat. 
 366; U. S. V. Tmgey, 5 Peters, 115. 
 
 9 Commonwealth v. Lewis, 6 Binn. 266. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Worrall, 2 Dall. 384; U. S. v. Marigold, 9 How. 560. 
 
 11 McCulloch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316. 
 
 12 Bk. of U. S. V. Halstead, 10 Wheat. 51. 
 
 13 Bk. of U. S. V. Halstead, 10 Wheat. 51. 
 
 Wheat^ir*^ ^' ^^^*^^^^' 1^ Wheat. 1; Bk. of U. S. v. Halstead, 10 
 
 15 Mulligan v. Hovey, 3 Biss. 13. 
 
 16 Hunt V . Palas v. How. 589. 
 
 SECTION 9. 
 Limitation of the powers of Congress. 
 
 1. Migration or importation of persons. 
 
 2. Habeas corpus not to be suspended. 
 
 3. Attainder and ex post facto laws prohibited. 
 
 4. Capitation and direct taxes. 
 
 5. Taxation on exports. 
 
 6. Commercial regulations. 
 
 7. Public moneys and accounts. 
 
 8. Titles of nobility. Presents, oflces, etc. 
 
 Sec. 9. ^The migration or importation of such persons 
 
 as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, 
 
 shall not he prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one 
 
 j thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be 
 
 1 imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for 
 
 I each person. 
 
 \ This section has no application to State governments.! 
 ; It is a limitation on the powers of the General Govern- 
 iment, rather than a grant of power,2 as the possession 
 I of this power during a limited time cannot be admitted 
 I Jo apply to the possession of any other power. 3 Migra- 
 j tion applies to voluntary as well as to involuntary arriv- 
 j als.4 Passengers can never be subject to State laws until 
 lithey become a portion of the population of the State.^ 
 Destt Fed. Con.— lO. 
 
Art. I, § 9 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 110 
 
 As to the legislation by Congress after the period desig- 
 nated, see.6 Exclusive power is vested in Congress siiiee 
 January 1st, 1808.'' 
 
 1 Butler V. Hopper, 1 Wash. C. C. 499. 
 
 2 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 541 ; 45 Mass. 282; Wilson v. U. S. 1 Brock. 
 423; Butler v. Hopper, 1 Wash. C. C. 499; U. S. v. Libby, 1 Wood. & M. 
 235. 
 
 3 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 230. 
 
 4 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 230. 
 
 5 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283; 45 Mass. 282. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Preston, 3 Peters, 65. 
 
 7 Savory v. Caroline, 20 Ala. 19. 
 
 2 The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not he 
 suspended, unless lohen in cases of rebellion or invasio7i the ; 
 public safety may require it. 
 
 The privilege of the writ shall not be suspended, that 
 is, the i^rivilege of having it issued, and the case heard 
 and determined;! the writ means, the writ ad subjicien- 
 dum.^ It is a writ of right,^ the privilege of having judi- 
 cial inquiry made into the cause of imprisonment, and a 
 suspension precludes all further proceedings on a writ 
 issued. 4 The privilege of the writ can only be suspended 
 by act of Congress. ^ The power is given to Congress to 
 suspend the writ in cases of rebellion or invasion, and 
 Congress is the exclusive judge of when the exigency 
 arises, 6 The President cannot suspend the writ, but may 
 be authorized by act of Congress to do so.'^ A statute 
 authorizing the President to suspend the writ, when in his 
 judgment the public safety requires it, is valid. s The 
 Secretary of War has no authority to suspend the privilege 
 of the writ, 9 nor can the commander of a military district. ^^ 
 There is a distinction between the suspension of the writ 
 and the ipso facto suspension which takes place wherever 
 martial law actually exists, n Congress has no power to 
 suspend the issuing of the writ by a State court, i^ but it 
 may provide that an officer shall not be liable for an arrest 
 made during the suspension of the privilege of the writ.i'^ 
 The suspension of the privilege of the writ is an ex^jress 
 permission and direction from Congress to arrest or im- 
 prison all iDersons who may be dangerous to the common 
 weal;!'^ it simply denies to one arrested the privilege to 
 obtain his liberty ; is it does not suspend the duty to issue 
 the writ, 16 but upon its return it will be dismissed witli-j 
 out inquiry into the validity of the arrest. i" Courts will 
 take judicial notice of the close of the Rebellion, and withj 
 
Ill LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 9 
 
 it the end of the suspension of the writ.i^ if the term 
 habeas corpus had a well-known meaning, the Convention 
 had reference to that meaning in framing the Constitu- 
 tion.19 
 
 1 Macready v. Wilcox, 33 Conn. 321. 
 
 2 The Santisslma Trinidad. 7 Wheat. 305; Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 
 29; Lnther v. Borden, 7 How. 1 ; Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 615; Cross v. 
 Harrison, 10 How. 189. 
 
 3 Yates v. Lansing, 5 Johns. 282. 
 
 4 Ex parte Fagan, 2 Sprague, 91 ; Ex parte Dunn, 25 How. Pr. 467. 
 
 5 Ex parte BoUman, 4 Cranch, 75; Ex parte Merryman, Tanev, 267; 
 24 Law Rep. 78 ; Jones v. Seward, 3 Grant, 431 ; Griffin v. Wilcox, 21 Ind, 
 370; In re Kemp, 16 Wis. 359. But see McQuillan's Case, 9 Pitts. L. Int. 
 27; 27 Law Rep. 129; Ex parte Field, 5 Blatchf. 82. 
 
 6 Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 19; Ex parte Merryman, Taney, 246; 24 
 Law Rep. 78; McCall v. McDowell, Deady, 233; 1 Abb. U. S. 212; Ex 
 parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 115. 
 
 7 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 114. 
 
 8 McCall V. McDowell, Deady, 233; 1 Abb. U. S. 212; In re Oliver, 17 
 ' Wis. 681. 
 
 9 Ex parte Field, 5 Blatchf. 63. 
 
 10 Ex parte Field, 5 Blatchf. 63 ; Johnson v. Dmican, 3 Mart. 530. 
 
 11 In re Kemp, 16 Wis. 359. 
 
 I) 12 Griffin v. Wilcox, 21 Ind. 370; Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238. 
 
 I 13 McCall V, McDowell, Deady, 233; 1 Abb. U. S. 212. 
 
 14 McCall V. McDoweU, Deady, 233; 1 Abb. U. S. 212. 
 
 15 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 115. 
 
 16 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 130. 
 
 17 Kulp t). Ricketts, 3 Grant, 420; Vallandigham's Trial, 259; 1 Wall. 
 ;243. 
 
 18 Cozzens v. Frink, 13 Am. L. R. 700. 
 
 19 Calder v. Bull, 3 Wall. 386 ; Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 88 ; Carpen- 
 ter i;. Pemisylvania, 17 How. 456; U. S. v. Wilson, 7 Peters, 150; U. S. v. 
 Harris, 1 Abb. U. S. 115. 
 
 ^No hill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed. 
 
 A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts 
 punishment without a judicial trial, i It may inflict the 
 1 punishment absolutely or conditionally. 2 If the terms 
 ■ "bill of attainder" and "ex post facto" had a well-known 
 i ineaning at the time of framing the Constitution, the Con- 
 tention had reference to that meaning.^ A constitution 
 requiring expurgation by a provision for a stringent test- 
 Dath, is a bill of attainder.^ So, a provision in a statute 
 I for a stringent test -oath, operating the exclusion from 
 jiany profession or avocation of life for past conduct, is a 
 j' punishment for such conduct, and partakes of the nature 
 
Art. I. § 9 lilMITATIOK OF POWERS. 112 
 
 of a bill of pains and penalties, and subject to the consti- 
 tutional inhibitions as^alaw excluding from practice at- 
 torneys at law who participated in the late Rebellion. ^ A 
 bill of attainder may affect the life of an individual, or 
 may confiscate his property, or both,' A statute which 
 makes the non-payment of taxes evidence of participation 
 in rebellion and forfeits the land absolutely, is a bill of 
 attainder; « but not a statute providing for a forfeiture for 
 a violation of the revenue law;^ nor a statute imposing a 
 forfeiture of citizenship for continuance of desertion after 
 IDroclamation and trial by court-martial to enforce the 
 penalty. 1° A provision exempting an officer from action 
 for acts done by order of lawful military superiors is not 
 a bill of attainder.il 
 
 1 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277; Ex parte Garland, Ibid. 333; In 
 re De Giacomo, 12 Blatclif . 401. 
 
 2 Gaines v. Buf ord, 1 Dana, 510. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Harris, 1 Abb. U. S. 115; Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; U. S. 
 V. Wilson, 7 Peters, 150; Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 88; Carpenter v. 
 Pennsylvania, 17 How. 456. 
 
 4 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277. 
 
 5 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 333; Pierce v. Carokadon, 16 Wall. 234; 
 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 320; KJueger v. Missouri, 13 Wall. 257. 
 
 6 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 333. 
 
 7 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Crancli, 138. 
 
 8 Martin v. Snowden, 18 Gratt. 100. 
 
 9 U. S. V. A Distillery, 2 Abb. U. S. 192. 
 
 10 Gotcbens v. Matheson, 40 How. Pr. 97; 58 Barb. 152. 
 
 11 Drebman v. Stefle, 8 Wall. 595. 
 
 Ex post facto laws. — Every law which makes an 
 act innocent before the law a crime, and iDunishes, or that 
 aggravates a crime, and makes it greater than it was when 
 committed, or that enhances the j)unishment, or that pro- 
 vides for less evidence for conviction, is an ex post facto 
 law;i so, a statute which attempts to validate a punish- 
 ment which would otherwise be illegal is an ex post facto 
 law;2 so, a statute excluding a person from the practice 
 of his profession for acts committed prior to the passage 
 thereof is an ex post facto law.3 But a statute making 
 treasury notes a legal tender is not an ex post facto law;* 
 nor a statute which imposes forfeiture of citizenship for 
 continuance of desertion after assurance of j)ardon;5 nor 
 a treaty for extradition of criminals, although it provides 
 for crimes antecedently committed. ^ This provision ap- 
 plies only to criminal laws.^ An act of Congress protect- 
 ing from civil process persons amenable to prosecution is 
 not unconstitutional. 8 
 
113 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 9 
 
 1 Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 390; Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87; Cum- 
 mingsv. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277; Shepherd v. People, 25 N. Y.406: Lapeyre 
 V. U. S. 17 Wall. 206; Carpenter v. Pemisylvania, 17 How. 563. 
 
 2 In re Murphy, 1 Woolw. 141. 
 
 3 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 333; Ex parte Law, 35 Ga. 285; Ex parte 
 Baxter, 14 Am. L. Keg. 159. 
 
 4 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400. 
 
 5 Gotchens v. Matheson, 40 How. Pr. 97; 58 Barb. 152. ^ 
 
 6 Ex parte De Giacoino, 12 Blatchf. 391. 
 
 7 Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 390; Fletcher u. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87; Ogden v. 
 Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Satterlee v. Matthewson, 2 Peters, 380; Wat- 
 son u. Mercer, 8 Peters. 110; Carpenter v. Pennsylvania, 17 How. 463; 
 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 333; Locke v. New Orleans, 4 Wall. 172; 
 Society for Prop, of Gosp. v. Whe€?er, 2 Gall. 105; U. S. v. Hall, 6 
 Cranch, 171; 2 Wash. C.C. 366; Commonwealth v. Lewis, 6 Binn. 271; 
 U. S. V. Hughes, 21 Int. Rev. Rec. 84; Thompson v. Alger, 12 Met. 428: 
 McCormick v. Pickering, 4 N. Y. 276; Baugher v. Nelson, 9 Ga. 299; 
 Bridgeport v. HubbeD, 5 Conn. 240. 
 
 8 In re Murphy, Woolw. 148. 
 See Art. I, Sec. 10, (1) and note. 
 
 ^No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in 
 proportion to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed 
 to be taken. 
 
 A capitation tax is a direct tax,i "direct taxes" 
 compreliending only capitation taxes and taxes on lands, 
 and perhaps taxes on personal property by general valu- 
 ation and assessment.'-^ A tax on income is not a capita- 
 tion or other direct tax.s A tax on bank circulation is 
 not a direct tax,^ nor a tax on the business of an insur- 
 ance company,^ nor a tax on carriages kept for private 
 use. 6 Direct taxes must be laid by the rule of apportion- 
 ment. 7 
 
 1 Hylton V. U. S. 3 Dall. 171. 
 
 2 Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533; Loughborough v. Blake, 5 
 Wheat. 317; Hylton v. U. S. 3 Dall. 171. 
 
 3 Clark V. Sickel, 14 Int. Rev. Rec. 6; Smedberry v. Bentley, 21 Ibid. 
 .4 Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533. 
 
 5 Pacific Ins. Co. v. Soule, 7 Wall. 433. 
 
 6 Hylton v. U. S. 3 Dall. 171. 
 
 7 License Tax Cases, 5 Wall. 471. 
 See Article 1, Sec. 2, (3). 
 
Art. I, § 9 LIMITATIOiSr OF POWERS. 114 
 
 ^ JVo tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any 
 State. 
 
 The po"wer of Congress to interfere with exports is 
 taken away by this provision. i A charge for a stamp on 
 a package of tobacco intended for export, made as a means 
 to prevent fraud, is not a tax on exports. 2 A statute reg- 
 ulating commercial intercourse wiih the insurrectionary 
 States and imposing duties tliereon, is valid. ^ 
 
 1 Hylton V. U. S. 3 Dall. 171 ; U. S. v. Tlie William, 2 HaU's L. J. 255. 
 
 2 Pace V. Burgess, 92 U. S. 372. 
 
 3 Folsom V. U. S. 4 Ct. CI. 366. 
 
 ^No preference shall he given by any regulation of com- 
 inierce or revenue to the ports of one State over those of an- 
 other ; nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one State, be 
 obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another. 
 
 Congress is restrained from fostering or oppressing 
 one port, or the commerce of one State, to the end of de- 
 stroying equality and uniformity as to levies of contribu- 
 tions from foreign commerce.^ The privileges and im- 
 munities to vessels entering or clearing from the ports of 
 a State must be common and equal in all the ports of the 
 several States.^ The provision is a limitation on the 
 power of Congress to regulate commerce ;3 it was intended 
 to prevent vessels from being obliged to enter, clear, or 
 pay duties in any State other than that to or from which 
 they should be bound. ^ What is forbidden is not discrim- 
 ination between individual ports within the same or dif- 
 ferent States, but discrimination between States, as Con- 
 gress may make a i^ort in one State a port of entry, while 
 it refuses to make a port in another State a port of entry.^ 
 It does not apply to incidental advantages resulting from 
 legislation connected with commerce. 6 It does not affect 
 the States in the regulation of their domestic affairs r^ as 
 to a State tax upon an article brought into the State from 
 another State ;« or a tax upon capital invested in ships ;^ 
 or a tax on money, although it is continuously invested 
 in cotton purchased for exportation j^o \)jxt it is a prohibi- 
 tion upon the State to destroy, by legislation, the com- 
 mercial equality between the States. ^ This clause is not 
 a restriction upon the legislation of the States in the reg- 
 ulation of their internal police, as in the inspection of 
 vessels. 12 So, State pilot laws are not in conflict, because 
 
115 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 9 
 
 they neither give a preference of one port over another, 
 nor require vessels to pay duties. is "Of anotlier" and 
 " duties on another," relate to commerce and naviga- 
 tion. i4 
 
 1 Munn V. Illinois, 94 111. 113; State v. Charleston, 10 Ricli. 240 
 
 2 Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & B. Br. Co. IS How. 421. 
 
 3 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283; 45 Mass. 282; Alexander v. R. R. Co. 
 3 Strob. 594. 
 
 4 U. S. V. The William, 2 Hall's L. J. 255. 
 
 5 Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & B. Br. Co. 18 How. 421 
 
 6 Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & B. Br. Co. 18 How. 421. 
 
 7 Munn v. Illinois, 94 111. 113 ; Baker v. Wise. 16 G-ratt. 139. 
 
 8 State V. Charleston, 10 Rich. 240. 
 
 9 State V. Charleston, 10 Rich. 240. 
 
 10 People V. Tax Commissioners, 17 N. Y. Supr. 255. 
 
 11 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283; 45 Mass. 282; Alexanders. R. R. Co 
 3 Strot). 594. 
 
 12 Baker v. Wise, 16 Gratt. 139. 
 
 13 Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299 ; Pennsylvania v. Wlieeling & 
 B. Br. Co. 18 How. 421. 
 
 14 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. 
 
 ■^ N'o money shall be drawn from the treasury hut in con- 
 sequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular 
 statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all 
 public money shall be published from time to tim.e. 
 
 Anonymous, 3 Opin. Att. Gen. 13. 
 
 8 jVo title of nobility shall be granted by the United States : 
 And no person holding any office of profit or trust under 
 them shall, loithout the consent of the Congress, accept of any 
 present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, 
 from any king, prince, or foreign State. 
 
 A marshal of the United States cannot at the same 
 time hold the ofiSce of commercial agent of a foreign 
 nation. 
 
 6 Opin. Att.-Gen. 4C9. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWEES. 116 
 
 Sec. 10. ^JSfo State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, 
 or confederation ; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin 
 money; emit bills' of credit; make anything but gold and 
 silver coin a tender in payment of debts; 23ciss any bill of 
 attainder, ex post facto laio, or law impairing the obligation 
 of contracts; or grant any title of nobility. 
 
 Secession and confederation.— The Union of the 
 States is perpetual and indissoluble, i A State has no right 
 to secede. 2 "The Ordinance of Secession and all acts to 
 give it effect are null and void." It did not annul or re- 
 peal the constitution and laws then in force ; '^ nor did it 
 suspend or destroy the existence of the State government. 
 It continues to exist dejicre, and its acts are as valid and' 
 binding as if no attempt at secession had been made.^ 
 A State can have no political existence outside and inde- 
 pendent of the Constitution of the United States, o The 
 attempt of a State to separate from the Union does not 
 destroy its identity as a State, nor free it from the bind- 
 ing force of the Constitution of the United States.'^ The 
 Ordinance of Secession did not abrogate the Constitution 
 nor release citizens from their obligation of loyalty to the 
 Government of the United States, s The constitutioual 
 obligations and duties of a State are not affected by its 
 vebellion.9 At no time were the rebellious States out of the 
 Union. 10 There is no law, State or National, by which the 
 Government of the United States is bound to recognize 
 as valid the public or political action of a State engaged 
 in rebellion.il The constitution in force before the Or- 
 dinance of Secession continues in force after the over- 
 throw of the Rebellion,!^ and statutes adoi^ted by a law- 
 ful government will be deemed valid, is The govern- 
 ment of a rebellious State is not a de facto government.!^ 
 Acts in furtherance of rebellion are void;i5 but acts 
 necessary to peace and good government are valid, i^ All 
 acts of a State in rebellion are binding upon the State, 
 except such as were in aid of the Rebellion. i" Statutes 
 intended to promote good order and welfare may be en- 
 forced. i*^ When a State by her acts sets aside her State 
 government, and constitutes and establishes a new one, 
 connected with another so-called central government^ her 
 practical relations to the Union were suspended; but they 
 did not for a moment effect a separation from the Union. i9 
 The late so-called Confederate government never reached 
 the dignity of a de facto government, and was without 
 the authority to coin money, emit bills of credit, etc.^'^ 
 The government of the Confederation had no existence, 
 except as organized treason. 21 It was not a de facto gov- 
 
117 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 ernment in the sense that its acts are entitled to judicial 
 recognition as valid.22 It could not divest any right or 
 property of the United States.23 It had no right to se- 
 questrate the property of a citizen of the United States 
 as an " alien euemy."24 it could not take, hold, or convey 
 a valid title to property, real or personal.^^ The acts of 
 confiscation of the Confederate government were null and 
 void. 26 The State is not liable for services rendered to a, 
 rebellious government. 27 All contracts made in and of 
 the Rebellion are void.28 An obligation incurred by a 
 corporation in aid of the Rebellion cannot be enforced.29 
 Notes and bonds issued by a State while in rebellion are 
 not binding.30 Bonds and treasury notes of the Confeder- 
 ate States are not enforceable. 3i Treasury notes issued 
 by a State in aid of rebellion are void.32 Charters granted 
 by a State in rebellion are void.^s 
 
 1 Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700. 
 
 2 White V. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; Sequestration Cases, 30 Tex. 688: 
 Chancely v. Bailey. 37 Ga. 532; Cent. K. R. Co. v. Ward, 37 Ga. 515; Hood 
 V. Maxwell, 1 W. Va. 219. 
 
 3 Keith V. Clark, 97 U. S. 461; Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700; Pennywit 
 V Foote,27OhioSt.600; U. S.?;. Cathcart,l Bond, 556; U. S.-y. Morrison, 
 Chase, 521. 
 
 4 Harlan v. State, 41 Miss. 566. 
 
 5 Hawkins v. Filkins, 24 Ark. 286; White v. Cannon, 6 WaU. 443; 
 Harlan v. St. 41 Miss. 566; St. v. Sears, Phill. N. C. 146. 
 
 6 Penn v. Tollison, 26 Ark. 545. 
 
 7 Keith v. Clark, 97 U. S. 451. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Cathcart, 1 Bond, 556. 
 
 9 White V. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; Homestead Cases, 23 Gratt. 266. 
 
 10 White V. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; Keith v. Clark, 97 U. S. 461. 
 
 11 Thompson •;;. Mankin, 26 Ark. 586. 
 
 12 Scruggs V. HuntsviUe, 45 Ala. 220; President v. State, Ibid. 399. 
 
 13 Reynolds v. Taylor, 43 Ala. 420. 
 
 14 Penn v. Tollison, 26 Ark. 545; Thompson v. Mankin, 26 Ark. 586, 
 Thomas v. Taylor, 42 Miss. 651. 
 
 15 Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700 ; Hatch v. Burroughs, 1 Woods, 439. 
 
 16 Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700; Sequestration Cases, 30 Tex. 688; 
 Chappell V. Williamson, 49 Ala. 153; Cook v. Oliver, 1 Woods, 437. 
 
 17 Keith v. Clark, 97 U. S. 465; Horn v. Lockhart, 17 Wall. 570; Sprott 
 v.U. S. 20 Wall. 459; Home Ins. Co. v. U. S. 8 Ct. CI. 449; Watson v. 
 Stone, 40 Ala. 451. 
 
 18 Hill V. Boyland, 40 Miss. 618; Buchanan v. Smith, 43 Miss. 90; Wal- 
 lace V. State, 33 Tex. 445. 
 
 19 Shortridge v. Macon, Chase, 136. 
 
 20 McCracken v. Poole, 19 La. An. 359; Bailey v. Milner, 35 Ga. 330; 
 Thornburg v. Harris, 3 Cold. 157. 
 
 21 Sprott V. U. S. 20 Wall. 459. 
 
Art. I, § 10 TilMITATION OF POWERS. 118 
 
 22 Keppel v. Petersburg R. R. Co. Chase, 167. 
 
 23 U. S. V. Kechler, 9 Wall. 83. 
 
 24 Central &c. E,. R. Co. v. Ward, 37 Ga. 515; Sequestration Cases, 30 
 Tex. 688; Vance v. Burtis, 39 Tex. 88; Knox v. Lee, 12 Wall. 457: Short- 
 ridge V. Macon, Chase, 136. 
 
 25 Sprott V. U. S. 20 Wall. 459. 
 
 26 Keppel v. Petersburg <frc. R. R. Co. Chase, 167; Penn. v. ToUison, 
 26 Ark. 545; Thompson v. Mankia, 26 Ark. 586; Timms v. Grace, 26 Ark. 
 598; Perdicaris v. Charleston Gas Lt. Co. Chase, 435. 
 
 27 Buck V. Yasser, 47 Miss. 551 ; Chisholm v. Colman, 43 Ala. 204. 
 
 28 Keith v. Clark, 97 U. S. 464; Hanauer v. Doane, 12 Wall. 342. 
 
 29 Bibb V. Commrs. 44 Ala. 119; Evans v. Richmond, Chase, 551, 
 
 30 Hanauer v. Woodruff, 15 Wall. 439; Thomas v. Taylor, 42 Miss. 651; 
 Leak v. Commrs. 64 N. C. 132; Rand v. State, 65 N. C. 194. 
 
 31 Ray V. Thompson, 43 Ala. 434; Irvine v. Armstead, 46 Ala. 333; 
 Martin v. Hewitt, 44 Ala. 418; Texas v. Hardenberg, 10 Wall. 68. 
 
 32 Thomas v. Taylor, 42 Miss. 651. 
 
 33 U. S. V. Home Ins. Co. 22 AVall. 99. 
 
 Bills of credit. — A bill of credit is a paper issued by 
 a sovereign power, containing a pledge of its faith, and 
 designed to circulate as money. ^ It must be issued by a 
 State on its faith and credit, designed to circulate as 
 money,2 receivable for all debts and taxes, salaries and 
 fees,8 and although it is not made a legal tender.* The 
 emission is a bill of credit if the intention is to create a 
 currency. 5 The intent is the intent of the legislature, to 
 be deduced from its acts alone. '^ It may comprehend any 
 instrument by which the State engages to pay money at a 
 future day," and may cover a certificate of debt^ or notes 
 of a State bank.^ A State cannot, by indirect means, or 
 any device, emit bills of credit, i*' Instruments executed, 
 binding a State to pay money at a future day for services 
 rendered or for money borrowed, are not bills of credit ;ii 
 nor is a treasury note issued as evidence of a loan, if not 
 intended as a circulating medium ;i'2 nor an auditor's war- 
 rant issued according to law for the payment of a demand 
 against the State. i^ States may incorporate banks, and 
 their notes are not bills of credit,^* not even if the State 
 pledges its credit for their payment, i^ nor though the 
 bank is owned by the State, and the officers give bonds to 
 the State for the faithful performance of their duties. i6 
 Where a State becomes a stockholder it imparts none of 
 its sovereignty to the corporation, i'^ States and municipal 
 corporations may borrow money and give proper securi- 
 ties therefor; is so, a State may authorize a municipal cor- 
 poration to issue certificates of indebtedness,i'J or treasury 
 notes made receivable for all debts due, and to pledge it's 
 
119 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 real estate for their redemption, -o but certificates of in- 
 debtedness for the payment of current exijenses to be re- 
 ceivable for all State taxes, etc., are bills of credit, and 
 void.2i Confederate notes were not bills of credit.-^ 
 The State governments organized by force in the Rebel- 
 lion could not emit bills of credit. 23 A bill of credit is 
 not a good consideration for a contract. ^•i 
 
 1 Craig V. Missouri, 4 Peters, 431; Briscoe v. Bk. of Ky. 11 Peters. 
 257; Woodruft" v. Trapiiall, 10 How. 190; Bailey v. Milner, 1 Abb. U. S, 
 263; City Bk. v. Mahan, 21 La. An. 751; State v. Compt. Gen. 4 S. C. 185; 
 Auditor v. Treasurer, Ibid. 311. 
 
 2 Curran v. Arkansas, 15 How. 304; 12 Ark. 321; Indiana v. Woram, 
 6 Hill, 33. 
 
 3 Craig v. Missouri, 4 Peters, 431 ; In re Milner, 1 Bank Keg. 107. 
 
 4 Craig v. Missouri, 4 Peters. 431; Byrne v. Missouri, 8 Peters, 40; 
 Billis V. State,2McCord, 12; McFarland v. State Bank, 4 Ark. 44. 
 
 5 State V. Hoge, 4 Ricb. (N. S.) 185; State v. Auditor, Ibid. 311 ; Craig 
 V. Missouri, 4 Peters, 431. 
 
 6 Payaud v. State, 13 Miss. 491. 
 
 7 Craig v. Missouri, 4 Peters, 410; Byrne v. Missouri, 8 Peters, 40. 
 
 8 Craig V. Missouri, 4 Peters, 410; Byrne v. Missouri, 8 Peters. 40. 
 But see State v. Cardozo, 5 Kich. (N. S.) 297. 
 
 9 Briscoe v. Bank of Ky. 11 Peters, 257; Darrington v. Bank of Ala- 
 bama, 13 How. 12. 
 
 10 Briscoe v. Bank of Ky. 11 Peters, 341, explaining Bank of Ky. v. 
 Wister, 2 Peters, 318; Bank v. Clarke, 4 Mo. 59; Griffith v. Bank, 4 
 Mo. 255. 
 
 11 Craig V. Missouri, 4 Peters, 410 ; Payaud v. State, 13 Miss. 491, 
 
 12 Green v. Sizer, 40 Miss. 530. 
 
 13 Payaud v. State, 13 Miss. 491. 
 
 14 Briscoe v. Bank of Ky. 11 Peters, 431; Woodruif v. Trapnall, 10 
 How. 190; Darrington v. Bank of Ala. 13 How. 12; Curran v. Arkansas, 
 15 How. 304; Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 553; Owen v. Branch Bank, 
 3 Ala. 258; McFarland v. State Bank, 4 Ark. 44; Bank v. Spilman, 3 
 Dana, 150; Lampton v. Bank, 2 Litt. 300; Billis v. State, 2 McCord, 12: 
 Craighead v. Bank, 1 Meigs. 199; State v. Calvin, K. M. Charlt. 151. Ana 
 see Vermont Bank v. Porter, 5 Day, 316. 
 
 15 Darrington v. Bank of Alabama, 13 How. 16. 
 
 16 Billis V. State, 2 McCord, 12. Contra, Linn v. State Bank, 3 111. 87. 
 
 17 Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, 1 Peters, 257; 7 J. J. Marsh. 349; 
 Woodruff V. Trapnall, 10 How. 190; 8 Ark. 236; Darrington v. Branch 
 Bank of Alabama, 13 How. 12; Owen v. Branch Bank, 3 Ala. 258; Mc- 
 Farland?;. State Bank, 4 Ark. 44; Central Bank v. Little, 11 Ga. 34b; 
 Billis V. State, 2 McCord, 12. 
 
 18 McCoy V. Washington Co. 3 Wall. Jr. 381. 
 
 19 Mayor v. State, 15 Md. 376; Smith v. New Orleans, 23 La. An. 5; 
 Delafield v. Illinois, 26 Wend. 192. 
 
 20 Smith v. New Orleans, 23 La. An. 5. And see State v. Cardozo. 5 S. 
 C. 297. 
 
 21 City National Bank v. Mahan, 21 La. An. 751. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. _ 120 
 
 22 Bailey v. Milner, 35 Ga. 330. 
 
 23 McCracken v. Poole, 19 La. An. 359; In re Milner, 1 Bank. Reg. 107. 
 
 24 Craig V. Missouri, 4 Peters, 431; Bank v. Clark, 4 Mo. 59; Linn v. 
 State Bank, 5 lU. 87. 
 
 Legal tender. — A statute making bank-notes, or any- 
 thing but gold and silver, a legal tender, is unconstitu- 
 tional,! or a statute requiring a bank to receive its own 
 notes in payment of the note of another bank,^ or a statute 
 authorizing the tender of the scrip of a corporation for 
 taxes or assessments,^ or a statute which provides for a 
 stay of execution unless the creditor accepts payment 
 in State bank paper. ^ This clause does not oblige States 
 to pass tender laws.^ A State may establish banks, pro- 
 hibit the circulation of foreign notes, and determine in 
 what the public dues may be paid.^ 
 
 1 Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, 11 Peters, 257; 7 J. J. Marsh. 349; 
 Lowry v. McGhee, 8 Yerg. 242; Edwards v. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 606. 
 
 2 Bank of States v. Bank of Cape Fear, 13 Ired. 75. 
 
 3 Gaines v. Hives, 8 Ark. 220 ; State v. Beackmo, 8 Blackf . 246. 
 
 4 Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, 11 Peters, 257; 7 J. J. Marsh. 340; 
 Townsend v. Townsend, Peck, 1 ; Bailey v. Gentry, 1 Mo. 164. 
 
 5 Van Husan v. Kanouse, 13 Mich. 303. 
 
 6 Woodruff V. Trapnall, 10 How. 190; 8 Ark. 236; Bush v. Shipman, 5 
 HI. 186; Paup V. Drew. 10 How. 218: 9 Ark. 205; Trigg v Drew, 10 How. 
 224. 
 
 Bill of attainder.— A bill of attainder is a legislative 
 act which inflicts punishment without a judicial trial, ab- 
 solutely or conditionally,! and any deprivation or suspen- 
 sion of any inalienable right is punishment.'-^ A State law 
 which deprives a jjarty of the jarivilege of enforcing a con- 
 tract on account of acts previously done is a bill of attain- 
 der,3 or a State law which deprives a party of the right to 
 pursue an avocation unless he takes an expurgatory oath 
 of freedom from guilt for past offenses,^ as a disqualifica- 
 tion of all teachers and clergymen who took part in the, 
 late Rebellion, 5 or a statute depriving of a right to rehear- 
 ing in an attachment suit unless he will take an oath that 
 he has not theretofore done certain acts, is a bill of attain- 
 der. 6 But if a party by a statute is not precluded from 
 asserting a title or enforcing a right, it is not a bill of at- 
 tainder.'^ So, where a right is the creature of the organic 
 law of a State, the State may require an expurgatory oath 
 that he has not done a certain act before he may be allowed 
 the exercise of that right, as the right to vote,« or the right 
 to practice law.^ A statute of indemnity for acts done 
 under military authority during the Civil War is not a bill 
 of attainder. 10 
 
121 LIMITATION OF POWEKS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 1 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277; 36 Mo. 263. 
 
 2 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277 ; 36 Mo. 263. 
 
 3 McNealy v. Gregory, 13 Fla. 417. 
 
 4 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277; 36 Mo. 263; Murphy's Case, 41 
 Mo. 339; State I?. Heighland, 41 Mo. 338. But see State v. Garsche, 36 
 Mo. 256. 
 
 5 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277 ; 36 Mo. 263. 
 
 6 Pierce v. Carskadon, 16 Wall. 234; Kyie v. Jenkins, 6 West Va. 371; 
 Ross V. Jenkins, 7 Ibid. 284; Lynch v. Hoffman, Ibid. 553. 
 
 7 Drehman v. Stifle, 3 Wall. 595; 41 Mo. 184. 
 
 8 Anderson?;. Baker, 23 Md. 531; Blair «. Eidgley,41 Mo. 63; State 
 V. Neal, 42 Mo. 119; Randolph v. Good, 3 West Va. 551. 
 
 9 Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 333; Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 379. 
 10 Dreliman v. Stifle, 8 Wall. 595; 41 Mo. 184; Clark v. Dick, 1 DiU. 8; 
 
 Smith V. Owen, 42 Mo. 508 ; State v. Gatzweiller, 49 Mo. 18; Hess v 
 Johnson, 3 West Va. 645. 
 
 See Ante, Art. 1, Sec. 9, (3). 
 
 Ex post facto laws.— The prohibition as to ex post 
 facto laws means that a State shall not pass laws after a 
 fact done by a subject or citizen, which shall have relation 
 to such fact, and shall punish him for liaving done It.i It 
 is not intended to prohibit the passage of retrospective 
 laws, but only ex 2^0 st facto laws.^ The words ex x>ost facto 
 are not applicable to civil laws, which may be retro- 
 spective.^ A statute, to come within this i^rohibition, must 
 not only be retroactive, but must retroact by way of pun- 
 ishment. * So, if a new statute provides for a remission of 
 part of a sentence it is not liable to objection, ° nor if it 
 mitigates the punishment. ^ Tlie words ex post facto relate 
 exclusively to penal laws,'^ and such a law is one which 
 renders an act punishable which was not punishable at 
 the time it was committed ; ^ or which renders an act pun- 
 ishable in a manner different from when it was com- 
 mitted ; 9 or which changes the punishment after convic- 
 tion for the offense ; ^^ or which aggravates the punish- 
 ment by a law posterior to the commission of the offense, ^^ 
 or which adds a new punishment or increases an old one, 
 for an offense committed before its adoption. ^'^ A statute 
 which alters the legal rules of evidence and prescribes 
 less or different testimony for conviction than the law re- 
 quired at the time of tlie commission of the offense is an 
 ex post facto laio; i^ so, a statute repealing an amnesty act 
 is an ex post facto law; i^ so, a statute allowing a divorce 
 for an act which was no ground for a divorce at the time 
 it was committed, is an ex post facto law;is so, a statute 
 suspending the right of a party engaged in rebellion to 
 continue or prosecute a suit, is an ex post facto law.i^ A 
 statute which provides that a party the second time con- 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— li. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATIO^f OF POWERS. 122 
 
 victed of petit larceny is to be deemed guilty of a felony, 
 is not exx>ost facto; i^ so, a law changing the forms of pro- 
 cedure by which persons accused of crime are to be tried 
 for offenses committed before the law was passed, is not 
 ex post facto. '^^ A statute may make the breach of a pre- 
 existing contract criminal, although it was before only 
 subject to a suit for damages. i9 A law increasing costs 
 on conviction in criminal cases is ex post facto.-^ A stat- 
 ute adding penalties and instituting new methods of i3ro- 
 ceeding cannot be applied to prior offenses. ^^ 
 
 1 Calcler v. Bull, 3 Dall. 3S6; Cummings v. Missouri, 4 "WaU. 277; 36 
 Mo. 263. 
 
 2 "Watson r. Mercer, 8 Peters, 109; Albee v. Mav, 2 Paine, 74; Tate 
 V. Stoolzfoos, 16 Ser?. & R. 35; Sedstwick v. Bunker, 16 Kans. 498; Tilton 
 V. Swift, 40 Iowa, 78; Baldwin v. Newark, 38 N. J. 158; Lane v. Nelson, 
 79 Pa. St. 407; Calder r. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; Buckner v. Street, 1 Dill. 254; 
 Kandall v. Kreiger, 2 Dill. 444; Milner v. Huber, 3 McLean, 217; 
 Bloomer v. Stollev, 5 McLean, 165; Johnston v. Van Dyke, 6 McLean, 
 441; Holman v. Bank of NorfoUc, 12 Ala. 369. 
 
 3 Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 109; Locke v. N. O. 4 Wall. 173; Rich 
 V. Flanders, 39 N. H. 304. 
 
 4 Hartung v. People, 22 N. Y. 103; State v. Paul, 5 R. 1. 190; State v. 
 Keeran, 5 R. I. 497. 
 
 5 Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Crancli, 137; State v. 
 • Arlin, 39 N. H. 179; Hartung v. People, 22 N. Y. 95. 
 
 6 Turner v. State, 40 Ala. 21; Commonwealth v. Gardner, 77 Mass. 
 438; State v. Arlin, 39 N. H. 179; State v. Kent, 65 N. C. 311. 
 
 7 Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 109; Carpenter v. Pennsylvania, 17 
 How. 456; Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 390; Lock v. New Orleans, 4 Wall. 
 172 ; Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 390 ; 2 Root. 352 ; Bridgeport v. Hubbell, 5 Conn. 
 240; Elliott v. Mayfield, 4 Ala. 417; Holman w.^ank of Norfolk, 12 Ala. 
 379; Bridgeport r. Hubbell, 5 Conn. 240; Wilder v. Lumpkin, 4 Ga. 209; 
 Boston V. Cummings, 16 Ga. 102; Aldridge v. T. C. &e. R. R. Co. 2 Stew. 
 & P. 199; Bloodgodd V. Carnack, 5 Stew. & P. 276. 
 
 8 Fletcher v. Peck. 6 Cranch, 87; Cummings v. Missoru'i, 4 Wall. 332; 
 Matter of Dorsey, 5 R. 1. 190; Gut v. State, 9^VaU. 38. 
 
 9 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 138; Hartiuig v. People, 22 N. Y. 95; 
 Shepherd v. People, 25 N. Y. 406; State v. McDonald, 20 Minn. 136 
 
 10 Haitung r. People, 22 N. Y. 95. 
 
 11 Dickinson V. Dickinson, 3 Murph. 327; Shepherd v. People, 25 N. 
 Y. 406; U. S. v. Gilbert, 2 Sum. 101. 
 
 12 Wilson V. O. & M. R. R. Co. 64 HI. 542; Ross v. Riley, 19 Mass. 165; 
 State V. Salomons, Riley, 99; Hartung v. People, 22 N. Y. 95; 26 N. Y. 167. 
 
 13 Hart v. State, 40 Ala. 32; State v. Bond, 4 Jones N. C. 9; State v. 
 Johnson, 12 Minn. 476. 
 
 14 State?;. Reith, 63N. C. 140. 
 
 15 Dickinson v. Dickinson, 3 Murph. 327. Contra, Carson v. Carson, 
 40 Miss. 349. 
 
 16 Davis r. Pierce, 7 Minn. 13; Keough v. McNitt, Ibid. 30; McFar- 
 land V. Butler, 8 Minn. 116; Jackson v. Butler, Ibid. 117; Wilcox v. Da- 
 vis, 7 Mimi. 23; Vernon v. Benson, 24 Ark. 242. 
 
 17 Ex parte Gutierrez, 45 Gal. 430; Kand v. Commonwealth, 9 Gratt. 
 738. 
 
123 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 18 People V. Mortimer, 46 Cal. 114. 
 
 19 Blann v. State, 39 Ala. 353. 
 
 20 Caldwell v. State, 55 Ala. 133. 
 
 21 Miles V. State, 40 Ala. 39; Moore v. State, Ibid. 49: Stephens v. 
 State, Ibid. 67; Miller v. State, Ibid. 54. 
 
 See Ante, Art. 1, 9 (3). 
 
 What not ex post facto la^ATS.— The words ex post 
 facto do not relate to criminal jDroceedings.i So, statutes 
 creating new tribunals to try past offenses,^ or changing 
 the place of trial, ^ or a statute which operates only on 
 the forms of the proceedings, rendering a defective indict- 
 ment valid, 4 or allowing amendments thereto,^ or chang- 
 ing the mode of summoning juries, c or allowing the State 
 a certain number of peremiDtory challenges,''' or reducing 
 the number of peremjatory challenges, are not ex post facto 
 laws.s But a statute which deprives the accused ot' the 
 right to object to an incompetent grand juror is an ex post 
 facto law. 9 A statute allowing counsel for the State to 
 open and close the argument instead of alternating, is 
 valid. ^0 A statute authorizing the jury to assess the 
 amount of the line to be imposed, or punishment to be 
 inflicted, is not an ex post facto law.^^ A statute allowing 
 the court, in granting a divorce, to decree that the guilty 
 party shall not contract marriage during the lifetime of 
 the other party, is not an ex post facto law.i^ So, a law 
 setting aside a decree and granting a new trial, is not an 
 ex posi facto law.^s Any change, referable to prison dis- 
 cipline or penal administration, may take effect on past 
 as well as future offenses. i'^ A statute imposing a higher 
 punishment for a second offense is not in conflict. i^ A 
 law which repeals a x^rior law before the performance of 
 the acts necessary to give vested rights, is not an ex post 
 /acio law, 16 uor a law which prescribes conditions under 
 which, alone, a thing may be used in future. ^'^ A la".7 
 regulating escheats, which does not refer to crimes, pains, 
 and XDcnalties, is not an ex post facto law. is A State law 
 imposing a tax upon transactions of a preceding year is 
 not an ex post facto law.i^ A State law exacting an ex- 
 purgatory oath as a condition for holding an office is net 
 an ex post facto law. 20 
 
 1 Walston V. Comm. 16 B. Mon. 15; People v. Mortimer, 46 CaL 114 : 
 Perry v. Comm. 3 Gratt. 632; Maiming v. State, 14 Tex. 402. 
 
 2 Commonwealth r . Phillips,28 Mass, 28 ; State v. SuUivan,14 Eich.281. 
 
 3 Gut V. State, 9 Wall. 35. 
 
 4 State V. Sears, Phil. N. C. 146; Commonwealth v. Bean, Thach. O. 
 C. 85. 
 
 5 State V. Manning, 14 Tex. 402. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LEMITATIOX OF POWERS. 124 
 
 6 Perry v. Commonwealth, 3 Gratt. 632. 
 
 7 Walston V. Commonwealth, 16 B. Men. 15; State v. Ryan, 13 Minn. 
 370. 
 
 8 Reynolds v. State, 1 Ga. 222; Perry v. Commonwealth, 3 Gratt. 632. 
 
 9 Martm v. State, 22 Tex. 214. 
 
 10 People V. Mortimer, 46'Cal. 114. 
 
 11 Holt V. State, 2 Tex. 363; Dawson v. State, 6 Tex. 347. 
 
 12 Elliott V. Elliott, 38 Md. 337. 
 
 13 Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 336. 
 
 14 Hartimg v. People, 22 N. Y. 95. But see Strong u. State, 1 Blackf. 
 133; Commonwealth v. Gardner, 77 Mass. 438. 
 
 15 Ex parte Gutierrez, 45 Cal. 430; Rand v. Commonwealth. 9 Gratt. 
 733; Rossv. Riley, 19 Mass. 165; Plumbly v. Commonweal41i, 43 Mass. 413. 
 
 16 Van Home v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304. 
 
 17 Evans v. Jordan, '.) Cranch, 199; 1 Brock. 24S; Evans v. Weiss, 2 
 Wash. C. C. 342; Evans v. Robinson, 1 Car. L. R. 209. 
 
 18 White V. Wayne, Charlt. 104. 
 
 19 State V. Bell, Phill. (N. C.) 76. 
 
 20 State V. Woodson, 41 Mo. 227. 
 
 State legislation inhibited. — The inhibition in this 
 provision is on the States, and not on the Congress.^ But 
 Congress cannot by authorization or ratification give the 
 slightest effect to a State law or constitution in conflict 
 with the Constitution of the United States.^ The prohi- 
 bition goes to the power of the State, and not to the man- 
 ner or character of its action. 3 The body on which the 
 prohibition rests is the legislative department.* A State 
 constitution is a law so far that it cannot impair the obli- 
 gation of contracts by a retroactive provision. ^ So of a 
 constitutional amendment. ^ A change in the State con- 
 stitution cannot release a State from its contracts made 
 under the original constitution.'^ The term "law" in- 
 cludes a judicial decision as well as a statute, § The 
 Constitution only prohibits the impairing of the obliga- 
 tions of contracts. y A law prohibiting the making of 
 certain contracts is valid, i^* A claim arising out of a tort, 
 and not from a contract, is not within the inhibition. ^ 
 The inhibition is Avhoily prospective, and States may leg- 
 islate as to contracts thereafter to be made. 12 The legis- 
 lature cannot alter the nature and legal effect of an exist- 
 ing contract, or violate its obligation. i3 Whether the 
 contract relate to real or i^ersonal estate, is executed or 
 executory, on parol or under seal, the Constitution pre- 
 serves it inviolate as to its obligations. i* If a contract 
 
125 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 when made is valid, its validity and obligation cannot be 
 impaired by any subsequent legislation, decision, altera- 
 tion, or construction of the law.^^ 
 
 1 Matt, of Klein, 1 How. 277; Satterlee v. Matthewson, 2 Peters, .180; 
 16 Serg. & R. 191; Hepburn v. Griswold, 8 Wall. 603; Lesr'l Tender 
 Oases. 12 Wall. 457; Wliite v. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; 39 Ga.; faloomer v. 
 StoUey, 5 McLean, 158; Evans v. Eaton, 1 Peters C. C. 337; Gimn v. 
 Barry, 8 Bank Reg. 1; In re Smith, 8 Bank Reg. 405; Kunzler v. Kohaus, 
 5 HiU. 325; Metrop. Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 400; Mayer v. Knight, 
 27 Tex. 719. 
 
 2 Gunn v. Barry. 8 Bank Reg. 1; In re Kennedy, 2 Rich. N. S. 216. 
 Calhoun v. Calhoun, 2 Rich. N. S. 283; White v. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; 39 
 Ga. 306. 
 
 3 Jacovvay v. Denton, 25 Ark. 625. 
 
 4 Trustees v. Rider. 13 Conn. 87. 
 
 5 Dodge V. Woolsey, 18 How. 331; Groves v. Slaughter, 15 Peters, 
 449; Railroad ». McClnre, 10 Wall. 511; Delmas v. Ins. Co. 14 Wall. 667; 
 Gunn V. Barry, 15 Wall. 610; 8 Bank Reg. 1; Moulti'ie Co. i\ Savings 
 Bank. 92 U. S. 632: In re McLean, 2 Bank^i,3g. 17?; Marsh v. Burroughs, 
 1 Woods, 463; Osborn v. Nicholson, 1 Dill. 235; Hawkins r. Filkins, 24 
 Ark. 286; Jacoway v. Denton, 25 Ark. 625; McNealy v. Gregory, 13 Fla. 
 417; Homestead Cases, 23 Gratt. 266; Furman v. Nichol, 8 WaU. 44; 
 Moore v. Illinois Central R. R. Co. 4 Chic. L. N. 123; Edwards v. Jager, 
 19 Ind. 407; Logwood v. Planters' Bank, 1 Minor, 23; Chicago r. Rum- 
 sey, 87 111. 348; Ex parte Lee's Bank, 21 N. Y. 9; Rutland v. Copes, 15 
 Rich. 84; Hazen.i'. Union Bank, 1 Sneed, 115; Keith v. Clark, 2 South 
 L. Rev. 24; Union Bank v. State, 9 Yerg. 490; Jones v. Brandon, 48 Ga. 
 593; Chambliss v. Jordan, 50 Ga. 81. 
 
 6 Pac. R. R. Co. V. McGuire, 20 Wall. 36; Keith v. Clark, 97 U. S. 454. 
 
 7 Dodge V. Woolsey, 18 How. 331 ; Matheny v. Golden, 5 Ohio St. 361. 
 
 8 Butz V. Muscatine, 8 Wall. 575; Chicago v. Sheldon, 9 Wall. 50; 
 City V. Lampson, Ibid. 477; Township v. Talcott, 19 Wall. 666. 
 
 9 Thornton v. Hooper, 14 Cal. 9. 
 
 10 Churchman v. Martin, 54 Ind. 380. 
 
 11 Dash V. Van Kleeck, 7 Johns. 477; Amy v. Smith, 1 Litt. 323; 
 Thayer i>. Seavey, 11 Me. 284. 
 
 12 Edwards v. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 603. 
 
 13 King V. Dedham Bank, 15 Mass. 447. 
 
 14 Trustees v. Rider, 13 Conn. 87; Taylor v. Stearns, 18 Gratt. 244; 
 Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U. S. 633. 
 
 15 Ohio L. I. & T. Co. V. Debolt, 16 How. 416; 1 Ohio St. 563; Gelpcke 
 V. Dubuque, 1 Wall. 175; Havemeyer v. Iowa Co. 2 Wall. 294; Thompson 
 V. Lee Co. 3 Wall. 327: Mitchell v. Burlington, 4 Wall. 270; Lee Co. «. 
 Rogers, 7 Wall. 181; City v. Lamson, 9 Wall. 477; Chicago v. Sheldon, 9 
 Wall. 55; White v. Hart, 13 Wall. 647; Osborn v. Nicholson, 13 Wall. 655; 
 Olcott V. Supervisors, 16 Wall. 678; Boice v. Tabb, 18 Wall. 546; 111. 
 Cent. R. R. Co. v. McLean Co. 17 111. 291; Hunsaker v. Wright, 30 111. 146; 
 Newstadt v. lU. Cent. R. R. Co. 31 111. 484. But see McClure v. Owen, 26 
 Iowa, 243. 
 
Art. I, § 10 lilMITATIOK OF POWERS. 126 
 
 Retrospective statutes. — Laws merely retrospective 
 do not necessarily Impair tlie obligation of contracts. i If 
 they do not violate the obligation of contracts or partake 
 of the character of ex 'post facto laws, they are not for- 
 bidden.2 States cannot prevent citizens from making 
 what contract they please out of the State, ^ nor can 
 State laws operate on contracts of citizens beyond the 
 limit of the State. * An obligation derived from the laws 
 of one State cannot be impaired by the laws of another 
 State, but there is no provision requiring each State in 
 the Union to give the same legal obligation to contracts 
 made in any other State. ^ State laws in conflict with 
 acts of Congress must give way. 6 States in rebellion 
 were never out of the Union and'could not pass laws vio- 
 lating the obligations of contracts,'' nor could they adopt 
 such a provision in their constitutions ]3reparatory to 
 the restoration of their relations to the Union. § But all 
 acts of such States during the Rebellion, not in conflict 
 with the Constitution and laws of the United States, are 
 binding.9 A mortgage is not invalid because the loan 
 was Confederate State bonds ; i<^ such consideration was 
 unlawful only when used in aid of the Rebellion ; ^ so, 
 their voluntary acceptance extinguishes a debt,i2 and 
 their payment to an executor is valid ;i3 go, a guardian is 
 entitled to credit for and chargeable with the value of 
 Confederate State bonds. ^^ 
 
 1 Locke V. New Orleans. 4 Wall. 173: Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 110; 
 Curtis V. Whitney, 13 Wall. 68; Baldwin ?;. Newark, 38 N. J. 159. 
 
 2 Charles River Bridget. Warren Bridge, 11 Peters, 420; Satterlee 
 V. Matthewson 2 Peters, 380; Davis v. Ballard, 1 J. J. Marsh. 563; Brown 
 V. Storm, 4 Vt. 37; Andrews v. Russell, 7 Blackf. 574; Holmes v. Bank, 
 12 Ala. 369; Baltimore &c. R. R. Co. ?> Nesbit, 10 How. 401; Wilson w. 
 Hardesty, 1 Md. Ch. 66; Albee v. May, 2 Paine, 74; Bay v. Gage, 36 
 Barb. 447; Drehmau v. Stifle, 41 Mo. 184; Wilder v. Lumpkin, 4 Ga. 209; 
 Boston V. Cummings, 16 Ga. 102; Bronsonv. Kinzie, 1 How. 331. 
 
 3 Lamb v. Bowser, 7 Biss. 315, 372. 
 
 4 Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213. 
 
 5 Lapsley i'. Brashear, 4 Litt. 47. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Ames, 1 Wood. & M. 76; Perry Manuf. Co. v. Brown, 2 
 Ibid. 462. 
 
 7 White V. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; Gunn v. Barry, 15 Wall. 610; Horn v. 
 Lockart, 17 Wall. 581; Williams v. Brufly, 96 U. S. 176; Houston v. De- 
 loach, 43 Ala. 364; Powell v. Boon, 43 Ala. 469. 
 
 8 Gunn v. Barry, 15 Wall. 610 ; White v. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; 39 Ga. 306; 
 In re Kennedy, 2 Rich. N. S. 116; Calhoun v. Calhoun, 2 Rich. N. S. 283. 
 
 9 Keith v. Clark, 11 Chic. L. N. 118; Reynolds v. Taylor, 43 Ala. 420. 
 
 10 Micou V. Ashurst, 55 Ala. 607. 
 
 11 Van Hoose v. Bush, 54 Ala. 342. 
 
 12 McQueen v. McQueen, 55 Ala. 433: Hester v. Watkins, 54 Ala. 44. 
 
127 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 13 Blount V. Moore, 54 Ala. 360; Foscue v. Lyon, 55 Ala. 441. 
 
 14 Ferguson v. Lowery, 54 Ala. 510; Harbin v. Bell, 54 Ala. 3S9. 
 Contracts.— A contract is an agreement to do or not to 
 
 do a certain thing. i It is a compact between two or more 
 persons ^ or between States,3 or between a State and the 
 United 'states ;4 but not social compacts between the 
 citizens and the State.s it comprises obligations or legal 
 ties whereby one party binds liimself or becomes bound 
 to pay a sum of money, or to perform or omit to perform 
 a c^ertain act, 6 without distinction between express and 
 implied agreements.' It embraces those contracts which 
 respect property or some object of value, and which con- 
 fer rights that may be asserted in a court of ]ustice.« it 
 applies to agreements which impose obligations under 
 general principles of law, and not those which are void 
 under the State constitution, or those entered into with- 
 out authoritv from the party sought to be bound. 9 The 
 character of "the parties to a contract does not prevent the 
 application of this prohibition, lo and corporations are 
 within it as a part of the general law.i^ Contracts include 
 executed as well as executory ;i2 express as well as im- 
 plied agreements. 13 
 
 1 Offden V. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Sturgis v. CrowninsMeld, 4 
 Wheat. 122; Woodruff t;. State, 3 Ark. 285; Trustees ik Rider 13 Conn. 
 87; Robinson i;..Magee, 9 Cal. 81; Farnsworth v. Vance, 2 bold. 108. 
 
 2 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 136. 
 
 3 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 84 ; Achison y. Huddleson, 12 How. 293; 
 7 Gill 179; Penn. v. Wheeling &c. Bridge Co. 13 How. 518; » How. 64 1 ; 
 StokesV. Sebright, 3 How. IsT; Neil?'. State, Ibid 720; Von Hoffman v. 
 Qidncyr4 Waif 550; Spooner't-. McConnell, 1 McLean, 337; Allen «. 
 McKean, 1 Sam. 276i Cox v. State, 3 Blackf. 193; Canal Co. v. R. R. Co. 
 4 Gill & J. 1; Hogg V. Canal Co. 5 Ohio, 410. 
 
 4 Lowry v. Francis, 2 Yerg. 534. 
 
 5 Billings v. Hall, 7 Cal. 1 ; State v. Paul, 5 R. 1. 185. 
 
 6 Woodruff V. State, 3 Ark. 285. 
 
 7 Woodruff V. State, 3 Ark. 285; Myrick v. Battle, 5 Fla. 345. 
 
 8 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87: Dartmouth CoUege v. Woo(^ard, 
 4 Wheat. 518; Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. 402; Trustees v- Ruler. 
 13 Conn. 87 ; Regents v. Williams, 9 Gill &> J. 365; Swan v. Buck, 40 Miss. 
 268; Herrick?;. Randolph, 13 Vt. 530. 
 
 9 Peoplev.Roper, 35N. Y. 629. 
 
 10 Trustees w. Rider, 13 Conn, 87; Regents v. Williams, 9 Gill & J. 
 365. 
 
 11 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87 ; State v. Wilson, 7 Cranch, 164 ; 2 N. 
 J. 300; Terrett v. Taylor, 9 Cranch, 43; Town ot Pawlett v. Clark. 9 
 Cranch, 292; Green vf Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; Astrom v. Hammond, 3 Mc- 
 LSV%oodruff t,.Trapnall,10 How 190; 8Ark.2^^6; Derby^^^^^^ 
 V Parks, io Conn. 522; Trustees v. Rider, 13 Conn. 87; 13Ired. 75; Stan- 
 mire V. Taylor, 3 Jones, (N. C.) 207. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 128 
 
 12 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Crancli, 137; Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 
 535; Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1. 
 
 13 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 137; Dartmouth Coll. v. Woodward, 4 
 Wheat. 518. 
 
 Contracts with State. — In its broadest sense, con- 
 tracts comprehend the political, between the Government 
 and its citizens, ^ and legislative enactments become con- 
 tracts under this provision.^ A State legislature may con- 
 tract with an individual,^ and by special legislation a sub- 
 sequent legislature may be bound ; * but the details of a 
 State contract may be altered where the alteration does 
 not affect the obligation. 5 Every contract with the State 
 presupi^oses a consideration. ^ State legislation in matters 
 of p^^rely legislative concern, or general political powers, 
 are not within the inhibition.''' General laws are not con- 
 tracts, but only the expression of the legislative will, and 
 laws which amend or repeal them are not within the inhi- 
 bition, ^ such as general regulations for the descent and 
 transmission of property. 9 States are bound by all their 
 contracts, but this does not include all contracts with 
 public officers or municipal corporations. i" So, appoint- 
 ment to a public office is not a contract, ii and the fees 
 may be reduced by legislation if there is no provision in 
 the Constitution to oppose it ; i^ or the office may be abol- 
 ished; 13 or the salary may be diminished; ^^ or additional 
 duties may be attached without increase in compensa- 
 tion, ^^ and an officer of a public corporation is a public 
 officer. 16 If a professor accepts office in a university con- 
 trolled by the State, his employment may be terminated 
 at the discretion of the legislature. i''' A statute which 
 implies a contract executory does not create any rights or 
 duties which can be impaired. i^ A statute granting an 
 annuity for services rendered is not a contract. i^ A stat- 
 ute offering a bounty is not a contract except as to those 
 who earn the bounty while it is in force.^*^ 
 
 1 Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518; Swan v. Buck, 40 
 Miss. 268; Winter v. Jones, 10 Ga. 190. 
 
 2 New Jersey v. Yard, 95 U. S. 114; Winter v. Jones, 10 Ga. 190. 
 
 3 Trustees v. Bailey, 10 Fla. 112; Winter v. Jones, 10 Ga. 190; Canal 
 Co. V. Railroad Co. 4 Gill & J. 1. 
 
 4 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Deholt, 
 16 How. 416; 1 Ohio St. 563; Mechanics' Bank v. Debolt, 18 How. 380; 
 Mechanics' Bank v. Thomas, 18 How. 384; Jefferson Bank v. Skelley, 1 
 lUack, 436; 9 Ohio St. 606; Dodge v. Woolsey. 18 How. 331 ; Wilmington 
 R. R. Co. V. Reid, 13 Wall. 264; TomlinsontJ. Branch Bank, 15 Wall. 460; 
 Humphrey v. Pegues, 16 Wall. 244 ; Daughdrill v. Life Ins. Co. 31 Ala. 
 91 ; State V. County Court, 19 Ark. 360;' Johnson v. Comm. 7 Dana, 338; 
 State V. Bank, 2 Houst. 99; Illinois Cent. R. R. Co. v. McLean Co. 17 III. 
 291; State Bank v. People, 5 III. 303; Bank v. New Albany, 11 Ind. 139; 
 Bank i;. Edwards, 5 Ired. 516; Bank v. Demiug, 7 Ired. 55; Municipality 
 
129 lilMlTATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 V. State Bank, 5 La. An. 394; People t;. Auditor, 7 Mich. 84; Camden 
 &c. R. R. Co. V. Commissioners, 18 N. J. 71 ; State v. Berry, 17 N. J. 81; 
 Gardner v. State, 21 N. J. 557 ; Matheny v. Golden, 5 Ohio St. 361 ; State 
 V. Auditor, 5 Ohio St. 444; Ross Co. Bank v. Lewis, 5 Ohio St. 447. But 
 see Toledo Bank v. Bond, 1 Ohio St. 622; Norwalk Co. v. Husted, 3 Ohio 
 St. 586; Exchange Bank v. Hines, 3 Ohio St. 1 ; Milan &c. Co. v. Husted, 
 3 Ohio St. 578; Sandusky Bank v. Wilson, 17 Ohio St. 48; Tenn. & Coosa 
 R. R. Co. V. Moore, 36 Ala. 371. 
 
 5 Thornton v. Hooper, 14 Cal. 9. 
 
 6 Ohio Trust Co. v. Debolt, 16 How. 416; 1 Ohio St. 563. 
 
 7 Commonwealth v. Bird, 12 Mass. 443 ; People v. Roper, 35 N. Y. 629. 
 
 8 Corning v. Greene, 23 Barb. 33; State v. Dews, R. M. Charlt. 397: 
 People V. Roper, 35 N. Y. 629. 
 
 9 In re Lawrence, 5 N. Y. Sup. 310. 
 
 10 Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. 402. 
 
 11 Butler V. Pennsylvania, 10 HoW. 402 ; Barker v. Pittsburgh, 4 Pa. St. 
 49; Commonwealth v. Bacon, 6 Serg. & R. 322; Jones ij. Shaw, 15 Tex. 
 577; Commonwealth v. Mann, 5 Watts & S. 418; Benford v. Gibson, 15 
 Ala. 521; Coffin z'. State, 7 Ind. 157; Haynes w. State, 3 Ohio, 480; Swann 
 V. Buck, 40 Miss. 268; State v. Smedes, 26 Miss. 47; Connor v. N. Y. 2 
 Sand. 355; 1 Seld. 295; State v. Dews, R. M. Charl. 397; People v. Lip- 
 pincott, 67 111. 333. 
 
 12 Warner v. People, 2 Denio, 272. 
 
 13 Dartmouth Coll. v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 693; West Riv. Br. Co. v. 
 Dix, 6 How. 548; Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. 402; Connor v. N. Y. 
 1 Seld. 295; 2 Sandf. 355; Knoup v. Piqua Bank, 1 Ohio St. 616; Toledo 
 Bank V. Bond, 1 Ohio St. 655. 
 
 14 Bedford v. Gibson, 15 Ala. 521 ; People v. Auditor, 2 111. 537 ; Barker 
 V. Pittsburgh,4 Pa. St . 49 ; State w. Dews, R. M. Charl. 397 ; Connor v. New 
 York,2 Sandf. 355; 1 Seld. 295; Knoup t^.Piqiia Br. Bank,! Ohio St. 616; 
 Toledo Bank v. Bond, Ibid. 655; Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. 418; 
 Commonwealth v. Mann, 5 Watts & S. 403: Kilgore v. Magee, 85 Pa. St. 
 401. 
 
 15 Turpen v. Commissioners, 7 Ind. 172. 
 
 16 Augusta V. Sweeny, 44 Ga. 463; Iowa City v. Foster, 10 Iowa, 189; 
 Commonwealth v. Bacon, 6 Serg. & R. 322. 
 
 17 Head v. University, 19 Wall. 526; 47 Mo. 220. 
 
 18 Trustees v. Rider, 13 Conn. 87; Swann v. Buck, 40 Miss. 268. 
 
 19 Dale v. Governor, 3 Stewt. 387. 
 
 20 Salt Co. V. East Saginaw, 13 Wall. 373; 19 Mich. 259; People v. 
 Auditor, 9 Mich. 327. 
 
 Contracts with State. — The privilege of payment 
 for land sold by the State cannot be taken away by a sub- 
 sequent statute.! Where the State gives a contract for 
 printing to one person, it cannot make a subsequent con- 
 tract with another person for the same work.^ A statute 
 providing for the discontinuance of work on a public 
 building, under contract, is valid; the remedy for dam- 
 ages for breach of the contract remains. ^ The instrument 
 pledging public faith may be either in terms a contract or 
 a mere legislative enactment.^ Where a statute pledges 
 certain property for the payment of certain debts of a 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 130 
 
 municipal corporation, a subsequent statute may change 
 the mode of sale of such property.*^ But if the legislature 
 pledges certain property to secure bonds, it cannot subse- 
 quently divest the lien or postpone it. 6 A statute that 
 coupons of State bonds shall be receivable for taxes and 
 all debts due the State is a contract. ^ If a statute author- 
 ize the sale of stock held by the State, the State cannot 
 repeal the law, and deprive jpurchasers of the means of 
 enforcing the contract. § A statute which declares all 
 debts incurred by the State in aid of the Rebellion void 
 is valid. 9 But a law in violation of a compact between 
 States is unconstitutional. i*^ A statute by which the State 
 waives the larivilege of sovereignty, and permits itself to 
 be sued, is not a contract. ^^ Where there is no legal rem- 
 edy to enforce a contract against a State, a statute forbid- 
 ding the auditor to issue a warrant does not violate the 
 obligation of the contract, i^ 
 
 1 Damiiian v. Commissioners, 4 Wis. 414. 
 
 2 State V. Barker, 4 Kans. 379. 
 
 3 Lord V. Tliomas, 64 N. Y. 107. 
 
 4 Bridge Prop. v. Hoboken &c. Co. 1 Wall. 116. 
 
 5 Babcock v. Middleton, 20 Cal. 643. 
 
 6 Trustees v. Beers, 2 Black. 448. 
 
 7 Antone v. Wriglit, 23 Gratt. 833. 
 
 8 Baldwin v. Commissioners, 11 Busli, 417. 
 
 9 Leak v. Commissioners, 64 N. C. 132. 
 
 10 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1 : Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535. 
 
 11 Beers v. State, 20 How. 527 ; Bank of Washington v. State, 20 How. 
 530; Platenius v. State, 17 Ark. 518. 
 
 12 Swann v. Buck. 40 Miss. 268. 
 
 Obligation of contract.— The obligation of a con- 
 tract is that which requires the performance' of the legal 
 duties imposed by it, i and consists of that right or power 
 over his will or actions which a party by his contract con- 
 fers on another, 2 and includes everything within its ob- 
 ject and scope. 3 It does not inhere and consist in the 
 . contract itself, but in the law applicable to the contract. '^ 
 Laws relating to the validity, construction, discharge, and 
 enforcement are part of the contract.^ The obligation 
 consists in the binding force on the party who makes .the 
 contract, and that depends on the laws in existence when 
 it is made. 6 The obligation of other things than contracts 
 is not protected.'^ The obligation of a contract com- 
 mences at its date, 8 and continues until the debt is paid 
 or the act performed. ^ It extends to future possessions, ^o 
 The validity, construction, and remedy are parts of the 
 
131 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 obligation.il Contracts made in the Confederate States, 
 not in aid of the Rebellion, and payable in Confederate 
 currency, are not therefore void. 12 
 
 1 Blann v. State, 39 Ala. 353. 
 
 2 Ogden V. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Lapsley v. Brashears, 4 Litt. 47. 
 
 3 Edwards v. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 601. 
 
 4 Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 353; Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 
 Wheat. 122; Brouson?;. Kinzie. 1 How. 311; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 
 How. 608; Blair v. Williams, 4 Litt. 34; Lapsley v. Brashears, 4 Litt. 47; 
 Blanchard v. Kussell, 13 Mass. 1; Edwards v. Kearzey, 6 Am. L. K. 289. 
 
 5 Edwards t;. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 601; 6 Am. Lav Reg. 289; Von Hoff- 
 man V. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535; McCracken v. Haywai-d, 2 How. 608. 
 
 6 Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122; Ogden v. Saunders, 12 
 Wheat. 213; McCracken ti. Hayward, 2 How. 608; Robinson, v. Magee, 
 9 Cal. 84; Johnson v. Duncan, 3 Mart. 531; Western Sav. Fund v. Phil.. 
 adelphia, 31Pa. St. 175; Woodi;. Wood, 14 Rich. 148; Smith v. Cleve< 
 land, 17 Wis. 556. 
 
 7 Ogden V. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Robinson v. Magee, 9 Cal. 84; 
 Blair v. Williams, 4 Litt. 34. 
 
 8 Blair v. Williams, 4 Litt. 34. 
 
 9 Baily v. Gentry, 1 Mo. 164; Forsyth v. Marbury, R. M. Charl. 324. 
 
 10 Edwards v. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 600; 6 Am. Law Reg. 289. 
 
 11 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; 
 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 608; 
 Von Hoifman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535; People v. Bond, 10 Cal. 570; Story 
 V. Furman, 25 N. Y. 223; Walker v. AVhitehead, 16 Wall. 314. 
 
 12 Thorington v. Smith, 8 Wall. 1 ; Hanauer v. Woodruff, 15 Wall. 439; 
 Confederate Note Case, 19 Wall. 548; Wilmington ifcc. R. R. Co. v. King, 
 91 U. S. 3. 
 
 Impairment of obligation. — To impair means to alter 
 so as to make the contract more beneficial to one party and 
 less to the other than by its terms it purports to be.i So, 
 the discharge of a contract is an actual impairment of the 
 obligation;'-^ or where the contract is destroyed ;3 or 
 where an essential jjart is annnlled,^ or partially re- 
 scinded. ^ The time, place, iDcrson, or thing to be done 
 cannot be changed. ^^ So, the obligation is impaired by a 
 statute which authorizes a discharge of the contract by a 
 smaller sum, or at a different time, or in a different man- 
 ner than stipulated,'' as the alteration of the terms of a 
 condition of a mortgage. § Any means which lessens the 
 validity gives diminished value, or which divests priority 
 of lien, obligation, or recovery, violates the obligation,^ 
 or anything which affects its validity ,10 as where the obli- 
 gation is diminished, weakened, or rendered less opera- 
 tive, n A statute which releases one party from any arti- 
 cle of a stipulation is a violation of the obligation, i'^ as 
 releasing a sheriff and sureties from liability on an official 
 bond,i3 or a release of sureties on a bail-bond after condi- 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 132 
 
 tion broken, and assignment of the bond to the creditor.i* 
 The sureties on an official bond cannot be made liable for 
 his failure to discharge the duties of an additional office 
 imposed by a subsequent act.^^ A statute releasing future 
 acquisitions from liability, ^^ or releasing a tenant from 
 his liability for rent, is void.i" A statute which declares 
 that a certain consideration shall be deemed void is in- 
 valid. i^ A statute declaring that a contract made during 
 the war, the consideration whereof was slaves, is void, 
 impairs the obligation of the contract; i^ or which de- 
 clares the consideration of Confederate money, notes, or 
 bonds to be void. 20 The validity of a contract may be 
 affected by a subsequent statute of frauds. 2^ 
 
 1 Bailey v. Gentry, 1 Mo. 164. 
 
 2 Farmers and Mechanics' Bank v. Smith, 6 Wheat. 131. 
 
 3 Kobinson v. Magee, 9 Cal. 84. 
 
 4 New Jersey v. Wilson, 7 Cranch, 164. 
 
 5 Grimball v. Ross, Charlt. 175. 
 
 6 TownsencL v. Townsend, Peck, (Tenn.) I. 
 
 7 Golden v. Prince, .5 Hall L. J. 502; 3 Wash. C. C. 313; Edmondson 
 V. Ferguson, 11 Mo. 344. 
 
 8 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; Pool v. Young, 7 Mon. 587. 
 
 9 Grimhall v. Koss, Charl. 175. 
 
 10 Edwards v. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 595; Planters' Bank v. Sharp, 6 How. 
 301; 4 Smedes & M. 17. 
 
 11 Lapsley v. Brashears, 4 Litt. 47; Nevitt v. Bank, 14 Miss. 513. 
 
 12 Jones V. Crittenden, 1 Car. Law Rep. 385; Pool v. Young, 7 Mon. 
 587; Townsend v. Townsend, Peck, (Tenn.) 1; Greenfield t). Dorris, 1 
 Sneed, 548. 
 
 13 State V. Gatzweiller, 49 Mo. 18. 
 
 14 Lewis V. Breckinridge, 1 Blackf . 220 ; Starr v. Robinson, 1 Chip. 257. 
 
 15 Reynolds v. Hall, 2 111. 35. 
 
 16 Sturges V. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122. 
 
 17 Clark v. Ticknor, 49 Mo. 144. 
 
 18 McNealy v. Gregory, 13 Fla. 417. 
 
 19 Osborn v. Nicholson, 13 Wall. 654; 1 Dill. 219; Boyce v. Tabb, 18 
 Wall. 546; McElvain v. Mudd, 44 Ala. 48; Fitzpatrick v. Hearne, 44 Ala. 
 171; Curry v. Davis, 44 Ala. 281 ; Roach v. Gunter, 44 Ala. 209. 
 
 20 Delmas v. Ins. Co. 14 Wall. 661; Forscheimer v. Holly, 14 Fla. 239; 
 Roach V. Gunter, 44 Ala. 209; Hatch v. Burroughs, 1 Woods, 439; Marsh 
 17. Burroughs, 1 Woods, 463. 
 
 21 Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535. 
 
133 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Alt. I, § 10 
 
 Degree of impairment. — A contract cannot be im- 
 paired in the remotest degree. i It is not a question of 
 degree, manner, or cause. ^ But any deviation, by post- 
 ponement or acceleration of the period of performance, 
 or imposing conditions not expressed, or dispensing with 
 those expressed, is a violation of the obligation,^ as com- 
 pelling a party to do more than he has promised, or 
 enforcing payment before the debt becomes due,* or 
 authorizing the sale of property free from incumbrance 
 before the maturity of the mortgage, ^ or jDroviding that 
 all contracts shall be payable in installments, ^ or chang- 
 ing a joint bond into a several, •■ or attempting to deprive a 
 creditor of interest on an overdue debt,^ or requiring inter- 
 est on a debt which did not bear interest,^ or requiring a 
 higher rate than that allowed at the time,io or allowing 
 recovery of damages in addition to interest, n or author- 
 izing a party to surrender property in full discharge of 
 indebtedness,!^ or providing that indorsers shall be bound 
 without demand, notice, or i^rotest,!^ but not a statute 
 changing the mode of giving notice and making protest.-* 
 A law providing that all future contracts shall be subject 
 to the power of future legislatures is void.i^ A declara- 
 tory, like any other act, may be unconstitutional. 16 Any 
 act of the legislature in contravention of a compact is an 
 impairment of the obligation of a contract.!" 
 
 1 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535. 
 
 2 Sturges v. Crowninshielcl, 4 Wheat. 122; Green v. Biddle, 8 
 Wheat. 1; Planters' Bank v. Sharp, 6 How. 301; 12 Miss. 17; Walker v. 
 Whitehead, 16 Wall. 314; 43 Ga. 537; Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 
 535; Gault's Appeal, 33 Pa. St. 194; Farnsworth v. Reeves, 2 Cold. Ill; 
 Winter v. Jones, 10 Ga. 190. 
 
 3 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; McCracken v. Hay ward, 2 How. 608; 
 People V. Bond, 10 Cal. 563; Winter v. Jones, 10 Ga. 190; Blanchard v. 
 Russell, 13 Mass. 1; Commercial Bank v. State, 12 Miss. 439; West Riv. 
 Br. Co. V. Dix, 6 How. 507; 16 Vt. 446; McCauley v. Brooks, 16 Cal. 11. 
 
 4 Jones v. Crittenden, 1 Car. L. Repos. 385; Townsend ■;;. Townsend, 
 Peck Tenn. 1. 
 
 5 Randolph v. Middleton, 26 N. J. Eq. 543. 
 
 6 Aycock v. Martin, 37 Ga. 124; Jacobs v. Smallwood, 63 N. C. 112. 
 
 7 Fielden v. Lahens, 6 Blatchf. 524. 
 
 8 Bleakley v. Williams, 20 Pitts. L . J. 66. 
 
 9 Goggins V. Turnipseed, 1 Rich. N. S. 80. 
 
 10 Woodruff V. State, 3 Ark. 285; Hubbard v. Callahan, 42 Conn. 524; 
 Lee V. Davis, 1 A. K. Marsh. 397; Bryan v. Moore, 1 Minor, 377. 
 
 n Steen v. Finley, 25 Miss. 535. 
 
 12 Abercrombie v. Baxter, 44 Ga. 36. 
 
 13 Farmers' Bank v. GunneU, 26 Gratt. 131. 
 
 14 Levering v. Washington, 3 Minn. 323 ; Grymes v. Byrne, 2 Minn. 87. 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— IS. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 134 
 
 15 Goenen v. Schroeder, 8 Minn. 387. 
 
 16 Dundas v. Bowler, 3 McLean, 397; Union Iron Co. v. Pierce, 4 
 Biss. 3i7. 
 
 17 Green t;. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; Pennsylvania v. "Wheeling &c. Br. 
 Co. 18 How. 433. 
 
 "What not a violation of obligation.— It is not every 
 law affecting the validity of a contract which impairs 
 its obligation.! States may pass laws validating con- 
 tracts. 2 So, a law which gives validity to a void contract 
 does not impair the obligation of that contract, ^ as a law 
 declaring a contract founded on an illegal or immoral con- 
 sideration as valid and binding,* or validating bonds ille- 
 gally issued,^ or altering the Statute of Frauds and giving 
 validity to a contract, or making previous jiayments of 
 usurious interest valid, '^ or joermitting the enforcement of 
 a usurious contract, although it applies to a prior con- 
 tract, ^ or prohibiting recovery of interest when not ex- 
 pressly stipulated in the contract,'-* or rendering a judg- 
 ment valid. I*' A repeal of a statute is no more void than 
 a new law would be which would operate on the contract 
 to affect its validity, construction, or duration, but it can- 
 not affect past contracts. 11 A statute may repeal a statute 
 under which a contract was illegal, and authorize suit 
 thereon,i2 as the repeal of a statute i)rohibiti:ig stock-job- 
 bing.i3 States may pass retrospective laws that will 
 divest antecedent rights if they do not technically impair 
 the obligation of contracts.'^* 
 
 1 Curtis^. Whitney, 13 Wall. 68. 
 
 2 Welsh u.Wadsworth, 30 Conn. 154 ; Mather ?;. Chapman,6 Cowen, 57. 
 
 3 Satterlee ■;;. Matthewson, 2 Peters, 380; Hess v. Werts, 4 Serg. & R. 
 356 ; Bleakney v. Farmers' Bank, 17 Serg. & R. G4 ; Bridgeport v. Rail- 
 road Co. 15 Conn. 475; Central Bank v. Empire S. D. Co. 26 Barb. 23. 
 
 4 Satterlee v. Mattliewson, 2 Peters, 412 ; Curran t?. Arkansas, 15 
 How. 10; Aspinwall v. Commissioners, 22 How. 365. 
 
 5 Kuukle V. Franklin, 13 Minn. 127 ; Comer v. Folsom, 13 Minn. 219. 
 
 6 Baker v. Ilerndon, 17 Ga. 568. 
 
 7 Sparks v. Clapper, 30 Ind. 204. 
 
 8 Woodruff?;. Scruggs, 27 Ark. 26; Grimes v. Doe, 8 Blaclcf. 371 ; An- 
 drews V. Russell, 7 Blackf. 474; Savings Banki;. Bates, 8 Conn. 505; Sav- 
 ings Bank v. Allen, 28 Conn. 97 ; Welsh v. VV^adsworth, 30 Conn. 149; 
 Bauglier v. Nelson, 9 Gill, 299; Town v. Peace, 25 Gratt. 1; Woodi). 
 Kennedy, 19 Ind. 68; Wilson v. Hardesty, 1 Md. Ch. 66; Curtis v. Leav- 
 itt, 15 N. Y. 9. Contra, Morton v. Rutherford, 18 Wis. 298. 
 
 9 Harmanson v. Wilson, 14 Amer. L. Reg. 627. 
 
 10 Tilton V. Swift, 40 Iowa, 78; Underwood v. Lilly, 10 Serg. & R. 97. 
 
 11 Ogden V. Saunders, 9 Wheat. 1; Atwater v. Woodbridge, 6 Conn. 
 223; Osborne v. Humphreys, 7 Conn. 335; Landon v. Litchfield, 11 Comi. 
 251. 
 
135 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 12 Milne v. Huber, 3 McLean, 212; Hill v. Smith, Morris, 70; Johnson 
 V. Eently, 16 Ohio, 97; Lewis v. McElvain, 16 Oliio, 347. And see Bar- 
 ings V. Dabney, 19 Wall. 1; Van Home v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304; 
 "Walker v. Tipton, 3 Dana, 3. 
 
 13 Washburn v. Franklin, 35 Barb. 599. 
 
 14 Calcler v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; Watson «. Mercer, 8 Peters, 88; Bait. 
 &C.R.K.V. Nesbit, 10 How. 395; Satterlee v. Matthewson, 2 Peters, 
 380; 16 Serg. & R. 191; Lewis v. Lewis, 7 How. 784; Charles Riv. Br. v. 
 Warren Br. 11 Peters, 420; 23 Mass. 422; 24 Mass. 344; Cochran v. Van 
 Surlay, 20 Wend. 365; Towle v. Forney, 4 Duer, 164. 
 
 What not a violation of obligation.— A legislature 
 
 may enact such laws as may have for their object the 
 application to public use of the property of any member 
 of the community, 1 wlieu a fair and just equivalent is 
 awarded to the owner. ^ A law passed before the contract 
 is made cannot impair its obligation. 3 So, a law may pro- 
 hibit making a contract of a certain kind.'^ If a party, by 
 a statute, is not precluded from asserting a title or en- 
 forcing a right, it is not a violation of the obligation of 
 contracts. 5 So, a statute requiring an oath of loyalty 
 from an attorney is not an impairment of the obligation 
 of a contract. 6 bays of grace are no part of the original 
 contract, and a State may legislate on the subject.'' A law 
 may be good in part and bad in part ; it may be bad as to 
 past, and good as to future contracts, s The power to pass 
 curative acts to legalize proceedings depends on the power 
 to authorize such proceedings. ^ A State may cure an 
 irregularity or want of authority in the levy of a tax,io or 
 may provide for the validation of marriages, ^ or may 
 cure irregularities in conveyances. 12 
 
 1 Young V. McKenzie, 3 Ga. 31; Jackson v. Winn, 4 Litt. 323; Beek- 
 man v. Ka'ilroad, 3 Paige, 45; Bloodgood v. Railroad Co. 18 Wend. 9. 
 
 2 People V. Piatt, 17 Johns. 195; Bonaparte v. Camden &c. Co.l Bald. 
 220. 
 
 3 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; Moore v. Fowler, Hemp. 536; 
 Blair v. Williams, 4 Litt. 34; Roby v. Boswell, 23 Ga. 51; Powers v. 
 Dougherty, Ibid. 65; Sparrow v. Railroad Co. 7 Ind. 36D; Davis v. Bron- 
 son, 6 Iowa, 410; Bruns v. Crawford, 34 Mo. 330; Edwards v. Kearzy, 98 
 U. S. 600; 6 Amer. L. R. 289. 
 
 4 Churchman v. Martin, 54 Ind. 330. 
 
 5 Drehman v. Stifle, 8 Wall. 595. 
 
 6 State V. Garesche, 36 Mo. 256. 
 
 7 Barlow v. Gregory, 31 Conn. 263. 
 
 8 Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; 4 Johns. Ch. 150; Berry v. 
 Haines, 2 Caro. L. R. 428; Commonwealth v. Kimball, 41 Mass. 359; 
 Norris v. Boston, 45 Mass. 282; State v. Paul, 5 R. 1. 185; Barry v. Ise- 
 man, 14 Rich. 129; State v. Newton, 59 Ind. 173. 
 
 9 Kimball v. Rosendale, 42 Wis. 407. 
 
 10 Grim v. Weissenberg Sch. Dist. 57 Pa. St. 433. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 136 
 
 11 Jacquins v. Commouwealth, 63 Mass. 282; Goshen v. Richmond, 
 86 Mass. 461. 
 
 12 Thompson v. Morgan, 6 Minn. 292. 
 
 Impairment of remedy. — The remedy enters into 
 and forms a material part of tlie obligation of the con- 
 tract. -^ The validity and remedy of a contract are insepa- 
 rable; both are parts of the obligation, ^ and a statute im- 
 pairing the remedy is prohibited. ^ The obligation of the 
 contract is the duty of performing it ; and if the law is so 
 changed that the means of enforcing it are materially im- 
 paired, the obligation of the contract no longer remains 
 the same.^ A statute can no more impair the efficacy of 
 a contract by changing the remedy than attack its vitality 
 in any other way.*^ A party has a right at all times to 
 some adequate and available remedy. ^ Where the legal 
 obligation is diminished, suspended, or destroyed by re- 
 laxing or abolishing the legal remedy, the obligation is 
 impaired,"^ so by burdening the proceedings with new con- 
 ditions or restrictions, ^ or by taking away the remedy; ^ 
 but a State may abolish one of two remedies, i'' as impris- 
 onment for debt, both as to present and future j)unish- 
 ment,^o and in time of war and other controlling circum- 
 stances the remedy maybe entirely suspended. ^^ Where 
 the remedy is essential to the contract, the legislature 
 cannot take it away.^^ 
 
 1 Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535 ; Walker v. Whitehead, 16 WaU. 
 314; 43 Ga. 537; Gunny. Barry, 15 Wall. 610; 8 Bank. Reg. 1; Johnson v. 
 Higgins, 3 Met. (Ky.) 566. 
 
 2 Walker v. Whitehead, 16 Wall. 314 ; 43 Ga. 537 ; Von HoflFman v. 
 Quincy, 4 Wall. 535; Scaine v. Belleville, 39 N. J. 10; Vroom, 526. 
 
 3 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311 ; Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1 ; Smith 
 V. Morse, 2 Cal. 524; Johnsons. Duncan, 3 Mart. 531; Qpffman v. Bank, . 
 40 Miss. 29. 
 
 4 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311 ; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 
 €12 ; Grantly v. Ewing, 3 How. 717 ; Curran v. Arkansas, 15 How. 304 ; 
 Butz V. Muscatine, 8 Wall. 583; Walker v. Whitehead, 16 Wall. 314; Ol- 
 cott V. Supervisors, 16 Wall. 678; Gunn v. Barry, 15 Wall. 623; Jackson 
 V. Lamphii-e, 3 Peters, 280; Green v. Biddle, 8 Wiieat. 1; Ed.wards v. 
 Kearzey, 96 U. S. 601; Taylor v. Stearns, 18 Gratt. 244; Nevitt v. Bank, 
 14 Miss. 513; Vou Baimibach v. Bade, 9 Wis. 659. 
 
 5 Walker v. Whitehead, 16 Wall. 314; 43 Ga. 537. 
 
 6 Coffman v. Bank, 40 Miss. 29; ; and an act denying all remedy is 
 miconstitutional— West v. Sansom, 44 Ga. 295. 
 
 7 Lapsley v. Brashears, 4 Litt. 27; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 
 612. 
 
 8 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311 ; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 
 612 ; Riggs v. Martin, 5 Ark. 506 : Curran ■;;. Arkansas, 15 How. 304; 12 
 Ark. 321; Mundy v. Monroe, 1 M.ich. 68; Commercial Bank v. Cham- 
 bers, 96 Miss. 9 ; Penrose v. Reed, 2 Grant, 472 ; West. Sav. Fund v. 
 PhUadelphia, 31 Pa. St. 175; Patman r. Bond, 15 Wis. 20. 
 
137 lilMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 9 Woodruff V. Trapnall, 10 How. 190; Richmond R. K. Co. v. Louis- 
 ville E. R. Co. 13 How. 71; Binghanipton Br. Case, 3 Wall. 51; East 
 Hartford v. Hartford Br. Co. 10 How. 535; 17 Conn. 78; Boston &e. R. 
 R. Co. V. Salem etc. R. R. Co. 2 Gray, 1; Piscataqua Br. Co. v. New 
 Haven Br. 7 N. H. 35; Brewster v. Hough, 10 N. H. 138; Johnson i-. 
 Duncan, 3 Mart. 531. 
 
 10 Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat. 370; Beers «. Haughton, 9 Peters, 35:); 
 Butz V. Muscatine, 8 Wall. 575; Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122; 
 VonHoffmanv. Quincy,4 Wall.535; Society for Prop. G-osp. r. Wheeler, 
 2 Gall. 141 ; Gray v. Munroe, 1 McLean, 528; Newton v. Tibbatts, 7 Ark. 
 150; Fisher v. Lacky, « Blackf. 373; Robinson v. Magee, 9 Cal. 81; Peo- 
 ple t?. Carpenter, 46 Barb. 619; Bi-onson v. Newberry, 2 Doug. (Mich.) 
 38; Mercer's Case, 4 Harring. 248; Woodfln v. Hooper, 4 Humph. 13; 
 Mundy V. Monroe, 1 Mann. (j8 ; Kennebec Land Co. v. Laboree, 2 Me. 294 ; 
 Oriental Bank v. Freeze, 18 Me. 109; Call v. Hagger, 8 Mass. 429; Brown 
 V. Dellahunty, 12 Miss. 713; Donnelly v. Corbett, 7 N. Y. 500; Sommers v. 
 Johnson, 4 Vt. 278; Conkey v. Hart, 14 N. Y. 22; Petition of Pennunan, 
 11 R. I. 333; Watts v. Everett, 47 Iowa, 269. 
 
 11 Johnson v. Duncan, 3 Mart. 531; Ex parte Pollard, 40 Ala. 77. 
 
 12 Thompson v. Commonwealth, 81 Pa. St. 314. 
 
 Change of remedy. — A violation of the obligation 
 is not necessarily implied by a reasonable change in the 
 mode of enforcing the contract, i Unless it substantially 
 lessens the rights of the creditors^ the change must reac'i 
 the intent of the parties. ^ A mere change in one of two 
 remedies does not impair the obligation. ^ So, mere inci- 
 dental delay, following from a general law, does not im- 
 pair the remedy.^ A statute may prescribe a remedy, if 
 there be none; and if a remedy given be as good as that 
 taken away, the obligation is not impaired. ^ States may 
 pass remedial laws which are retrospective,'^ but not sucla 
 as impair vested rights, or create personal liabilities, or 
 impose new obligations or duties. ^ A legislature may al- 
 ter, modify, or even take away a remedy,'^ or give a rem- 
 edy not already existing, ^^ although the new remedy may 
 be less convenient, or more tardy or difficult, ^i or may 
 change the remedy from equity to law, or vice versa, i^ If 
 a contract in its inception was without legal remedy, the 
 legislature may repeal a statute subsequently passed pro- 
 viding a remedy. i'3 So long as contracts are submitted to 
 the ordinary and regular course of justice, and existing 
 remedies are preserved in substance, the obligation of the 
 contract is not impaired.^* A mere change in the remedy 
 is not unconstitutional. 1° A statute may change the rem- 
 edies that are used before judgment, but not those after 
 judgment, so as to materially affect the rights under the 
 contract; ^6 but if the change materially affects rights and 
 interests it is so far a violation of the compact, i'' A State 
 legislature may regulate the remedy and mode of pro- 
 
Art. I, § 10 I.IMITATION OP POWERS. 138 
 
 ceeding, of past as well as future contracts, but not so as 
 to take away all remedy, i^ 
 
 1 Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat. 310; Templeton v. Home, 82 111. 491; 
 Rader v. S. E. Road Dist. 37 N. J. (8 Vroom), '273; Baldwin v, Newark, 
 38 N. J. (9 Vroom) 160; Billings v. Biggs, 5(j 111. 483. 
 
 2 Bronson t7. Kinzie, 1 How. 311 ; Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 
 122; Woodruff v. Trapnall, 10 How. 190; jftawthorne v. Calef , 2 Wall. 10; 
 Walker iJ. Whitehead. 16 Wall. 314; Greene. Biddle,8 Wheat. 1; Cur- 
 ran V. Arkansas, 15 How. 319; Roberts v. Cocke, 28 Gratt. 207. 
 
 3 Commercial Bank v. State, 12 Miss. 439. 
 
 4 Heyward v. Judd, 4 Minn. 483; Watts v. Everett, 47 Iowa, 269. 
 
 5 Rathbone v. Bradford, 1 Ala. 312; Jones v. Crittenden, 1 Car. Law 
 Rep. 385; Townsend v. Townsend, Peck, (Tenn.) 1 ; Wood v. Wood, 14 
 Rich. 148. 
 
 6 Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat. 370 ; Milne v. Huber, 3 McLean, 212 
 Brandon v. Gaines, 7 Humph. 130 ; Simmons v. Hanover, 40 Mass. 188 
 Commercial Bank v. State, 12 Miss. 439 ; Wheat v. State, Minor, 199 
 Anonymous, 2 Stewt. 228; Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311 ; Davis v. Bal- 
 lard, 1 J. J. Marsh. 563; McMillan -y. Sprague, 4 How. (Miss.) 647; Laps- 
 ley V. Brashears, 4 Litt. 47 ; Townsend y. Townsend, Peck, (Tenn.) 1; 
 Sav. Inst. V. Makin, 23 Mo. 360; Commercial Bank v. State, 12 Miss. 439; 
 Longfellow v. Patrick, 25 Me. 18 ; Van Rensselaer v. Snyder, 13 N. Y. 
 299: In re Trust. Pub. Sch. 31 N. Y. 574 ; Morse v. Gould, 11 N. Y. 281; 
 Pratt V. Jones, 25 Vt. 303. 
 
 7 Freeborn v. Smith, 2 Wall. 175 : Foster v. Essex Bank, 16 Mass. 245 ; 
 Rich V. Flanders, 39 N. H. 304; Searcy v. Stubbs, 12 Ga. 437; Johnson v. 
 Roockogy, 23 Ga. 183. 
 
 8 Brandon v. Green, 7 Humph. 130 ; Rich v. Flanders, 39 N. H. 304; 
 DeCordova v. Galveston, 4 Tex. 470 ; Hope v. Johnson, 2 Yerg. 125 ; 
 Vanzandt v. Waddell, 2 Yerg. 260: Coffin v. Rich, 45 Me. 507; Kennebec 
 Purch. V. Laboree, 2 Me. 275. 
 
 9 Sturges V. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122; Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 
 311; Von Hoffman V. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535; Crawford v. Branch Bank of 
 Mobile, 7 How. 279; Kenyon v. Stewart, 44 Pa. St. 179; Railroad Co. 
 V. Hecht, 95 U. S. 168; Tennessee v. Sneed, 96 U. S. 69; Florentine v. 
 Barton, 2 Wall. 216; Appeal of Long, 11 Ch. L. N. 43; Stocking v. Hunt, 
 3 Denio, 274; Corner v. Miller, 1 Bank. Reg. 99; In re Jordan, 8 Bank. 
 Reg. 186; Bruce v. Schuyler, 9 111. 221; Wood v. Child, 20 111. 209; Hunt- 
 zhiger V. Brock, 3 Grant, 243 ; Read v. Frankfort Bank, 23 Me. 318; Pen- 
 rose V. Erie Canal Co. 56 Pa. St. 46; Lord v. Chadbourue, 42 Me. 429; 
 Mason v. Wait, 5 111. 134; Evans v. M:ontgomery, 4 Watts & S. 218; pro- 
 vided a substantial remedy is left— Cutts v. Hardee, 38 Ga. 350; Lock- 
 ett V. Usry, 28 Ga. 345. 
 
 10 Freeborn v. Smith, 2 Wall. 175; Foster v. Essex Bank, 16 Mass. 245; 
 Rich V. Flanders, 39 N. H. 325; Schenley v. Commonwealth, 36 Pa. St. 
 57; Hepburn D. Curts, 7 Watts, 300; Wheat v. State, Minor, 199; Anony- 
 mous, 3 Stew. 228; Blann v. State, 39 Ala. 353. 
 
 11 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311 ; Guild v. Rogers, 8 Barb. 502. 
 
 12 Paschal v. Whitsell, 11 Ala. 472; Bethune v. Dougherty, 30 Ga. 770; 
 Baugher v. Nelson, 9 Gill, 299; Bartlett v. Lang, 2 Ala. 401. 
 
 13 Young V. Oregon, 1 Oreg. 213. 
 
 14 Holmes v. Lansing, 3 Johns. Cas. 73. 
 
139 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 15 Morse v. Gould, 11 N. Y. 281 ; Jones v. Davis, 6 Neb. 33 ; Richardson 
 V. Akin, 87 111. 141 ; Templeton v. Home, 82 111. 491 ; Jones v. Davis,6Neb. 
 33; Cox V. Berry, 13 Ga. 306; Bronson v. Kinzlo, 1 How. 311 ; Woodruff v. 
 Trapnall, 10 How. 190; Hawthorne v. Calef, 2 Wall. 10. 
 
 16 Oliver v. McClure, 28 Ark. 555; Woods v, Buie, 5 How. (Miss.) 285; 
 Lockett V. Usry, 28 Ga. 345; Read v. Frankfort Bank, 23 Me. 318; Orien- 
 tal Bank v. Freeze, 18 Me. 109. 
 
 17 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535: 
 Billings V. Riggs, 56 111. 4S3. ' 
 
 18 Ex parte Pollard, 40 Ala. 77. 
 
 What not an impairment of remedy. — A statute 
 may take away the remedy by attachment, ^ or may allow 
 amendment in attachment suits. ^ Attachment laws do 
 not impair the obligation of contracts between the gar- 
 nishee and the debtor.^ A statute authorizing attach- 
 ments may apply to actions before its passage. * A 
 statute may abolish distress for rent,^ or conform a defect- 
 ive levy and sale under an execution, g or mitigate the 
 severity of tlie penalty on bonds,''' or may extend the time 
 for advertisement of mortgage sales, s or diminish the 
 period for publication of a notice of foreclosure,'-^ or may 
 change the remedy on a judgment, i'^ or the remedy on 
 the enforcement of forfeiture of a charter.ii Where a 
 deed of trust authorizes a trustee, upon a default in pay- 
 ing certain notes, to sell the property, the sale cannot be 
 suspended for a lixed term, 12 
 
 1 Darnleyt'. State Bank, 15 Ark. 16; Krebs v. State Bank, 15 Ark. 
 19; Allis V. State Bank, 15 Ark. 19; Leathers r. Shipbuilders' Bank, 40 
 Me. 386; Bigelow v. Pritchard, 38 Mass. 169. 
 
 2 Knight v. Dorr, 36 Mass. 48. 
 
 3 Philbrick v. Philbrick, 39 N. H. 468; Klaus v. City, 34 Wis. 628. 
 
 4 Coosa River S. Co. v. Barclay, 30 Ala. 120. 
 
 5 Conkey v. Hart, 14 N. Y. 22; Van Rensselaer v. Snyder, 13N. Y. 
 299; Gould v. Rogers, 8 Barb. 502. 
 
 G Mather v. Chapman. 6 Conn. 54; Beach v. Walker, 6 Conn. 190; 
 Norton v. Pettibone, 7 Conn. 319; Booth v. Booth, 7 Conn. 350; Menges 
 V. Wertman, 1 Pa. St. 218; Bell v. Roberts, 13 Vt. 582; Selsby v. Redlon, 
 19 Wis. 17. 
 
 7 Wood V. Kennedy, 19 Ind. 68; Potter v. Sturdevant, 4 Me. 154. 
 
 8 Von Baumbach v. Bade, 9 Wis. 559; Starkweather v. Hawes, 10 
 Wis. 125. 
 
 9 Hopkins v. Jones, 22 Ind. 310; Webb v. Moore, 25 Ind. 4. 
 
 10 Livingston v. Moore, 7 Peters, 420; Williams -y. Waldo, 4 111. 264; 
 Grosvenor v. Chesley, 48 Me. 369; Sprott v. Reid, 3 G. Greene, 489. 
 
 11 Aurora T. Co. v. Holthouse, 7 Ind. 59. 
 
 12 Taylor v. Stearns, 18 Gratt. 244. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OP POWERS. 140 
 
 Statutes of limitation and usury laws, unless ret- 
 roactive, do not impair tlio obligation of contracts ; i so, 
 an act reducing tlie time prescribed by a statute of lim- 
 itations is not inconsistent, if reasonable time be given. 2 
 Statutes of limitations are not inconsistent if reasonable 
 time be given before the bar takes effect,^ but if unreason- 
 able they are void; '^ yet if a substantial remedy remains, 
 they are valid. ° A limitation of one year on municipal 
 bonds, for negotiation in a foreign market, is unreasona- 
 ble. ^ Thirty days is not a reasonable time to allow for 
 the bringing of a suit,'^ but an extension of time for bring- 
 ing an action does not impair the obligation of the con- 
 tract. ^ Whether the time allowed for commencing an 
 action is reasonable or not is a question for the court, and 
 not the legislature, to determine, ^ and it must appear 
 that the unmistakable purpose and effect of the law is 
 to cut off the right of the party, and not merely to limit 
 the time. 10 A statute prescribing the time for the exer- 
 cise of authority to establish a lottery is valid. i'- A stat- 
 ute requiring a new promise to be in writing, is valid if 
 ample time is allowed to enforce the demand. 1=^ A stat- 
 ute of limitations repealing a prior act is void as to actions 
 pending at the time of the repeal. ^^ jt^n g^ci; jn the nature 
 of a limitation act is constitutional, as it merely affects 
 the remedy. i4 
 
 1 Sturges V. Crowninshield, 4 Wlieat. 122. 
 
 2 Terry v. Andei-son, 95 U. S. 628. 
 
 3 Jackson v. Lampbire, 3 Peters, 280; Hawkins v. Barney, 5 Peters, 
 457; Lockhart ■?;. Yeiser, 2 Bush, 231; Barker v. Jackson, 1 Paine, 559; 
 Lewis V. Broadwell, 3 McLean, 568; Cliristmas v. Russell, 5 Wall. 290; 
 Sohn?;. "Waterson, 17 Wall. 5:j6; Samples v. Bank, 1 Woods, 523; Terry 
 V. Anderson, 95 U. S. 634; Lewis v. Harbin, 5 B. Mon. 564; Blackford v. 
 Peltier, 1 Blackf. 36; Pearce v. Patton, 7 B. Mon. 162; Stearns v. Git- 
 tings, 23 111. 387; Nev.'land t'. Marsh, 19 111. 376; Griffin v. McKenzie, 7 
 Ga. 163; McKenny v. Compton, 18 Ga. 170; George v. Gardner, 49 Ga. 
 441 ; Butler v. Palmer, 1 Hill, 324; State v. Bermudez, 12 La. 352; Cum- 
 mings V. Maxwell, 45 Me. ir,0; Beal v. Nason, 14 Me. 344; Sampson?;. 
 Sampson, 63 Me. 328; State v. Jones, 21 Md. 432; Smith v. Morrison, 39 
 Mass. 430; Holcombe v. Tracy, 2 Minn. 241; Stone v. Bennett, 13 Minn. 
 153; Stephens v. St. Louis National Bank, 43 Mo. 385; Briscoe v. Anke- 
 tell, 28 Miss. 361; Malthy i'. Cooper, Morris, 59; Rexford v. Knight, 11 
 N. Y 308; Calif. Hagger, 8 Mass. 423; De Cordova v. Galveston, 4 Tex. 
 470; Bell v. Roberts, 13 Vt. 582; Smith v. Packard, 13 Wis. 371; Miller v. 
 Commonwealth, 5 Watts & S. 488. Instances of reasonable time— Ad- 
 amson V. Davis, 47 Mo. 268; Adamson v. AVilson, 47 Mo. 272; Adamson 
 V. Marshall, 47 Mo. 273; Coffman v. Bank of Kentucky, 10 Miss. 29; Hill 
 z>. Boyland, lOMiss. 618; Burt t;. Williams. 24 Ark. 91; Coxe v. Martin, 
 44 Pa. St. 322. 
 
 4 Pereles v. Watertown, 6 Biss. 79; Berry v. Ransdall, 4 Met. (Ky.) 
 292; Society for Prop, of Gospel v. Wheeler, 2 Gall. 105; Johnson v. 
 Bond, Hemp. 533; Robinson v. Magee, 9 Cal. 81; Auld v. Butcher, 2 
 Kans. 135; Amy v. Smith, 1 Litt. 326; Proprietors v. Laborers, 2 Me. 
 
141 lilMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 275; Garrett v. Beaumont, 24 Miss. 377; Forsyth «. Marbury, R. M. 
 Cliarlt. 324; Osborn v. Jaines, 17 Wis. 573. 
 
 5 Von Baumbach v. Bade, 9 Wis. 559. 
 
 6 Perelesv. Watertown, 6 Biss. 79. 
 
 7 Berry v. Ransdall, 4 Met. (Ky.) 292. 
 
 8 Cox V. Berry, 13 Ga. 306; Winston v. McCormick, 1 Ind. 56; Ed- 
 wards V. McCaddon, 20 Iowa, 520; Swickard v. Bailey, 3 Kans. 507; 
 Oilman v. Cutts, 23 N. H. 376; Smitli v. Tucker, 17 N. J. 82; Wardlaw v. 
 Buzzard, 15 Rich. 158; Pleasants v. Rohrer, 17 Wis. 577. 
 
 9 Pereles v. Watertown, 6 Biss. 79. But see Smith v. Morrison, 39 
 Mass. 430. 
 
 10 Rexford v. Knight, 11 N. Y. 308. 
 
 11 Phalen v. Commonwealth, 8 How. 163; 1 Rob. (Va.) 713. 
 
 12 Briscoe v. Anketell, 28 Miss. 361 ; Joy v. Thompson, 1 Doug. 383. 
 
 13 Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 207; McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 
 Peters, 312; Society v. Wheeler, 2 Gall. 141 ; Bank of Alabama v. Dalton, 
 9 How. 522; Kennebec Land Co. v. Laboree. 2 Me. 293; Kingsley v. 
 Cousins, 47 Me. 91; Call v. Hagger, 8 Mass. 429; Beal v. Nason, 14 Me. 
 344: Woart v. Wimmick, 3 N. H. 473. 
 
 14 George v. Gardner, 49 Ga. 441 ; Bertrand v. Taylor, 87 111. 235. 
 
 Exemption laws. — States may pass exemption laws,i 
 but if the exemption is too large and materially affects 
 the remedies, it is void ;2 as where a new constitution 
 deprives courts of jurisdiction to sell exempt property .^ 
 Statutes exempting from execution impair the obligation 
 as to prior contracts.^ The legislature may exempt real 
 as well as personal property ;5 but if the law is to enable 
 the holding of large properties rather than to secure the 
 well-being of citizens, it is void.^ So, a State cannot enact 
 a law to exempt property if it was liable to seizure and 
 appropriation when the debt was incurred.'' A State law 
 exempting a homestead is valid if it is such as sound 
 policy dictates, 8 although it leaves the debtor no property 
 liable to execution.^ Such a law is valid so far as it affects 
 debts created after its passage, though prior to the declar- 
 ation of homestead. '^0 The subjection of property to exe- 
 cution, which was not so at the time the contract was 
 made, does not imj)air the obligation of the contract. ii 
 No exemption can be allowed, as against a mortgagee 
 claiming under a mortgage made prior to the law allow- 
 ing the exemption. 12 An exemption law cannot divest 
 the lien of a judgment and leave no means for the collec- 
 tion of the debt.i3 So, creating a new exemption by a 
 constitutional provision impairs the obligation of prior 
 contracts. 14 
 
 1 Planters' Bank ?;. Sharp, 6 How. 301; Von Hoffman i?. Quincy, 4 
 Wall. 535; Morse v. Gould, 11 N. Y. 281. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 142 
 
 2 Edwards v. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 611; Grimes v. Byrne, 2 Minn. 89; 
 Stephenson v. Osborne, 41 Miss. 119; Morse v. Gould, 11 N. Y. 281; 
 Lessley v. Phipps, 49 Miss. 790. 
 
 3 Hardeman v. Downer, 39 Ga. 425. 
 
 4 Quackenboss i;. Danks, 1 Denio, 128; 1 N. Y. 129; Hawthorne v. 
 Calef, 2 Wall. 23. But see contra, Mede v. Hand, 5 Amei*. L. Reg. 
 N. S. 82; Rockwell v. Hubbell,2 Doug. 197; Morse v. Gould, 11 N. Y. 281. 
 And see Roby v. Boswell, 23 Ga. 51. 
 
 5 Hill V. Kessler, 63 N. C. 436; Jacobs v. SmaUwood, Ibid. 112. 
 
 6 Cusic B. Douglas, 3 Kans. 23. 
 
 7 Penrose v. Erie Can. Co. 56 Pa. 46; State v. Bank, 1 Rich. N. C. 63. 
 
 8 Cusic V. Douglas, 3 Kans. 23; Root v. McGrew, Ibid. 215. 
 
 9 Hill V. Kessler, 63 N. C. 436. 
 
 10 In re Henkel, 2 Sawy. 305. 
 
 11 Reardon v. Searcy, 2 Bibb, 202. 
 
 12 Shelor v. Mason, 2 Rich. N. S. 233. 
 
 13 Gunn v. Barry, 15 Wall. 610; Smith v. Morse, 2 Cal. 524; Tillotson 
 V. Millard, 7 Minn. 513; McKeithan v. Terry, 64 N. C. 25; Forsyth v. 
 Marbury, R. M. Charl. 324. But see Hardeman v. Downer, 39 Ga. 425; 
 In re Kennedy, 2 Rich. N. S. 116; Adams v. Smith, Ibid. 228. 
 
 14 Gunn v. Barry, 15 Wall. 610; Jones v. Brandon, 48 Ga. 593. 
 
 Stay laws. — Laws providing for a stay of execution, 
 so far as they abridge the remedy ,• impair the obligation 
 of the contract, ^ and are in conflict with the National Con- 
 stitution ; ^ but if they affect the remedy, and not the right, 
 they are valid.^ A law procrastinating the remedy de- 
 stroys j)art of the right. ^ The right to suspend the recov- 
 ery of a debt for one ijeriod implies the right of suspending 
 it for another.^ A statute exempting from civil process 
 while parties are in the military service is void.^ So, a 
 statute which subjects parties to a longer credit than was 
 allowed by law when tlie contract was made, is unconsti- 
 tutional.'^ A law which merely suspends temporarily pro- 
 ceedings for the collection or debts is constitutional ;8 
 so, where the stay is definite,and not unreasonable, ^ as that 
 all actions to enforce a judgment shall be suspended for 
 seven months, i*^ or that all actions shall stand continued 
 during the time defendant remains in the actual military 
 service. 11 The legislature may provide for a stay of exe- 
 cution if the stay is not so unreasonable as to substan- 
 tially impair the' obligation of the contract; i^ so a pro- 
 vision for a stay, unless plaintiff will take property levied 
 on at two-thirds of its appraised value,is unconstitutional ;i3 
 but a statute providing for a reasonable stay, unless the 
 property levied on shall bring two-thirds of its appraised 
 value, is not unconstitutional in respect to its retrospec- 
 tive operation. 14 A statute adding conditions that no 
 sale under execution for any sum less than two-thirds the 
 
143 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 value of the property levied on shall be made, violates 
 the obligation of the contract. ^^ So, the legislature can- 
 not provide for a stay when the contract provides that 
 there shall be no stay.^^^ A statute allowing a stay for an 
 indefinite time,i' upon the consent of two-thirds of the 
 creditors, is void. is So, a statute allowing a stay of exe- 
 cution, so long as installments are paid, is void ; '9 but a 
 statute may iDrovide for a stay on a judgment obtained by 
 confession until the demand is due,=^° or until an appraise- 
 ment is made. 21 A law which grants a stay of execution 
 for a certain period upon a judgment suj)erseded with 
 sureties, impairs the obligation of contracts made before 
 its adoption. 22 An act cannot affect a judgment rendered 
 before its passage. 23 A State may grant a stay of execu- 
 tion upon a judgment due to a municipal corjsoration.^^ 
 A statute which enacts that the obligation on official 
 bonds shall not have the benefit of stay laws or appraise- 
 ment laws, is valid. 25 
 
 ?. Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; MeCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 
 608; Graiitby V. Ewing, 3 How. 707; Howard v. Buabee, 24 How. 461; 
 Scoby V. Gibson, 1 Am. Law Reg. N. S. 221 ; Ex parte Pollard, 40 Ala. 
 77; Burt v. Williams, 24 Ark. 91; Dormire v. Cogly, 8 Blackf. 177; Hud- 
 speth V. Davis, 41 Ala. 389 ; Jones v. Crittenden, 1 Car. Law Rep. 385; 
 Garlington v. Priest, 13 P'la. .559; Aycock v. Martin, 37 Ga. 124; Webster 
 V. Rose, 6 Heisk. 93; Sti'ong v. Daniel, 5 Ind. 348; Barnes v. Barnes, 8 
 Jones, (N. C.) 366 ; Cargill v. Power, 1 Mich. 369; Coffmant'. Bank, 40 
 Miss. 29; Bally v. Gentry, 1 Mo. 164; Brown v. Ward, I Mo. 209; Bum- 
 gardner v. Circuit Com-t, 4 Mo. 50; Grayson v. Lilly, 7 Mou. 6; Jacobs 
 V. Smallwood, 63 N. C. 112; Stevens v. Andrews, 31 Mo. 205; Townsend 
 V. Townsend, Peck. (Tenn.) 1; State v. Carew, 13 Rich. 498; Sequestrar- 
 tion Cases, 30 Tex. 688; Canfield v. Hunter, Ibid. 712; Culbreath v. Hun- 
 ter, Ibid. 713; Levisoni). NoiTis, Ibid. 713; Levisont'. Krohne, Ibid. 714; 
 Bunn V. Gorgas, 5 Wright, 441; Billmyer v. Evans, 4 Wright, 324. But 
 see McCormick v. Rusch, 3 Am. Law Reg. N. S. 93; Chadwick v. Moore, 
 8 Watts & S. 49; Breitenbach v. Bush, 8 Wright, 313. 
 
 2 Edwards v. Kearzey, 96 U. S. 601, approving Barnes i>. Barnes, 8 
 Jones (N. C.) 366; Jones v. Crittenden, 1 Car. Law Rep. 385: Jacobs w. 
 Smallwood, 63 N. C. 112. 
 
 3 Coriell v. Ham, 4 G. Greene, Iowa, 455; Grosvenor v. Chesley,48 
 Me. 369; Swift v. Fletcher, 6 Minn. 550. 
 
 4 Johnson v. Duncan, 3 Mart. 531; as postponing the rendition of 
 judgment for at least twelve months— Ex parte Pollard, 40 Ala. 77. 
 
 5 Jones V. Chittenden, 1 Car. Law Rep. 385. 
 
 6 Clark v. Martin, 49 Pa. 299; Hasbrouck v. Shlpman, 16 Wis 296. 
 
 7 January v. January, 7 Mon. 542; Pool v. Young, Ibid. 587. 
 
 8 Grimball v. Ross, Charl. 175. 
 
 9 State V. McGinty, 41 Miss. 435; Breitenback v. Bush, 44 Pa. St. 313; 
 Coxe V. Martin, Ibid. 322. 
 
 10 Johnson v. Higgins, 3 Met. (Ky.) 566; Barkley v. Glover, 4 Met. 
 (Ky.) 44. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LENnTATION OF POWERS. 144 
 
 11 McCormick v. Kusch, 15 Iowa, 127; Edmundson v. Ferguson, 11 
 Mo. 344; Lindsey v. Burbridge, Ibid. 545. 
 
 12 Huntzinger v. Brock, 3 Grant, 243. 
 
 13 Baily v. Gentry, 1 Mo. 164. 
 
 14 Thompson v. Buckley, 34 Leg. Int. 148; Chadwick v. Moore, 8 
 Watts & S. 49. 
 
 15 McCracken v. Hay ward, 2 How. 608; Gantly u. Ewing, 3 How. 707; 
 Bronsonv. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; Hunt v. Gregg, 8 Blackf. 105; Smoott;. 
 Lafferty, 2 Gilm. 383; Rosier v. Hales, 10 Iowa, 470; Rawley v. Hooker, 
 21 Ind. 144; Baily v. Gentry, 1 Mo. 164. Contra, Waldo v. Williams, 4 
 lU. 264; Catlin v. Munger, 1 Tex. 598. 
 
 16 Griffith v. Thomas, 34 Leg. Int. 150; BiUmeyer v. Evans, 40 Pa. St. 
 324; Lewis v. Lewis, 47 Pa. St. 127. 
 
 17 Hudspeth v. Davis, 41 Ala. 389. 
 
 18 Bunn v. Gorgas, 41 Pa. St. 441'. 
 
 19 Jones v. McMahan, 30 Tex. 319; Earle v. Johnson, 31 Tex. 164. 
 
 20 Wood V. Child, 20 111. 209; Barnes v. Barnes, 8 Jones N. C. 366. 
 
 21 Catlin v. Munger, 1 Tex. 598. 
 
 22 Blair v. Williams, 4 Litt. 34; Lapsley v. Brashears, 4 Litt. 47. Con- 
 tra, Farnsworth v. Vance, 2 Cold. 108. 
 
 23 Dormire v. Cogly, 8 Blackf. 177; nor wiU it apply to a mortgage 
 executed prior to its passage— Harrison v. Styres, 74 N. C. 290. 
 
 24 Governor v. Gridley, Walk. 328. 
 
 25 Pierce v. MiU, 21 Ind. 27. 
 
 State insolvency laTATS.— An insolvent law whiclt 
 discharges from future debts is valid, i wliere the creditor 
 and the debtor reside in the same State,^ but not if the 
 creditor resides in a different State f but an insolvent 
 law which releases the debtor from a debt contracted 
 prior to its enactment impairs the obligation of the con- 
 tract, * although tlie foreign creditor was temporarily 
 residing in the State at the time the contract was made ;5 
 the question depends upon the citizenship of the creditor, 
 and not upon the place wliere the contract was made, or 
 was to be performed. ^^ If the contract was not to be per- 
 formed in tlie State, a discharge will not release from the 
 demand of a citizen of anotlier State, '^ and if the attorney 
 of a foreign creditor takes a note for tlie debt, the court 
 will regard the rights of the beneficial owner ;8 but a 
 State insolvent law is valid against a foreign creditor so 
 far as it releases the i^erson of the debtor from imprison- 
 ment. ^ A statute may provide for the discharge of a jail- 
 bond in a manner different from that named in the bond.i" 
 A law providing for the distribution of the assets of an 
 insolvent estate is valid as against general creditors, ^i 
 So, an insolvent law discharging the person and after-ac- 
 quired property is not a violation of the Constitution.l2 
 
145 LIMITATION OP POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 1 Ogden V. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 213; Hempstead v. Reed, 6 Conn. 
 480; Blanchard ■;;. Russell, 13 Mass. 1; Betts v. Bagley, 12 Pick. 572; 
 Adams V. Storey, 1 Paine, 79; 6 Hall L. J. 474. See Roby v. Boswell, 23 
 Ga. 61. 
 
 2 Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 358 ; Wilson v. Matthews, 32 Ala. 332; 
 Pugh V. Bussell, 2 Blackf. 366; Norton v. Cook, 9 Conn. 314; Jacques v. 
 Marchand, 6 Cow. 497 ; Mather v. Bush, 16 Johns. 233 ; Baker v. Wheaton, 
 5 Mass. 509; Walsh v. Farrand, 13 Mass. 19; Blanchard v. Russell, 13 
 Mass. 1; Alexander v. Gibson, 1 Nott & McC. 480; Smith i\ Carsons, 1 
 Ohio, 236. And see Herring v. Selding, 2 Ark. 12; Smith v. Mead, 3 
 Conn. 253; Hammett j;. Anderson, Ibid. 304; Medbury v. Hopkins, Ibid. 
 472; Hlnkley ?;. Marian, 3 Mason, 88; Vanuxem i;. Hazlehursts, 4 N.J. 
 192; BaUantine v. Haight, 16 N. J. 196. 
 
 3 Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 369; Boyle v. Zacharie, 6 Peters, 635; 
 Cook V. Moffat, 5 How. 295; Baldwhi v. Hale, 1 Wall. 223; Kelly v. 
 Drury, 9 AUen, 27; Pugh i;. Bussell, 2 Blackf. 366; Norton v. Cook, 9 
 Conn. 314; Bradford ?;.Parrand, 13 Mass. 18; Donnelly t?. Corbett, 7 N. 
 Y. 500; Van Reimsdyk v. Kane, 1 Gall. 630; 9 Cranch, 158; Huntley v. 
 Morean, 3 Mason, 88. 
 
 4 Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122; Farmers &c. Bank v. 
 Smith, 6 Wheat. 131 ; 3 Serg. & R. 63; Golden v. Prince, 3 Wash. C. C. 
 313; Boardman v.De Forest, 5 Conn. 1; Roosevelt v. Cebra, 17 Johns. 
 108: Post V. Riley, 18 Johns. 54; In re Wendell, 19 Johns. 163; Oldens v. 
 Hallet, 5 N. J. 466; Smith v. Mead, 3 Conn. 253; Roosevelt v. Cebra, 17 
 Johns. 108 ; Kimberly v. Ely, 6 Pick. 451 ; Corner v. Miller, 1 Bank. Reg. 
 99; Cook v. Moffatt, 6 How. 295. But see Adams v. Storey, 1 Paine, 
 79; Barbers. Minturn, 1 Day, 136; McMillan v.McNeiU,4 Wheat. 20 J; 
 Terrett v. Taylor, 9 Cranch, 43. 
 
 5 Easterly v. Goodwin, 36 Conn. 279. 
 
 6 Baldwin v. Hale, 1 WaU. 223; 3 Amer. L. R. N. S. 462; Hawley v. 
 Hunt, 27 Iowa, 303. 
 
 7 Mcliim V. WiUis, 83 Mass. 512. 
 
 8 Isley V. Merian, 61 Mass. 242; Crow ». Coons, 27 Mo. 512. 
 
 9 Glenn v. Humphreys, 4 Wash. C. C. 424; Choteau v. Richardson, 94 
 Mass. 368; Carey v. Conrad, 2 Miles, 92 ; Donnelly v. Corbett, 7 N. Y. 500. 
 
 10 Oriental Bank v. Freeze, 18 Me. 109; Morse v. Rice, 21 Me. 53. 
 
 11 Deichman's Appeal, 2 Whart. 395. 
 
 12 Wilson V. Matthews, 32 Ala. 332. 
 
 Legislative authority over judicial proceedings. 
 
 The forms and system of courts and proceedings may be 
 changed by the legislature, i A State may create, alter, 
 or abolish courts, and change their sessions ;2 but a change 
 in the terms which operates on contracts only is void.^ 
 The legislature may pass laws confirming doings of courts 
 and other public bodies known to the laws.* A statute 
 may regulate the time and mode of trial,^ or change the 
 manner of commencing action, serving notices, and 
 process ;C but a statute extending the time for prosecu- 
 tion cannot revive a right which was barred at the time 
 of its passage.' A statute may extend the time for tak- 
 ing default's The legislature may change the rules of 
 evidence so as to affect prior contracts,^ but it cannot cut 
 Desty Fed. Cost.— 13. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 146 
 
 off or destroy the rights of a bona fide holder of commer- 
 cial paper by changing the rules of pleading or evidence ; ^^ 
 so, a law which changes the rale of evidence of a contract 
 impairs its obligation. ^ A statute regulating proofs is 
 valid;!- so, a la^r dispensing with the necessity of proving 
 the names of individual partners is valid, i3 or of j) roving 
 the signature to a written instrument.!'* A statute may 
 change the presum^Dtion in favor of tax-deeds, i^ A stat- 
 ute may facilitate the means of ascertaining what the 
 contract was,i6 or may permit inquiry into the considera- 
 tion of a sealed instrument executed in another State ; i^ 
 but a statute which requires proof of consideration, on a 
 plea under oath that it has been used for illegal jiurposes, 
 is void.!^ A statute making parties competent witnesses 
 on their own behalf is valid. ^'^ A statute may permit 
 either party to give in evidence the consideration, its 
 value, the intent of the i)arties as to payment, the value 
 of the currency, and may direct that verdict and judg- 
 ment be on principles of equity;-^" but the jury cannot put 
 their own estimate upon the value of the contract instead 
 of taking tlie value stipulated by the parties.^i- A retro- 
 spective statute, which provides that no verdict should 
 be rendered unless the contract had been legally returned 
 for taxes, is void.^^ 
 
 1 Livingston v. Moore, 7 Peters, 469; Bald. 424; Rathbone t). Brad- 
 ford, 1 Ala. 312; Grubbs v. Harris, 1 Bibb, 567; Stoddard v. Smith, 5 
 Binn. 355; Smith v. Bryan, 34 111. 264; Maynes v. Moore, 16 Ind. 116; 
 Hopkins v. Jones, 22 Ind. 310; Webb v. Moore, 25 Ind. 4; Citizens' Bank 
 V. Uegnoodt, 25 La An. 628; Wheat v. State, Minor, 199; Vanzandt 
 V. VVaddell, 2 Yerg. 260. 
 
 2 Rathbone v. Bradford, 1 Ala. 312; Ex parte Pollard, 40 Ala. 77; 
 Woods V. Bine, 5 How. (Miss.) 285; New Kirk v. Chapron, 17 111. 344; 
 Lapsley v. Brashears, 4 Litt. 47; Johnson v. Duncan, 3 Mart. 531: John- 
 son V. Higgins, 3 Met. (Ky.) 566; Morse v. Goold, 11 N. Y. 281; State t;. 
 Barringer, Phil. (N. C.) 554; Wood v. Wood, 14 Rich. 148; Hansrickv. 
 Rouse, 17 Ga. 56. 
 
 3 Jacobs V. Smallwood, 63 N. C. 112 ; Johnson v. Winslow, 64 N. C. 27. 
 
 4 Kearney v. Taylor, 15 How. 494; Goshen v. Stonington, 4 Conn. 
 310; Thornton v. McGrath, 1 Duval, 349; Davis v. State Bank, 7 Ind. 
 316; Underwood v. Lilly, 10 Serg. & R. 97. * 
 
 5 Woods V. Bine, 5 How. (Miss.) 285; Ex parte Pollard, 40 Ala. 77; 
 Van Baumbach v. Bades, 9 Wis. 559. 
 
 6 Railroad Co. v. Hecht, 95 U. S. 168; McCreary v. State, 27 Ark. 425; 
 New Albany &c. R. R. Co. v. McNamara, 11 Ind. 543. 
 
 7 State V. Sneed, 25 Tex. Sup. 66. 
 
 8 Von Baumbach v. Bade, 9 Wis. 559; Holloway v. Sherman, 12 
 Iowa, 282. 
 
 9 People V. Mitchell, 45 Barb. 208; Fales v. Wadsworth,23 Me. 553; 
 Scheible v. Bachs, 41 Ala. 423; Tarleton v. Southern Bank, Ibid. 722; 
 Kirtland v. Molton, Ibid. 548; Herbert v. Easton, 43 Ala. 547: Slaughter 
 
147 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 V. Culpepper, 35 Ga. 26; Eoby v. Chicago, 64 111. 447; Howard v. Moot, 
 
 64 N. Y. 262. 
 
 10 Cornell v. Hichens, 11 Wis. 353. 
 
 11 Marsh v. Burroughs, 1 Woods, 463. 
 
 12 Wood V. New York, 6 Robt. 463. 
 
 13 Ballard v. Ridgley, Morris, 27. 
 
 14 Ingraham v. Dooley, Morris, 28. 
 
 15 Hickox V. Tallman. 38 Barb. 608; Roby v. City, 64 111. 447; Smith v. 
 Cleveland, 17 Wis. 55G; Lain v. Shepardson, 18 Wis. 59. 
 
 16 Woodfln V. Slader, Phill. (N. C.) 200. 
 
 17 Williams v. Haines, 27 Iowa, 251. 
 
 18 Edwards v. Dixon, 53 Ga. 334. 
 
 19 Ralston v. Lothain, 18 Ind. 303; Neass v. Mercer, 15 Barb. 318. 
 
 20 Slaughter v. Culpepper, 35 Ga. 25; Cutts v. Hardee, 38 Ga. 350; 
 Taylor v. Flint, 35 Ga. 124; Kirtland v. Molton, 41 Ala. 54^<; Tarleton v. 
 Southern Bank, 41 Ala. 722; Herbert y. Easton, 43 Ala. 547; Robeson v. 
 Brown, 63 N. U. 554; King y. W. & W. R. R. Co. 66; N. C. 277; 91 U.S. 3; 
 Rutland v. Copes, 15 Rich. 84. 
 
 21 W. & W. R. R. Co. V. King, 91 U. S. 3 ; 66 N. C. 277 ; Leach v. Smith, 
 25 Ark. 246; Woodruff i'. Tilly, 25 Ark. 309. 
 
 22 Lathrop v. Brown, 1 Woods, 474 ; Walker v. Whithead, 16 Wall. 314; 
 Gardner v. Jeter, 49 Ga. 195; Griffiths v. Shipp, Ibid. 231; Kimbro v. 
 Bank, Ibid. 419; Dougherty v. Fogle, 50 Ga. 464. 
 
 Statute rights. — Rights growing out of statute pro- 
 visions may be modified by statute. ^ The legislature may- 
 regulate tiie marriage contract,'^ or may regulate di- 
 vorces, ^ or may regulate dower.^ A statute requiring in- 
 terest to be paid in advance to enable the mortgagor to 
 remain in possession is valid.^ A statute authorizing the 
 sale of property free from incumbrance, and transferring 
 the lien thereof to the proceeds, is valid ;6 but if it per- 
 mits the sale whether it brings sufficient to pay the 
 incumbrance or not, it im^Dairs the obligation of the mort- 
 gage ;'' so if it allows the proceeds of the' property lirst to be 
 applied to the payment of costs other than of the sale. 8 
 The lien of a judgment may be taken away by statute.^ 
 Depriving creditors of their judgment-lien does not im- 
 pair the obligation of contracts, i** and requiring a party 
 to record the abstract of his judgment to preserve the 
 lien is valid, ii A State has control of a judgment for 
 damages in a proceeding to appropriate private property 
 to public use.l-^ Liens created by law are subject to the 
 control of the legislature, to either alter, vary, modify, or 
 repeal ;i3 so, a statute giving a sub-contractor a lien is 
 valid. '^4 A statute creating a lien upon the property of 
 the debtor in favor of an existing contract is valid. ^^ A 
 statute giving the grantee of a rent charge the right of 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 148 
 
 reentry for nonpayment of rent is valid ;16 so, an act tak- 
 ing away priority of claim for rent in case of a levy is 
 valid. 1'' A statute depriving a lessee of an action for 
 forcible entry and detainer against a lessor, is or a statute 
 giving an action of covenant against an assignee of a 
 leasehold estate, is valid. i"' 
 
 1 Oriental Bank v. Freeze, 18 Me. 109; Morse v. Klce, 21 Me. 53. 
 
 2 White V. White, 5 Barb. 474; Fultz v. Fox, 9 B. Mon. 499; Kelly «. 
 McCarthy, 3 Bradf. 7; Starr v. Hamilton, Deady, 268; Noel v. Ewing, 
 
 9 Ind. 37 ; Jones' App. 57 Pa. St. 369. 
 
 3 Dartmouth Coll. v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518; Berthelemy v. John- 
 son, 3 B. Mon. 90; Tolen v. Tolen, 2 Blackf. 407; Starr w. Pease, 8 Conn. 
 541; Maguirev. Maguire, 7 Dana, 181; Townsend v. Griffin, 4 Harring. 
 440; Adams v. Palmer, 51 Me. 480; Cabell v. Cabell, 1 Met. Ky. 319; 
 Clark V. Clark, 10 N. H. 380; Cronise v. Cronlse, 54 Pa. St. 255. But see 
 Pouder v. Graham, 4 Fla. 23; State y. Fry, 4 Mo. 120; Brysou w. Camp- 
 bell, 12 Mo. 498. And see Holmes v. Holmes, 4 Barb. 295. 
 
 4 Kelly v. McCarthy, 3 Bradf. 7; Starr v. Hamilton, Deady, 268; 
 Noel V. Ewing, 9 Ind. 37; Barbour v. Barbour, 46 Me. 9; Lucas v. Saw- 
 yer, 17 Iowa, 517; Magee v. Young, 40 Miss. 164; Lawrence v. Miller, 1 
 Sandf. 516; 2 N. Y. 245; In re Lawrence, 5 N. Y. Sup. 310; Moore v. 
 Mayor, 8 N. Y. 110. 
 
 5 Stone V. Bassett, 4 Minn. 298. 
 
 6 Potts V. Water-power Co. 9 N. J. Eq. 592; Potts v. N. J. Arms &c. 
 Co. 17 N. J. Eq. 395. 
 
 7 Martin v. Somerville, 3 WaU. Jr. 206. 
 
 8 Martin v. Somerville, 3 Wall. Jr. 206. 
 
 9 New Orleans v. Holmes, 13 La. An. 502; Iverson v. Shorter, 9 Ala. 
 713; Beck v. Burnett, 22 Ala. 822; Daily w. Burke, 28 Ala. 328; Curry?;. 
 Landers, 35 Ala. 280. 
 
 10 Livingston v. Moore, 7 Peters, 469; Bald. 424; Bank v. Longworth, 
 1 McLean, 35; Daily v. Burke, 28 Ala. 328; Curry v. Landers, 35 Ala. 280; 
 McCormick v. Alexander, 2 Ohio, 285. 
 
 11 Tarpley v. Hamer, 17 Miss. 310. 
 
 12 Garrison v. Mayor, 21 Wall. 196 ; In re Broadway, 61 Barb. 483. 
 
 13 Evans v. Montgomery, 4 Watts & S. 218; Patin v. Prejean, 7 
 La. 301; Woodbury?;. Grimes, 1 Colo. 100; Templeton v. Home, 82 lU. 
 491. 
 
 14 Sullivan v. Brewster, 1 E. D. Smith, 681 ; Miller v. Moore, Ibid. 739. 
 
 15 Gordon v. Canal Co. 1 McA. 513 ; Brien v. Clay, 1 E. D. Smith, 649; 
 Bolton ;;. Johns. 5 Pa. St. 145. But see Kinney v. Sherman, 28 111. 520. 
 
 16 Van Rensselaer v. Ball, ID N. Y. 100. 
 
 17 Stocking v. Hunt, 3 Denio, 274. 
 
 18 Drehmanv. Stifle, 8 Wall. 595; 41 Mo. 184. 
 
 19 Taggart v. McGinn, 14 Pa. St. 155. 
 
149 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 Right of redemption.— The right to redeem is no 
 part of the contract, and may be repealed at any time,i 
 but a right to redeem at any time within two years after 
 sale under a mortgage cannot retroact.2 A statute may 
 give the mortgagor the right to remain in possession dur- 
 ing time of redemption ; 3 but a statute providing that the 
 mortgagor shall not be liable for rent after the sale, is void 
 so far as it. ajiplies to prior contracts. * The legislature 
 cannot change the estate which the trustee is authorized 
 to sell, and extend the time for redemption; ^ but a stat- 
 ute may prescribe a shorter time for advertising a mort- 
 gage sale than existed at the time of the mortgage. 6 Re- 
 demption laws as to judgments on anterior contracts are 
 in conflict with this provision.'^ A law authorizing the 
 redemption of property sold by forced sale impairs the 
 obligation of contracts. ^ The legislature cannot extend 
 the time for the redemption of lands sold for taxes, '-' nor 
 apply appraisement laws to anterior contracts ; i" so, laws 
 for the release and discharge of securities are in conflict,ii 
 and laws a,llowing the debtor to remove property are 
 void as to prior judgment-liens. 12 A law which gives the 
 mortgagor a period in which to redeem confers an equita- 
 ble estate and impairs the obligation of the contract ;13 
 but when a mortgagor applies to a courb for the enforce- 
 ment of his mortgage, he must take the remedy as he 
 iinds it.i^ The right to redeem from execution sale exists 
 solely by statate, which may be repealed at any time.i^ 
 A State may provide that all judicial sales shall be 
 made subject to redemption, and tliis will not violate the 
 obligation of existing judgments, ^° or may provide for re- 
 demption from sale under a lien.^" 
 
 1 Tuolumne Red. Co. v. Sedgwick, 15 Cal. 515; Holland ?;. Dicker- 
 son, 41 Iowa, 367. But see Cargill v. Power, 1 Mich. 369; Iverson v. 
 Shorter, 9 Ala. 713; Beck v. Burnett, 22 Ala. 822. 
 
 2 Howard t?. Bugbee, 24 How. 461; 32 Ala. 713; Seale v. Mitchell, S 
 Cal. 401; Thorne v. San Francisco, 4 Cal. 127; Malony v. Fortune, 14 
 Iowa, 417. But see Iverson v. Shorter, 9 Ala. 713. 
 
 3 Heyward v. Judd, 4 Minn. 483; Berthold v. Holman, 12 Minn. 335; 
 Berthold v. Fox, 13 Minn. 501. 
 
 4 G-reenfield v. Dorris, 1 Sneed, 548. 
 
 5 Hevward v. Judd, 4 Minn. 483; Goenen v. Schroeder, 8 Minn. 387 ; 
 Carrol v. Rossiter, 10 Minn. 174. 
 
 6 James v. StuU, 9 Barb. 482. 
 
 7 Scobey v. Gibson, 17 Ind. 572; Inglehart v. VP'olfin, 20 Ind. 32. 
 
 8 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 
 608; Gantly v. Ewing, 3 How. 716; Howard v. Bugbee, 24 How. 434; 
 Weaver v. Maillot, 15 La. An. 395 ; Billmeyer v . Evans,40 Pa. St. 324 ; Bunn 
 V. Gorgus, 41 Pa. St. 441 ; Oliver v. McClure, 28 Ark. 555; Scobey v. Gib- 
 
Art, I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 150 
 
 son, 17 Ind. 572. But see Turner v. Watkins, 31 Ark. 429; Moore v. Mar- 
 tin, 38 Cal. 428. 
 
 9 Robinson v. House, 13 Wis. 341: Dikeman v. Dikeman, 11 Paige, 
 434. But see Gault's Appeal, 33 Pa. St. 94. 
 
 10 Rosier v. Hale, 10 Iowa, 470. 
 
 11 Swift V. Fletcher, G Minn. 550. 
 
 12 Tillotson V. Millard, 7 Minn. 513. 
 
 13 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; Grantlj" v. Ewing, 3 How. 716. 
 But see Waldo -y. Williams, 4 111. 264; Stone v. Bassett, 4 Minn. 298; 
 Heyward v. Judd, Ibid. 483; Freeborn v. Pettibone, 5 Minn. 277. 
 
 14 Heyward v. Judd, 4 Miun. 483. 
 
 15 Holland t!. Dickerson, 41 Iowa, 367; Tuolumne Red. Co. v. Sedg- 
 wick, 15 Cal. 515. But see Cargill v. Power, 1 Mich. 369. 
 
 13 Moore v. Martin, 33 Cal. 428; Turner v. Watkins, 31 Ark. 429; Tuol- 
 umne Red. Co. V. Sedgwick, 15 Cal. 515. But see Oliver v. MeClure, 28 
 Ark. 555; Scobey v. Gibson, 17 Ind. 572; Inglehart v. Wolfin, 20 Ind. 52. 
 
 17 Templeton v. Home, 82 HI. 491. 
 
 State power of taxation. — A tax upon a new sub- 
 ject, or an increased tax upon an old one, does not impair 
 the obligation of the contract. ^ A statute imposing a tax 
 on a mortgage is valid. ^ So, a tax on a loan may author- 
 ize the borrower to dediict the amount of the tax from the 
 interest. 3 A bond received as a security for the purchase 
 of property may be taxed to any extent required by the 
 State government. 4 So, a tax upon the annual rent re- 
 served in leases does not impair the obligation of the con- 
 tract. ^ A State may tax bonds issued by itself for bor- 
 rowed money. '^ A State cannot pass a law taxing a corpo- 
 ration when it violates the obligation of the contract. ' So, 
 a subsequent act, imposing additional taxation on shares 
 of stockholders, imjDairs the obligation, s A State may im- 
 pose a tax on its corporation as an entity as well as upon 
 the corporation stock, its capital, or its sejiarate corpora- 
 tion property, and this may be in j)roi)ortion to the income 
 received as well as to the value ;'-^ or it may reijeal a tem- 
 porary rate and impose another and higher rate.i'^ A stat- 
 ute authorizing a tax according to a previous assessment 
 is not retrospective.il The provisions in this clause are a 
 limitation on the taxing power of the State, as well as 
 upon all its legislation. i- 
 
 1 North Mo. R. R. v. Maguire, 20 WaU. 46; 49 Mo. 490. 
 
 •>. Cook V. Smith, 30 N. J. .87. 
 
 3 Maltby v. Reading &c, R. R, Co, 52 Pa. St. 140. 
 
 4 Weston v. Charleston, 2 Peters, 449; Harp. 340. 
 
 5 Loring v. State, 16 Ohio, 590; Livingston v. Hollenbeck, 4 Barb. 9. 
 
 6 Champaign Bankt?. Smith, 7 Ohio St. 42; People v. Home Ins. Co. 
 29 Cal. 533, explained in Miuray v. Charleston. 96 U. S. 447. 
 
153 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 7 Washington University v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 4.39; Home of the Friend 
 less V. Rose, 8 Wall. 430. 
 
 8 Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U. S. 679. 
 
 9 Delaware R. R. Tax, 18 Wall. 232. 
 
 10 St. Joseph V. Hannibal & St. J. R. R. Co. 39 Mo. 476. 
 
 11 Locke V. New Orleans, 4 Wall. 172. 
 
 12 Murray v. Charleston, 96 U. S. 432. 
 
 Licenses. — A license is a contract, but revocable at the 
 will of the licenser, unless otherwise provided in the State 
 constitution.! If no bonus is given for the right, a subse- 
 quent levy of a tax is valid. ^ So, a license to sell liquor 
 is issued as a part of the police system of the State, and 
 is subject to modification or revocation. ^ The license to 
 practice law or medicine may be modified in any manner 
 which the public welfare may demand, and a tax on the 
 license is not unconstitutional. ^ If the license to erect a 
 dam in a navigable river is defeasible by the terms thereof, 
 it may be modified or revoked. ^ The certificate to a for- 
 eign corporation does not constitute a contract so as to 
 prohibit subsequent taxation by the laws of the State. "^ 
 
 1 Phalen ?;. Virginia, 8 How. 163; 3 Harring. 441 ; Caklerw. Kurby,5 
 Gray, 597; Adams v. Hackett, 27 N. H. 283; Him v. Ohio, 1 Ohio St. 21; 
 Metrop. Bd. of Excise r.Barrie, 7 Tiff. 667; Bass v. Mayor, Meigs, 421; 
 Gregory v. Shelby, 2 Met.(Kv.) 589; Freligh v. State, 8 Mo. 60;); State v. 
 Sterling, 8 Mo. 697 ; State v. Hawthorn, 9 Mo. 389. 
 
 2 Wendover v. Lexington, 15 B. Mon. 253. 
 
 3 Fell V. State; 42 Md. 71; Calder v. Kurby, 71 Mass. 517; State v. 
 Holmes, 38 N. H- 225; Metrop. Bd. of Excise v. Barrie, 34 N. Y. 657; 
 Comm. V. Intox. Liquors, 115 Mass. 153. 
 
 4 State V. Fellowes, 12 La. An. 344; State v. Waples, Ibid. 343; New 
 Orleans v. Turpen, 13 La. An. 56; Simmons v. State, 12 Mo. 268; State v. 
 Gazlay, 5 Ohio, 14. 
 
 5 Rundle v. Del. &c. Can. Co. 14 How. 80; 1 Wall. Jr. 275; Pratt v. 
 Brown, 3 Wis. 603; Monongahela Nav. Co. v. Coons, 6 Watts & S. 101; 
 Susquehanna Can. Co. v. Wright, 9 Ibid. 9. And see Glover v. Powell, 
 10 N. J. Eq. 211; Cranshaw v. State R. Co. 6 Rand. 245. 
 
 6 Home Ins. Co. v. Augusta, 93 U. S. 116. 
 
 Exemption from taxation.— The State right of tax- 
 ation can be waived only by express stipulation,! and 
 the intention to exempt must be clear.2 The legislature 
 may bind the State by contract so as to exempt property 
 from taxation, 3 but the contract must be construed 
 strictly.^ If property be given to a society for certain 
 purposes, under a statute exempting such gifts, the stat- 
 ute is a contract with the donors, and such property is 
 exempt so long as it is used for the purposes of the donee.^ 
 A provision in the charter of an eleemosynary corj)oration, 
 or of a university, that its property shall be exempt, is a 
 
Art. I, § 10 -LIMITATION OF POWERS. 152 
 
 contract and cannot be impaired, c A statute which pro- 
 vides that public grants for pious and other uses shall 
 be forever exempt has no effect on prior grants while it 
 remams m force, and may be repealed.' If the exemp- 
 tion IS a mere gratuity, is spontaneous, and no service or 
 duty or other condition is imposed, it may be withdrawn 
 at any time;8 but if a statute for a valid consideration 
 stipulates that certain lands shall be exempt from taxa- 
 tion, It cannot pass a law to impair the obligation of the 
 contract,^ nor will the payment of taxes for twenty vears 
 prevent the owner from claiming the exemption.io If 
 a statute provides that all land purchased from the 
 United States shall be exempt from taxation for a certain 
 period, it cannot be taxed till the expiration of that time n 
 It the land is exempt the buildings erected on it are ex- 
 empt also; ^2 but if the interest in the buildings is created 
 entirely distinct from the interest in the lands, the build- 
 ings may be taxed although the land is exempt. i3 if the 
 land be exempt it will be exempt in the hands of the 
 lessee ; i* but if the lessee covenants to pay such taxes as 
 may be assessed thereon he cannot allege the unconstitu- 
 tionality of an act imposing a tax. is if the privilege of 
 exemption is annexed to the land it will pass to a pur- 
 chaser; 10 bat it will not pass to a purchaser under a sub- 
 sequent act authorizing the sale,i' and a subsequent stat- 
 ute may render it liable where it is conveyed without the 
 reservation of an annual rent, is 
 
 w iT^.^i^i^^^- ?• ^^- ^- ^aguire, 20 Wall. 42; Tomlinson v. Branch, 15 
 Wall. 460; Tomlmson z-. Jessup, 15 Wall. 454; Providence R. R i. Eil- 
 linss, 4 Peters, 514; Charles River Briclt>c v. Warren Brids-e 11 Peters 
 420; Turnpike Co. v. State, 3 Wall. 210; Jones & Co. v. Comm. 6f) Pa. St.' 
 
 lo7. 
 
 o^^TT^^^^??f ^V Slieboymn, 2 Black, 513; Rector &c. v. Philadelphia Co. 
 24 How. 302; Jones & Co. ■y.^Conim. 6;i Pa. St. 137. 
 
 3 New Jersey ^; Wilson, 7 Cranch, 166; Richmond R. R. Co. v. 
 Louisa R. R. Co. 13 How. 71 ; Dod<>e v. Woolsey, 18 How. 331 ; Piqua Br. 
 Bk. V. Knoop, 16 How. 369; Von Hoffman v. Quincv, 4 Wall 535- Jpfferl 
 son Br. Bk. v. Skelly, 1 Bl4ck, 447; Washington UidV ^Roust's WaU 
 43.-J; iomlmson?;. Branch, 15 Wall. 460; Tomlinson v. JessuD 15 Wall' 
 454; Pacific R.R. Co. ^.Maguire, 20 Wall. 42; Erie R. Cof". Penn 21 
 Wo -i^i'o' Gordons Appeals Tax Ct. 3 Har. 133; McGee v. Mathis, 4 
 Wall. 143; Home of the Friendless v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 430; Wilmino-tbn 
 R. R. Co. V. Reid, 13 Wall. 264; Humphrey v. Pegues, 16 Wall. 244 
 
 4 Weston V. Supervisors, 44 Wis. 242. 
 
 5 Atwater v. Woodbridge, 6 Conn. 223; Osborne v. Hnmnhrevs. 7 
 Conn. 335; Parker v. Redtield, 10 Conn. 4>J0; Landon v. Litchfield 11 
 Po^."rl.^-I-;^^' Seymour v. Hartford, 21 Conn. 431; Herrick v. Randolph. 
 13 Vt. 52o. 
 
 6 Home of The Friendless v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 430: Washington Uni- 
 versity V. Rouse, 8 Wall. 439; 42 Mo. 308. ' '^""*=>''"" "J"! 
 
 7 Herrick v. Randolph, 13 Vt. 525. 
 
163 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 8 Rector V. Philadelphia, 24 How. 300; 24 Pa. St. 229; Tucker v. Fer- 
 guson, 22 Wall. 527 ; Bramercl v. Colchester, 31 Conn. 407 ; Lord v. Litch- 
 field, 36 Conn. 116; West Wisconsin K. R. Co. v. Trempealeau Co. 93 TJ. 
 S. 595. And see Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Wheat. 316; Fertiliz- 
 ing Co. tJ.Hyde Park, 97 U. S. 666. 
 
 9 State V. Wilson, 7 Cranch, 164; 2 N. J. 300. 
 
 10 Landon v. Litchfield, 11 Conn. 251. 
 
 11 Thompson v. Holton, 6 McLean, 386. And see McGee v. Mathis, 4 
 Wall. 143. 
 
 12 Osborne v. Humphreys, 7 Conn. 335. 
 
 13 Parker v. Redfield, 10 Conn. 490. 
 
 14 Osborne v. Humphrey, 7 Conn. 335; Landon v. Litchfield, 11 Conn. 
 251 ; Hardy v. Waltham, 24 Mass. 108», Matheny v. Golden, 5 Ohio St. 361; 
 Kumler v. Traber, 5 Ohio St. 442. 
 
 15 Hart v. Cornwall, 14 Conn. 228. 
 
 16 State V. Wilson, 7 Cranch, 164; 2 N. J. 300. 
 
 17 Armstrong v. Treasurer, 16 Peters, 281 ; 10 Ohio, 235. 
 
 18 New Haven v. Sheffield, 30 Conn. 160; Brainerd v. Colchester, 31 
 Conn. 407 ; Lord v. Litchfield, 36 Conn. 116. 
 
 Land grants. — A statute repealing a prior grant of 
 land is void.i A State cannot pass a law whereby the es- 
 tate granted will be impaired or rendered null and void. 2 
 An executed contract is impaired by a law operating to 
 divest any right or estate vested under a grant, ^ and any 
 attempt to destroy vested rights is unconstitutional.'^ A 
 subsequent statute imposing conditions not contained in 
 the grant is unconstitutional. ^ A grant of the right to 
 purchase cannot be impaired by a subsequent act.^ If a 
 party by payment of the purchase-money becomes enti- 
 tled to a grant, the State cannot by a subsequent act pro- 
 vide for a forfeiture of his right." A grant of land to a 
 railroad cannot be subsequently revoked. ^ If a grant in- 
 cludes both sides of an unnavigable river, a State cannot 
 by subsequent legislation compel the owner to alter a dam 
 already erected. ^ Statutes which affect the right of a pat- 
 entee of the State are in violation of the obligation of the 
 contract, 1'' but a party may be required to establish the 
 genuineness of his certificate to be entitled to survey and 
 patent. ^1 A statute cannot divest the innocent purchaser 
 from a grantee who procured his title by fraud. ^^ The 
 property of an alien purchased under a si^ecial act cannot 
 be transferred to another by mere legislative power. ^3 go, 
 a legislature cannot by a subsequent act provide a differ- 
 ent mode of jjerpetuating a trust. i^ A law annulling con- 
 veyances and declaring that grantors shall stand seized of 
 their former estates is unconstitutional. ^^ A law which 
 restricts the rights of a claimant as against an occupant 
 of land is in violation of a compact between States; i^ 
 
Art. I, § 10 lilMITATIOJf OF POWERS. 154 
 
 but a statute allowing an occupant to recover compensa- 
 tion for improvements does not impair the obligation of 
 the grant. 1'^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Minnesota &c. E,. R. Co. 1 Black, 353; 1 Minn. 127. 
 
 2 Fletcher ?;. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87 ; Gaines v. Buf orcl, 1 Dana, 481 ; Peo- 
 ple V. Piatt, 17 Johns. 195; Crenshaw v. Slate Kiv. Co. 6 Rand. 245. 
 
 3 Phila. &c. R. R. Co. v. Bowers, 4 Houst. 506. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Louisville &c. Can. Co. 4 Dill. 611. 
 
 5 Gaines v. Buf ord, 1 Dana, 481. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Great Falls Manuf . Co. 21 Md. 119. 
 
 7 Winter^?. Jones, 10 Ga. 190; Fogg ?;. Williams, 2 Head, 474. 
 
 8 Davis V. Gray, 16 Wall. 203. 
 
 i) People 1). Piatt, 17 Johns. 195; States. Glenn, 7 Jones (N. C.) 321; 
 Cornelius v. Glenn, 7 Jones (N. C.) 512. 
 
 10 People V. Piatt, 17 Johns. 195. 
 
 11 League v. DeYoung, 11 How. 185. 
 
 12 Fletcher V. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87. 
 
 13 Bonaparte v. Camden &c. Co. Bald. 205. 
 
 14 Fletcher v. R. & B. R. R. Co. 39 Vt. 535. 
 
 15 Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87 ; Terrett v. Taylor, 9 Cranch, 43; 
 Montgomery v. Kasson, 16 Cal. 189 ; Grogan v. San Francisco, 18 Cal. 
 590; Berrett v. Oliver, 7 Gill & J. 191. 
 
 16 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1. 
 
 17 Albee tj. May, 2 Paine, 74; Armstrong v. Jackson, 1 Blackf. 210; 
 Scott V. Mather, 14 Tex. 235. But see Bristoe v. Evans, 2 Overt. 341 ; 
 Nelson v. Allen, 1 Yerg. 360. 
 
 Grants. — A grant made for the purpose of public in- 
 struction is not subject to subsequent legislative control; i 
 but if a scholarshiiD does not name the iDlace of tuition, 
 the locality of the college may be changed.'-^ If parties 
 dedicate a square to public use, the legislature cannot 
 authorize its sale and use for a purpose foreign to the ob- 
 ject of the grant; 3 but subjecting the land of a grantee to 
 the payment of his debts does not impair vested rights 
 under the graut.'^ A grant of a portion of submerged 
 lands will not prevent the improvement of the remainder 
 by the State.^ The legislature may prohibit the use of a 
 place for a cemetery, although there is a covenant in the 
 grant that the place may be so used.^ Where a religious 
 corporation is under a disability to convey by its charter, 
 a State may authorize a sale; '' so, a statute providing for 
 the sale of lands by tenants in common, or joint tenants, 
 is valid. 8 A State may release its interest in an es- 
 cheated estate to the occupant. 9 An act confirming a 
 deed defectively acknowledged does not impair the obli- 
 gation of contracts. 10 Although the effect of a registra- 
 tion law is to render a prior deed fraudulent and void 
 
155 LIMITATION- OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 against subsequent purchasers, it is not a law impairing 
 obligations.il A statute which perfects a voidable entry 
 and gives a patent therefor is valid, although it divests a 
 grant made after entry but before its passage, i- A grant 
 of land by the United States to a^ State is on conditions, 
 and its acceptance is a contract, is 
 
 1 Terrell v. Taylor, 9 Cranch, 43 ; Grammar Scliool v. Bm-t 11 Vt. 632. 
 
 2 Houston V. Jefferson College, 63 Pa. St. 423. 
 
 3 Warren v. Mayor, 22 Iowa, 351. 
 
 4 Livingston v. Moore, 7 Peters, 460; Bald. 424. 
 
 5 HoUister v. Union Co. 9 Conn. 436; Lansijig v. Smith, 8 Cowcn, 143. 
 
 6 Coates v. New World, 7 Cowen, 585; Presb. Cluircliv. N. Y. 5 Cow. 
 538. And see Lake View v. Rose Hill Cemetery, 70 111. 191. 
 
 7 Barton's Appeal, 57 Pa. St. 213. 
 
 8 Ricliardson v. Monson, 23 Conn. 94. 
 
 9 Mulligan v. Corbins, 7 Wall. 487. 
 
 10 Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 88; Kaverty v. Fudge, 3 McLean, 230; 
 Dentzell?;. Waldie, 30 Cal. 138; Betliuno v. Dougherty, 30 Ga. 7*0; Du- 
 lany ^;. Tilghman, 6 Gill. & J. 461; Hughes t-. Cannon, 2 Humph. o39, 
 Brinton v. Sievers, 12 Iowa, 389; Maxey v. Wise, 2o Ind, 1 ; Bell v. Pei- 
 kins. Peck, Tenn. 261; Barton v. Morris, 15 Ohio, 408; ChestnuJt v. 
 Shane, 15 Ohio, 599; Journeay ?;. Gibson, 56 Pa. St. 57; Barnet «. bai^ 
 net,15Serg. &R.72; Tate v. Stooltzfoos, 16 Serg. & R. So. And see 
 Pearce v. Patton, 7 B. Mon. 162. 
 
 11 Jackson ^.Lamphire, 3 Peters, 280; Stafford v. Lick, 7 Cal. 479; 
 Tucker V. Harris, 13 Ga. 1; Boston v. Commissioners, 16 .Cra- 102, Suc- 
 cession of Nelson, 24 La. Ann. 25; Rochereau z^. Delacroix, 26 La An. 
 584; Varrick v. Briggs, 6 Paige, 323; 2 Wend. 543; Miles v. Kmg, 5 Rich. 
 N. S. 146. 
 
 12 Williams v. Norris, 12 Wheat. 117. 
 
 13 McGee v. Mathis, 4 Wall. 156. 
 
 Vested rights.— A right is vested when it has already 
 become a title legal or equitable,i and the legislature has 
 no power to divest titles,^ or legal or equitable rights pre- 
 viously vested,^ or to vest them in another; * so, vested 
 rights acquired by a statute granting new remedies, or en- 
 larging old ones, are beyond the reach of the legislature, 
 and the repeal of the statute will not affect them.^ The 
 legislature cannot take away vested rights, nor create a 
 cause of action for which there was no remedy at the time 
 of its occurrence. 6 Even if rights have grown up under 
 a law of somewhat ambiguous meaning, the legislature 
 cannot interfere with them,^ but an ex post Jacto law 
 which does not apply to crimes, impair the obligation ot 
 contracts, or divest vested rights, is not unconstitutional. «^ 
 An act of the legislature is not to be construed to operate 
 retrospectively so as to take away a vested right. « A stat- 
 ute is not objectionable because it purports to operate on 
 
Art. I, § 10 liOnTATiON of powers. 156 
 
 prior contingent or qualified rights, but onljr where it op- 
 erates on vested rights, i*^ acquired under existing laws.^i 
 A State may pass a retrospective law impairing her own 
 rights. 12 If an act of the legislature is within the legisla- 
 tive power it is not a valid objection to it that it divests 
 vested rights. Such an act is not within the constitu- 
 tional prohibition, however repugnant it may be to the 
 principles of sound legislation. ^3 
 
 1 Kichardson v. Akin, 87 111. 138. 
 
 2 Helm V. Webster, 85 111. 116. 
 
 3 Bunn v. Morrison, 5 Ark. 217; Grissom v. Hill, 17 Ark. 489. 
 
 4 Koenig v. Omaha &c. E. R. Co. 3 Neb. 383. 
 
 5 Memphis v. U. S. 97 U. S. 293. 
 
 6 Coosa Kiv. R. E,. Co. v. Barclay, 30 Ala. 120. 
 
 7 McLeod v. Burroughs, 9 Ga. 213. 
 
 8 New Orleans v. Pontz, 14 La. An. 853; New Orleans v. Corcliviolle, 
 13 Ibid. 260; Bay v. Gage, 36 Barb. 447; Hinton v. Hinton, PhiU. (N. C.) 
 410; Tilton v. Swift, 40 Iowa, 78; Lane v. Nelson, 79 Pa. St. 407. 
 
 9 Dash V. Vankleck, 7 Johns. 477. 
 
 10 Clarke v. McCreary, 40 Miss. 347. 
 
 11 Society &c. v. Wheeler, 2 Gall. 139. And see Nelson v. AUen, 1 
 Yerg. 360; Officer v. Young, 5 Yerg. 320. 
 
 12 Davis V. Dawes, 4 Watts & S. 401. 
 .3 Lane v. Nelson, 79 Pa. St. 407. 
 
 Impairment of rights. — If the right be impaired by a 
 
 subsequent statute the law is void,i but the repeal of a 
 statute before a party has taken all the steps necessary to 
 give him a right under it does not impair the right. ^ A 
 statute requiring the submission of a claim under a con- 
 tract before a board of examiners for approval is void;^ 
 so, a prohibition to sue is an impairment of the obliga- 
 tion,4 as a statute prohibiting persons aiding the Rebellion 
 from prosecuting or defending actions.^ A provision in a 
 constitution that prohibits the enforcement of a contract 
 for slaves is void ; ^ or that deprives a creditor of his rem- 
 edy on a judgment against a municipal corporation for- 
 ever, unless the legislature shall provide for its payment ; ' 
 so, a retrospective law dejjriving a party of his right to 
 enforce a contract, if taxes have not been paid, is void.^ 
 A statute prohibiting the transfer of clioses in action, and 
 any action thereon after the transfer, is unconstitutional. ^- 
 The right to institute ejectment is part of the mortgage 
 contract, and cannot be prohibited by statute ;i*^ so, a 
 statute which deprives a person of his right to recover a 
 rent previously paid to the marshal is unconstitutional. i^^ 
 The right of a purchaser to a tax-sale deed cannot be 
 
157 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 taken away by subsequent legislation. 12 An act empow- 
 ering courts and juries to remit interest is void as to prior 
 contracts. 13 
 
 1 Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311 ; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 608; 
 Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535. 
 
 2 Van Home v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304; Mobile R. K. Co. v. State, 29 
 Ala. 573; Brinsfielcl v. Carter, 2 Ga. 143; Wise v. Rogers, 24 Gratt. 169; 
 Huntsman v. Randolph, 5 Hayw. 263; State v. Gray, 4 Wis. 380. 
 
 3 McCauley v. Brooks, 16 Cal. 11. 
 
 4 Beers v. Arkansas, 20 How. 527; Scarborough v. Dugan, 10 Cal. 305. 
 
 5 Davis V. Pierse, 7 Minn. 13; McFarland v. Butler, 8 Miim. 116; 
 Jackson v. Butler, 8 Minn. 117. 
 
 6 Whits V. Hart, 13 Wall. 646; 39 Ga. 306; French v. Tomlin, 19 Am. 
 Law Reg. 641 ; Jacoway v. Denton, 25 Ark. 625; McNealy v. Gregory, 13 
 Fla. 417. But see Shorter v. Cobb, 39 Ga. 285; Armstrong v. Lecompte, 
 21 La. An. 528; Dranguet v. Rost, 21 La. An. 538. 
 
 7 Hadfield v. N. Y. 6 Robt. 501. 
 
 8 Walker v. Whitehead, 16 Wall. 314; 43 Ga. 537; Lathrop v. Brown, 
 1 Woods, 474 ; Griffiths v. Shipp, 49 Ga. 231 ; Kimbro v. Bank, 49 Ga. 419; 
 Mitchell V. Cothrans,49 Ga. 125; Gardner v. Jeter, 49 Ga. 195; Dough- 
 erty V. Fogle, 50 Ga. 464. 
 
 9 Planters' Bank v. Sharp, 6 How. 301; 12 Miss. 17; Jemison v. 
 Planters' Bank, 23 Ala. 168; Montgomery v. Galbraith, 19 Miss. 555; 
 Mclntyre v. Ingraham, 35 Miss. 25; Grand Gulf R. R. Co. v. State, 18 
 Miss. 428. And see Hyde v. Planters' Bank, 8 Rob. (La.) 416. 
 
 10 Mimdy v. Monroe, 1 Mich. 68. 
 
 11 Clark V. Mitchell, 64 Mo. 564. 
 
 12 Bruce V. Schuyler, 4 Gilm. 221. 
 
 13 Roberts v. Cocke, 28 Gratt. 207; Cecil v. Deyerle, Ibid. 775; Kent v. 
 Kent, Ibid. 840; Pretlow v. Bailey, 29 Gratt. 212. 
 
 What not an impairment of rights. — A statute 
 may provide that no suit shall be brought on a promise 
 except it be in writing, 1 or may allow suits on an official 
 bond instead of scw'e facias on the judgment, 2 or may re- 
 peal a law which prohibited suits against Indians. ^ A 
 statute may require a creditor to exhaust his securities 
 before bringing suit on his claim, * or may require holders 
 of certificates of purchase to give notice to occupants of 
 land of his intent to apply for a deed a certain time be- 
 fore his application,^^ or may require suitors to take a test 
 oath of loyalty. 6 A. statute may enact that suit must be 
 brought in the name of the real party. '^ A statute may 
 allow the holder of a detached coupon to sue thereon, ^ or 
 may allow a purchaser to recover money paid for taxes 
 and costs,9 or may authorize the grantee of a rent charge 
 to sue at law in his own name,i'> or allow an administrator 
 de bonus non to sue, in the name of the State, on the bond 
 of his predecessor, 11 or may allow one firm to sue another, 
 although some are members of both firms,i2 or may 
 
 Desty Fed. Cost.— 14=. 
 
Art. I, § 10 I.I3IITATION OF POWERS. 158 
 
 authorize one plaintiff to recover, although the other does 
 not establish his title, i^ or may authorize the assignee of 
 a chose in action to sue in his own name,i4 or may render 
 a party liable to suit by repeal of an act under which he 
 was exempt, 15 or may require that the maker and indorser 
 of a note be sued in a joint action. 16 A statute may 
 authorize an administrator to apply to the court for the 
 sale of real estate of an intestate to pay his debts, i" or 
 may allow a guardian to sell real estate and invest pro- 
 ceeds in other securities, ^^ or may discharge a testament- 
 ary trustee on his own request and appoint another, i^ A 
 statute may grant the right to an appeal, or allow appeal 
 without security for costs, or permit one of several to 
 appeal,2o or may take away the right of appeal,'-^! or may 
 authorize the filing of a bill of review, 22 or may allow a 
 new trial or an appeal ;23 but a statute declaring a judg- 
 ment void, and granting a new trial, is void;^* yet a law 
 affecting judgments not rendered on a contract is valid. -'J 
 A statute may provide that no scire facias shall be issued 
 to revive a dormant judgment.^s A debtor in default has 
 no vested right to have his property sold in any particular 
 way. 2" A statute may change the law of costs as to pend- 
 ing judgments,28 but not as to rights already vested,29 or 
 may reduce costs below the legal amount, or deny them 
 altogether. 30 
 
 1 Kiugsleyt). Cousms, 49 Me. 91. 
 
 2 WMte w. Wilkins, 24 Me. 299.. 
 
 3 Stokes V. Rodman, 5 R. I. 405. 
 
 4 Swift V. Fletcher, 6 Minn. 550. 
 
 5 Cmtis V. Whitney, 13 Wall. 68. 
 
 6 Beirne v. Brown, 4 West Va. 72. 
 
 7 Hancock V. JRitcliie, 11 Ind. 48. 
 
 8 Augnsta Bank v. Angusta, 49 Me. 507. 
 
 9 Smith V. Merchand, 7 Serg. & R. 260. 
 
 10 Van Rensselaer v. Hays, 19 N. Y. 68. 
 
 11 Graham v. State, 7 Ind. 470. 
 
 12 Hepburn v. Curts, 7 Watts, 300. 
 
 13 Hinckle v. Rifiert, 6 Pa. St. 196. 
 
 14 Harlan r. Sigler, Morris, 39; Ford t). Hale, 1 Hon. 23. 
 
 15 Stokes V. Rodman, 5 R. I. 405.. 
 
 16 McMillan v. Sprague, 4 How. (Miss.) 647. 
 
 17 Florentine v. Barton, 2 "VI^U. 210. And see Brenham v. Story, 39 
 Cal. 179; Rozier v. Fagan, 46 111. 404. 
 
 18 Lohrano V. Nelligan, 9 Wall. 295. 
 
 19 Williamson v. Snydam, 6 Wall. 723. 
 
159 I.1MITATI0K OJb' POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 20 Todd V. Neal, 49 Ala. 266; Wilder v. Lumpkin, 4 Ga. 208: Converse 
 V. Burrows, 2 Minn. 229: Davis v. Ballard, 1 J. J. Marsh. 563; Braddep 
 V. Brownfield, 2 Watts & S. 271. 
 
 21 Grover v. Coon, 1 N. Y. 536. 
 
 22 Sampereac v. U. S. 7 Peters, 222. 
 
 23 Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; Baltimore &c. R. K. Co. v. Nesbit, 10 
 Hovsr. 395; League v. De Young, 11 How. 185; Colby v. Dennis, 36 Me. 9: 
 Page V. Matthews, 40 Ala. 547. 
 
 24 Weaver v. Lapsley, 43 Ala. 224. 
 
 25 Sprott V. Reid, 3 G. Greene, 489. 
 
 26 Pai-ker^. Shannonhouse, Phillips (N. 209. 
 
 27 Tuolumne Redemp. Co. v. Sedgwick, 15 Cal, 515. 
 
 28 Taylor v. Keeler, 30 Conn. 324. 
 
 29 State v. Auditor, 33 Miss. 287. 
 
 30 Free v. Howorth, 19 Ind. 404 ; Potter ^. Sturdevant, 4 Me. 154 ; Rader 
 V. S. R. Dist. 36 N. J. 273. 
 
 Corporations. — If the foundation of a corporation is 
 private, tliougli under the charter of the Government, the 
 corporation is valid. i A corporation may be private, and 
 yet the charter may contain provisions of a purely public 
 character,^ and a bounty may as well be bestowed on a 
 private as on a public corporation. ^ Where the proj^erty 
 of a corporation is private, it is a private corporation ;'i but 
 where the whole interests and franchises are the exclusive 
 property and domain of the Government, it is a public 
 corporation. 5 A corporation created for the purpose of 
 investing school funds for a town is a private corporation. 6 
 An act which impairs the charter by enlarging the powers 
 of the State over the body corporate, or by abridging the 
 franchise, or by altering the charter, is void;" so, a statute 
 passed after granting the charter, annexing a cause of 
 forfeiture unknown to the charter, is unconstitutional. ^ 
 The grant of an annual appropriation in a charter, in con- 
 sideration of subscriptions by private individuals, is a 
 contract, and cannot be repealed. 9 The legislature may 
 require a corporation to make annual reports, lo or may 
 require a certain ijroportion of its officers to reside in the 
 State, 11 or may make a failure to comply with police regu- 
 lations a ground for forfeiture of charter, ^2 q^ may change 
 the mode of assessing its jjroperty.i^ A corporation is 
 subject to legislative control where it is a mere instrument 
 or agent of the State, i'^ but the legislature cannot subject 
 a corporation to forfeiture of its franchise for any cause 
 not sufficient when such corporation was created. ^^ A 
 State may revive a corporation and legalize contracts 
 
Art. I, § 10 I;IMITATION OF POWERS. 160 
 
 made by it after forfeiture of its cTiarter, or it may trans- 
 fer the property of an insolvent corporation to a new one. ^6 
 It may provide for a receiver ujion dissolution of the cor- 
 poration.!" The dissolution does not impair the obligation 
 of its contracts. 18 
 
 1 Dartmouth Coll. v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518; Trustees v. State. 14 
 How. 26 i; 2 Ind. 293; Allen v. McKean, 1 Sum. 276; Louisville v. Univer- 
 sity, 15 B. Mon. 642; Kegents v. Williams, 9 Gill. & J. 365; Trustees v. 
 Bradbury, 11 Me. 118; Yarmouth v. Yarmouth, 34 Me. 411; Brown v. 
 Hummel, 6 Pa. St. 86; Plymouth v. Jackson, 15 Pa. St. 44; State v. Hey- 
 ward, 3 Rich. 389. 
 
 2 Kegents v. WilUams, 9 Gill. & J. 365. 
 
 3 Allen v. McKean, 1 Sum. 276; Louisville v. University, 15 B. Mon. 
 642; Regents v. Williams, 9 Gill. & J. 365; Montgomery Acad. v. George, 
 14 La, 395; Sheriff v. Lowndes, 16 Md. 357; Richardson w. Brown, 6 Me. 
 355; Yarmouth v. Yarmouth, 34 Me. 411; State v. Heyward, 3 Rich. 389. 
 
 4 Piqua State Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; 6 Ohio St. 342. 
 
 5 Dartmouth Coll. v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 578; Allen v. McKean, 
 1 Sum. 276; Regents v. Williams, 9 Gill. & J. 365; University v. Maultsby, 
 
 8 Ired. Eq. 257. 
 
 6 Ti-usteest?. Bradbiu-y, 11 Me. 118. 
 
 7 Phila. <fec. R. R. Co. v. Bowers, 4 Houst. 506; Commercial Bank v. 
 State, 14 Miss. 439. 
 
 8 Washington Br. Co. v. State, 18 Conn. 53; People v. Plankroad Co. 
 
 9 Mich. 285; Aurora T. Co. v. Holthouse, 7 Ind. 59; State v. Tombecbee 
 Bank, 2 Stew. 30. 
 
 9 Visitors v. State, 15 Md. 330. 
 
 10 State V. S. P. R. R. Co. 24 Tex. 80. 
 n State V. S. P. R. R. Co. 24 Tex. 80. 
 
 12 State V. S. P. R. R. Co. 24 Tex. 80. The provisions of a charter 
 cannot exempt a corporation or its officers from regulations made in 
 the exercise of police powers of the State— Cummings v. Spaunhorst, 
 5 Mo. Ct. App. 21. 
 
 13 Bank v. Hamilton, 21 111. 53. 
 
 14 Louisville v. University, 15 B. Mon. 642; Lincoln Bank v. Richard* 
 son, 1 Me. 79; Bleakney v. Farmers' Bank, 17 Serg. & R. 64; Of&cer v. 
 Young, 5 Yerg. 320. 
 
 15 State V. Tombeckbee Bk. 2 Stew. 30. 
 
 16 Mudge V. Commissioners, 10 Rob. (La.) 460. 
 
 17 Carey v. Giles, 9 Ga. 253; Searcey v. Stubbs, 12 Ga. 437; Hall v. 
 Carey, 5 Ga. 253; Aurora T. Co. v. Holthouse, 7 Ind. 59; Readt;. Frank- 
 fort Bank, 23 Me. 318; vSav. Inst. i). Maken, 23 Me. 360; Leathers?;. 
 Shipbuilders' Bank, 40 Me. 386; Nevitt v. Bank, 14 Miss. 513; Suydam 
 V. Receivers, 3 N. J. Eq. 314; Bank of Cohuubiav. Att. Gen. 3 Wend. 588. 
 
 18 Mumma v. Potomac Co. 8 Peters, 281. 
 
161 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 Corporate liability. — A statute may render the cor- 
 poration liable for its debts, i or may render the stock- 
 holders personally liable, 2 or may relieve stockholders 
 who subsequently subscribed from personal liability. 3 A 
 statute repealing a law imposing a personal liability on 
 stockholders cannot affect debts contracted before its 
 passage."^ A statute may subject the iDroperty and fran- 
 chise of the corporation to the payment of its debts, ^ or 
 may provide means for enforcing debts against it. *5 Where 
 a statute enacts tliat a corporation shall be responsible for 
 its debts, rights acquired while it is in force cannot be 
 impaired.'' A State cannot enact that a writ of seques- 
 tration shall not issue, unless the corporation is guilty of 
 mismanagement or willful delay in discharging its liabil- 
 ities.*^ The legislature may render a corporation liable to 
 suit in any county if it does not injuriously affect its coj^ 
 porate rights. 9 It may provide that a corporation be sued 
 in the county where a tort by it committed, occurs. i** It 
 may give to a legal representative a right of action for 
 injuries sustained, i^ or may take from a creditor the right 
 to proceed against stockholders and vest such right in a 
 trustee, 12 or may modify and control summary proceed- 
 ings against stockholders, i3 or may change the mode of 
 process against the corporation, ^'^ or may allow attach- 
 ment of property in hands of stockholder without previ- 
 ously exhausting the assets of the corporation. is A stat- 
 ute may authorize a corporation to sue in its own name.i^ 
 
 1 Peters v. Railroad Co. 23 Mo. 107; Grannahan v. Railroad Co. 30 
 Mo. 546. 
 
 2 Coffin V. Rich, 45 Me. 507; Stanley v. Stanley, 26 Me. 191; Gray v. 
 Coffin, 63 Mass. 192. 
 
 3 Ochiltree v. Railroad Co. 21 Wall. 249. 
 
 4 Hawthorne v. Calif, 2 Wall. 10 ; Conant v. Van Schaick, 24 Barb. 87. 
 But see Coffin v. Rich, 45 Me. 507; Richardson v. Akin, 87 111. 13S. 
 
 5 Louisville T. Co. v. Lounsbury, 2 Met. (Ky.) 165. 
 
 6 Foster v. Essex Bank, 16 Mass. 245. 
 
 7 Strubel v. Milwaukee &c. R. R. Co. 12 W^is. 67. 
 
 8 Penrose v. Erie Can. Co. 56 Pa. St. 46. 
 
 9 Howard v. Insurance Co. 13 B. Mon. 282; Sanders v. Hillsborough 
 Ins. Co. 44 N. H. 238. 
 
 10 Davis V. Central R. R. Co. 17 Ga. 323. 
 
 11 Board v. Scearce, 2 Duval, 576; Southwestern R. R. Co. v. Paulk, 
 24 Ga. 356. 
 
 12 Story v. Furman, 25 N. Y. 214. 
 
 13 Ex parte Northeast. R. R. Co. 37 Ala. 679. 
 
 14 Cairo &c. R. R. Co. v. Hecht, 29 Ark. 661. 
 
 15 Smith V. Bryan, 34 111. 264. 
 
 16 CraAvford v. Bank, 7 How. 279. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 162 
 
 Corporate franchises. — A grant of a franchise is not 
 distinguishable from a grant of other property, i The 
 benefit derived to the community is the consideration, 2 
 of the sufficiency of which the legislature is the exclusive 
 judge. 3 A charter is a contract between the State and the 
 stockholders, both executed and executory,^ and every 
 valuable privilege given by the charter is a contract. ^ No 
 consideration is necessary to render the grant irrevoca- 
 ble. ^ A charter is a stipulation that the powers specially 
 granted are not to be withdrawn or diminished,'^ and the 
 implied powers conferred are as sacred as those expressly 
 given, 8 and these are implied from those given. ^ Such 
 contracts are to be construed liberally, ^"^ but nothing can 
 be taken by intendment against the State, i-"- Where the 
 right under the charter is claimed by construction, only 
 the scope and evident design of all the provisions of the 
 charter must be considered.^'- Where the instrument is 
 susceptible of two meanings, that which works least 
 harm to the State is to be adopted. is The exercise of a 
 corporate franchise being restrictive of individual rights, 
 it cannot be extended beyond the letter and spirit of the 
 act of incorporation. I'l If the charter allows a reasonable 
 time to comj)ly with the conditions whereby it may obtain 
 interest in land, the legislature cannot shorten that time 
 or impose any liability if it choose to avail itself of all the 
 time allowed.15 A general law for the organization of 
 corporations is a special act as to each corporation, i^ 
 The legislature cannot contravene the provisions of the 
 charter,!'^ and any variation in the grant of a franchise 
 violates ; is but mere endowments of existence are held 
 subject to the control and modification of the legislature. i^ 
 So, the legislature may reserve the right to amend, alter, 
 or repeal the terms of the franchise. 20 The right to with- 
 draw a franchise includes every power or privilege which 
 is a part of the franchise. ^1 
 
 1 Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518; Benson v. N. Y. 10 
 Barb. 223; Enfield Br. Co. v. Conn. Riv. Co. 7 Conn. 28; Derby T. Co. v. 
 Parks, 10 Conn. 522; Washington Br. Co. v. State, 18 Conn. 53; Canal 
 Co. V. Railroad Co. 4 Gill & J. 1. 
 
 2 Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518; Home of the 
 Friendless v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 430; Regents v. Williams, 9 Gill & J. 365. 
 
 3 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; 6 Ohio St. 342. 
 
 4 Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 656; McGee v. Mathis, 
 r^id. 143; Fletchers. Peck, 6 Cranoh, 87; Terrett v. Taylor, 9 Cranch, 
 43; Town of Pawlett v. Clark, 9 Cranch, 292; Piqua Bank v. Knoup, 16 
 How. 369; Dodge v. Woolsey, 18 How. 331; Mechanics & Farmers' 
 Banki;. Deholt, I8H0W. 380; Mechanics & Farmers' Bank t;. Thomas, 
 10 How. 384; Skelly v. Jefferson Bank, 1 Black, 436; Matheny v. Golden, 
 5 Ohio St. 361; Ross Co. Bank v. Lewis, 5 Ohio St. 447; Allen ?>. Buch- 
 anan, 20 Pitts. L. J. 128; Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Peters, 514; 
 
163 LIMIT ATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 Gordons. Appeal T. C. 3 How. 133; Planters' Bank v. Sharp, 6 How. 311; 
 Woodruff w. irapnall, 10 How. 190; Curran v. State, 15 How. 304; Fur- 
 man V. Nichol, 8 Wall; 44; J3in,'?:hamr)tou Bridge Case, 3 AVall. 72; Home 
 of the Friendless v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 430; Chicago &c. K. R. Co. v. Iowa, 
 94 U. S. 161; Ohio &c. Ins. Co. v. Debolt. 16 How. 416; Dodge?;. Woolsey, 
 18 How. 331; Young «. Harrison, 6 Ga. 130; '.) Ala. 235; Enfield Br. Co. v. 
 R. R. Co. 17 Conn. 454; Mich. St. Bank v. Hastings, 1 Dong. 225; 9 Ga. 
 517; Mayor «. Baltimore &c. R. R. Co. 6 Gill, 288; Bank of Pennsylva- 
 nia ». Commonwealth, 7 Harris, 144; Canal Co. v. R R. Co. 4 Gill & J. 
 
 I ; Norris v. Absigdon Acad. 7 Gill <fc J. 7 : Regents v. Williams, 9 
 Gill & J. 365; Bruffitt v. Great W. R. R. Co. 25 111. 353; People v. Mayor 
 of Brooklyn, 4 N. Y. 419; Bank v. Bank of Cape Fear, 13 Ired. 75; 21 
 Ohio, 564; 10 Pa. St. 142; Philadelphia &c. R. R. Co. v. Bowers, 4 Houst. 
 506; Worsley V. Second Municipality, 9 Rob. (La.) 324; Olive v. Lee's 
 Bank, 21 N. Y. 9 ; Keith v. Clark, 2 South. L. Rev. 27 ; Backus v. Lebanon, 
 
 II N. H. 19; Grammar School v. Burt, 11 Vt. 632; 15 Wall. 495; 1 Dill. 258; 
 Derby T. Co. v. Parks, 10 Conn. 541. 
 
 5 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; 6 Ohio St. 343. 
 
 6 Derby Turnpike Co. v. Parks, 10 Conn. 522. 
 
 7 Commonwealth v. Farmers' Bank, 38 Mass. 542; Thorpe v. Burling- 
 ton &c. R. R. Co. 27 Vt. 140. 
 
 8 Commercial Bank v. State, 12 Miss. 439; People v. Manhattan Co. 
 9 Wend. 351. 
 
 9 Payne v. Baldwin, 11 Miss. 661 ; Commercial Bank v. State, 12 Miss. 
 439. 
 
 10 Binghampton Bridge v. Chenango Bridge, 3 Wall. 74; 27 N. Y. 87. 
 
 11 Charles Riv. Br. v. Warren Br. 11 Peters, 544; Jefferson Br. Bank 
 V. Skelly, I Black, 446. 
 
 12 Maysville T. Co. v. How. 14 B. Mon. 428. 
 
 13 Binghampton Bridge v. Chenango Br. 3 Wall. 51 ; 27 N. Y. 87. ' 
 
 14 Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Petei^s, 514; Charles Riv. Br. v. 
 Warren Br. 11 Peters, 420; Mills v. St Clair Co. 8 How. 539; Planters' 
 Bank v. Sharp, 6 How. 301; 12 Miss. 17; Ohio Trust. Co. v. Debolt, 16 
 How. 416; 1 Ohio St. 563; Richmond R. R. Co. v. Louisa R. R. Co. 13 
 How. 71 ; Enfield Br. Co. v. Conn. Riv. Co. 7 Conn. 28; Hartford Br. Co. 
 V. East Hartford, 16 Conn. 14:); Hartford Br. Co. v. Union Ferry Co. 29 
 Conn. 210; McLeod v. Burroughs, 9 Ga. 213; Turnpike Co. v. Railroad 
 Co. 10 Gill & J. 392; Tuckahoe Can. Co. v. Railroad, 11 Leigh, 42; Col- 
 lins V. Sherman, 31 Miss. 67,9. 
 
 15 Nichols V. S. & K. R. R. Co. 43 Me. 353. 
 
 16 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; 6 Ohio St. 342. 
 
 17 State V. Noyes, 47 Me. 139. Nor can it impair rights thereunder 
 miless it provides indemnity —Enfield Br. Co. v. Conn. Riv. Co. 7 
 Coim. 28. 
 
 18 Enfield Br. Co. t). Conn. Riv. Co. 7 Conn. 28. 
 
 19 Bank v. Hamilton, 21 111. 53. 
 
 20 Peck V. Chicago & N. W. R. R. Co. 6 Biss. 181 ; Griffin v. Kentucky 
 Ins. Co. 3 Bush, 592; Commonwealth v. Fayette Co. R. R. Co. 55 Pa. St. 
 452; Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25; Butler v. Walker, 80 111. 345; 
 Trustees of University v. Winston, 5 Stewt. & P. 17. 
 
 21 Central R. R. & B. Co. v. Georgia, 54 Ga. 420: Atlantic & Gulf K. 
 R. Co. V. Georgia, 7 Reporter, 324. 
 
Art. I, § 10 liiMiTATio^r of powees. 164 
 
 Exemption from taxation.— The exemption of a cor- 
 poration from taxation must be clear and express, i It is 
 not necessary that a bonus should be received to make 
 the contract binding.- A provision exempting a corpora- 
 tion from taxation applies not merely to the State, but to 
 every public cor]3oration created by it.^ So long as a cor- 
 poration uses its x3roperty for its original purposes the ex- 
 emption continues. 4 The exemption includes all that is 
 obviously appropriate and convenient to carry into effect 
 the franchise granted, and to its objects and its use,^ in- 
 cluding real and personal estate requisite for the success- 
 ful prosecution of its business. g Exemption from all tax- 
 ation includes exemption from a privilege tax,'' but not 
 from an assessment for benefits arising from opening or 
 improvement of a street.^ A privilege that a certain 
 rate of taxes shall be jjaid in lieu of all taxes to the State 
 does not exempt from liability for municipal taxes'^ nor 
 from a school tax.^*^ Merely exempting from taxation 
 "without consideration is not a contract, and may be re- 
 pealed. ^1 A provision exempting a coriDoration from tax- 
 ation applies to its property as well as to its franchise, ^2 
 but not to its bonds. ^^ jf ^ charter merely exemiDts the 
 corporation and its property the exemption does not pass 
 to a party who purchases property at a sale under mort- 
 gage or execution; 14 but if the State makes immunity 
 from taxation transferable, it cannot tax property in the 
 hands of a purchaser. ^^ If the charter stipulates for ex- 
 emption of the property from taxes, no tax can be assessed 
 thereon, IS if all property is used for necessary purposes; 
 and property not so used may be taxed, ^^ but not prop- 
 erty used, although it may be used by others, is if the 
 charter authorizes to build and rent a building, it exempts 
 the property leased as stores, i^ Exempting tJae property 
 of a corporation exempts its franchise.'^*^ If the right is 
 reserved to alter the charter the right to taxis conferred.^i 
 
 1 Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Peters, 514 ; Portland Bank?;. Ap- 
 tliorpe, 12 Mass. 252 ; Herrick v. Randolph, 13 Wall. 531 ; Judson v. 
 State, Minor, 150; North Mo. R. R. Co. v. Maguire, 20 Wall. 46; 49 Mo. 
 490; Erie R. Co. v. Pennsylvania, 21 Wall. 492; Jones &c. Co. v. Comm. 
 69 Pa. St. 137. 
 
 2 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; 6 Ohio St. 342. 
 
 3 Mayor v. Bait. &c. R. R. Co. 6 GiU, 288; Richmond v. R &c. 
 
 R. R. Co. 21 Gratt. 604 ; Bank of Cape Fear v. Edwards, 5 Ired. 516; 
 State Bank v. Charleston, 3 Rich. 342. 
 
 4 Washington Univer. v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 439; 42 Mo. 308. 
 
 5 State V. Georgia R. R. & B. Co. 54 Ga. 423 ; State v. Mansfield, 23 N. 
 J. 510; State v. Flavell, 24 N. J. 370; State v. Powers, 24 N. J. 400; State 
 V. Blundell, 24 N. J. 402; State v. Haight, 25 N. J. 40; State v. Collector, 
 
165 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 26 N. J. 519; Cook v. State, 33 N. J. 474; State v. Hancock, 35 N. J. 537; 
 State V. Woodruff, 36 N. J. 94; State v. Collector, 38 N. J. 270. 
 
 6 Wilmington &c. R. R. Co. v. Reecl, 13 Wall. 264. 
 
 7 Grand Gulf &c. R. R. Co. v. Buck, 53 Miss. 246. 
 
 8 State Home Soci. v. Mayor, 35 N. J. 157; City v. Society, 24 N. J. 
 385; Mayor v. Proprietors, 7 Md. 517; Sheelian v. Good Samar. Hosp. 
 50 Mo. i55. But see St. Paul &c. R. R. Co. v. St. Paul, 21 Minn. 526; 
 State V. Newark, 27 N. J. 185. 
 
 9 Lexington v. Avill, 30 Mo.'480; Paris v. Farmers' Bank, 30 Mo. 575; 
 City V. Hannibal &c. R. R. Co. 39 Mo. 476 ; Pac. R. R. Co. v. Cass, 53 
 Mo. 17. 
 
 10 Livingston v. Hannibal &c. R. R. Co. 60 Mo. 516. 
 
 11 St. Louis &c. R. R. Co. V. Loften, 10 Ark. 693; Holly Springs &c. 
 Co. V. Marshall, 52 Miss. 281; Sandusky Bank v. Wilbor, 7 Ohio St. 481; 
 People V. Commissioners, 47 N. Y. 501; 53 Barb. 70; Hospital i;. Phila- 
 delphia, 24 Pa. St. 229; State v. County Treas. 4 Rich. N. S. 520; Jones 
 &c. V. Comm. 69 Pa. St. 137. So, a promised forbearance from taxa- 
 tions is only a bounty or gratuity— Prov. Bank v. Billings, 4 Wheat. 
 316; Fertilizing Co. v. Hyde Park, 97 U. S. 666 
 
 12 Camden &c. R. R. Co. v. Commissioners, 18 N. J. 71. But see Mu- 
 nicipality V. Commercial Bank, 5 Rob. (La.) 151. 
 
 13 State V. Branin, 23 N. J. 484. 
 
 14 Morgan v. Louisiana, 93 U. S. 217; Trask v. Maguire, 18 Wall. 391. 
 
 15 St. Paul &c. R. R. Co. v. Parcher, 14 Minn. 297; State v. Winoua 
 &c. R. R. Co, 21 Minn. 315; A. &c. R. R. Co. v. Allen, 15 Fla. 15. 
 
 16 Hardy v. Waltham, 24 Mass. 108. 
 
 17 State V. Love, 37 N. J. 60. 
 
 18 State V. Betts, 24 N. J. 555. 
 
 19 State V. Leester, 29 N. J. 541. 
 
 20 Wihnington R. R. Co. v. Reid, 13 Wall. 264. 
 
 21 Union Imp. Co. v. Comm. 69 Pa. St. 140; Comm. v. Fayette Co. R. 
 R. 55 Pa. St. 452; Iron City Bank v. Pittsburg, 37 Pa. St. 340; Hewitt v. 
 N. Y. &c. R. R. Co. 12 Blatchf . 467. 
 
 Exemption from taxation.— If the charter exempts 
 the capital stock it extends to additional cajiital permitted 
 under subsequent acts.i If the stock is exempted the 
 State cannot levy a tax on the property held by the cor- 
 poration; 2 but if the charter makes a distinction between 
 the capital stock and the property, a tax may be laid on 
 the property though the stock is exempt; ^ but it does not 
 exonerate the dividends of shareholders. * So, a contract 
 exempting the franchise will not exempt stockholders. ^ 
 A j)rovision exempting a bank from further taxation ex- 
 empts the stockholders ; G so, if a corporation is exempt 
 from taxation the State cannot tax the shares of the stock- 
 holders; 7 and if shares are exemjpted, an act imposing a 
 tax on franchise or property is invalid. ^ The mere reser- 
 vation of a sum to be paid annually does not contain an 
 implied contract that no further tax shall be imposed. ^ 
 If the charter stipulates for an annual payment in lieu of 
 
Art. I, § 10 lilMITATIOK OF POWERS. 166 
 
 all taxation, the amount cannot lie subsequently in- 
 creased. lo The legislature may prescribe a bonus to be 
 paid in commutation of all taxes on its corporate stock 
 and property. 1^ A provision fixing the mode of assessment 
 does not preclude the adoption of another mode ; 12 "but a 
 limitation to a joarticular mode includes a negative of any 
 otlier mode.i'^ A corporation may yield a part of the ex- 
 emption, and accept other terms in lieu thereof; i*^ but if 
 a charter is renewed without renewal of the exemption, 
 the power of taxation is revived. ^^ Where the tax is to 
 be levied on the happening of some future contingency 
 no tax can be levied prior to that time.i^ A law offering 
 a bounty for manufacturing and freed from taxation is 
 not a contract. ^'-'^ 
 
 1 State V. N. &c. R. R. Co. 30 Conn. 290. 
 
 2 New Haven v. City Bank, 31 Conn. 106; Ordinary v. Centr. R. R. 
 Co. 40 Ga. (34(3; Tax Cases, 12 Gill & J. 117. 
 
 3 St. Louis &c. R. R. Co. v. Lof ten, 30 Ark, 693 
 
 4 State V. Petway, 2 Jones Eq. 396. 
 
 5 Gordon v. Appeal Tax Ct. 3 How. 133; 5 Gill, 231. 
 
 6 Gordon v. Appeal Tax Ct. 3 How. 133; 5 Gill, 231. * 
 
 7 State V. Branin, 23 N. J. 484; State v. Powers, 24 N. J. 400; Stat6 v. 
 Bentley, 23 N. J. 532. 
 
 8 Mayor v. Bait. &c. R. R. Co. 6 Gill, 288 : Nichols v. N. H. & N. Co. 42 
 Conn. 103; Hannibal &c. R. R. Co. v. Cliacklett, 30 Mo. 550; Stately. Han- 
 nibal &c. R. R. Co. 37 Mo. 265. 
 
 9 Delaware R. R. Tax, 18 Wall. 206; Minot v. P. W. &c. R. R. Co. 2 
 Abb. U. S. 323; Union Bank v. State, 9 Yerg. 490. 
 
 10 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369 ; Dodge v. Woolsey, 18 How. 331 ; 
 6 McLean, 142; Mechanics' Bank v. Debolt, 18 How. 380; 1 Ohio St. 591; 
 Mechanics' Bank v. Tliomas, 18 How. 384; Franklin Bank v. State, 1 
 Black, 474; Jefferson Bank v. Skelly, 1 Black, 436; 9 Ohio St. 606; 
 Wright V. Sill, 2 Black, 544; Gordon v. Appeal Tax Ct. 3 How. 133; 5 
 Gill, 231; Farmers' Bank t;.. Commonwealth, 6 Bvish, 126; Attorney- 
 General V. Bank of Charlotte, 4 Jones Eq. 287; Leroy v. East S. C. R. 18 
 Mich. 233; State v. Commissioners, 37 N. J. 240; State v. Commercial 
 Bank, 7 Ohio, 125; Mathenv v. Golden, 5 Ohio St. 361. And see Minot 
 P. W. &c. R. R. Co. 2 Abb. U. S. 323; 18 Wall. 206; Mayor v. Bait. &c. R. 
 K. Co. 6 Gill. 288. 
 
 11 Draughdrill v. Ala. &c. T. Co. 31 Ala. 91. 
 
 12 Bailey v. Maguire, 22 Wall. 215; State v. Hannibal &c. R. R. Co. 60 
 Mo. 143. 
 
 13 Raleigh &c. R. R. Co. v. Reid, 13 Wall. 269; 64 N. C. 155. 
 
 14 State V. Commissioners, 37 N. J. 240. 
 
 15 State V. Bank, 2 Houst. 99. 
 
 16 McGavisk v. State, 34 N. J. 509. 
 
 17 Salt Co. V. East Saginaw, 13 Wall. 373. 
 
167 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 Banking corporations.— The State charter to a bank 
 constitutes a contract it is not at liberty to break, i and a 
 provision in the charter cannot be abrogated by snbse- 
 quent legislation. 2 So, a provision that its bills shall be 
 receivable for taxes is an obligation which cannot be im- 
 paired, 3 So, the repeal of a provision that its notes shall 
 be received for all debts due the State cannot affect notes 
 in circulation at the time.* Where a statute provides 
 that such bills are payable in gold or silver coin, a law 
 providing that depreciated bills shall not be received is 
 valid. ^ A general statute making the suspension of 
 specie payment by a bank a cause of forfeiture, when not 
 so stated in the charter, is void.^ If a State creates a 
 bank of which it is the sole stockholder, it cannot with- 
 draw the fund or any part without imjaairing the obliga- 
 tion to creditors."^ So, a statute which withdraws the 
 assets of a bank from the operation of all legal j)rocess, 
 is void. 8 A statute appropriating the assets of a bank 
 operates as an assignment, and cannot be repealed by a 
 subsequent act.^ A law declaring notes of a State bank 
 void is unconstitutional.!'^ The general right to prescribe 
 the issue of notes cannot be construed to be relinquished, 
 unless the intention is clearly expressed.!^ A statute 
 prohibiting a bank from transferring notes by indorse- 
 ment is valid, unless the power to do so is expressly 
 granted in the charter, i"^ If notes are made payable at a 
 certain place, a statute requiring it to receive them in 
 payment of notes of other banks is void.i^ A statute 
 which permits bank-notes to be tendered for a debt due 
 the bank, but assigned before its passage, is unconstitu- 
 tional. 14 A banking corporation, the stock of which is 
 owned by private individuals, is a private corporation, 15 
 but a State cannot incorporate individuals and authorize 
 them to coin money. 16 A statute may authorize debtors 
 of the bank to pay in the notes and certificates of the 
 bank, 17 or may provide that a bank shall redeem several 
 bills presented together as a single obligation, 18 or may 
 impose a penalty for refusal to pay bank-bills, unless a 
 clause in the charter iDrohibits such iaw.l'J The State may 
 assess the stockholders of banks which have gone into 
 liquidation. 20 A State allowing a judge and commissioner 
 to reduce the account in a savings bank, affects the rem- 
 edy and is valid .21 Where a bank charter provided for 
 the receipt of bank-notes for taxes, an amendment to 
 the Constitution cannot impair the obligation of the con- 
 tract.22 
 
 1 Woodruff V. Trapnall, 10 How. 190; 8 Ark. 236; Paup v. Drew, 1(1 
 How. 222; 9 Ark. 205. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 168 
 
 2 Furman v. Nichol, 8 Wall. 44; Barings v. Dabney, 19 Wall. 1 
 
 3 Furman v. Nichol, 8 Wall. 44. 
 
 4 Woodruff V. Trapnall, 10 How. 190; 8 Ark. 236; Paup v. Drew, 10 
 How. 222; 9 Ark. 205; Trigg v. Drew, 10 How. 224. 
 
 5 Graniteville Manuf. Co. v. Roper, 15 Rich. 138. 
 
 6 State V. Tombecbee Bank, 2 Stew. 30. 
 
 7 Curran v. Arkansas, 15 How. 304; 12 Ark. 321. 
 
 8 State V. Bank, 1 Rich. N. S. 63. 
 
 9 Barings v. Dabney, 19 Wall. 1 
 
 10 Keith V. Clark, 97 U. S. 451. 
 
 11 Ohio T. Co. V. Debolt, 16 How. 416; 1 Ohio St. 563; State v, Mat- 
 thews, 3 Jones (N. C.) 451. 
 
 12 Payne v. Baldwin, 11 Miss. 661 ; Mclntyre v. Ingraham, 35 Miss. 25. 
 
 13 Bank v. Bank of Cape Fear, 13 Ired. 75. 
 
 14 Dundas v. Bowler, 3 McLean, 397. 
 
 15 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; Miners' Bank v. U. S. 1 Iowa, 
 553; Hazen v. Union Bank, 1 Sneed, 115. 
 
 16 Briscoe v. Banlc of Kentucky, 11 Peters, 257 ; 7 J. J. Marsh. 349. 
 
 17 Bank of Md. v. Ruff, 7 Gill & J. 448; Exchange Bank v. Tiddy, 67 
 N. C. 169; Bank v. Hart, 67 N. C. 264; Bank v. Domitian, 12 Ohio, 220. 
 
 18 Reapers' Bank v. Willard, 24 111. 433. 
 
 19 Brown v. Penobscot Bank, 8 Mass. 445. 
 
 20 Commonwealth v. Cochituate Bank, 3 Allen, 42. 
 
 21 Simpson v. Savings Bank, 56 N. H. 466. 
 
 22 Keith v. Clark, 97 U. S. 451 
 
 Bridges, ferries, and turnpikes. — A charter includes 
 the laws defining its stipulations at the time of the grant, 
 and a subsequent statute allowing the erection of abridge 
 within the prohibited distance is void.i The construction 
 of a railroad bridge is not a violation of the exclusive 
 right to construct a bridge for carriages in common use.2 
 A statute cannot require a canal corporation to keep in 
 repair the bridges connecting the highways intersected by 
 the canal. 2 A statute giving a right of action to those 
 who have been injured by the erection of a close bridge 
 over a navigable creek, when such bridge was authorized 
 by the charter, is void.^ A grant of a ferry franchise is a 
 contract ;5 but if no consideration has been paid, the 
 grantee takes it subject to the power of the legislature to 
 regulate rates of ferriage.^ A new road, canal, or bridge, 
 materially diverting travel or business from an old one 
 established under a prior charter, is not unconstitutional, 
 unless the franchise is defined or made exclusive.'' A 
 franchise granting exclusive privileges is a contract ;8 so 
 as to ferry franchise. ^ If the grant of a ferry franchise 
 is accompanied by a reservation, the legislature may 
 make another grant directly to another, lo A charter to a 
 
169 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 railroad does not impair a prior charter to a turnpike 
 company. 11 There is no implied contract of an exclusive 
 grant to a turnpike corporation, or that they shall be free 
 from the common liability under the power of eminent 
 domain. 12 If the charter prescribes the form of the signs 
 and boards with rates of toll, it will prevail over a gen- 
 eral statute subsequently passed. i3 A statute conferring 
 the right to collect additional tolls is a grant, i* A statute 
 authorizing commissioners to examine turnpike roads, 
 and throw open its gates if not in repair, is void;!^ but a 
 statute appointing commissioners with power to direct 
 proper repairs is valid. i^ The legislature cannot require 
 a turnpike company to set back its gates, located in ac- 
 cordance with the terms of its charter. i^ 
 
 1 Micou V. Tallahassee Br. Co. 47 Ala. 652. 
 
 2 Bridge Prop. v. Hoboken &c. Co. 1 Wall. 116; 2 Beas. 81; McLeod 
 V. Savannah &c. R. R. Co. 25 Ga. 445; Mohawk Br. Co. v. Railroad Co. 
 6 Paige, 554; Thompson v. Railroad Co. 3 Sandf. 625. 
 
 3 City V. Erie Canal Co. 59 Pa. St. 174. And see Meadville v. Erie 
 Can. Co. 18 Pa. St. 66. 
 
 4 Bailey v. Railroad Co. 4 Harring. 389. 
 
 5 MiUs V. St. Clair Co. 8 How. 581 ; McRoherts v. Washhourne, 10 
 Minn. 23. 
 
 6 People V. The Mayor, 32 Barb. 102; State v. Hudson, 23 N. J. 206; 
 24 N. J. 718. 
 
 7 Charles Riv. Br. Co. v. Warren Br. 11 Peters, 420; 24 Mass. 462; 
 Turnpike Co. v. State, 3 Wall. 260; In re Hamilton Av. 14 Barb. 405; 
 Oswego Br. Co.w. Fish, 1 Barb. Ch. 547; Fall v. Suter, 21 Cal. 237; In- 
 dian Canyon Road v. Robinson, 13 Cal. 519; Salem T. Co. v. Lynn, 18 
 Conn. 451; Fitch v'. Railroad Co. 30 Conn. 38; Harrison v. Young, 9 Ga. 
 359; Shorter v. Smith, 9 Ga. 517; West End Co. v. Atlantic Co. 4 Ga. 
 151; Illinois & M. Can. Co. v. R. R. Co. 14 111. 314; Ciu^tis v. Morehouse, 
 12 La. An. 649: Bush v. Peru Br. Co. 3 Ind. 21; Collins v. Sherman, 31 
 Miss. 679; Mohawk Br. Co. v. R. R. Co. 6 Paige, 554; Fort Plain Br. Co. 
 V. Smith, 30 N. Y. 44; Thompson v. R. R. Co. 3 Sand. Ch. 625. 
 
 8 Bridge Proprs. v. Hoboken Co. 1 Wall. 116; McRee v. Wilmington 
 &c. Co. 2 Jones (N. C.) 186; Enfield T. B. v. Hartford &c. Co. 17 Conn. 
 40 ; Commonwealth v. New Bedf. Br. 68 Mass. 339; Mohawk Br. Co. v. 
 Utica &c. Co. 6 Paige, 564; Thompson v. N. Y. &c. Co. 3 Sandf. 625. 
 
 9 Conway v. Taylor, 1 Black. 603; Hartford B. Co. v. Union F. Co. 29 
 Conn. 210; Trust, of Newport v. Taylor, 6 J. J. Marsh, 134; Comm. v. 
 Bacon, 13 Bush, 212. And see Morey v. Prop, of Oxford Br. Smith 
 (N. H.) 91. 
 
 10 Dyer v. Tuscaloosa Br. Co. 2 Port. 296. 
 
 11 Turnpike Co. v. Railroad Co. 10 Gill. & J. 392. 
 
 12 White Riv. T. Co. v. Vermont C. P. R. R. Co. 21 Vt. 590. 
 
 13 Nichols V. Bertram, 20 Mass. 342. 
 
 14 Derby T. Co. v. Parks, 10 Conn. 522. 
 
 15 Powell V. Sammons, 31 Ala. 552. 
 
 16 State V. Bosworth, 13 Vt. 402. 
 
 17 White's Creek T. Co. v. Davidson Co. 3 Tenn. Ch. 396. 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— J.*- 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 170 
 
 Railroads. — The charter to a railroad is a contract. i If 
 it provides that no otlier railroad shall be built within a 
 certain distance, the corporation cannot be disturbed in 
 the enjoyment of their franchise. 2 Any act which essen- 
 tially paralyzes the franchise is void.^ On the consolida- 
 tion of two or more corporations, the franchise granted 
 to the consolidated corporation is subject to the laws in 
 force at the time of the consolidation. * The consolida- 
 tion works their individual dissolution. s Railroads, being 
 highways, are not for all purposes private property — pos- 
 sessing a public character, they are subject to public 
 supervision. 6 A State has the right to regulate the rates 
 to be charged by a railroad for the transportation of 
 freight or passengers, ^ and this power is not affected 
 by a lease of the road and a pledge of its income.*^ 
 A law changing the tariff of freights allowed by the 
 charter is void.^ The State may impose a penalty for 
 taking unlawful toll or freight; 10 or may prevent an 
 unjust discrimination in freights. 11 Where a charter 
 provides for the regulation of the business, a subsequent 
 statute interfering with it is void.i'^ A statute may 
 authorize the appointment of commissioners to determ- 
 ine the duties and obligations of railroad companies, ^^ 
 or may prohibit a railroad from constriicting a track 
 where it will endanger safe and convenient access to a 
 depot, 1"^ but it cannot change the gauge of a railroad. ^^ 
 A statute may render a railroad liable for injuries caused 
 by sparks from its engine, ^.^ or for the neglect and miscon- 
 duct of its employees, i^ or may require railroads to build 
 a depot at a certain place and stop thereat, is If a com- 
 missioner merely has the power to approve or disapprove 
 of the abandonment of a station, his consent is not a con- 
 tract binding on the State. ^^ A statute may regulate 
 railroad crossings, ^o or may require them to ring a bell or 
 sound a whistle at a crossing, 21 or may regulate their speed 
 in a city,22 or may require them to erect fences and cattle- 
 guards, 23 or may prohibit from carrying freight which is 
 regarded as detrimental to public health, morals, or safety, 
 and may make them liable as insurers of life and limb of 
 passengers ; 24 but a statute requiring a railroad to keep 
 flagmen where there is no unusual danger is void. 25 An 
 act imposing restrictions on conveyance of land to rail- 
 roads impairs the obligation of the contract.26 
 
 1 Wilmington E,. R. v. Keid, 13 Wall. 264 ; Koenig v. O. & N. W. K. E. 
 Co. 3 Neb. 383. 
 
 2 Boston &c. E,. R. Co. v. Salem &c. R. R. Co. 68 Mass. 1. 
 
 3 Sloan v. Mo. Pac. R. R. Co. 2 Cent. L. J. 781; Philadelphia &c. R. 
 R. Co. V. Bowers, 4 Houst. 506; T. W. &c. R. R. Co. v. City, 67 111. 37. 
 
I 171 LIMITATION OF POWERS. ' Art. I, § 10 
 
 4 Kailroacl Co. v. Maine, 96 U. S. 510; Atlantic &c. R. R. Co. v 
 
 I Georgia, 11 Chic. L. N. 215; State v. Northern Cent. R. R. Co. 44 Mrl. 131. 
 
 5 Shields v. Ohio, 95 U. S. 319. 
 
 6 Pittsburg &c. R. R. Co. v. S. W. Pa. R. R. Co. 77 Pa. St. 173. 
 
 7 Chicago &c. R. R. Co. v. Iowa, 94 F. S. 155; Winona &c. R. R. Co. 
 V. Blake, 94 U. S. 180; 19 Minn. 418; Parke v. Metrop. R. R. Co. 109 
 
 ^ Mass. ,506. 
 
 8 Chicago &c. R. R. Co. v. Iowa, 94 U. S. 155. 
 
 9 Sloan v. Missouri P. R. R. Co. 2 Cent. L. J. 781 ; Philadelphia &c. R. 
 R. Co. V. Bowers, 4 Houst. 506; Hamilton v. Keith, 5 Bush, 458; Attor- 
 ney-General V. Railroad Co. 35 "Wis. 425. But see Moore v. Illinois 
 Cent. R. R. Co. 4 Chic. L. N. 123. 
 
 10 Camden & A. R. R. Co. v. Briggs, 22 N. J. 623; Norris v. Andro- 
 scoggin R. R. Co. 39 Me. 273. 
 
 11 Chicago &c. R. R. Co. v. People, 67 111. 11; Vincent v. Chicago &c. 
 R. R. Co. 49 111. 33; People v. Chicago »fec. R. R. Co. 55 111. Ill; Chicago 
 &c. R. R. Co. V. People, 56 111. 365. 
 
 12 State V. Noyes, 47 Me. 189. 
 
 13 Portland R. R. Co. v. Railway Co. 46 Me. 69. 
 
 14 P. &c. R. R. Co. V. B. &c. R. R. Co. 65 Me. 122. 
 
 15 State V. Richmond &c. R. R. Co. 73 N. C. 527. 
 
 16 Lyman v. B. &c. R. R. Co. 58 Mass. 288; Rodemacher v. M. &c R. 
 R. Co. 41 Iowa, 297. 
 
 17 B. &c. R. R. Co. V. State, 32 N. H. 215. 
 
 18 Railroad Commissioners v. P. &c. R. R. Co. 63 Me. 269. 
 
 19 State tJ. N. H. &c. R. R. Co. 43 Conn. 351. 
 
 20 P. &c. R. R. Co. V. S. W. P. R. R. Co. 77 Pa. St. 173. 
 
 21 Galena R. R. Co. v. Appleby, 28 111. 283; Galena R. R. Co. v. 
 Loomis, 13 111. 548. 
 
 22 Chicago &c. R. R. Co. v. Haggerty, 67 111. 113. 
 
 23 Suydam V. Moore, 8 Barb. 358; Waldron v. Railroad Co. 8 Barb. 
 390; New Albany &c. R. R. Co. v. Tilton, 12 Ind. 3; Madison i&c. R. R. 
 Co. V. Whiteneck, 8 Ind. 217; Ohio &c. R. R. v. McClelland, 25 111. 140; 
 Kansas P. R. R. Co. v. Mower, 16 Kans. 573; Jones v. G. &c. R. R. Co. 
 16 Iowa, 6; Indianapolis R. R. Co. v. Kercheval, 16 Ind. 84; Nichols v. 
 S. &c. R. R. Co. 43 Me. 356; Wenona &c. R. R. Co. v. Waldron, 11 Minn. 
 515; Gorman v. Pacific R. R. Co. 26 Mo. 441; Blair v. M. &c. R. R. Co. 
 20 Wis. 254; Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. Riblet, 66 Pa. 164. 
 
 24 Thorpe v. Burlington &c. R. R. Co. 27 Vt. 140; Nelson v. Vermont 
 &c. R. R. Co. 26 Vt. 717. 
 
 25 T. &c. R. R. Co. V. City, 67 111. 37. 
 
 26 De GraflE v. St. Paul &c. R. R. Co. 23 Minn. 144. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATIOK OF POWERS. 172 
 
 Immunity from taxation.— The immunity from tax- 
 ation in the original charter accompanies the lands trans- 
 ferred by the State to a new corj)oration;i so, a grant of 
 all rights and privileges conferred by the charter of an- 
 other corporation includes an exemption from taxation. 2 
 The legislature cannot repeal an act exempting a railroad 
 from taxation. 3 The exemption of a railroad from taxa- 
 tion does not exempt the lessee of the road from taxation 
 on profits and earnings. ^ If the stock is exempt no tax 
 can be levied on a branch road authorized by amendment 
 of the charter; 5 but on consolidation of two corporations 
 the exemption of one will not' extend to the property of 
 the other. A contract not to tax a railroad or its prop- 
 erty is broken by a levy of a tax on its gross receipts for 
 transportation of freight and passengers.'^ A statute re- 
 leasing a railroad corporation from a tax lawfully imj)osed 
 by a municiiial corporation im]3airs the obligation of the 
 contract. 8 Where the capital stock Avas forever exemj)t 
 and the road and other property exempt for a limited 
 time, the capital stock is taxable after that time.9 
 
 1 Tomlinson v. Branch, 15 Wall. 460; Thomas v. Scotland Co. 3 Dill. 
 12; Harslimau V. Bates Co. 3 Dill. 150; County Commrs. v. Franklin 11. 
 B. Co. 34 Mtl. 15;}; First Div. R. E. v. Parcher, 14 Minn. 297; Wilming- 
 ton &c. K. R. Co. V. Keid, 13 WaU. 264. 
 
 2 Hmnphreys v. Pegues, 16 Wall. 244. Contra, Wilson v. Gaines, 3 
 Tenn. Ch. 597. 
 
 3 Hmnphreys v. Pegues, 16 Wall. 244. 
 
 4 State V. Delaware &c. R. R. Co. 30 N. J. 473; 31 N. J. 531. 
 
 5 Atlantic &c. R. R. Co. v. Allen, 15 Fla. 637. 
 
 6 Philadelphia &c. R. R. Co. v. State, 10 How. 376 : Tomlinson v. 
 Branch, 15 Wall. 460; Delaware R. R. Tax, 18 Wall. 206; Evans ville &c, 
 R. R. Co. •;;. Commonwealth, 9 Bush, 438. 
 
 7 Pacific R. R. Co. v. Maguire, 20 WaU. 36; 51 Mo. 142. 
 
 8 City V. Illinois Cent. R. R. Co. 39 Iowa, 36. 
 
 9 Memphis &c. R. R. Co. v. Gaines, 3 Tenn. Ch. 604. 
 
 State authority over corporations. — The legisla- 
 ture has the same right of general control over (jorporations 
 that it has over natural persons, 1 and any privileges which 
 may exempt a corporation from burdens common to indi- 
 viduals do not flow necessarily from the charter, but must 
 be expressed in it, or they do not exist ;2 so, the relinquish- 
 ment of sovereign powers must be plain and unequivocal ; 
 it is never to be assumed. ^ The State grant of a charter 
 is a contract ; but all contracts are made subject to the 
 right of eminent domain, '^ and the exercise of the right of 
 eminent domain is not a revocation of the grant ;5 so, an 
 act providing for the condemnation of property for street 
 
173 LIMITATION OV POWERS. Art. I, § iO 
 
 purposes is not in conflict/' There is nothing in the char- 
 ter of a corporation Avhich prevents the taking of its prop- 
 erty for public use, 7 jjrovided compensation Ibe made.s A 
 statute setting aside an inquisition for damages, and sub- 
 stituting an inquisition cle novo, does not impair the 
 obligation of the charter.^ A State legislature cannot 
 abandon the police power, or give a vested right to its 
 exercise by either a corporation or an individual, i" A 
 corporation has no greater rights to manufacture or sell 
 malt liquor than an individual, ^ and if a corporation 
 claims exemption from such powers, it must show a re- 
 linquishment in the charter, or that its exercise is incom- 
 patible with or destructive of particular rights in the char- 
 ter. 12 The legislature is the exclusive judge of the 
 propriety of interference in the use of private property 
 within the scope of legislative power, is Every legislative 
 grant is made with the implied reservation that it shall 
 not injure others, i^ 
 
 1 Benson v. N. Y. 10 Barb, 223; Galena &c. R. R. Co. v. Loomis, 13 
 111.548; Ohio&c. E. R. Co. v. McClelland, 25 111. 140; N. "W. Fert. Co. 
 V. Hyde Park, 70 111. 634; New Albany «fec. R. R. Co. v. Tilton, 12 Ind. 3; 
 Gorman v. Pacific R. R. 26 Mo. 441 ; Burlington &c. R. R. v. State, 32 N. 
 H. 215; State v. Matthews, 3 Jones & C. 451; Nelson v. Vermont &c. R. 
 R. 26 Vt. 717; Tliorpe v. B. &c. R. R. 27 Vt. 140. 
 
 2 Bank v. Hamilton, 21 111. 53; Peters v. Railroad Co. 23 Mo. 107: 
 Thorpe V. Burlington &c. R. R. Co. 27 Vt. 140. 
 
 3 Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Peters, 514; Phila. &c. R. R. Co. v. 
 State, 10 How. 376; Delaware R. R. Tax, 18 Wall. 206; State v. Mat- 
 thews, 3 Jones (N. C.) 451; Gordon v. Baltimore, 5 Gill. 231; Judson v. 
 State, Minor, 150; City v. Boatmen's &c. Co. 47 Mo. 150; State v. Dulle, 
 48 Mo. 282; Brewster v. Hough, 10 N. H. 138; State v. Minton, 23 N. J.' 
 529; Bank of Pa. v. Commonwealth, 19 Pa. St. 144; Gilman v. Sheboy- 
 gan City, 2 Black, 517. 
 
 4 West Riv. Br. Co. v. Dix. 6 How. 548; 16 Vt. 446; Richmond R. R. 
 Co. V. Louisa R. R. Co. 13 How. 71 ; Rundle v. Del. &c. Co. 14 How. 
 80; Enfield Br. Co. v. Railroad Co. 17 Conn. 454; Shorter v. Smith, 9 Ga. 
 517; James Riv. Co. v. Thompson, 3 Gratt. 270; Newcastle &c. R. R. Co. 
 V. Peru &e. R. R. Co. 3 Ind. 464; Boston Wat. Riv. Co. v. Railroad, 40 
 Mass. 360; Boston &c. R. R. Co. v. Salem &c. R. R. Co. 68 Mass. 1; Cen- 
 tral Br. V. Lowell, 70 Mass. 474; Piscataqua Br. v. N. H. Bridge Co. 7 N. 
 H. 35; Barber v. Andover, 8 N. H. 398; Northern R. R. v. Concord R. 
 R. 27 N. H. 183; Crosby v. Hanover, 36 N. H. 404; Red River Br. Co. v. 
 Clarksville, 1 Sneed, 176; State v. De Lesdernier, 7 Tex. 99; Armington 
 V. Barnet, 15 Vt. 745. 
 
 5 Illinois & Mich. C. Co. v. Railroad Co. 14 111. 314. 
 
 6 Garrison t;. N. Y. City, 21 Wall. 196. 
 
 7 Alabama &c. R. R. Co. v. Kenney, 39 Ala. 307; In re Kerr, 42 Barb. 
 119; Beliona Comp. Case. 3 Bland, 442; Turnpike Co. ■;;. Railroad Co. 10 
 Gill & J. 392; Tuckahoe C. Co. r. Railroad, 11 Leigh, 42; Boston W. P. 
 Co. V. Railroad, 40 Mass. 360; Backus v. Lebanon, 11 N. H. 19; Crosby v. 
 Hanover, 36 N. H. 404; White River T. Co. v. Railroad Co. 21 Vt. 590. 
 
 8 Barber v. Andover, 8 N. H. 398; Pierce v. Somersworth. 10 N. H. 
 369; Armington v. Barnet, 15 Vt. 745. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS, 174 
 
 9 Bait. E. R. Co. v. Nesbit, 10 How. 395. 
 
 10 Dinarman v. People. 51 111. 277 ; Beer Co. i'. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 
 25; Fertillzins Co. v. Hyde Park, 97 U. R. 659. 
 
 11 Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25. 
 
 12 State V. South Pacific R.. R. 24 Tex. 80. 
 
 13 Muim V. Hliuois, 94 U. S. 113; 69 111. 80. 
 
 14 Pittsburg &c. R. R. Co. v. S. W. Pa. R. R. Co. 77 Pa. St. 173. 
 
 Amendment or alteration of charter.— A charter 
 
 may be altered or aiuenderl with the consent of the cor- 
 poration, i but there must be an acceptance of the subse- 
 quent act.- If an amendment is accepted by a corporate 
 vote as an amendment to the original charter, it is not a 
 violation of the charter. ^ The assent relates back to the 
 date of the law.-* An inference of assent cannot be 
 drawn from non-user or misuser of its franchise,'^' but for 
 a willful misuser or non-user a corporation is subject to 
 dissolution.'^ Where the amendment is as to several par- 
 ticulars, the acceptance must be made as it is offered, or 
 not at all.' The charter of a corporation may be repealed 
 by an amendment accepted by the corporation,*^ but an 
 amendment is not binding without acceptance,^ unless 
 the power be reserved in the charter, i'^' If the grant is 
 accepted on the terms presci'ibed, it becomes a compact, 
 binding on the parties.^ A statute cannot amend a char- 
 ter so as to restrict the use of its property.^- Nor to give 
 to public use for a use entirely different and inconsistent 
 with the original use.13 So, an officer of a corporation 
 cannot be deprived of his office by an amendment of the 
 charter. 1-* A ijublic statute which provides how charters 
 may be amended is not a contract. i^ A jiower to alter is 
 not ordinarily a power to repeal or a power to destroy. ^^ 
 A State may modify or repeal a charter before it is ac- 
 cepted, and before rights have been acquired under it.i' 
 
 1 People V. Marshall, 1 Gilm. (572 ; Conim. v. Jarvis, 1 Mon. 5 ; Monon- 
 gahela ISav. Co. v. Coou, 6 Pa. St. 379; (i Watts & S. 101; Ehreuzeller ». 
 Canal Co. 1 Rawle, 181; Trustees v. Winston, 5 Stew. & P. 17. 
 
 2 Pinsirv v. Washburn, 1 Aik. 264; Commonwealth v. CuUen, 13 Pa. 
 St. 133; 'Allen v. McKan, 1 Sum. 276. Otherwise as to the assent of 
 curators and directors of an eleemosynary corporation — State v. 
 Adams, 44 Mo. 570. 
 
 3 Dartmouth Coll. v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518; Mumma v. Potomac 
 Co. 8 Peters. 281; Penn. Coll. Cases, 13 Wall. 214; She v. Bloom, 19 
 Johns. 456; Joy y. Jackson Co. U Mich. 155; Riddle v. Locks and Canals, 
 7 Mass. 169; McLaren v. Penninqton, 1 Paige, 107; Monongahela Nav. 
 Co. V. Coon, 6 Pa. St. 379; Commonwealth v. CuUeu, 13 Pa. St. 133. 
 
 4 EhrenzeUer v. Canal Co. 1 Rawle, 181. 
 
 5 Regents v. WiUiams, 9 Gill & J. 365. 
 
 6 Mmnma v. Potomac Co. 8 Peters, 281. 
 
175 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 7 Marietta &c. R. R. Co. v. Elliott, 10 Ohio St. 57. 
 
 8 Mobile R. R. Co. V. State, 29 Ala. 573; Mononsaliela Nav. Co. v. 
 Coon, 6 Pa. St. 379; 6 Watts & S. 101. 
 
 9 Sa^e V. Dillard, 15 E. Hon. 340; Yeaton v. Bank, 21 Gratt. 5:)3; Troy 
 V. Rutland &c. R. R. Co. 17 Barb. 531; White v. Railroad Co. 14 Barb. 
 559; Pennsylvania Coll. Cas. 13 Wall. 213; Tonilinson v. Jessu]), 15 Wall. 
 459; Miller v. State, 15 Wall. 47S; Holyoke v. Lyman, 15 Wall. 500; Mayor 
 &c. V. Norwich &c. R. R. Co. 109 Mass. 103; Thornton v. Marghial F. R. 
 Co. 123 Mass. 32. 
 
 10 Wash. Br. Co. v. State, 18 Conn. 64; Enfield T. B. Co. v. H. &c. Co. 
 17 Conn. 59 ; Bronson v. Taylor, 33 Conn. IIG ; M. & E. R. R. Co. v. 
 Coramrs. of R. R. Tax, 37 N. J. 228. 
 
 11 Crease v. Babcock, 40 Mass. 334; Iron City Bank v. Pittsburgh, 37 
 Pa. St. 340. 
 
 12 Comm. v. Bacon, 13 Bush, 210. 
 
 13 Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Co. 67 111. 540. 
 
 14 AUen v. McKean, 1 Sum. 276. 
 
 15 State V. New Haven <fec. R. R. Co. 43 Coim. 351. 
 
 16 Hartford Br. Co. v. East Hartford, 16 Conn. 140. 
 
 17 Canal Co. w. R. R. Co. 4 Gill & J. 5. 
 
 Reserved power to alter or amend.— When this 
 power is reserved in the State constitution, or in general 
 laws on tlie subject, or in the sjDccial act of incorporation, 
 its exercise does not impair the contract of wliich it forms 
 a part.i If not reserved in the constitution, it is a ques- 
 tion wliether the legislature intended it to inliere in tlie 
 charter.'-^ That the charter shall not be altered except by 
 an act of the legislature is a sufficient reservation of the 
 power to alter. s If the power is reserved in a charter, the 
 legislature may repeal, alter, or modify it,^ and a creditor 
 of the corporation cannot object to the repeal. ^ The legis- 
 lature may modify the charter by a general statute, ^ and 
 the alteration is binding whether the corporation assents 
 or not J or the alteration may be made by a change in the 
 State constitution. 8 The power to alter or modify is not 
 exhausted by one alteration. ^ Under this reserved power 
 a legislature cannot change the fundamental character of 
 the corporation, 1"^ nor take away nor intermeddle with 
 property rights, ii nor authorize the legislature to take the 
 corporation property for public \ise without compensa- 
 tion ; '-2 and where there is a provision that the alteration 
 shall work no injustice, it is for the courts to decide 
 whether injustice is done.^3 This power becomes, by 
 operation of law, a part of every contract or mortgage 
 made by the corporation ;^-^ but the legislature cannot 
 alter contracts made under the charter. ^5 if the general 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMI*AT?IOK OF POWEltS. 176 
 
 statute contains this reservation, a charter subsequently 
 granted is subject to this power.-^ Where the power to 
 alter is reserved, the State may from time to time desig- 
 nate the agents or organs, and prescribe the manner in 
 which the power shall be exercised. i" Where the power 
 is reserved in the Constitution, the right is not afEected by 
 the grant of authority by the legislature to consolidate 
 with a foreign corporation. ^8 
 
 1 Penn. Coil. Cases, 13 Wail. 214; Miller v. State, 15 Wall. 478; Holy- 
 obe V. Lvman, 15 Wall. 522; Common-wealtli v. Fayette Co. K.. K.. Co. 55 
 Pa. 452; English v. N. H. & N. Co. 32 Conn. 243. 
 
 2 State V. Yard, 10 Chic. L. N. 90. 
 
 3 Penn. Coll. Cases, 13 Wall. 214; Houston v. Jeff. Coll. 63 Pa. St. 428; 
 Comm. V. Bousall, 3 Whart. 559. 
 
 4 Allen v. McKean, 1 Sum. 276; Crease v. Babcock,40 Mass. 334; Per- 
 rin V. Oliver, 1 Minn. 202; Del. K. R. Co. v. Thorp, 5 Harriug-.454; Mc- 
 Laren V. Pennington, 1 Paige, 102; Monongahela Nav. Co. v. Coon, 6 Pa. 
 St. 379; 6 W. & S. 101; Ferguson t?. Miners' & M. Bank, 3 Sneecl, 609; 
 Stephen v. Smith, 29 Vt. 160; Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25; 
 Butler V. Walker, 80 111 345. 
 
 5 West Wis. R. E. Co. v. Supervisors, 93 U, S. 595; 35 Wis. 257; Read 
 V. Frankfort Bank, 23 Me. 318. 
 
 6 State V. Commrs. 38 N. J. 472 ; Bangor R. R. Co. v. Smith, 47 Me. 34. 
 
 7 Hyatt v. Whipple, 37 Barb. 595; Hyatt «. Esmond, 37 Barb. COl, 
 Mayor v. N. &c. R. R. Co. 109 Mass. 103; Attorney-General v. R. R. Co. 
 35 Wis. 425. 
 
 8 In re Lee's Bank, 21 N. Y. 9. 
 
 9 People V. Hills, 46 Barb. 340; Proprietors v. Haskell, 7 Me. 474; 
 State V. Comm. 37 N. J. 228; M. & E. R. R. Co. v. Commrs. of R. R. 
 Tax, 37 jST. J. 228. 
 
 10 Buffalo &c. R. R. Co. v. Dudley, 14 N. Y. 336; Troy &.C. R. R. Co. v. 
 Kerr, 17 Barb. 581; White v. R. R. Co. 14 Barb. 559. 
 
 11 AUen V. McKean, 1 Sum. 276; Comm. v. Essex Co. 79 Mass. 239. 
 
 12 Miller «. R. R. Co. 21 Barb. 513 
 
 13 Iron City Bank v. Pittsburgh, 37 Pa. St. 340. 
 
 14 Anonymous, 6 Chic. L. N. 333. 
 
 15 Bank v. McVeigh, 20 Gratt. 457; Penn. Coll. Cases, 13 WaU. 214; 
 Piek V. C. &c. R. R. Co. 94 U. S. 164; 6 Biss. 177; Terretfc v. Taylor, 9 
 Cranch, 43; Penn. CoU. Cases, 13 Wall. 180. 
 
 16 Sherman v. Smith, 1 Black, 587; Miller v. State, 15 Wall. 478; Suy- 
 dam V. Moore, 8 Barb. 358; White v. R. R. Co. 14 Barb. .559; Griffin v. 
 Ky. Ins. Co. 3 Bush, 592; Hyatt w. McMahon, 25 Barb. 457; State v. Per- 
 son, 32 N. J. 134; Cent. R. R. Co. v. State, 54 Ga. 501; State v. Commis- 
 sioners, 37 N. J. 228; Fort Plain Br. v. Smith, 30 N. Y. 44; Iron City 
 Bank V. Pittsburgh, 37 Pa. St. 340. 
 
 17 In re Reciprocity Bank, 22 N. Y. 9; 17 How. Pr. 323; 29 Barb. 369. 
 
 18 Anonymous, 6 Chic. L. N. 33 
 
 ooo 
 
177 I^IMITATION OF POWEES. Art. I, § 10 
 
 Exercise of reserved po"wer. — The reserved power 
 may be exercised to any extent to carry into effect tlie 
 original purposes of the graiit,i hut it should not extend 
 beyond the terms in which it is expressed. 2 When this 
 power is reserved, the corporation may be required to pay 
 the excess of the dividend instead of one-third of the net 
 prolits,3 or the stockholders may be made liable for all 
 debts until the whole capital stock is paid in.* Where 
 the power to alter is reserved in the charter, a State may 
 prohibit an insolvent corporation from giving a prefer- 
 ence,^ or it may make the stockholders personally liable 
 for the debts of the corporation subsequently contracted. 6 
 If the interests of the creditors demand it, the legislature 
 may take away the custody of the assets from the trus- 
 tees, and place them in the custody of a State officer,'^ or 
 may authorize a receiver to make assessments on premium 
 notes instead of the directors, ^ but it cannot appoint ad- 
 ditional trustees. 9 It may repeal a clause in the charter 
 exempting from taxation ; ^0 or may impose a tax different 
 from that stipulated for in the charter; n or may modify 
 a provision requiring consent of a majority to levy a pew 
 tax -,12 or may diminish the right to a ferry franchisees 
 Where this power is reserved, a corporation authorized to 
 construct a dam may be required to construct a suitable 
 iishway;!* or may impose a burden connected with the 
 grant ; ^^ or may require a railroad to erect a station- 
 house ;i6 or may require several railroads to unite in a 
 station in a city; i'^ or may authorize another company to 
 lay a similar track, or to use the track of the first com- 
 pany on making compensation for wear and tear; is or 
 may require the raising or lowering of highways across 
 its tracks; 19 or direct excavations and emlDankments to 
 be made; 20 or compel the widening of a bridge over an 
 excavation ; 21 or require a railroad to fence its roads; 22 
 or to construct cattle-guards. 23 
 
 1 Fletcher v. Peck. 6 Cranch, 87; Miller v. State, 15 Wall. 478; Holy- 
 oke V. Lyman, 15 Wall. 500. 
 
 2 State V. Yard, 10 Ch. L. N. 90. 
 
 3 Massachusetts Gen. Hosp. v. State M. L. Ins. Co. 70 Mass. 227. 
 
 4 Butler I'. Walker, 8 Ch. L. N. 92. 
 
 5 Kobinson v. Gardiner, 18 Gratt. 509. 
 
 6 Sherman v. Smith, 1 Black, 587; In re Reciprocity Bank, 29 Barb. 
 369; 17 How. Pr. 323; 22 N. Y. 9; In re Lee's Bank, 21 N. Y. 9; Bailey v. 
 HolUster, 26 N. Y. 112; In re Empire City Bank, 18 N. Y. 199. 
 
 7 Lothrop V. Stedman, 42 Conn. 583. 
 '. 8 Hyatt V. McMahon, 25 Barb. 457. 
 
 9 Sage V. Dillard, 15 B. Mon. 340. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF TOWERS. 178 
 
 10 Tomlinson v. Jessiip, 15 Wall. 454; West. Wis. E. R. Co. v. Super- 
 visors, 93 U. S. 595; 35 Wis. 257; Hewitt v. N. Y. &c. R. R. Co. 12 Blatclif. 
 452; C. R. & B. Co. v. State, 54 Ga. 401; A. & G. R. R. Co. v. State. 55 
 Oa. 312; City v. Metrop. Bank, 27 La. An. G48; Iron City Bank v. Pitts- 
 burgh, 37 Pa. St. 340; State v. Miller, 31 Ibid. 521 ; State v. Mayor, 31 N. 
 J. 575; Commonwealth v. Fayette Co. R. R. Co. 55 Pa. St. 452; Union 
 Improve. Co. v. Commonwealth, 69 Pa. St. 140. 
 
 11 Iron City Bank v. Pittsburgh, 37 Pa. St. 340. 
 
 12 Bailey v. Trustees, 6 R. I. 491. 
 
 13 Perrin v. Oliver, 1 Minn. 202. 
 
 14 Holyoke v. Lyman, 15 Wall. 500; Commrs. v. Holyoke W. P. Co. 104 
 Mass. 446. Bu.t see Comm. v. Essex Co. 79 Mass. 239. 
 
 15 English v. New Haven Co. 32 Conn. 240. 
 
 16 Comm. «. Eastern R.R. Co. 103 Mass. 254. 
 
 17 Mayor v. N. & W. R. R. Co. 109 Mass. 103. 
 
 18 Metrop. R. R. Co. v. Highland Railway, 118 Mass. 290. 
 
 19 City of Roxbmy v. Railroad Co. 6 Cush. 424. 
 
 20 Fitchburg R. R. Co. v. Grand Junction R. R. Co. 86 Mass. 198; 
 Albany R. R. Co. v. Brownell, 24 N. Y. 345. 
 
 21 English v. New Haven Co. 32 Conn. 240. 
 
 22 Staats v. Hudson Riv, R. R. Co. 3 Keyes, 196. 
 
 23 Bulkley v. N. Y. &c. R. R. Co. 27 Conn. 479. 
 
 Power to repeal. — The reservation of the power of 
 revocation is valid. i The power to repeal does not confer 
 the power to destroy the executory contracts of the cor- 
 poration.-^ If the power to repeal depends on the abuse 
 or misuse of the i)rivileges, it is not necessary that such 
 abuse or misuse should be judicially ascertained. ^ An 
 act of incorporation may be repealed by implication. ^ If 
 the power to repeal is reserved by one constitution, it can- 
 not be affected by the subsequent adoption of another. ° 
 Under the reserved power to repeal, the State may regu- 
 late tolls or rates of transportation of persons or property. 6 
 A State may repeal or alter a charter of a corporation 
 where it is the sole contributor to the fund which sup- 
 ports it.''' 
 
 1 McLaren I). Pennmgton, 1 Paige, 102 ; Crease v . Babcock, 40 Mass. 334. 
 
 2 Curran v. State, 15 How. 304; 12 Ark. 321. 
 
 3 Crease v. Babcock, 40 Mass. 334; Miners' Banic v. U. S. 1 Iowa, 553; 
 Erie &c. R. R. Co. v. Casey, 26 Pa. St. 287. But see Mayor v. Pitts- 
 burgh &c. R. R. Co. 1 Abb. U. S. 9; Flint &c. v. WoodhuU, 25 Mich. 99. 
 
 4 Union R. R. Co. v. East Tenn. R. R. Co. 14 Ga. 327. 
 
 5 State V. Northern Centr. R. R. Co. 44 Md. 131. 
 
 6 Peik V. Chicago ctc.R. R. Co. 94 U. S. 164; 6 Biss. 177; Parker v. 
 Metropolitan R. R. Co. lOD Mass. 506; Plank Road Co. ». Reynolds, 3 
 Wis. 287; Attorney-General v.. R. R. Co. 35 Wis. 425; Hinckley «;. Chi- 
 cago &c. R. R. 38 Wis. 194; State v. Stone, 37 Wis. 204; Shields v. State, 
 26 Ohio. St. 86; Anonymous, 6 Ch. L. N. 333. 
 
179 lilMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 7 Curran v. Arkansas, 15 How. 304; 12 Ark. 321; Dart v. Houston, 22 
 Ga. 506. Winston, 316; Trustees v. Stew. & P. 17; Bass v. Fontleroy, 11 
 Texas, 698; Mobile School Com. v. Putnam, 44 Ala. 406. 
 
 Municipal corp.orations. — The charter of a public 
 corporation created for the purjDOses of governraent can- 
 not be considered a contract, i as the grant of the fran- 
 chise may at any time be resumed. ^ A power to alter 
 and change public corporations and to adapt them to the 
 purposes intended is implied. ^ Transactions between the 
 legislature and municipal corporations are in the nature 
 of legislation rather than of comijact.^ A statute may 
 take i^art of the territory of one municipal corporation 
 and give it to another.^ or extend the limits of a corpora- 
 tion without consent of the citizens of the annexed land.'> 
 But a law which repeals an act passed on the division of 
 a township, requiring each town to bear its proportionate 
 expenses of paupers, is unconstitutional." The power to 
 divide tlie property is incident to the power to divide the 
 territory. 8 The legislature may unite and divide town- 
 ships and their school funds, o but it cannot divert the 
 fund from a land grant to a township, though if may abol- 
 ish the township. 10 A statute giving a municipal corpo- 
 ration the right to purchase ]:>roi3erty of a private corpora- 
 tion may be repealed or modified at pleasure ;ii so, if the 
 legislature gives the reveaues accruing from a private 
 corporation, it may alter or rej)eal the law, and appropri- 
 ate such revenues to other purposes ;^2 but if the legisla- 
 ture grant bonds to a municipal corporation, a subsequent 
 statute vesting rights to the bonds in others is void;^^ qq^ 
 the legislature cannot divest a municipal corporation of 
 its private property without consent of its inhabitants, i* 
 If a municipal corporation is made trustee of an estate, 
 its-rights and title are subject to be defeated by the abol- 
 ishment of its existence. 15 
 
 1 Bradford v. Gary, 5 Me. 339 ; Marietta v. Fearing, 4 Oliio, 427 ; Gov- 
 ernor V. Gridley, Walk. 328; People v. Morris, 13 Wend. 325; Dartmouth 
 Coll. V. Woodward, 4 Wheat. G94 ; East Hartford v. Hartford Br. 10 How. 
 511; People v. Plnkney, 32 N. Y. 377. 
 
 2 Trustees v. Tatman, 13 111. 27. 
 
 3 State V. Railroad, 3 How. 534 ; 12 Gill & J. 399; Aspinwall v. Com- 
 missioners, 24 How. 364; Bricli^eport v. Hubbell, 5 Conn. 237 ; Bush v. 
 Shipman, 5 111. 186; Mills v. Williams, 11 Ired. 558; Gatzweiller v. Peo- 
 ple, 14 111. 142 ; North Yarmouth v. Skillings, 45 Me. 133 ; Mayor v. State, 
 15 Md. 376; Trustees v. Aberdeen, 21 Miss. 645; Bristol v. New Chester, 
 3 N. H. 524; Paterson v. Society, 24 N. J. 385; City v. Russell, 9 Mo. 507; 
 People V. Morris, 13 Wend. 325. 
 
 4 Hartford v. Hartford Br. Co. 10 How. 511; 16 Conn. 149; Trustees 
 V. Tatman, 13 111. 27; Reynolds v. Baldwin, 1 La. An. 162; Police Jury v. 
 Shreveport, 5 La. An. 661 ; Layton v. N. 0. 12 La. An. 515. 
 
 5 Wade V. Richmond, 18 Gratt. 583. ' 
 
Art. I, § 10 lilMITATION OF POWERS. 180 
 
 6 Morford v. Unger, 8 Iowa, 82; Manly v. Raleigh, 4 Jones Eq. 370. 
 
 7 Bowdoinliam v. Riclimond, 6 Me. 112. 
 
 8 Richmond v. Lawrence, 12 111. 1; North Yarmouth v. SkiUings, 45 
 Me. 133; Bristol v. New Chester, 3 N. H. 524. 
 
 9 Greenleaf v. Township, 22 111. 236. 
 
 10 State V. Springfield, 6 Ind. 83 ; Morton v. Granada Acad. 16 Miss. 
 773. 
 
 11 Crescent City G. Co. v. New Orleans G. Co. 27 La. An. 138. 
 
 12 Police JurytJ. Shreveport, 5 La. An. 661; Marks v. Donaldson, 21 
 La. An. 242. 
 
 13 Spaulding v. Andover, 54 N. H. 38. 
 
 14 Grogan v. San Francisco, 18 Cal. 590; Milwaukee v. Milwaukee, 12 
 Wis. 93. 
 
 15 Bass V. Fontleroy, 11 Tex. 698; Montpelier v. East Montpelier, 29 
 Vt. 12. 
 
 Subscription to corporation stock.— In the ab- 
 sence of a constitutional prohibition, the legislature may 
 authorize municipal corporations to subscribe to railroad, i 
 and an act authorizing subscription to corporation stock 
 and a submission of the question to the iDeople is consti- 
 tutional ;'-^ but the legislature cannot render a void election 
 and suljscription to railroad stock valid. ^ Under the new- 
 constitution, municipal corporations are inhibited from 
 subscribing to railroad stock ;4 but the inhibition is pros- 
 pective only, and does not repeal statutes in force at the 
 time of its adoption. ^ So, where the vote on a subscription 
 to corporate stock was had, and the subscription made 
 prior to the adoption of the new constitution, the old con- 
 stitution must govern. 6 Art. 12, Sec. 2, of the constitution 
 of Nebraska is a restriction on legislative discretion, and 
 fixes the boundary beyond which the legislature cannot go, 
 but within which it is supreme.'^ An act authorizing a mu- 
 nicipal corporation to subscribe to the capital stock of a 
 railroad corporation is not a contract.^ The legislature 
 may prohibit a municipal corporation from subscribing to 
 the stock of a private corporation, ^ or may repeal an 
 amendment to the charter allowing such subscription, lo 
 or may authorize a change in the mode of paying such 
 subscription, 11 or may confirm a subscription not made in 
 pursuance of the power conferred,!'^ or may provide for 
 the issue of the stock to taxpayers in proportion to their 
 taxes,i3 or may jDrovide that the filing of the affidavit of 
 consent of taxpayers shall be conclusive evidence of such 
 assent. 1* A vote of the people authorizing such subscrip- 
 tion does not form a contract until the subscription is 
 actually made.i^ Bonds issued to railroad companies are 
 ever after valid and binding on the body issuing them.i^ 
 
181 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 1 San Antonio v. Jones, 28 Tex. 19. 
 
 2 HiU V. Comm. of Forsythe, 67 N. C. 337. 
 
 3 Marshall v. Silliman, 61 111. 218; Wiley v. SiUiman, 62 111. 170. 
 
 4 Hetfleld v. Fort Edward, 70 N. Y. 28; Horton v. Town of Thomp- 
 son, 71 N. Y. 513; People v. Dupuyt, 71 111. 651. 
 
 5 Indiana Co. v. Agricultural Society, 85 Pa. St. 359. 
 
 6 Decker v. Hughes, 63 111. 33. And see Mason v. Shawneetown, 77 
 m. 533. 
 
 7 Reineman v. C. C. & B. H. R. R. 7 Neb. 310. 
 
 8 List V. Wheeling, 7 West Va. 501. 
 
 9 Aspinwall v. Commissioners, 22 How. 364. 
 
 10 Covington &c. R. R. Co. v. Kenton, 12 B. Mon. 144. 
 
 11 Louisville &c. R. R. Co. v. Davidson, 1 Sneed, 637; Hunsaker o. 
 Borden, 5 Cal. 288. 
 
 12 City V. Railroad Co. 15 Conn. 475; Bass v. Mayor, 38 Ga. 875; Mc- 
 Millen v. Boyles, 6 Iowa, 304; Hannibal &c. R. R. Co. v. Marion, 38 
 Mo. 294. 
 
 13 Commissioners v. Lucas, S3 U. S. 108. 
 
 14 People V. Mitchell, 45 Barb. 208. 
 
 15 List V. Wheeling, 7 West Va. 501. 
 
 16 Lansing v. Muscatine Co. 2 Abb. TJ. S. 59; Lee Co. v. Rogers, 7 
 WaU. 181. And see Butz v. City of Muscatine, 8 Wall. 585. 
 
 Authority of legislature. — It may confirm the elec- 
 tion of officers made before act of incorporation,! or may 
 remove an officer for refusal to take oath of allegiance,^ 
 or may require payment for services of an officer rendered 
 under a prior act, which required such services to be paid 
 for by other persons. ^ The legislature may alter the char- 
 ter so as to change the person on whom service of process 
 must be made,^ or may withdraw the power to grant 
 licenses, ° or may change the mode and time of payment 
 of a county debt,6 or may regulate the mode of selection 
 and removal of a county seat,' or may increase the num- 
 ber of directors which a municipal corporation is entitled 
 to. 8 Where a municipal corporation has condemned land 
 as a highway, and paid for it, a State cannot diminish the 
 width of the highway and give the land back to the 
 owner.o A statute to be accepted by a municipal cor- 
 poration and a private corporation may be a contract •,^'^ 
 but a statvite taking from the board of supervisors the 
 power to make a contract, and conferring that power on 
 another, is not a contract. i^ A charter exempting corpo- 
 ration stock from taxation, except for State purposes, is 
 binding on a municipal corporation. i^ A statute allowing 
 a municipal corporation to set-off a claim for benefits 
 against damages, is valid. "^s 
 
 Desty Fed. Coisr.— lo. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION or POWEES. 182 
 
 1 state V. Kline, 23 Ark. 587. 
 
 2 State I'. Adams, 44 Mo. 570. 
 
 3 Southwortli v. City, 24 La. An. 312. 
 
 4 Perkins v. Watertown, 5 Biss. 320; 5 Ch. L. N. 472. 
 
 5 Gatzweiller v. People, 14 111. 142; Morris v. People, 13 Wend. 325. 
 
 6 Hunsaker v. Borden, 5 Cal. 288. 
 
 7 Moses V. Kearney, 31 Ark. 261; Elwell v. Tucker, 1 Blackf. 285; 
 Armstrong v. Commissioners, 4 Blackf. 208; Hamrick v. House, 17 Ga. 
 56; Adams 2;. Logan, 11 111. 336; Harris v. Sliaw, 13 111. 456; State v. 
 Jones, 1 Ired. 414; Newton v. Commissioners, 26 Ohio St. 618. But see 
 State V. Perry Co. 5 Ohio St. 497. 
 
 8 Miller v. State, 15 Wall. 478; People v. Hills, 46 Barb. 340, 
 
 9 People V. Commissioners, 47 N. Y. 501; 53 Barb. 70. 
 
 10 Central Bridge v. Lowell, 8 Mass. 474. 
 
 11 Pott V. Sheboyan Co. 25 Wis. 506. 
 
 12 State Bank v. Madison, 3 Ind. 43; Bank v. New Albany, 11 Ind. 139. 
 
 13 Baldwin v. Newark, 9 Vroom, 158; Loweree v. Newark, Ibid. 151. 
 
 Municipal contracts.— Where the State authorizes 
 a municipal corporation to contract and to exercise the 
 power of local taxation to the extent necessary to meet 
 its engagements, the power given cannot be withdrawn 
 until the contract is satisfied. ^ A State cannot release a 
 municipal corporation from its contracts without the con- 
 sent of the otlier i^arty";^ nor require it to rescind a con- 
 tract for the sale of land made by it;^ nor impair a 
 contract for street work;* nor can a municipal corpora- 
 tion revoke a donation actually made or impose new 
 terms or duties on the donees ,5 If a municipal corpora- 
 tion may legally purchase property of a private corpora- 
 tion, a subsequent statute cannot interfere.*^ A municipal 
 corporation may make such contracts as are allowed by 
 the act of incorporation, but it cannot abridge its legisla- 
 tive power to bind its legislative capacity.'^ When it 
 engages in things not public in their nature its acts bind 
 them as much as if it were a natural person. ^ The power 
 conferred to raise money by taxation is a political jDOwer, 
 and its application is within the control of the legislature. ^ 
 A State cannot authorize a municipal corporation to impose 
 a tax which the State itself has no right to levy .^o If a mu- 
 nicipal corporation sells lots, the use of the streets passes 
 as appurtenant, and it cannot afterward alter or defeat 
 the dedication; ii^ the compliance with the conditions of a 
 grant is a contract, i^ A municipal cori^oration may waive 
 a forfeiture. 13 An ordinance requiring a license fee after 
 the granting of the right to run street-cars is void.i^ The 
 repeal of an ordinance requiring a bond from an auction- 
 eer cannot destroj' or affect any right acquired under the 
 
183 LIMIT ATIOIs' OF POWERS. Art, I, § 10 
 
 ordinance. 13 The legislature cannot revoke a municipal 
 charter so as to destroy its lawful contracts, or impair 
 their obligation. ^6 An ordinance of a city council impos- 
 ing a license on an insurance company authorized tc) 
 transact business by State laws is not a violation of tho 
 obligation of contracts. i'^ 
 
 1 Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall. 535; People v. Bell, 10 Cal. 570; 
 Dominic v. Sayre, 3 Sand. 555; Lansing v. Co. 1 Dill. 522; 2 Abb. U. S. 53. 
 
 2 Davenport Co. v. Davenport, 13 Iowa, 229; People v. FishkilTP. R. 
 Co. 27 Barb. 445. 
 
 3 Butler v. Cliariton, 13 Mo. 112. 
 
 4 Gooclale v. Fennel!, 27 Obio St. 426. 
 
 5 Louisville v. University, 15 B. Mon. 642. 
 
 6 Sala V. N. O. 2 Woods, 183. 
 
 7 Gozzler v. Georgetown, 6 Wbeat. 593; Presbyterian Church v. N. 
 T. 5 Cowen, 538; Coates v. Is. Y. 7 Cowen, 585. 
 
 8 West. Sav. Fund v. Philadelphia, 31 Pa. St. 175, 185. 
 
 9 People V. Power, 25 111. 187. 
 
 10 O'Donnell v. Bailey, 24 Miss. 386; Camden & A. R. R. Co. v. Com- 
 missioners, 18 N. J. 71 ; Camden & A. R. R. Co. v. Hillegas, Ibid. 11. 
 
 11 Breed v. Cunningham, 2 Cal. 361. 
 
 12 Brooklyn C. R. R. Co. v. Brooklyn Cit. R. R. R. Co. 32 Barb. 358. 
 
 13 State V. Railroad Co. 3 How. 534; 12 Gill & J. 399; Coles v. Mad- 
 ison, Breese, 115. 
 
 14 Mayor v. Second Av. B. R. Co. 34 Barb. 41; In re Peters, N. Y. El. 
 R. R. 70 N. Y. 327. 
 
 15 McMechan v^ Mayor, 2 Har. & J. 41. 
 
 16 Bleakey v. Williams, 20 Pitts. L. J. 66. 
 
 17 Home Ins. Co. v. City Council, 93 U. S. 115; Osborne v. Mobile, 16 
 Wall. 482. 
 
 Municipal liabilities. — An act of the State legisla- 
 ture which prohibits from levying taxes to pay a judg- 
 ment is void if it deprives the creditor of every means for 
 the collection of his debt.i A statute providing another 
 and different mode of payment of a warrant for county 
 indebtedness than that provided in the contract, is void; ^ 
 
 . so, requiring the holders of a county warrant bearing in- 
 terest to surrender them, and accept a bond bearing less 
 interest, is void.^ If a corporation obtain a loan by plac- 
 ing certain property in the hands of trustees as security, 
 it cannot subsequently make a change in the selection of 
 trustees. 4 A statute exempting property of a municipal 
 corporation from forced sale on execution is valid, if no 
 prior statute has authorized a levy thereon ; ^ so, a stat- 
 ute providing a redemption fund to meet indebtedness 
 
 - may provide that preference be given to the proposal that 
 offers the largest amount of indebtedness for the least 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATIOIS" OF POWEKS. 184 
 
 amount of money. <5 A statute making one mniiicipal 
 corporation liable instead of another is valid. '' 
 
 1 Soutter V. Madison, 15 Wis. 30. 
 
 2 Kose ?;. EstudiUo, 39 Cal. 270. 
 
 3 Brewer v. Otoe Co. 1 Neb. 373. 
 
 4 West. Sav. Fund v. Pliiladelpliia, 31 Pa. St. 175, 185. 
 
 5 Gilman v. Contra Costa Co. 8 Cal. 52. 
 
 6 Youngs V. Hall, 9 Nev. 212. But see Blealdey v. Williams, 20 Titts. 
 L. J. 66, 
 
 7 Rader v. S. R. Dist. 6 Vroom. 273. 
 
 Municipal bonds.— If a statute authorizing a munic- 
 ipal corporation to issue bonds provides for a tax to pay 
 the same, it is a contract, i and a subsequent act cannot 
 destroy the corporation. ^ If a fund is pledged for the 
 payment of municipal bonds a subsequent statute cannot 
 authorize its diversion so as to imi3air the security of the 
 bond-holders. 3 An act providing for the redemption of 
 the bonds at less than par, and authorizing a loan of the 
 fund if no bonds are tendered for redemption, is void."^ 
 A statute authorizing a municipal corporation to issue 
 bonds does not impair the obligation of a grant of land to 
 individual citizens from the State. ^ If a statute author- 
 izing condemnation of land for a park provides that the 
 bonds issued shall be a lien thereon, no subsequent act 
 can provide for the sale of the land free from the lien, 
 although the proceeds are to form a sinking fund for the 
 use of the bond-holders. ^ An act passed prohibiting the 
 issue of bonds for any purpose but the one specified is 
 not subject to rejjeal or amendment.'^ The legislature 
 may validate municipal bonds illegally issued. ^ A stat- 
 ute cannot compel a party to surrender the evidence of 
 indebtedness and take another in its place. ^ 
 
 1 Maenhnt v. N. 0, 2 Woods, 108; Ranger v. N. O. 2 Woods, 128. 
 
 2 Milner v. Pensacola, 2 Woods, 632. 
 
 3 People V. Woods, 7 Cal. 579; People v. Supervisors, 12 Cal. 300; 
 People V. Bond, 10 Cal. 563; People v. Tillinghast, 10 Cal. 584; English v. 
 Supervisors, 19 Cal. 172; Board v. Fowler, 19 Cal. 11; Trustees v. Bailey, 
 10 Fla. 112; West. Sav. Fund v. Philadelphia, 31 Pa. St. 175, 185. 
 
 4 Goldsmith v. Brown, 5 Or. 418. 
 
 5 McCoy V. Washington Co. 3 Wall. Jr. 381; 3 Phila. 290. 
 
 6 Brooklyn Park v. Armstrong, 45 N. Y. 234. 
 
 7 Smith V. Appleton, 19 Wis. 468. 
 
 8 Kunkle v. Franklin, 13 Minn. 127; Comm. v. Folsom, 13 Minn. 219. 
 
 9 People V. Morse, 43 Cal. 535; Rose v. Estudillo. 39 Cal. 270. 
 
185 LIMIT ATIOK OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 Police powers.— It is the province of the legislature 
 to determine the exigency calling for the exercise of 
 police powers, and of the courts to decide the proper sub- 
 jects of its exercise,! and it cannot by any contract divest 
 itself of this power,2 nor of its discretion in its exercise.s 
 The police powers comprehend all those general laws of 
 internal regulation necessary to secure peace, good order, 
 healthy and the comfort of society,'^ private interests being 
 subservient to the general interests of the community.^ 
 The legislature may forbid an individual from undertak- 
 ing a dangerous employment, except at his own risk,^ or 
 it may prohibit a hazardous or jDernicious business, al- 
 though it affects prior contracts."^ So, it may regulate the 
 sale of naphtha or inflammable oils.s A subsequent stat- 
 ute may prohibit the transportation of dead animals under 
 a charter allowing their use as fertilizers. 9 So, a statute 
 prohibiting a lottery is valid, though the charter gave a 
 right to establish one.-" A State legislature may pass 
 laws regulating the observance of the Sabbath, n or may 
 give a remedy against nuisances. 12 Every citizen holds 
 Ms land subservient to such police regulation as the legis- 
 lature in its wisdom may enact for the general welfare. 13 
 The States may regulate the carrying on of business 
 within its limits. 14 So, State laws may impose reasonable 
 police regulations for the protection of markets against 
 the sale of commodities unfit for commerce, 1° or may reg- 
 ulate the sale of any commodity the use of which would 
 be detrimental to the morals of the people. i^ The legis- 
 lature may regulate the sale of spirituous or malt liquors ;i" 
 or prohibit their sale if it does not interfere with vested 
 rights ; ^^ or impair the obligations of the charter created 
 for the purpose of their manufacture. 19 So, a State may 
 tax liquor-dealers,2o or may license the sale of liquors, 
 although a charter contains a prohibitory clause. ^1 It 
 may establish reasonable regulations for the operation of 
 mines, '-^2 and under the police power may require qualifi- 
 cations for professional graduates. ^3 When applied to 
 corporations the police power is subject to constitutional 
 limitations, and it cannot conflict with the charter; 2* but 
 provisions for penalties and forfeitures in a charter are 
 not mere matters of contract. 25 The legislature may au- 
 thorize cities and towns to prohibit the erection of wooden 
 buildings as a protection of person and property against 
 fire. 26 Under the police power the legislature may au- 
 thorize a railroad company to lay its tracks in the streets 
 of a city.2" An ordinance regulating the transportation 
 of heavy merchandise in a city is valid. 28 Congress can- 
 not legislate on the internal police of a State. 29 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 186 
 
 1 Lake View v. Rose Hill Cemetery, 70 111. 191 ; Daniels v. Hilgard. 77 
 m. 640. 
 
 2 Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25. 
 
 3 Boyd V. Alabama, 94 U. S. 645 ; Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. 
 S. 33. 
 
 4 Ex parte Shrader, 33 Gal. 279; Philadelphia &c. R. R. Co. v. Bow- 
 ers, 4 Houst. 506; Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25. 
 
 5 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 62; Comm. v. Alger, 7 Cush. 53. 
 
 6 Klrby v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co. 76 Pa. St. 506. 
 
 7 People V. Hawley, 3 Mich. 330. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Dewitt, 9 Wall. 41. 
 
 9 Fertilizing Co. v. Hyde Park, 70 111. 634; 97 U. S. 669. 
 
 10 Moore v. State, 48 Miss. 147. 
 
 11 Bohl V. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 683. 
 
 12 Fertilizing Co. v. Hyde Park, 97 U. S. 689 ; 70 111. 634 ; Brady v. 
 Weeks, not yet reported. 
 
 13 Brown v. Keener, 74 N. C. 714; Pool v. Trexler, 76 Ibid. 297. 
 
 14 Higgins v. Rinker, 47 Tex. 381. 
 
 15 State V. Fosdick, 21 La. An. 256; N. H. &c. T. B. Co. v. Bunnell, 4 
 Conn. 59; Fertilizing Co. v. Hyde Park, 97 U. S. 669. 
 
 16 State V. Gurney, 37 Me. 156. 
 
 17 Higgins??. Rinker, 47 Tex. 393. 
 
 18 Bertholf v. O'Reilly, 15 Am. Law Reg. N. S. 119; Metrop. Bd. of 
 Excise V. Barrie, 34 N. Y. 657; Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 IT. S. 25 ; 
 Butler V. Walker, 80 III. 345; Comm. v. Intox. Liq. 115 Mass. 153. 
 
 13 Commonwealth v. Intox. Liq. 115 Mass. 153. 
 
 20 Sinclair V. State, 69 N. C. 47. 
 
 21 Dingman v. People, 51 111. 277. 
 
 22 Daniels v. Hilgard, 77 HI. 640 ; Dingman v. People, 51 111. 277. 
 
 23 Regents v. Williams, 9 Gill & J. 365; State v. Heyward, 3 Rich. 389; 
 Logan V. State, 5 Tex. Ct. App. 306. 
 
 24 Lake View v. Rose Hill Cemetery, 70 111. 191 ; State v. Fosdick, 21 La. 
 An. 256. 
 
 25 State v. Railroad Co. 3 How. 534 ; 12 Gill & J. 399. 
 
 26 Salem v. Maynes, 123 Mass. 372. 
 
 27 Perry v. N. O. R. R. Co. 55 Ala. 613. 
 
 28 People V. James, 16 Hun. 426. 
 
 29 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 203; U. S.v. ^e W^tt, 9 Wall. 41; 
 Slai^hter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36; Railroad Co. v. Fuller, 17 WaU. 560. 
 
187 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 2JVb State shall, loithout the consent of the Congress, lay 
 any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except lohat may 
 he absolutely necessary for executing its inspection laws ; and 
 the net produce of all duties and imposts, laid by any State 
 on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the Treasury of 
 the United States ; and all such laws shall be subject to the 
 revision and control of the Congress. 
 
 Imports refer only to goods imported from a foreign 
 country. 1 An "impost" is a custom, or tax, levied on 
 articles brought into the country. It is not merely a duty 
 on the act of importation, but a duty on the thing im- 
 ported.2 The prohibition is an exception on the power of 
 the State to levy taxes. ^ The object of the prohibition is 
 to protect both vessel and cargo from State taxation while 
 in transitu, and this prohibition cannot be evaded and 
 the same result effected by calling it a tax on passengers 
 or on the master.^ The prohibition is general, and reaches 
 a tax on the sale of the article imported and on the occu- 
 pation of the importer.^ By payment of duty, the im- 
 porter purchases the right to dispose of his goods as well 
 as to bring them into the country. 6 While the import 
 remains the property of the importer, in the original form 
 or package, a tax on it is a duty on imjjorts.''' A tax on a 
 bill of lading of foreign articles is a tax on imports, and 
 void;8 so, a tax on passengers is void.^ A stamp-tax on 
 a foreign bill of exchange drawn in the State is not an 
 impost or tax on exports ;^'' but a stamp-tax required on 
 the export of gold dust is an export tax.H A State law 
 imposing a transit duty on foreign corporations for per- 
 sons or "goods transported in the State is not a tax on 
 i«aports or exports, i^ nor a provision in a railroad charter 
 that all tonnage carried shall be subject to a toll, or duty, 
 per mile ;13 so, a tax on the gross receipts of an exj)ress 
 company engaged in carrying goods between States is 
 valid. 1^ The payment of duties includes the authority to 
 sell without the necessity of a State license ; so, a State 
 law requiring importers to take out a license to sell im- 
 ported goods is an indirect tax on imports. ^^ A tax on 
 sales of imported merchandise in original jiackages by 
 brokers and auctioneers is unconstitutional ;i6 but a tax 
 on the gross sales of a ]purchaser from the importer is not 
 a tax on imports. i*^ A tax on sales is a tax on the pro- 
 ceeds, and not on the imports, is Requiring a license for 
 non-resident traders to vend foreign merchandise is not a 
 tax on imports or exports, ^^ nor is a provision requiring 
 hawkers and peddlers to take out a license.20 A State may 
 impose a penalty on those who sell foreign goods without a 
 
Art. I, § 10 liiMiTATioisr of powers. 188 
 
 license.2i State pilot laws are not embraced in the words 
 "imposts or duties on imports."^^ A State cannot im- 
 pose a tax or toll on lumber floated down into another 
 State. 2S A State law providing for a ganger at a port of 
 delivery is not unconstitutional, 2* That the net produce 
 shall be for the United States applies only to tax laws for 
 inspection iiurposes.^s 
 
 1 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 
 Woodruff V. Parham, 8 Wall. 123; Hiuson v. Lott, 8 Wall. 148; 40 Ala. 
 123; License Cases, 5 How. 504; 13 N. H. 536; State v. Pinckney, 10 Rich. 
 474; State-y.Charleston, lOKich. 240; State Tax on R. E,. Gross Receipts, 
 15 Wall. 284; Harrison v. Mayor, 11 Miss. 581; Board i'. Pleasants, 23 
 La. An. 349. 
 
 2 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; Hinson v. Lott, 8 Wall. 148; 40 
 Ala. 123; Bode v. State, 7 Gill. 326; State v. Shiby, 2 Harr. & J. 480; 
 Wynne v. Wright, 4 Dev. & B. 19; State Freight Tax Case, 15 WaU. 232; 
 Sheffield v. Parsons, 3 Stewt. & P. 302. 
 
 3 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 488; 4 Johns. Ch. 150; 
 Hamilton Co. v. Massachusetts, 6 Wall. 639. 
 
 4 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283; 45 Mass. 282; People v. Downer, 7 Cal. 
 169; Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35. 
 
 5 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; License Cases, 5 How. 504; 
 State V. North, 27 Mo. 464; Biddle v. Commonwealth, 13 Serg. & R. 405. 
 
 6 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; Hinson v. Lott, 8 WaU. 148; 40 
 Ala. 123. 
 
 7 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 447; License Cases, 5 How. 504; 13 
 N. H. 536; Low v. Austin, 13 Wall. 29; Wynne v. Wright, 4 Dev. & B. 19: 
 State V. Charleston, 10 Rich. 240; State v. Shapleigh, 27 Mo. 464; Wood- 
 ruff?;. Parham, 8 Wall. 123; State Tax on R. R. Gross Receipts, 15 Wall. 
 284; Murray v. Charleston, 96 U. S. 447; State v. North, 27 Mo. 464. 
 
 8 Almy v. People, 24 How. 169 ; Brummagim v. Tillinghast, 18 Cal. 265. 
 
 9 Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283. 
 
 10 Ex parte Martin, 7 Nev. 140. 
 
 11 Almy V. California, 24 How. 169, distinguished in Pace v. Burgess, 
 02 U. S. 376. ^ 
 
 12 State V. Delaware L. & A. R. R. Co. 31 N. J. 531. 
 
 13 Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. Commonwealth, 3 Grant, 128. 
 
 14 Southern Express Co. v. Hood, 15 Rich. 66. 
 
 15 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1 ; Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; 
 License Cases, 5 How. 504; Pervear v. Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 478; 
 Waring v. The Mayor, 8 Wall. 110. 
 
 16 People V. Moring, 47 Barb. 642; 3 Abb. App. 539; Cook v. Pennsyl- 
 vania, 6 Amer. L. R. 378. 
 
 17 Waring v. Mayor, 8 Wall. 110; 4 Ala. 139. 
 
 18 State V. Pinckney, 18 Rich. 474. 
 
 19 Sears v. Commissioners, 36 Ind. 267. 
 
 20 Commonwealth v. Ober, 66 Mass. 493. 
 
 21 Beall V. Indiana, 4 Blackf. 107; Raguet v. Wade, 4 Ohio, 107; Peo- 
 ple V. Coleman, 4 Cal. 46. 
 
 22 Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299; Baker v. Wise, 16 Gratt. 139. 
 
 23 C. R. L. Co. V. Patterson, 33 Cal. 334. 
 
189 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 24 Addison v. Saulnier, 19 Cal. 82. 
 
 25 Padelford v. Mayor, 14 Ga. 438. 
 
 State inspection laws.— The power of the State to 
 pass inspection laws is retained subject to the control and 
 revision of Congress, i The consent of Congress need not 
 he given in advance, but may be implied from legislation.^ 
 Inspection laws may apply to imports as well as exports. ^ 
 A State may lay a tax on imports to pay for services per- 
 formed in inspecting the articles, if passed in good faith, 
 and not for the object of raising revenue. * The power to 
 pass inspection laws involves the power to enforce them, 
 and the fees for remuneration of officers are not imposts. ^ 
 Whether such fees are excessive is a question to be deter- 
 mined by Congress. 6 The removal or destruction of in- 
 fectious or unsound articles is an exercise of the power of 
 inspection.' 
 
 1 Gibbons v. Oaden, 9 Wheat. 1 ; Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; 
 State Ton. Tax. Cases, 12 Wall. 204; Railroad Co. v. Peniston, 18 Wall. 
 29; Sheffield v. Parsons, 3 Stewt. & P. 302. 
 
 2 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1 ; Virginia v. West Virginia, 11 Wall. 59. 
 
 3 Neilson v. Garza, 2 Woods, 287. 
 
 4 Green v. State, R. M. Charl. 368. 
 
 5 Addison v. Saulnier, 19 Cal. 82. 
 
 6 Neilson v. Garza, 2 Woods, 287. 
 
 7 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419. 
 
 State taxattion, when valid. — The authority of a 
 State to tax property, business, and persons witliin its 
 limits, is not affected by this iDrovisiou.^ Goods imported 
 in the hands of the importer are not a mass of the prop- 
 erty of the State, 2 but after the goods have been broken up 
 for use, or for retail, and been incorporated and mixed up 
 with the mass of the property of the State, a tax may be 
 imijosed ; ^ but if a State singles out im^Dorts as a special 
 object for any impost or duty, it is unlawful,* though after 
 becoming incorporated into the mass of State property 
 the State may lay taxes discriminating against them.^ 
 An importing merchant may be taxed on what he is worth 
 like any other citizen ; ^ so, a State may tax capital al- 
 though continually invested in cotton purchased for ex- 
 portation.'^ A i3urchaser f rom an importer is subject to 
 taxation. 8 The articles cease to be importations the mo- 
 ment the importer becomes a vendor. o 
 
 1 Kaih'oad Co. v. Peniston, 18 Wall. 29. 
 
 2 Almy V. California, 24 How. 169; Woodruff v. Parham, 8 Wall. 123; 
 Hlnson v. Lott, Ibid. 148; Low v. Austin, 13 Wall. 34. 
 
 3 Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; License Cases, 5 How. 575; Par- 
 vear v. Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 479; Waring v. Mayor, 8 Wall. 122; 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 190 
 
 State Tax on Railroad G. Receipts, 15 Wall. 295; People v. Coleman, 4 
 Cal. 46; Wynne v. Wrisjht, 4 Dev. & B. 19; Cowles v. Brittain, 2 Hawks, 
 204; Tracy V. State, 3 Mo. 3; Davis v. Dashiel, PWII. (N. C.) 114; Cum- 
 mings V. Savannah. R. M. Charlt. 26; Biddle v. Commonwealth, 13 Serg. 
 & R. 405; Woodrnflf v. Parham, 41 Ala. 334 ; Murray v. Charleston, 96 U. 
 S. 447. But see State v. North, 27 Mo. 464. And see Raguet v. Wade, 
 4 Ohio, 107. 
 
 4 People V. Moring 47 Barb. 642. 
 
 5 Davis V. Dashiel, Phill. N. C. 114. 
 
 6 License Cases, 5 Hov^. 504; 13 N. H. 536; State v. Pinckney, 10 
 Rich. 474. 
 
 7 People V. Tax Commissioners, 17 N. Y. Supr. 255. 
 
 8 Waring v. The Mayor, 8 WaU. 110. 
 
 9 State V. Peckham, 3 R. I. 289. 
 
 3 N'o State shall, loithout the consent of Congress, lay any 
 duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of loar in time of 
 peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another 
 State, or loith a foreign iwioer, or engage in war, unless act- 
 ually invaded, or in such imminent danger as loill not admit 
 of delay. 
 
 Tonnage duties. — A tonnage duty is a tax on the ca- 
 pacity of the vessel. 1 The prohibition in this provision 
 was intended to protect the freedom of commerce, and 
 should be so construed. ^ It is general, withdrawing the 
 power except by the consent of Congress.^ The consent 
 of Congress need not be given in advance, but may be 
 implied from legislation. ^ Duty signifies a tax, custom, 
 or toll, 5 pro]3ortioned to the size of the vessel or its ton- 
 nage.*^ Not only is a pro rata tax prohibited, but any duty, 
 whether a fixed sum on tonnage or a sum comj)aring the 
 rate with the tonnage.'^ Thus, a tax on the master or 
 cargo, or on some privilege to be enjoyed by the vessel, 
 as of engaging in a particular trade, if really and sub- 
 stantially a duty on tonnage, is within the prohibition, 8 
 and this protection extends to all vessels employed in the 
 coasting trade, whether in commercial intercourse be- 
 tween the j)orts of different States, or ports of the same 
 State; ^ so, a tax on ships entering a port,io or plying the 
 waters of the State, is void.^i Kequiring vessels carry- 
 ing oysters taken out of the State to take out a li- 
 cense and pay a tax proportioned to the tonnage, 12 or lay- 
 ing a tonnage duty on vessels employed as lighters to 
 assist vessels engaged in foreign commerce, i3 is a viola- 
 tion of this provision. That the tax does not go into the 
 public treasury does not prevent its being a duty on ton- 
 nage, i* A tonnage tax cannot be emj^loyed as a means 
 
19i LIMITATION OF POWERS. Art. I, § 10 
 
 of enforcing some law whicli is within the constitutional 
 authority of the State to enact; is so, a State cannot im- 
 pose a tax or duty on tonnage to raise revenue to defray 
 the expenses of its quarantine system, is but a toll applied 
 to paying for improvements made on a navigable river is 
 not in the nature of a tonnage duty,i' nor is a toll or duty 
 on all tonnage carried by a railroad at a certain rate per 
 mile. 18 A State cannot levy a tax on tonnage upon inter- 
 state transportation, 19 but a tax on gross receipts is not 
 repugnant, being in the nature of a general income ;2<> 
 nor are pilot fees,2i nor charges for wharfage, though 
 graduated by the tonnage of the vessel.22 
 
 1 South Carolina v. Charleston, 4 Rich. 289. 
 
 2 Keokuk N. P. Co. V. Keokuk, 10 Chic. L. N. 91. 
 
 3 State Ton. Tax Cases, 12 Wall. 214; People v. R. & S. R. R. Co. 15 
 Wend. 131 ; Steamboat Co. v. Livingston, 3 Cowen, 743 ; Sheffield v. Par- 
 sons, 3 Stewt. & P. 302. 
 
 4 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1 ; Virginia v. West "Virginia, 11 Wall. 59. 
 
 5 Sheffield v. Parsons, 3 Stewt. & P. 302. 
 
 6 Inman S. S. Co. v. Tinker, 94 U. S. 238. 
 
 7 Johnson v. Drummond, 20 Gratt. 419. 
 
 8 Johnson v. Drummond, 20 Gratt. 419. 
 
 9 State Ton. Tax Cases, 12 Wall. 204; Lott v. Morgan, 41 Ala. 246. 
 
 10 Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 Wall. 577; N. W. TJ. P. Co. v. S. Paid, 3 
 Dill. 454; Steamship Co. v. Port Wardens, 6 WaU. 31. 
 
 11 Lott V. Mobile Trade Co. 42 Ala. 578 ; Lott v. Cox, 43 Ala. 697. 
 
 12 Jonson v. Drummond, 20 Gratt. 419. 
 
 13 Lott V. Morgan, 41 Ala. 246. 
 
 14 Sheffield v. Parsons, 3 Stewt. & P. 302; Alexanders. R, R. Co. 3 
 Strob. 594. 
 
 15 Johnson v. Drummond, 20 Gratt. 419. 
 
 16 Peete v. Morgan, 19 Wall. 581. 
 
 17 Thames Bank v. Lovell, 18 Conn. 500. 
 
 18 Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. Commissioners, 3 Grant, 128. 
 
 19 State Freight-Tax Cas. 15 Wall. 232; Osborne «. Mobile, 16 Wall. 
 479; Southern Exp. Co. v. Mayor, 49 Ala. 404. 
 
 20 State Tax on R. R. Gross Receipts, 15 Wall. 284; Osborne v. Mo- 
 bile, 16 WaU. 481. 
 
 21 Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299; Baker v. Wise, 16 Gratt. 139. 
 
 22 Cannon r. New Orleans, 20 Wall. 577; The Ann Ryan, 7 Ben. 20; 
 N. W. U. P. Co. V. St. Louis, 4 Car. & L. J. 58; Keokuk v. Packet Co. 
 Ibid. 276; Wharf Case, 3 Bland, 361 ; Keokuk v. K. & C. Co. 45 Iowa, 196. 
 
Art. I, § 10 LIMITATION OF POWERS. 192 
 
 Tonnage duty.— When a vessel, as an instrument of 
 commerce, is required to pay a duty as a condition to her 
 entry or departure, loading or unloading, either on her 
 tonnage or property, or as a license, it is a duty on ton- 
 nage under this prohibition. i A tax levied on a vessel 
 irrespective of its value as projaerty, and solely and ex- 
 clusively on the hasis of its tonnage, is a duty on tonnage ;^ 
 but taxes laid on vessels as property of the State at her 
 home-port are valid, ^ although registered and enrolled 
 by the United States.*^ So, the assessment of a vessel in 
 its own city for a city tax is not a duty on tonnage. ^ A 
 State law requiring vessels to pay a fee for pilotage is 
 valid. 6 A charge for services rendered or conveniences 
 provided is in no sense a tax or duty.'^ So, a statute 
 allowing fees to harbor-masters for assigning vessels to 
 their berths is not a tonnage duty, although the fees are 
 ascertained by the burden or tonnage ;§ but a law allowing 
 fees, whether to port-wardens or harbor-masters, whether 
 rendering services or not, is a duty on tonnage. ^ A. State 
 may legislate as to wharfage, i^ and regulate the compen- 
 sation, i^ AVharfage charges are not a duty on tonnage, i^ 
 whether the wharf be built by the State, a municipal 
 corporation, or a private individual ;i3 but where a stat- 
 ute discriminates as to products of other States, it is xzn- 
 constitutional.i^ A tax due from all vessels arriving and 
 stopping, or departing, and not merely for the use of the 
 wharf, is inhibited. ^^ Neither the State nor a municipal 
 corporation can impose a tax on tonnage under cover of 
 a law ostensibly passed to collect wharf age. ^^ a city 
 may exact and receive a reasonable compensation for the 
 use of artificial improvements.!' And an ordinance regu- 
 lating the charge for wharfage may be enforced unless 
 beyond the limits of a just compensation. is 
 
 1 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wlieat. 1 ; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283 ; Steam- 
 ship Co. I'. Port Wardens, ti Wall. 31 ; State Tonnage Tax Cases, 12 WaU. 
 204; Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 AVall. 577 ; 27 La. Ann. 16. 
 
 2 State Ton. Tax Cases, 12 Wall. 204. 
 
 3 State Ton. Tax Cases, 12 Wall. 212; Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283; 
 Lott V. Mobile T. Co. 42 Ala. 578; Lott v. Cox, 43 Ala. 697; Morgan v. 
 Parham, 16 Wall. 472. 
 
 4 Lott V. Mobile T. Co. 42 Ala. 578; Lott v. Cox, 43 Ibid. 697. 
 
 5 The North Cape, 6 Biss. 505. 
 
 fi Cooley V. Port Wardens, 12 How. 29; Baker v. Wise, 16 Gratt. 139. 
 
 7 Keokuk N. P. Co. v. Keokuk, 10 Chic. L. N. 91 ; 5 Cent. L. J. 504. 
 
 8 State V. Charleston, 4 Kich. 286; Benedict v. Vanderbilt, 1 Robt. 
 194; Port Wardens v. The Martha J. Ward, 14 La. Ann. 289; Masters. 
 Prats, 10 Rob. La. 459. 
 
193 LIMITATION OF POWERS. Alt. I, § 10 
 
 9 Southern Steamship Co. v. Port Wardens, 6 Wall. 31; Inman S. S. 
 Co. V. Tinker, 94 U. S. 2 .8; Hackley v. Geraghty, 34 N. J. 332; Sheffield 
 ». Parsons, 3 Stew. & P. 302; Alexander i;. Railroad Co. 3 Strob. 594. 
 But see City v. The Nautilus. 8 Int. Rev. Rec. 91 ; Port Wardens v. The 
 Martha J. Ward, 14 La. An. 289; Port Wardens v. The Charles Morgan, 
 Ibid. 595. 
 
 10 The Ann Ryan, 7 Ben. 20. 
 
 11 Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 Wall. 577. 
 
 12 Cooley v. Port Wardens, 12 How. 299; Packet Co. v. Keokuk, 95 U. 
 S. 84; 10 Ch. L. N. 91; 5 Cent. L. J. 504; Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 
 Wall. 577 ; Sterrett v. Houston, 14 Tex. 166; Municipality v. Pease, 2 La. 
 Ann. 538; The Ann Ryan, 7 Ben. 20. 
 
 13 Packet Co. v. Keokuk, 95 U. S. 84; 10 Ch. L, N. 91; 5 Cent. L. J. 
 504; Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 Wall. 577. 
 
 14 Wharf Case, 3 Bland, 361. 
 
 15 Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 Wall. 577 ; Northwestern U. P. Co. v. St. 
 Paul, 3 Dill. 454; 7 Ch. L. N. 331. 
 
 16 Packet Co. v. Keokuk, 95 U. S. 84; 10 Ch. L. N. 91: 5 Cent. L. J. 
 504; State Ton. Tax Cas. 12 Wheat. 219; Alexander v. Raikoad Co. 3 
 Strob. 594. 
 
 17 Northwestern U. P. Co. v. St. Louis, 4 Dill. 10; 7 Ch. L. N. 331; 
 Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 Wall. 577; Worsley v. Municipality, 9 Rob. 
 La. 324; Packet Co. v. Keokuk, 95 U. S. 84; 10 Ch. L. N. 91; 5 Cent. L. 
 J. 504. 
 
 18 Packet Co. V. Keokuk, 95 U. S. 84 ; 10 Ch. L, N. 91 ; 5 Cent. L. J. 504. 
 
 Agreements or compacts. — The right and duty to 
 protect the interests of the States is vested in the General 
 Government.! The term "agreement" includes every 
 agreement, verbal or written, formal or informal, positive 
 or implied, with each other or with foreign powers.^ Such 
 agreement or compact as is in its nature political, or which 
 may conflict with the powers delegated to the General 
 Government, 3 as on the question of boundary between 
 States, 4 or the delivery up of fugitives, ^ cannot operate 
 as a restriction upon the powers of Congress under the 
 Constitution. 6 The prohibition is political, and has no 
 reference to contracts or to the grant of a franchise. ^ The 
 agreement between corporations chartered by different 
 States, to unite, is not an agreement or compact between 
 States. 8 The mode or form in which the consent of Con- 
 gress is to be signified, is left to the discretion of that body. 
 It need not be given in advance, but may be implied from 
 legislation. 9 A compact made with consent of Congress 
 is binding on the States entering into the agreement. ^'^ 
 The confederation of the Southern States was in direct 
 violation of this clause. ii 
 
 1 Florida v. Georgia, 17 How. 478. 
 
 2 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540. 
 
 3 Union R. R. Co. v. East Tenn. R. R. Co. 14 Ga. 327. 
 
 4 riorida v. Georgia, 17 How. 478. 
 
 DESTT Fed. Con.— I'y. 
 
Art. H, § 1 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE. 194 
 
 5 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 574; 3 Op. Atty. Gen. 661. 
 
 6 "Wilson V. Mason, 1 Cranch, 45; Pennsylvania v. Wheeling &c. Br. 
 Co. 18 How. 421. 
 
 7 Union Branch E. R. Co. v. East Tenn. & G-. R. R. Co. 14 Ga. 327. 
 
 8 Dover v. Portsmouth Bridge, 17 N. H. 200. 
 
 i) Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat 1 : Virginia v. West Virginia, 11 Wall* 
 59; Canal Co. v. Railroad Co. 4 Gill & J. 1. 
 
 10 Poole V. Fleeger, 11 Peters, 185. 
 
 11 In re Milner, 1 Bank. Reg. 107. 
 
 ARTICLE II. 
 
 exeotttive department. 
 Section 1. 
 
 Powers of Executive. 
 
 1. President and Vice-President. Terms of. 
 
 2. Electors. 
 
 3. Manner of choosing President by electors. 
 
 4. Time of choosing electors. 
 
 5. President's qualifications. 
 
 6. Vacancy in of&ce of. 
 
 7. Salary. 
 
 8. Oath. 
 
 Sec. 1. 1 The executive power shall be vested in a Presi- 
 dent of the Unite i States of America. He shall hold his 
 office during the term of four years, and, together loitJi the 
 Vice-President, chosen for the same tprm, he elected, as fol- 
 loios : 
 
 Executive power. — The President is invested with 
 certain political powers, in the exercise of which he may 
 use his discretion, which is beyond the control of the 
 judiciary. 1 As far as his powers are derived from the 
 Constitution, he is beyond the reach of any other depart- 
 ment, except in the mode prescribed — through the im- 
 peaching power. 2 He is exempt from the writ of habeas 
 corpus.^ He is authorized to appoint certain officers in 
 the executive departments, the discharge of whose duties 
 is under his direction.'^: Congress may authorize the Presi- 
 dent to restrict or regulate the introduction of merchan- 
 dise into a territory under such isenalties as Congress may 
 prescribe ;5 but he has no common-law prerogative to 
 
195 POWEKS OF EXECUTIVE. Art. II, § 1 
 
 interdict commercial intercourse with any nation, or re- 
 vive any act whose operation has expired. ^ So, Congress 
 may authorize the President, during a certain period, 
 to suspend the writ of habeas corpus when, in his judg- 
 ment, tlie public safety requires it.'^ If the President 
 assumes powers which should have the authority or sanc- 
 tion of Congress, a ratification cures the defect.^ Congress 
 may impose on any executive officer any duty which is 
 not repugnant to any right which is secured and protected 
 by the Constitution. ^ 
 
 1 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Craiich, 165. 
 
 2 Kendall v.TS. S. 12 Peters, 524; 5 Crauch C. C. 163; In re Keeler, 
 Hemp. 306. 
 
 3 In re Keeler, Hemp. 306. 
 
 4 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 165; Kendall v. TJ. S. 12 Peters, 524; 
 5 Cranch C. C. 163. 
 
 5 The Louisa Simpson, 2 Sawy. 57; U. S. v. The Francis Hatch, 13 
 Am. Law Reg. 289. 
 
 6 The Orono, 1 Gall. 137. 
 
 7 McCall V. McDowell, Deady, 233; 1 Abb. U. S. 212; In re Oliver. 17 
 Wis. 681. 
 
 8 Prize Cases ,21 lack, 635. 
 
 9 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137; Kendall v. U. S. 12 Peters, 524; 
 5 Cranch C. C. 163. 
 
 2 Each State 'shall appoint, in such manner as the lec/islatare 
 thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the lohole 
 number of Senators and Representatives to lohich the State 
 m,ay be entitled in the Congress : but no Senator or Represent- 
 ative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the 
 United States, shall be appointed an elector. 
 
 Electors, choice of. — A State law directing the man- 
 ner of appointment of electors has its authority solely 
 from the Constitution.! The disqualification of the per- 
 son having the highest number of votes does not have the 
 effect of electing the minority candidate ;2 such disquali- 
 fication cannot be removed by resignation, unless the 
 resignation takes place before" the election. The office 
 of Commissioner of the United States Centennial Com- 
 mission is an office of trust. A person disqualified as an 
 elector by holding "office of trust or profit" under the 
 United States, cannot remove the disqualification by res- 
 ignation unless it precedes his appointment as elector. 
 
 1 Ex parte Hayne, 1 Hughes, 571. 
 
 2 In re Corliss, 11 R. I, 638; 16 Am. Law Reg. 15. 
 
Art. II, § 1 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE. 196 
 
 ^[TJie electors shall meet in their- respective States, and vote 
 by ballot for two persons, of lohom one at least shall not be an 
 inhabitant of the same State loith themselves. Arid they shall 
 make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of 
 votes for each; lohich list they shall sign and certify, and 
 . transmit sealed to the seat of the Government of the United 
 : States, directed to the President of the Senate. The Presi- 
 dent of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and 
 House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the 
 votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest 
 number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a 
 majority of the whole number of electors appiointed ; and if 
 there be more than one who have such majority, and have 
 an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives 
 shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; 
 and if no person have a majority, then from the jive highest 
 on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the 
 President. Rut in choosing the President, the votes shall he 
 taken by States, the representation from each State having 
 one vote ; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a mem- 
 ber or members from two-thirds of the States, and a major- 
 ity of cdl the States shall be necessary to a choice. In every 
 case, after the choice of the President, the person having the 
 greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice-Pres- 
 ident. Rut if there should remain two or more who have equal 
 votes, the Senate shall choose from them, by ballot the Vice- 
 President.} 
 Superseded by Xllth Amendment, i)05^. 
 
 4 Tlie^ Congress may determine the time of choosing the 
 electors', and the day on lohich they shall give their votes ;. 
 which day shall be the same throughout the United States. 
 
 . ^ No person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of 
 the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitu- 
 tion, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall 
 any person be eligible to that office loho shall not have attained 
 to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resi- 
 dent within the United States. 
 
 ^ in case of the removal of the President from office, or of 
 liis death, resignation, or inability to discharge the poivers 
 and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice- 
 President, and the Congress may by laio provide for the case 
 of removal, death, resignation, or inability, both of the Pres- 
 
197 POWERS oi* ifeXECUtiVE* Art. II, § 2 
 
 ident and Vice-President, declaring lohat officer shall then act 
 as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the 
 disability be removed, or a President shall be elected. 
 
 ■^ The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, 
 a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor dimin- 
 ished during the period for which he shall have been elected, 
 and he shall not receive loithin that period any other emolu- 
 ment from the United States, or any of them. 
 
 8 Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take 
 the following oath or affirmation: ^' I do solemnly swear {or 
 affirm) that Iioill faithfully execute the office of President of 
 the United States, and loill, to the best of my ability, preserve, 
 protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." 
 
 Oath. — The President is the only officer required to 
 take this oath.i xhe oath simply obliges the President to 
 obey the Constitution, and to use the power which it con- 
 fers on him to cause others to obey it. 2 The oath gives 
 the President no additional powers. ^ 
 
 1 Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 408. 
 
 2 GriflBn v. Wilcox, 21 Ind. 370. 
 
 3 In re Kemp, 16 Wis. 359. 
 
 Section 2. 
 Other powers and duties. 
 
 1. Act as Commancler-in-Chief. Reprieves, pardons. 
 
 2. To make treaties, laow. Appointments. 
 
 3. To fill vacancies. 
 
 ■ Sec. 2. 1 The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of 
 the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of 
 the several States, when called into the actual service of the 
 United States ; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the 
 principal officer in each of the Executive Departments, iipon 
 any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, 
 and he shall have pjoiver to grant reprieves and pardons for 
 offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeach- 
 ment. 
 
Art. II, § 2 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE. 198 
 
 As Commander-in-Chief. — The power of calling out 
 the militia is conferred on the President, ^ and his author- 
 ity to decide that the exigency has arisen is vested exclu- 
 sively in him,'^ Where the law gives the President a dis- 
 cretionary power he is the sole and exclusive judge of the 
 existence of the facts. ^ On the application of a State the 
 President may call forth the militia to suppress an insur- 
 rection.'i He is authorized by law, previous to a declara- 
 tion of war by Congress, to meet invasion or insurrection 
 by military force. ^ His power as Commander-in-Chief is 
 limited by the laws and usages of nations, ^ and to be used 
 only in the manner prescribed by the legislative depart- 
 ment,"^ and his orders are no protection to an officer acting 
 under them unless warranted by law.^ So, an instruction 
 to an officer cannot legalize an act which without it would 
 have been a trespass.^ It must be exercised in strict ac- 
 cordance with the right of appointment of military offi- 
 cers expressly reserved to the States. lo As Commander- 
 in-Chief he inay establish rules and regulations for the 
 government of the forces, or modify, or repeal, or create 
 them anew, 11 which action must be promulgated through 
 the Secretary of W£\p.'.i-2 He may direct the movement of 
 the forces, and employ them in any manner he may deem 
 most effectual. 13 He may declare a blockade of hostile 
 ports in a civil war as well as in a foreign war,i^ or may 
 contract with secret agents to obtain information regard- 
 ing the enemy's resources and motions, and direct pay- 
 ment therefor out of the contingent fund,!^ and if money 
 is advanced by direction of the head of the proper depart- 
 ment the direction of the President will be presumed.i^ 
 In case of insurrection he may accord to the enemy the 
 character of belligerents.i'^ 
 
 1 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 542; In re Griner, 16 Wis. 423; 
 Dreuckerv. Salomon, '21 Wis. 621. 
 
 2 Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 29; Prize Cases, 2 Black, 670; McCall v. 
 McDowell, 1 Abb. U. S. 219; Deady, 233; Dreucker v. Salomon, 21 Wis. 
 621. 
 
 3 Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 29; Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 43; U. S. 
 ». Packages, 11 Am. Law K. 419; Kulp v. Kicketts, 20 Leg. Int. 268; 
 Hodgson i;. Millward, Ibid. 164,348; Ohio «. Bliss, 11 Pitts. L. J. 304; 
 Ex parte Field, 5 Blatchf . 80. 
 
 4 Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 43; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 556. 
 
 5 Prize Cases, 2 Black, 668, See Act of February 28th, 1795. 
 G In re Kemp, 16 Wis. 359; Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2. 
 
 7 Anonymous, 9 Opin. Att. Gen. 518. 
 
 8 Little V. Barreme, 2 Cranch, 170. 
 
 9 Little V. Barreme, 2 Cranch, 170. 
 10 Anonymous, 2 Opin. Att. Gen. 711. 
 
199 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE. Art. II, § 2 
 
 11 U. S. V. Eliason, 16 Peters, 291; U. S. i;. Webster, 2 Ware (Dav.) 46; 
 In re Griner, 16 Wis. 423. 
 
 12 U. S. V. Eliason, 16 Peters, 291. 
 
 13 Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 603. 
 
 14 The Tropic Wind, 24 Law Kep. 144; Prize Cases, 2 Black, 635. 
 
 15 Totten v. U. S. 92 U. S. 105. 
 
 16 U. S. V. Cutter, 2 Curt. 617. 
 
 17 Prize Cases, 2 Black, 635. 
 
 Authority over conquered territory . — The hold- 
 ing of conquered territory is a mere military occupation 
 xmtil determined by treaty. ^ Such conquests do not en- 
 large the boundaries of the Union.2 If ceded by the 
 treaty of peace the acquisition is confirmed, and the ter- 
 ritory becomes a part of the nation to which it is annexed. ^ 
 It is a military duty of the President, as Commander-in- 
 Chief, so long as war continues, to provide for the security 
 of persons and property, and for the administration of 
 justice, -4 and to this end he may institute a temporary 
 military government where the laws cannot be executed 
 without it,5 which will continue to be operative until 
 official information of the ratification of the treaty of 
 peace. ^ This power must be exercised in subordination to 
 the Constitution/ but this power does not extend to the 
 repeal or contradiction of existing statutes, or to the mak- 
 ing provisions of a legislative nature. ^ He may cause all 
 the laws of the State to be administered and executed, or to 
 be disregarded and set at naught. ^ Where neither he nor 
 Congress dissolve the civil governmenb established in the 
 exercise of provisional rights, the inference is that it is 
 meant to be continued, lo The President as Commander-in- 
 Chief may establish provisional courts in the territory 
 taken by the national forces, to continue during the war.i^ 
 When a"^ State government is overthrown by rebellion, the 
 President, on obtaining possession of the territory, may ap- 
 point a military governor, 12 and may delegate his powers 
 to such provisional governor. i3 A military governor may 
 create courts for the administration of justice, 1"^ and ap- 
 point judges with authority to hold such courts. i-^ He 
 may levy and collect taxes under laws not superseded by 
 the conqueror. IS A provisional government may be estab- 
 lished under authority of the United States, and the acts 
 of its officers are valid and obligatory, but private re- 
 lations are in force, except so far as they are in conflict 
 with the Constitution. 18 The ordinance of such provis- 
 ional government supersedes institutions of the van- 
 quished country which are incompatible with it,i9 and its 
 authority does not terminate until by direct legislation by 
 
Art. II, § 2 POWERS OF EXECUTIVB. .' .;■ 1 200 
 
 Congress or by the territorial government. 20 The Presi- 
 dent may adopt means to enable the people of such ter- 
 ritory to meet in convention to form a new State govern- 
 nient,2i and may exclude particular isersons from voting 
 for such delegates. 22 
 
 1 American Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 542. 
 
 2 Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 603. 
 
 3 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 542; Leitersdorfer v. Webb, 
 20 How. 176. 
 
 4 The Grape Shot, 9 Wall. 129. 
 
 5 G-riffln v. Wilcox, 21 Ind. 370. 
 
 6 Cross V. Harrison, 16 How. 164. 
 
 7 Scott V. Billgerry, 40 Miss. 119. 
 
 8 Anonymous, 6 Op. Atty-Gen. 10. 
 
 9 Scott V. Billgerry, 40 Miss. 119. 
 
 10 Cross V. Harrison, 16 How. 164. 
 
 11 The Grapeshot. 9 Wall. 129; Kimball v. Taylor, 2 Woods, 37j. Arm- 
 istead v. State, 43 Ala. 340; Powell v. Boon, 43 Ala. 469; Burk v. Tregre, 
 22 La. An. 629. 
 
 12 Rutledgev. Fogg, 3 Cold. 554; Texas i'. White, 7 Wall. 700. 
 
 13 Scott V. Billgerry, 40 Miss. 119. 
 
 14 Scott V. Billgerry, 40 Miss. 119; Mechanics' and T. Bank v. Union 
 Bank, 22 Wall. 276. 
 
 15 Pennywit v. Eaton, 15 Wall. 382; Mechanics' Bank v. Union Bank, 
 22 Wall. 276. 
 
 16 EutledgeiJ.Fogg, 3Cold. 554. 
 
 17 Armistead v. State, 43 Ala. 340; Powell v. Boon, 43 Ala. 459. 
 
 18 Leitensdorfer I?. Webb, 20 How. 177. 
 
 19 Leitensdorfer v. Webb. 20 How. 176. 
 
 20 Leitensdorfer v. Webb, 20 How. 176. 
 
 21 Ex parte Hughes, Phill. N. C. 57. 
 
 22 Ex parte Hughes, Phill. N. C. 57. 
 
 Martial laTV is the law of force applied where civil 
 law is suspended by force. It is the war power of the 
 President, and all he possesses indejoendently of the civil 
 law.i It exists only in case of necessity"^ — such a neces-4 
 sity as effectually closes the courts and deposes the civil 
 administration. 3 It cannot arise from a threatened inva- 
 sion,4 but from the fact of the existence or immediately 
 impending force at a given place and time.^ It is limited 
 to those places within the theater of war, or its vicinity 6 — 
 the precise limits to be determined according to the cir- 
 cumstances of each case.'^ Its duration is limited by its 
 necessity.^ After the insurrection is suppressed and a 
 provisional government established, and a State constitu- 
 tion adopted, a citizen cannot be tried by court-martial 
 
201 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE. Art. II, § 2 
 
 for an alleged crime. ^ The President during the Rebellion 
 had no power to arrest or imprison any person not sub- 
 ject to military law without process of tiie court, lo but a 
 general order of the President authorizing the arrest of 
 persons absenting themselves to avoid the draft was 
 valid. 11 To suspend the writ of habeas corpus is a legisla- 
 tive power vested in Congress, and not in the executive. ^^2 
 State courts have no authority by habeas corpus over per- 
 sons held under authority of the United States. i3 
 
 1 Griffin i'. Wilcox, 21 Ind. 370. 
 
 2 Ex parte Eagan, 5 BlatcM. 319. 
 
 3 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2 ; Johnson v. Jones, 44 111. 142 ; Skeen «. 
 Monkeimer, 21 liul. 1; Griffin v. Wilcox, 21 Ind, 370: Johnson v. Jones, 
 44 111. 157; In re Kemp, 16 Wis, 359. 
 
 4 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2. 
 
 5 Griffin v. Wilcox, 21 Ind. 370. 
 
 6 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2; Jones v. Seward, 40 Barb. 563; In re 
 Kemp, 16 Wis. 359. 
 
 7 In re Kemp, 16 Wis. 353. 
 
 8 In re Milligan, 4 Wall. 2. 
 
 9 Ex parte Eagan, 5 Blatchf . 319. 
 
 10 Jones V. Seward, 40 Barb. 563. 
 
 11 Allen V. Colby, 47 N. H. 544. 
 
 12 In re Kemp, 16 Wis. 359. 
 
 13 Tarble's Case, .13 Wall. 397. 
 
 Power to pardon. — Pardon is an act of grace from 
 the power intrusted with the execution of the laws, ex- 
 empting from punishment which the law inflicts. ^ The 
 word "pardon" must be construed with reference to its 
 meaning at the time of the adoj)tion of the Constitution.^ 
 The power herein granted is not to jjardon, but to grant 
 reprieves and pardons, ^ and includes amnesty ;"* but am- 
 nesty proceedings did not give back property which had 
 been sold under confiscation acts.^ The power to grant 
 reprieves and pardons, except in cases of impeachment, 
 is unlimited,^ and is vested exclusively in the President,** 
 and not subject to the interference of Congress," and con- 
 tinues as long as any of the legal consequences of the 
 offense remain. ^ It may be exercised as well before trial 
 as after conviction, 9 or after expiration of part of the 
 sentence,!** and includes the power to commute the sen- 
 tence. H The power extends to all kinds of pardons known 
 to the law as such,i2 either general, special, or particular, 
 conditional or absolute, or statutory, not necessary in 
 some cases, and in some grantable of course, i"^ It may be 
 conditional.!^ This grant of power must be held to carry 
 
Art. II, § 2 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE, 203 
 
 with it the power to release from fines, penalties, and 
 forfeitures which accrue from the offense. i* But the 
 exercise of this power will not defeat legal rights which 
 have become vested ;i5 so, a general pardon and amnesty 
 do not entitle one receiving them to the proceeds of prop- 
 erty previously condemned and sold under confiscation 
 ants. '■^'5 The power does not embrace the power to relieve 
 from the payment of taxes assessed for violation of the 
 revenue laws,i7 nor to the remission of a forfeiture of a 
 bail-bond. 18 The power extends to cases ex necessitate 
 legislative, as where a female, after conviction, is found 
 to be enceinte, or when insanity supervenes. i^ A full 
 pardon releases the punishment, and blots out the exist- 
 ence of the gLiilt.2o Delivery is essential, and delivery is 
 not complete till acceptance. ^i Until delivery, a pardon, 
 though signed and sealed, may be recalled and canceled 
 by the President granting it,or by his successor. 22 The 
 amnesty proclamation included aliens domiciled in the 
 rebel States. ^s 
 
 1 U. S. V. Wilson, 7 Peters, 159. 
 
 2 U. S. D. "SVilson, 7 Peters, 162; Calcler v. Bull, 3 Ball. 3S6; Catlicart 
 V. Kobiuson, 5 Peters, 2(i4; Watson v. Mercer, 8 Peters, 75: Carpenter v. 
 Pennsylvania, 17 How. 456; U. S. v. Harris, 1 Abb. U. S. 115; Ex parte 
 Wells, 18 How. 316; U. S. v. Athens Armory, 2 Abb. U. S. 150. 
 
 3 Ex parte Wells, 18 How. 316. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Klein, 13 Wall. 128. 
 
 5 Semmes v. U. S. 91 U. S. 21; Wallach v. Van Riswick, 92 U. S. 202, 
 explaining Day v. Micou, 18 Wall. 156, and Biijelow v. Forest, i) Wall. 
 339; Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 38; U. S. v. Klein, 13 Wall. 147; U. S. v. 
 Tliomasson, 4 Biss, 340. But it relieved claimants of captured and 
 abandoned property of the necessity of proving adherence to the 
 United States— Armstrong v. U. S. 13 Wall. 15J; Pargond v. U. S. Ibid. 
 156. See the Addso, 11 Op. Att. Gen. 445. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Klein, 13 Wall. 123. 
 
 7 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 38; U. S. v. Klein, 13 Wall. 147. 
 
 8 Stetler's Case, Phill. (N. C.) 302. 
 
 9 Anonymous, 6 Op. Attorney-General, 20. 
 
 10 Stetler's Case, Phill. (N. C.) 302. 
 
 11 Ex parte Wells, 18 How. 307. 
 
 12 Ex parte Wells, 18 How. 314; Ex parte Garland, 4 WaD. 380. 
 
 13 Ex parte Wells, 18 How. 314; U. S. v. Wilson, 7 Peters, 161; Anou- 
 ymous, i Op. Attorney-General, 341; Anonymous, Ibid. 482; Case of 
 See-sec-sa-ma, 5 Ibid. 368; People v. Potter, 1 Park. Cr. R. 47; Fla veil's 
 
 Case, 8 Watts. & S. 197. 
 
 14 Osbornw. U. S. 91 U. S. 474; U. S. v. Harris, 1 Abb. U. S. 114; U. S. 
 V. Wilson, 7 Peters, 150; Ex parte Wells, 18 How. 307; U. S. n. Lancaster, 
 4 Wash. C. C. 6j; The llollen, 1 Mason, 431; State v. Farley, 8 Blatchf. 
 229; State v. Simpson, 1 Bailey, 378; Matt, of Flourney, 1 Kelly (Ga.) 
 606; State »>. McO'Bleuis, 21 Mo. 272: Playford v. Commonwealth, 4 Pa- 
 st. 144: State v. Williams, 1 Nott. & McC. 26; Ex parte McDonald, 2 
 
203 POWERS OF EXECUTrvB. Art II, § 2 
 
 Whart. 440; Duncan v. Commonwealth, 4 Serg. & R. 451; The Titi, 4 
 Op. Att.-Gen. 573; Anon. 4 Op. Att.-Gen. 317 ; Armstrong's Foundry. 6 
 Wall. 769. 
 
 15 U. S. V. Lancaster, 4 "Wash. C. C. 64; U. S. v. Morris, 10 Wheat. 246; 
 U. S. V. Wilson, 7 Peters, 150; Anonymous, 4 Op. Attorney-General, 576; 
 Cases of Drayton and Sears, 5 Ibid. 532, 579; Hanson's Case, 6 Ibid. 615. 
 
 16 Knote v. U. S. 6 Amer. L. R. 273. The pardoning power has no 
 authority to decree a repayment of a fine — Cook v. Middlesex, 3 
 Dutch. 437. 
 
 17 U. S. V. Roelle, 11 Chic. L. N. 19. 
 
 18 Columbian Ins. Co. v. Ashby, 4 Peters, 144. 
 
 19 Ex parte Wells, 18 How. 307. 
 
 20 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 333; U. S. v. Kleui, 13 Wall. 128; U. S. v. 
 Padelford, 9 Wall. 542. 
 
 21 U. S. V. Wilson, 7 Peters, 150; In re Callicott, 8 Blatchf. 89. 
 
 22 In re De Puy, 3 Ben. 307. 
 
 23 Carlisle v. U. S. 16 Wall. 148. 
 
 2jHe shall have iioroer, by and ivith the advice and consent 
 of the Senate, to make treaties, ^wovided two-thirds of the 
 Senators present concur ; and he shall nominate, and by and 
 loith the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint am- 
 bassadors, other iniblic ministers and consuls. Judges of the 
 Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, 
 lohose appointments are not herein othenoise provided for, 
 and lohich shall be established by law : but the Congress may 
 by laio vest the .appointment of such inferior officers as they 
 think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of laio, or 
 in the heads of departments. 
 
 A treaty is in its nature a contract between two na" 
 tions, to be carried into execution by the sovereign power 
 of the respective parties. i It cannot deprive Congress of 
 any part of its legislative power. ^ The power to make 
 treaties includes the power to acqviire new territory; and 
 this extends the power of legislation over such new terri- 
 tory.3 Indians may be made citizens by treaty. 'i An In- 
 dian treaty may stipulate that the law prohibiting the sale 
 of spirituous liquors in the ceded territory shall remain in 
 force, althougli the land lies within the limits of a State.'* 
 The President is made the only legitimate agent of the 
 Government to open and carry on correspondence with 
 foreign nations in matters concerning the interests of the 
 country or its citizens, and this duty is in his discretion. ^ 
 So, citizens abroad must look to the President for protec- 
 tion. 6 The power to make treaties is plenary.'' The recog- 
 nition and enforcement of the principles of public law are 
 the ordinary subject of treaties ;§ but the political rights 
 
Art. II, § 2 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE. 204 
 
 of the people of the several States, as such, are not sub- 
 jects of treaty stipulations. ^ A treaty made by the United 
 States, removing the disability of aliens to inherit, is valid, 
 and within the intent of the Constitution, lo So, a treaty 
 enabling them to purchase and hold lands in the United 
 States is valid. ^^ Congress may create a judicial system 
 by treaty. 12 
 
 1 Foster V. Neilson, 2 Peters, 314. 
 
 2 Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 629. 
 
 3 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 
 393. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Rhodes, 1 Abb. IT. S. 43; Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 
 511; Cross v. Harrison, 16 How. 164; U. S. a;. Lariviere, 23 K. I. 305. 
 
 5 Dui-and v. HoUins, 4 Blatcbf. 451. 
 
 6 Durand v. HoUins, 4 Blatchf. 451. 
 
 7 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540 ; U. S. v. Gallons, 93 IT. S. 188; 
 People V. Gerke, 5 Cal. 381. 
 
 8 People V. Curtis, 50 N. Y. 321. 
 
 9 LicenseCases, 5How. 504; 13N. H. 336. 
 
 10 People V. Gerke, 5 Cal. 381. 
 
 11 Chirac v. Chirac, 2 Wheat. 259. 
 
 12 Forbes v. Scannell, 13 Cal. 242. 
 
 Appointment and removal. — An office is a public 
 charge or employment, and he who performs the duties is 
 an officer, 1 but a man employed under a contract is not 
 necessarily an officer.^ The mere direction that a thing 
 shall be done does not constitute an office.^ The appoint- 
 ment and removal of an officer is a necessary incident to 
 executive power.^ The power of the President to appoint 
 includes the power to remove; 5 so, the President may re- 
 move any officer, whether civil or military, unless Con- 
 gress shall have given some other duration to the office. ° 
 The power to remove an officer appointed by the President 
 and Senate is vested in the President alone; " so, the Pres- 
 ident may remove a territorial judge, § or may strike a mil- 
 itary officer from the roll.^ All officers other than judicial 
 officers hold during pleasure. ^"^ Aremova Imay be either 
 express, by notification, by order of the President, or im- 
 plied by appointment of another person to the same of- 
 fice, but notice must be actually received by the person 
 removed. 11 A civil officer may resign at pleasure, and 
 the President cannot compel him to remain, nor is it nec- 
 essary that the resignation should be received to take ef- 
 fect. i^ "He shall nominate," means to recommend in 
 writing; in this form the advice of the Senate is asked. i^ 
 Nominating and appointing are distinct acts from commis- 
 sioning, i* The extension of a term must be by nomina- 
 
205 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE, Art. II, § 2 
 
 tion or new appointment by the President, with the con- 
 currence of the Senate. 15 He may appoint diplomatic 
 agents of any rank at any place or time ; ^^ he may appoint 
 collectors of taxes and mternal duties;!'^ but he cannot 
 make a temporary appointment in a recess, if the Senate 
 was in session when or since the the vacancy occurred, ^^ 
 Congress cannot by law designate the person to fill an 
 office; 19 the Senate can only affirm or reject the appoint- 
 ment.20 The successor to an appointee refusing to accept 
 is in the place of the appointee, and not the original 
 holder.2i The commission is conclusive of the appoint- 
 ment,22 but until signed the appointment is not fully con- 
 summated. ^3 Neither the transmission of the commission 
 to the appointee nor an acceptance thereof is necessary to 
 complete his rights.^* Heads of departments can make 
 appointments only in those cases authorized by law.25 
 All officers under the Federal Government, except such 
 as are expressly provided in the Constitution, shall be es- 
 tablished by law. 26 All inferior officers, appointed by 
 authority of law, hold their offices at the discretion of 
 the appointing power.27 The appointment of clerks of 
 courts properly belongs to the courts of law,28 but Con- 
 gress may restrict the appointment of a commissioner, 
 although his powers are of a judicial nature.29 A State 
 magistrate who commits offenders against the laws of the 
 United States, is not within this clause.so 
 
 1 U. S. V. Maurice, 2 Brock, 96. 
 
 2 U. S, V. Maurice, 2 Brock. 96. 
 
 3 U, S. V. Maurice, 2 Brock. 96. 
 
 4 Ex parte Hennen, 13 Peters, 213, 
 
 5 Ex parte Hennen, 13 Peters, 213; Gratiot v. U. S. 1 Ct. CI. 253; 
 Keenan v. Perry, 24 Tex. 253. 
 
 6 Gratiot v. U. S. 1 Ct. CI. 258. 
 
 7 The Hennen, 13 Peters, 230; U. S. v. Avery, Deacly, 204. 
 
 8 The Hennen, 13 Peters, 213: Anonymous, 3 Opin. Att. Gen. 673; 
 Anonymous, 5 Ibid. 288. 
 
 9 Case of Randolph, 4 Op. Att. Gen, 1, 
 
 10 Keenan v. Perry, 24 Tex. 258. 
 
 11 Bowerbank v. Morris, Wall, Sr. 118; Ex parte Hennen, 13 Peters, 
 230. 
 
 12 U. S. V. Wright, 1 McLean, 509. 
 
 13 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137; 7 Op. Att, Gen. 186 
 
 14 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137. 
 
 15 Case of District Attorney, 16 Am. Law Reg. 786, 
 
 16 Anonymous, 7 Op. Att. Gen. 186. 
 
 17 U. S. V. Kirkpatrick, 9 Wheat. 720. 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— 18. 
 
Art. II, § 3 POWERS OF EXECUTIVE. 206 
 
 18 Case of District Attorney, 16 Am. Law Reg. 786. 
 
 19 U. S. V. Ferreira, 13 How. 40. 
 
 20 Anonymous, 3 Op. Att. Gen. 188. 
 
 21 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 138; IT. S. v. Kirkpatrick, 4 AVlieat. 
 r34; Johnson v. U. S. 5 Mason, 438; Bo verbank v. Morris, Wall. Sr. 438. 
 
 22 U. S. V. Le Baron, 19 How. 74. 
 
 23 Case of Cose, 4 Op. Att. Gen. 218. 
 
 24 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 138. 
 
 25 U. S. V. Maurice, 2 Brock. 96. 
 
 26 U. S. V. Maurice, 2 Brock. 96. 
 
 27 Ex parte Hennen, 13 Peters, 230; U. S. v. Avery, Deady, 204. 
 
 28 Ex parte Hennen, 13 Peters, 230; In re Shipping Commissioner of 
 N. T. 13 Blatchf . 346. 
 
 29 Ex parte Robinson, 6 McLean, 355. 
 
 30 Ex parte Gist, 26 Ala. 156. 
 
 3 The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that 
 may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting com- 
 missions which shall expire at the end of their next session. 
 
 This power is not confined to vacancies which may 
 happen in offices created by law.^ The commission of an 
 officer appointed during the recess, and afterwards nom- 
 inated and rejected, continues in force till the end of the 
 next session. 2 If the Senate concur it is a new appoint- 
 ment, and a new bond will be required. ^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Maurice, 2 Brock. 96. 
 
 2 Hill's Case, 2 Opin. Att. Gen. 336; Tyson's Case, 4 Ibid. 30. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Kirkpatrick, 9 Wheat. 733. 
 
 SECTION 3. 
 
 Messages. Reception of Ambassadors, etc. Commissioning officers. 
 
 Sec. 3. 1 He shall from time to time give to the Congress 
 information of the state of the Union, and recommend to their 
 consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and 
 expedient ; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both 
 Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between 
 them, loith respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn 
 them to such time as he shall thinh proper ; he shall receive 
 ambassadors and other public ministers ; he shall take care 
 that the laios be faithfully executed, and shall commission all 
 the officers of the United States. 
 
207 POWERS OF EXBCUTIVB. Art. II, § 4 
 
 He shall take care that the Isiws be faithfully 
 executed as they are expounded and adjudged by the 
 co-ordinate branch of the Government to which that 
 duty is assigned, 1 to the exteut of the defensive means 
 placed in his hands; ^ but only by such means as the Con- 
 sticution and laws themselves have given him power to 
 employ ; 3 and in this he cannot be enjoined by the Supreme 
 Court,^ his discretionary power being beyond judicial 
 control. 5 Under this power the executive ought to order 
 suits in all cases when the laws are infracted and the 
 rights of government invaded. ^ The President has no 
 power to dispense with or forbid the execution of any 
 law," nor can he be restrained from carrying into effect an 
 act of Congress alleged to be unconstitutional. ^ In case 
 of revolution or dismemberment of a nation the judiciary 
 cannot take notice of any new government or sovereignty 
 until recognized by the political department. ^ Commis- 
 sioning and appointing are distinct powers. i^ 
 
 1 Ex parte Merryman, Taney , 246. 
 
 2 Anonymous, 9 Opin. Att. Gen. 524, 
 
 3 In re Kemp. 16 Wis. 359. 
 
 4 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 498. 
 
 5 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137 ; Kendall v. Stockton, 12 Peters, 
 527; Prize Cases, 2 Black, 635; State v. Southern Pac. K. R. 24 Tex. 177. 
 
 6 State V. Delesdernier, 7 Tex. 95. 
 
 7 Kendall v. U.S. 12 Peters, 524; 5 Cranch C. C. 163. 
 
 8 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 475. 
 
 9 U. S. V. Palmer, 3 Wheat. 634; Hays v. Gelston, 3 Wheat. 323; Hose 
 V. Hunely, 4 Cranch, 441; The Divina Pastora, 4 Wheat. 52; Nuestra 
 Senora de la Caridad, 4 Wheat. 497 ; Prize Cases, 2 Black, 635 ; Luther v. 
 Borden, 7 How. 1. 
 
 10 Marhury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 151. 
 
 Section 4. 
 Removal of officers on impeachment. 
 
 Sec. 4. 1 The President, Vice-President, and all civil offi- 
 cers of the United States, shall he removed from office on im- 
 peachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other 
 high crimes and misdemeanors. 
 
 Civil ofiBcers.— A Senator or member of Congress is 
 not such an officer, i but United States Circuit and District 
 Judges are such .2 
 
 1 Blount's Trial, 102. 
 
 2 Peck's Trial, 20 Chase's Trials, 137. 
 
Art. Ill, § 1 JUDICIAL DEPAKTBIENT. 208 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. 
 
 Section l. 
 
 Supreme and inferior Courts. Term of office and compensation of Judges. 
 
 Sec. 1. 1 The judicial poioer of the United States shall be 
 vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as 
 the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. 
 The Judges, both of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall 
 hold their offices during good behavior, and shall, at stated 
 times, receive for their services a compensation, which shall 
 not be diminished during their continuance in office. 
 
 Power of Congress. — Congress cannot confer any 
 part of the judicial power upon an executive officer. ^ 
 Congress cannot give jurisdiction or require services of 
 any "officer of a State government.'^ Congress cannot vest 
 any portion of the judicial power of the United States, 
 except in courts ordained and established by itself,^ nor 
 vest any portion of the jurisdiction of the United States 
 in State courts. ^ A State court cannot exercise jurisdic- 
 tion conferred upon it by Congress. s Congress cannot 
 enforce jurisdiction on a State court, ^ nor compel a State 
 court to exert jurisdiction," nor can Congress give juris- 
 diction, or require service of any officer of a State govern- 
 ment as suchjS nor confer jurisdiction on a military com- 
 mission. 9 This clause does not apply to or prohibit the 
 establishment of military courts in the insurrectionary 
 States. i'^ Congress may authorize any United States court 
 to perform any act which the Constitution does not require 
 to be performed in a different manner, n 
 
 1 Beatty v. U. S. 1 Dev. 231. 
 
 2 Ex parte Pool, 2 Va. Cas. 276; Prigg v. Pennsylvania, 16 Peters, 539. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Ames, 1 Wood. & M. 89; The British Prisoners, 1 "Wood. & 
 M. 66; Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; 
 3 Serg. & R. 169; Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300; Davison v. Chanplin, 7 
 Conn. 244; Ely v. Peck, 7 Conn. 239; U. S. v. Lathrop. 17 Johns. 4; State 
 V. McBride, Eice, 400; Jackson v. Kose, 2 Va. Cas. 34. 
 
 4 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; 
 Stearns v. U. S. 2 Paine, 300; Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300; Ely v.Teck, 
 7 Conn.239;Davison'y. Chanplin, 7 Conn. 244; U. S. v. Lathrop, 17 Johns. 
 4; State v. McBride, Kjce, 400; Jackson v. Kose, 2 Va. Cas. 34. 
 
 5 Ex parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300. 
 
209 JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. Art. Ill, § I 
 
 6 Stearns v. U. S. 2 Paine, 300; Ex parte Stephens, 70 Mass. 559; Miss. 
 Riv. Tel. Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 7 Cli. L. N. 158; The British Pris- 
 oners, 1 Wood. & M. 66. 
 
 7 Stearns v. U. S. 2 Paine, 300; Mississippi Riv. Tel. Co. v. First Nat. 
 Bank, 7 Ch. L. N. 158; Ex parte Stephens, 70 Mass. 559. 
 
 8 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 539; Ex parte Pool, 2 Va. Cas. 
 276. 
 
 9 Ex parte MiUigan, 4 Wall. 121. 
 
 10 Territorial Courts— see Art. 4, Sec. 3, Suhd. 2. 
 
 11 Ex parte Gist, 26 Ala. 156; Ex parte Pool, 216 Cas. 276. 
 
 Judicial power. — The Constitution defines the limits 
 of the judicial power, but Congress prescribes how much 
 of it is to be exercised by the Federal courts.^ Judicial 
 power means that iDower with which courts are clothed 
 tor the purpose of the trial and determination of causes 2 — 
 the power conferred to render a judgment or decree.^ It is 
 not sufficient to bring a matter under the judicial power 
 that it involves the exercise of judgment upon law and 
 facts.4 The power to hear and pass upon the validity of a 
 claim in an ex parte proceeding is not a judicial power. ^ 
 A provision requiring an assessor to impose a certain pen- 
 alty if he shall find a return false does not confer judicial 
 power;6 but administrative duties, the performance of 
 which involves an inquiry into the existence of facts, and 
 the application of them to the rules of law, is, in an en- 
 larged sense, a judicial act, as the adjustment of balances 
 and auditing of accounts. "' Judicial power is never exer- 
 cised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the 
 judge, but always of the will of the legislature, or of the 
 law,8 and must regard the Constitution as paramount. ^ 
 The powers not bestowed upon the Federal courts by 
 legislative provisions remain dormant until some law shall 
 call them into action by designating the particular tribu- 
 nal which shall be authorized to exercise them.io The 
 distribution of powers is regulated and governed by the 
 laws by which they are constituted.il The object of this 
 provision was to establish a judiciary of the United States 
 as a department of the Governments^ which cannot inter- 
 fere with the political department.i^ Keither the execu- 
 tive nor legislative department can be restricted by the 
 judicial, though the acts of both, when performed, are. 
 in proper cases, subject to its cognizance. ^-^ The condition 
 of peace or war, jpiiblic or civil, must be determined by 
 the political department, and not the judicial.i^ Whether 
 a foreign country has become an independent State is a 
 question for the treaty-making power, and cannot be 
 decided by the judiciary. is There is nothing in the Con- 
 stitution which prevents a ministerial officer, or person by 
 
J&ft. Ill, § 1 JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. 210 
 
 law directed, to do an act necessary to bring tlie accused 
 before the court possessing judicial power of determining 
 his guilt or innocence. i" The General Government has 
 full authority to appoint and commission all courts, mag- 
 istrates, and officers to carry out its laws.^^ 
 
 1 Turner v. Bank of N. A. 4 Dall. 10; Mclntyre v. Wood, 7 Cranch, 
 505; Kendall v. U. S. 12 Peters, 616; Gary v. Curtis, 3 How. 245; Clarke 
 V. City of Jonesville, 4 Amer. L. Reg. 593. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Arredondo, 6 Peters, 691; Eanton v. Wilson, 4 Tex. 400; 
 Ex parte Gist, 26 Aia. 156. 
 
 3 Ehode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Peters, 657. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Ferreira, 13 How. 40; Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 
 272; Ex parte Gist, 26 Ala. 156. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Ferreira, 13 How. 40; U. S. v. Todd, 13 How. 52; Humph- 
 reys V. U. S. 1 Dev. 204. 
 
 6 Doll V. Evans, 15 Int. Rev. Rec. 143. 
 
 7 Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 272. 
 
 8 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 818. 
 
 9 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 178 ; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 414. 
 
 10 Bank of U. S. v. Roberts, 4 Conn. 323; Bank of U. S. v. Northum- 
 berland Bank, 4 Con. 333. 
 
 11 Smith V. Jackson, 1 Paine, 453; Moffat v. Soey, 2 Paine, 103; Shuts 
 V. Davis, Peters C. C. 431. 
 
 12 Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 419; Osborne v. Bank of TJ. S. 9 
 Wheat. 818. 
 
 13 Georgia v. Stanton, 6 Wall. 50; Loan Asso. v. Topeka, 20 WaU. 669. 
 
 14 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 500, reviewing Marbury t;. Madison, 
 1 Cranch, 137; KendaUt;. Stokes, 12 Peters, 527. 
 
 15 U. S. V. Packages, 11 Am. Law Reg. 419. 
 
 16 Kennett v. Chambers, 14 How. 38; Gelston v. Hoyt, 3 WaU. 246; 
 Rose V. Himely, 4 Cranch, 241. 
 
 17 Prigg V. Comm. 16 Peters, 539; Ableman «. Booth, 21 How. 506; Ex 
 parte Martin, 2 Paine, 348; Ex parte Gist, 26 Ala. 156; Ex parte Pool, 2 
 Va. Co. 276. 
 
 18 Ex parte Stephens, 70 Mass. 559 
 
 Jurisdiction. — The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court 
 is pointed out in the Constitution.! Its original jurisdic- 
 tion exists only in cases of ambassadors, etc., and where 
 a State is a party. 2 Its appellate power is to be defined 
 by Congress. 3 It has no power to review by certiorari 
 proceedings of a military commission. ^ The vesting of 
 Judicial power is imperative.^ The power to establish 
 courts and confer jurisdiction is unlimited. ^ Neither the 
 legislativ-e nor executive branches can assign any duties 
 but such as are properly judicial, and to be performed in 
 a judicial manner.'^ Congress may say how much and 
 what shall vest in one inferior court and what in an- 
 other. s An inferior court is one whose judgment can be 
 
211 JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. Art. Ill, § 1 
 
 reversed on appeal. ^ Their jurisdiction depends exclusive- 
 ly on the Constitution and the terras of statutes passed in 
 pursuance thereof,!*^ or by treaty. ^i Tlie United States 
 courts can exercise only that jurisdiction conferred on 
 them by Congress. 12 They cannot exercise common-law 
 jurisdiction in criminal cases, i^ nor proceed by informa- 
 tion in criminal cases unless the power is granted by Con- 
 gress. i* They are of limited jurisdiction, but not inferior, 
 and can exercise no jurisdiction which is not expressly 
 granted or conferred by necessary implication, is as the 
 power to punish for contempt. ^^ Their respective juris- 
 dictions must be defined by Congress, i" and cannot be 
 enlarged or restricted by State laws.^s The Federal courts 
 have the right to determine their own jurisdiction. i'^ C'on- 
 gress may consent to a second trial of a claim against the 
 United States, although a judgment thereon has been ren- 
 dered for the Government.20 Congress has power to in- 
 vest inferior courts with ]Dower to issue writs of manda- 
 mus, 21 but it cannot empower a commissioner to commit 
 a person for an alleged contempt. ^^ The Federal courts 
 cannot apply the writ of habeas corpus to one in jail unless 
 confined under and by authority of the United States ; 23 
 and State courts have no authority to issue the writ within 
 the limits of the sovereignty of the United States. ^^ Fed- 
 eral courts have the power to issue writs only when neces- 
 sary in aid of their jurisdiction in a case pending. 2^ Con- 
 gress may make provision for the appointment of a board 
 of land commissioners to settle private land claims. 26 
 
 1 Smith V. Jacksou, 1 Paine, 453. 
 
 2 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wlieat. 304. 
 
 3 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540; Decatur v. Paulding, 14 Peters, 
 612. 
 
 4 Ex parte Vallancligham, 1 Wall. 243. 
 
 5 Martin v. Hunter, 1 "Wheat. 328; Anderson v. Dunn. 6 Wheat. 214. 
 
 6 Mayor v. Cooper, 6 Wall. 251. 
 
 7 Hayburn's Case, 2 Dall. 409 ; U. S. v. Ferreira, 13 How. 40; Doll v. 
 Evans, 15 Int. Rev. Rec. 143. 
 
 8 U. S. V. New Bedford Bridge, 1 Wood. & M. 437.. 
 
 9 Nugent v. State, 18 Ala. 52. 
 
 10 Mossman v. Higgenson, 4 Dall. 12 ; Hodgson v. Bowerbank, 5 
 Cranch, 303; Bank of United States v. Devaux, Ibid. 61 ; Amer. Ins. 
 Co. V. Canter, 1 Peters, 511 ; Livingston v. Jefferson, 1 Brock. 203; U. S. 
 V. Drenner, Hemp. 320; U. S. v. Alberti, Ibid. 444. 
 
 11 U. S. V. New Bedford Bridge, 1 Wood. & M. 437; The British Pris- 
 oners, 1 Wood. & M. 66; Smith v. Jackson, 1 Paine, 453. 
 
 12 Ex parte Cabrera, 1 Wash. C. C. 235; Magill v. Parsons, 4 Conn. 
 325. 
 
Art. Ill, § 1 JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. 212 
 
 13 Ex parte BoUman, 4 Cranch, 75; U. S. v. Hudson, 7 Cranch, 32; U. 
 S. V. Coolidge, 1 Wlieat. 415; 1 Gall. 488; U. S. v. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 336. 
 Contra, U. S. v. Bavara, 2 Dall. 297; U. S. v. Worrall, 2 DaU. 384. 
 
 14 U. S. iJ. Joe, 4 Chic. L. N. 105. 
 
 15 Titrner v. Bank of North America, 4 Dall. 9; U. S. v. Ta-wan-ga-ca, 
 Hemp. 304. 
 
 16 Matt, of Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 324; U. S. v. Hudson, 7 Cranch, 32. 
 
 17 Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738; Turner v. Bank of 
 North America, 4 Dall. 10; Mclntyretj. Wood, 7 Cranch, 506; Kendall 
 V. United States, 12 Peters, 616; Cary v. Curtis, 3 How. 245; Sheldon v. 
 Sill, 8 How. 448. 
 
 18 Livingston v. Jefferson, 1 Brock. 203; U. S. v. Drennan, Hemp. 320; 
 Greely v. Townsend, 25 Cal. 604. 
 
 19 U. S. V. Peters, 5 Cranch, 115; U. S. v. Booth, 21 How. 506; Freeman 
 i;. Howe, 24 How. 459. 
 
 20 Nock V. U. S. 2 Ct. CI. 451. 
 
 21 Kendall v. U. S. 12 Peters, 524. 
 
 22 Ex parte Doll, 7 Phila. 595. 
 
 23 Ex parte Des Rochers, McAU. 68. 
 
 24 Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 506. 
 
 25 Ex parte Everts, 7 Am. Law E,. 79, overruling U. S. v. Williamson, 
 4 Ibid. 11. 
 
 26 U. S. V. Ritchie, 17 How. 525. 
 
 Territorial courts.— Congress may define the jurisdic- 
 tion of territorial courts, or delegate tlie authority to the 
 territorial government, i Tlie jurisdiction witli whicli ter- 
 ritorial courts are invested is not a part of that judicial 
 power defined in this article, but is conferred in the exe- 
 cution of those general powers which Congress j)ossesses 
 over the Territories.^ Does not apply to the abnormal 
 condition of conquered territory, nor permit establish- 
 ment of courts in insurrectionary districts. 3 The Presi- 
 dent had power during the Civil War to establish provis- 
 ional courts, as an incident to the military occupation of 
 States which were the seat of war; ^ but such courts could 
 not decide cases of prize of war as ordinary courts of ad- 
 miralty. ^ On admitting a Territory into the Union, if 
 Congress fails to provide for cases pending in the supreme 
 court, it may do so by a subsequent act.<^ 
 
 1 Leitensdorfer v. Webb, 20 How. 176. 
 
 2 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511 ; Stacy v. Abbot, 1 Am. L. T. 
 B4. And see Benner v. Porter, 9 How. 244. 
 
 3 Mechs. Bank v. Union Bank, 22 Wall. 276; The Grapeshot, 9 Wall. 
 132. 
 
 4 The Grapeshot, 9 Wall. 132; Leitensdorfer v. Webb, 20 How. 176. 
 
 5 Jecker v. Montgomery, 13 How. 515. 
 
 6 Freeborn v. Smith, 2 Wall. 160. 
 
213 JUDICIAL DEPABTMBNT. Art. Ill, § 1 
 
 Authority of State courts. — The jurisdiction of 
 State courts is not taken away except as to cases where 
 such jurisdiction would be incompatible with the powers 
 granted to the United States.^ Where Federal courts 
 have paramount jurisdiction, State courts are expressly 
 prohibited from taking cognizance ; ^ so, a State statute 
 authorizing proceedings in rem for causes in admiralty 
 is unconstitutional. 3 Congress cannot confer jurisdiction 
 on a State tribunal.^ The jurisdiction of the State is 
 co-extensive with the territory. ^ but a State legislature 
 cannot confer jurisdiction upon Federal courts, or pre- 
 scribe the means or mode of its exercise. ^ No part of the 
 criminal jurisdiction can be delegated to State tribunals,'^ 
 but a crime not made an offense by an act of Congress is 
 cognizable in a State court. ^ So, State courts may punish 
 for counterfeiting under a State law, unless exclusive juris- 
 diction is vested in the Federal courts. ^ A State court 
 has jurisdiction to punish the forgery of a land warrant, 
 where it has not been made a crime by act of Congress. i*^ 
 State courts may entertain an action to recover a penalty 
 for breach of a Federal statute, ii A State magistrate may 
 commit a prisoner to be delivered over for prosecution to 
 the United States. 12 
 
 1 Martin V. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; 3 
 Serg. & R. 169; Teal v. Felton, 12 How. 284; State v. RandaU, 2 Aik. 89; 
 Delafiekl v. State, 2 Hill, 159; U. S. v. Lathrop, 17 Johns. 4; Jackson v. 
 Kose, 2 Va. Cas. 34; Claflin v. Houseman, 93 U. S. 130. 
 
 2 In re Brinkman, 7 Bank. Reg. 426; Slocum v. Mayherry, 2 Wheat. 
 1; Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; U. S. v. Peters, 5 Cranch, 115; 
 Duncan v. Darst, 1 How. 301; McNutt v. Bland, 2 How. 16; Bank of 
 Augusta V. Earle, 13 Peters, 590. 
 
 3 Crawford v. The Caroline Reed, 42 Cal. 469; In re Brinkman, 7 
 Bank. Reg. 426 ; Bird v. The Josephine, 39 N. Y. 19 ; Brookman v. 
 Hamill, 43 N. Y. 554; The Belfast, 7 Wall. 624, overruling Richardson v. 
 Cleveland, 5 Port. 251; Monroe v. Brady, 7 Ala. 59; The Farmers. Mc- 
 Craw, 31 Ala. 659; The Belfast, 41 Ala. 50. 
 
 4 Huber v. Reily, 53 Pa. St. 112. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 386; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 610, 
 
 6 Greely «. Townsend, 25 Cal. 604. 
 
 7 Martin ■!;. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; States. Wells, 2 HiU, S. C. 687; 
 Hubert. Reily, 53 Pa. St. 112; State v. McBride, Rice, 400; Common- 
 wealth V. Feely, 1 Va. Cas. 321 . 
 
 8 State V. Buchanan, 5 Har. & J. 317. 
 
 9 White V. Commonwealth, 4 Binn. 418; State v. Randall, 2 Ark. 89; 
 State V. Tutt, 2 Bailey, 44. 
 
 10 Commonwealth v. Schaffer, 4 Dall. App. 26. 
 
 11 Claflin V. Houseman, 93 U. S. 130; Stearns v. U. S. 2 Paine, 300; 
 Buckwalter v.V.S. 11 Serg. & R. 193. But see Ely v. Peck, 7 Conn. 239; 
 
Art. Ill, § 1 JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. 2J4 
 
 Davidson ij. Champlin, 7 Conn. 244; Haney v. Sharp, 1 Dana, 442; U. S. 
 V. Latlirop, 17 Johns. 4; Jackson v. Hose, 2 Va. Cas. 34. 
 
 12 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 539; Ex parte Gist, 26 Ala. 156; 
 Ex parte Smith, 5 Cowen 273; Ex parte Martin, 2 Paine, 348; Ex parte 
 Pool, 2 Va. Cas. 276. 
 
 Removal of causes. — Congress may transfer a suit 
 from one inferior tribunal to another.! It may also 
 provide for the removal of causes from State to Federal 
 courts. " This power is only given by implication — it is the 
 indirect means by which Federal courts acquire jurisdic- 
 tion, ^ A case may be removed from a State to a Federal 
 court where it arises under the Constitution and laws of 
 the United States, as well as where it arises between citi- 
 zens of different States.* Congress may determine at 
 what time its power may be invoked, and at what stage 
 of tlie proceedings a trial may be removed to the Federal 
 courts. & No State can take away the privilege conferred 
 uj)on citizens of other States to sue in the Federal courts, 
 by providing a special remedy in its own courts. ^ Parties 
 cannot by agreement oust jurisdiction in the Federal 
 judiciary. 7 A statute requiring an agreement from a 
 ■foreign corporation not to remove a cause, is void:^ but 
 if a license to transact business in a State is made to de- 
 pend on the condition that the corporation shall not 
 remove any case from a State to a Federal court, the State 
 may revoke it if such removal is made.^ 
 
 1 Stuart V. Laird, 1 Cranch, 299. 
 
 2 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304 ; Mayor v. Cooper, 6 Wall. 247 ; Rail- 
 road Co. V. Whitton, 13 Wall. 270; Murray v. Patrie,5 Blatchf. 343; Fisk 
 V. N. P. E. E. Co. 6 Blatchf. 362; Clark v. Dick, 1 Dill. 8; Johnson i: 
 Monell, Woolw. 390; McCormick v. Humphrey, 27 Ind. 144; Tod. v. Fair- 
 field, 15 Ohio St. 377; Hodgson v. Millward, 3 Grant, 412; Kulp v. Kick- 
 etts, 3 Grant, 420; Greely v. Townsend, 25 Cal. 604. 
 
 3 Kaikoad Co. v. Whitton, 13 Wall. 270; Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat 
 304. 
 
 4 Kulp V. Kicketts, 3 Grant, 420. 
 
 5 Gaines v. Fuentes, 92 U. S. 10. 
 
 6 Mason V. Boom Comp. 3 Wall. Jr. 252. 
 
 7 Davis V. Packard, 6 Peters, 41; 7 Ibid. 276; Ducat v. Chicago, 10 
 Wall. 415; Cobb v. N. E. Ins. Co. 6 Gray, 192; Hobbs ■(. Manhattan Ins. 
 Co. 56 Me. 421. 
 
 8 Morse v. Ins. Co. 20 Wall. 445; 30 Wis. 496; Railroad Co. v. Pierce, 
 27 Ohio St. 155; Doyle v. Continental Ins. Co. 94 U. S. 535; Hartford 
 F. Ins. Co. V. Doyle, 6 Biss. 463. But see Cont. Ins. Co. v. Kasey, 13 A. 
 L. J. 311; N. Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Best, 23 Ohio St. 105. 
 
 9 State V. Doyle, 40 Wis. 175; Doyle v. Continental Ins. Co. 15 A. L. 
 J. 267. But see Hartford F. Ins. Co. v. Doyle, 6 Biss. 461. 
 
215 juRiSDioTioK. Art. Ill, § 2 
 
 Judges, tenure of office. — Congress cannot limit the 
 teliure of judicial offices, or diminish the compensation, 
 or alter the stated time for payment. i Judges of courts 
 established by Congress must be appointed to hold office 
 during good beljavior.^ The fees allowed to justices of 
 the peace in tlie District of Columbia cannot be dimin- 
 ished during their continuance in office. ^ Territorial 
 courts being erected in the exercise of the general sover- 
 eignty of the United States over territory it may own, 
 their judges may be appointed for brief terms. ^ This 
 clause prohibits the imposition of a tax on the salary of 
 a judge. s Judges cannot be required to perform any but 
 judicial functions. ^ 
 
 1 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304. 
 
 2 Hayburn's Case, 2 Dall. 410, note; U. S. v. Ferreira, 13 How. 49; 
 U. S. V. Todd, 13 How. 52. 
 
 3 U. S. V. More, 3 Cranch, 160, liote. 
 
 4 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 546. 
 
 5 Commonwealth v. Mann, 5 "Watts & S. 415. 
 
 6 Hayburn's Case, 2 Dall. 410, note; U. S. v, Todd, 13 How. 52, note; 
 U. S. V. Ferreira, 13 How. 49. 
 
 SECTION 2. 
 Judicial powers. 
 
 1. Jurisdiction of Courts. 
 
 2. Of Supreme Court, original and appellate. 
 3'. Jury trials, place of trial. 
 
 Sec. 2. 1 The judicial poioer shall extend to all cases, in 
 law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the latos of 
 the United States, and treaties made, or ivhich shall be made, 
 tinder their author itij ;— to all cases affecting ambassadors, 
 other public ministers, and consuls ;—to all cases of admi- 
 ralty and maritime jurisdiction ;—to controversies to ivhich 
 the United States shall be a party ;—to controversies betioeen 
 tioo or more States ;— between a State and citizens of another 
 State ;— betioeen citizens of different States ;— between citizens 
 of the same State claiming lands under grants of different 
 States, and between a State, or the citizens thereof, and for- 
 eign states, citizens or subjects. 
 
 Jurisdiction.— ''Shall extend" is used in an impera- 
 tive sense, and imports an absolute grant o£ power. i 
 There are three classes of cases enumerated. In the lat- 
 ter class as to controversies, Congress may qualify the ju- 
 risdiction, either original or appellate.^ How jurisdiction 
 shall be acquired, whether original or appellate, and the 
 mode of procedure, are left to the wisdom of the legisla- 
 
Art. Ill, § 2 JURISDICTION. 216 
 
 ture ; ^ so, Congress may give the Federal courts original ju- 
 risdiction in any case to which appellate jurisdiction ex- . 
 ends; 4 and may lawfully provide for suits, at the op- 
 tion of the parties, on all controversies between citizens 
 of the different States. ^ When a question within the ju- 
 dicial power becomes an ingredient of the cause, Congress 
 may give the Federal courts jurisdiction.^ The questions 
 which the case involves must determine its character.''' 
 Congress may provide that a national bank may sue and 
 be sued in the national courts, s The judicial power is the 
 instrument provided in administering security to an offi- 
 cer acting in discharge of his duty. 9 It covers every leg- 
 islative act of Congress. 1*^ It is the final arbiter of con- 
 stitutional construction, n and may receive from the leg- 
 islature the power to construe every constitutional law.^^ 
 For the judicial power to extend to a violation of the 
 Constitution, it must be "a case in law or in equity" in 
 which a right under such law is asserted in a court of 
 justice. 13 Seeking jprotection under a law is a case aris- 
 ing under that law.i* The judicial power is unavoidably 
 in some cases exclusive of all State authority, and in 
 others may be made so at the election of the legislative 
 body.15 The jurisdiction of the Federal courts in the first 
 three classes of cases in this section is exclusive ; ^^ so as 
 to questions arising on treaties, when not political ques- 
 tions. i"^ Congress may grant exclusive jurisdiction in 
 United States courts over suits arising under the laws of 
 the United States, i^ 
 
 1 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304. 
 
 2 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; The Moses Taylor. 4 WaU. 411. 
 
 3 Mayor v. Cooper, 6 Wall. 247. 
 
 4 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738. 
 
 5 Gaines v. Fuentes, 92 TJ. S. 10. 
 
 6 Oshorn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; Mayor v. Cooper, 6 Wall. 247. 
 
 7 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738. 
 
 8 Oshorn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; Bank of TJ. S. v. Northum. 
 berland Bank, 4 Wash. C. C. 108; 4 Conn. 333; Magill v. Parsons, 4 Conn. 
 317; Bank of U. S. v. Roberts, 4 Conn. 323. 
 
 9 Hodgson v. Millward, 3 Grant, 412. 
 
 10 Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 506; 3 Wis. 1; Mayor v. Cooper, 6 
 Wall. 247. 
 
 11 Vandorne's Lessee v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304; Martin v. Hunter, 1 
 Wheat. 304; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264; Ableman v. Booth, 21 
 How. 506; 3 Wis. 1. 
 
 12 Osborne v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; Bank of U. S. v. Roberts, 
 4 Conn. 323; Hodgson v. Millward, 3 Grant, 412. 
 
 13 Cohens u. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
 14 Hodgson V. MiUward, 3 Grant. 412 ; Kulp v. Ricketts, Ibid. 420. 
 
217 JURISDICTION, Art. Ill, § 2 
 
 15 Martin V. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; The Moses Taylor, 4 Wall. 411. 
 
 16 State V. McBride, Kice, 400. 
 
 17 Wilson V. Wall, 6 Wall. 83; Ex parte I^eon, 1 Eclm. Sel. Cas. 301: 
 U. S. V. Lathrop, 17 Johns. 9; XJ. S. v. Campbell, 6 HaU L. J. 113; Haney 
 V. Sharp, 1 Dana, 442. 
 
 18 Fox t'. Ohio, 5 How. 410; Voorhees v. Frisbie, 8 Bank. Reg. 154. 
 
 Extent of judicial power.— A case in law or equity- 
 consists of the right of one party as well as of the other, 
 and it arises when its correct decision depends on the 
 construction of the Constitution or laws of the United 
 States. 1 It is a suit instituted according to the regular 
 course of judicial procedure; 2 it is limited to such as are 
 between parties, or are of a judicial nature,^ and does not 
 include political questions.* When the subject-matter of 
 a controversy is political, it is beyond the domain of the 
 judiciary, as where it involves the existence dejtire of the 
 Government, or the legality of some act or proceeding 
 purely governmental.^ Cases at law include suits in 
 which legal rights are to be ascertained and determined as 
 distinguished from those where equitable rights are ad- 
 ministered, ^ or where the proceeding is in admiralty; ^ 
 but a case can only be considered when the subject-matter 
 is submitted in the form prescribed by law,^ and the 
 record must show that the Constitution or some law or 
 treaty is drawn in question. 9 The United States courts 
 have no jurisdiction of offenses at common law.i'' Suits 
 in which relief is sought according to the principles and 
 practice of equity jurisdiction are "cases in equity." ^i 
 The true test is whether there is a plain, adequate, and 
 complete remedy at law in the same court.12 It extends 
 over cases in State courts, and over statutes whether 
 passed by a State legislature or by Congress, and which 
 are claimed to be in contravention of the Constitution of 
 the United StateSji^but not to statutes claimed to be void 
 under a State constitution. i* To bring an act within the 
 control of the judiciary, it must be clearly subversive of 
 the Constitution. 15 The objection must not be doubtful,i6 
 but a clear violation of the Constitution, i" The question 
 as to the title to property conferred by treaty is a political 
 question, and its decision by the political department is 
 conclusive on the judiciary ;i8 go, the protection of Indians 
 in their possessions,!'-' and as to State boundaries, ^o and 
 as to political treaties,2i and as to the recognition of for- 
 eign governments, are political questions. ^-^ The recog- 
 nition of the existence of a government is conclusive of 
 its public character.23 The jurisdiction extends to all 
 cases affecting ambassadors, etc. , although they are not 
 
 Desty Fbo, C03r.— 10 
 
Art. Ill, §2 JURISDICTION. 218 
 
 parties to the record.24 If the right of property in the 
 subject-matter is given or created by an act of Congress, 
 it is within the judicial power of the United States ;'^& but 
 State courts may entertain jurisdiction of cases arising 
 under tlie laws of the United States upon principles of 
 comity, which authorize the courts of every civilized State 
 to administer law and justice to suitors .^6 Congress may 
 give the circuit courts original jurisdiction in any case to 
 which the appellate jurisdiction attaches. ^^ 
 
 1 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 "VVlieat. 379; U. S. v. Williams, 4 Cranch C. C. 
 392: Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738; Jones v. Seward, 
 41 Barb. 272; Ex parte MiUigan, 4 WaU. 114. 
 
 2 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 138; Owings v, Norwood, 5 Cranch, 
 137; Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
 3 Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 1 ; U. S. v. Ferreira, 13 How. 40. 
 
 4 Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 1. 
 
 5 Georgia v. Stanton, 6 Wall. 50. 
 
 6 rarsons v. Bedford, 3 Peters, 447; Fenn v. Holme, 21 How. 486; 
 And see Stroth^r v. Lucas, 6 Peters, 768; Parish v. Ellis, 16 Peters, 453: 
 Bennett v. Butterworth, 11 How. 669; Sherbourne v. De Cordova, 24 
 How. 423. 
 
 7 Parsons v. Bedford, 3 Peters, 447 ; Robinson v. Campbell, 3 Wheat. 
 212. 
 
 8 Robinson v. Campbell, 3 Wheat. 212; Osborn v. Bank of United 
 States, 9 Wheat. 738; Parsons v. Bedford, 3 Peters, 433. 
 
 9 Lawler v. Walker, 14 How. 149; Mills v. Brown, 16 Peters, 525; 
 Railroad Co. v. Rock, 4 Wall. 180; Ryan v. Thomas, 4 Wall. 603. 
 
 10 Ex parte BoUman, 4 Cranch, 75 ; Turner v. Bank of N. A. 4 Dall. 10; 
 U. S. V. Lancaster, 2 McLean, 431; Kitchen v. Strawbridge, 1 Wash. C. 
 C. 84; U. S. V. New Bedford Bridge, 1 Wood. & M. 401. 
 
 11 Robinson v. Campbell, 3 Wheat. 212; U. S. v. Rowland, 4 Wheat. 
 108; Lorman v. Clark, 2 McLean, 568; Gordon v. Hobart, 2 Sum. 401; 
 Pratt V. Northam, 5 Mason, 95; Cropper v. Coburn, 2 Curt. 465. 
 
 12 U. S. V. Howland, 4 Wheat. 108; Boyce v. Grundy, 3 Peters, 215; 
 Gaines v. Chew, 2 How. 619; Williams v. Benedict, 8 How. 107. 
 
 13 Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 399; Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137; 
 Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 625. 
 
 14 Calder V. Bull, 3 Dall. 392. 
 
 15 Turner v. Althaus, 6 Neb. 54. 
 
 16 U. S. V. Jackson, 3 Sawy. 62; People v. Brinkerhoff, 68 N. Y. 259. 
 
 17 C. C. R. R. Co. V. Twenty-third St. R. R. Co. 54 How. Pr. 168; Ben- 
 nington v. Park, 50 Vt. 178. 
 
 18 Foster v. Neilson, 2 Peters, 309; U. S. v. Arredondo, 6 Peters, 711; 
 Garcia v. Lee, 12 Peters, 520; Williamson v. Suffolk lus. Co. 13 Peters, 
 441 ; Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 56. 
 
 19 Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 20. 
 
 20 Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Peters, 736; Garcia v. Lee, 
 Ibid. 520. 
 
 21 Luther V. Borden, 7 How. 58. 
 
219 JURISDICTION. Art. Ill, § 2 
 
 22 WiUiamson v. Suffolk Ins. Co. 13 Petei's, 419; Cherokee Na. v. 
 Georgia, 5 Peters, 20; Rose v. Hlmely, 4 Cranch, 241 ; U. S. v. Palmer, 3 
 Wheat. 610 ; Gelston v. Hoyt, Ibid. 246 ; The Divina Pastora, 4 Wheat. 64. 
 
 23 Du Pont V. Pichou, 4 Dall. 321 ; U. S. v. Ortega, 4 Wash. C. C. 531. 
 
 24 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; U. S. v. Ortega, 11 Wheat. 
 467 ; V.S.v. Ravara, 2 Dall. 297. 
 
 25 Bank of U. S. v. Roberts, 4 Conn. 323. 
 
 26 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; 3 Serg. & R. 169; Clafliu v. House- 
 man, 93 U. S. 130; Bank of U. S. v. Roberts, 4 Conn. 323; Jackson v. 
 Rose, 2 Va. Cas. 34. 
 
 27 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 336; Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 
 821; Jones v. Seward, 41 Barb. 272. 
 
 As to persons. — The judicial power extends to con- 
 troversies to which the United States shall be a party, 
 embracing civil suits, but not to suits against the execu- 
 tive to prevent the enforcement of reconstruction laws.i 
 It extends to suits where a State is a party,^ but only 
 when it is a party to the record, s and process is served on 
 the chief executive and attorney-general of the State ;* 
 or when the governor is sued in his official capacity.^ It 
 extends to controversies between two or more States, ^ 
 including suits to settle disputed boundaries,'^ and it only 
 applies to States that are members of the Union, and to 
 public bodies owing obedience and conformity to its con- 
 stitution and laws, 8 Indian nations not being deemed 
 States.^ It extends to controversies between a State and 
 citizens of other States, but this does not include a suit 
 by the citizens against the State. i*^ It extends to contro- 
 versies between citizens of different States ;ii the situation 
 of the parties, and not their characters, determines the 
 jurisdiction. 12 Citizenship, as to jurisdiction, means only 
 residence, 13 and for this purpose a corporation is deemed 
 a citizen of the State which charters it.ii This clause 
 does not embrace cases where one of the parties is a citi- 
 zen of a Territory, or of the District of Columbia, i^ Con- 
 troversies between citizens claiming lands under grants 
 of different States are within the jurisdiction, notwith- 
 standing one of the States, at the time of the first grant, 
 was apart of the other, i^ It is the grant which passes 
 the legal title and authorizes jurisdiction.!" This clause 
 gives jurisdiction where foreign States or individual for- 
 eigners are parties, is but an Indian tribe is not a foreign 
 nation within this provision, i^ .The controversy, in order 
 to give jurisdiction, must be one in which a citizen of a 
 State and an alien are parties,2o or a nominal citizen 
 suing for the use of an alien.21 So, a foreign corporation 
 is an alien. 2- The opposing party must be a citizen, and 
 it must so appear on the record. ^3 At common law, an 
 
Art. Ill, § 2 JURISDICTION. 220 
 
 alien cannot maintain a real action ;24 the disability is 
 personal. 25 This section does not include controviersies 
 between people of a State as to the formation or change 
 of their constitution. 26 
 
 1 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 498; Georgia v. Stanton, 6 Wall. 50. 
 
 2 N. Y. V. Conn. 4 Dall. 1; N. J. v. N. Y. 5 Peters, 290; Georgia v. 
 Brailsford, 2 Dall. 402, 415; Oswald i;. N. Y. 2 Dall. 415; Chisholm v. 
 Georgia, 2 Dall. 419; Grayson v. Va. 3 Dall. 320; Mass. v. R. 1. 12 Peters, 
 755; Gov. of Ga. v. Madrazo, 1 Peters, 122; Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 
 55; Mowrey v. Indiana & C. R. R. Co. 4 Biss. 80. 
 
 3 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; N. Y. v. Conn. 4 DaU. 3; 
 Fowler v. Lindsay, 3 Dall. 411 ; U. S. v. Peters, 5 Cranch, 115. 
 
 4 Georgia v. Brailsford, 2 DaU. 402; 3 Dall. 1 ; Oswald v. New York, 2 
 Dall. 415; Chisholm v. Ga. 2 Dall. 419; N. J. v. N. Y. 5 Peters, 284; Gray- 
 son V. Virginia, 3 Dall. 320; Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 How. 96. 
 
 5 Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 How. 97; Gov. of Georgia v. Madrazo, 1 
 Peters, 110. 
 
 6 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738; Dundas t). Bowler, 3 Mc- 
 Lean, 204. 
 
 7 R. I. V. Mass. 12 Peters, 657; Ala. v. Ga. 23 How. 510; Brainard v. 
 Williams, 4 McLean, 122. 
 
 8 Scott V. Jones, 5 How. 377. 
 
 9 Cherokee Nation v. Ga. 5 Peters, 16. 
 
 10 Cohens v. Va. 6 Wheat. 406. See Post, Xlth Amend., Note. 
 
 11 Ohio&Miss.R.R. Co. i;. Wheeler, 1 Black, 286. But see Hope Ins. 
 Co. V. Boardman, 5 Cranch, 57. 
 
 12 Connolly v. Taylor, 2 Peters, 556. 
 
 13 Gassies v. Ballon, 6 Peters, 761 ; Shelton v. Tiffin, 6 How. 163; Leg- 
 see of Cooper v. Galbraith, 3 Wash. C. C. 546; Lessee of Butler v. 
 Farnsworth, 4 Ibid. 101. 
 
 14 Hope Ins. Co. v. Boardman, 5 Cranch, 57; U. S. v. Planters' Bank, 
 9 Wheat. 410; Louisville &c. R. R. Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 497; Cumber- 
 land &c. Bank v. Slocomb, 14 Peters, 60; Marshall v. Bait. &c. R. R. Co. 
 16 How. 314; Wheeden v. Camden &c. R. R. Co. 4 Am. L. R. 296; Bank 
 of U. S. V. Devaux, 5 Cranch, 61. 
 
 15 Hepburn v. Ellzey,2 Cranch, 445; New Orleans v. Winter, 1 Wheat. 
 91; Gassies v. Ballon, 6 Peters, 761; Hartshorne ?;. Wright, Peters C. 
 C. 64; Scott V. Jones, 5 How. 376; Barney v. Baltimore, 6 Wall. 287; 
 Texas V. White, 7 Wall. 737 ; Railroad Co. v. Harris, 12 Wall. 86. 
 
 16 Town of Pawlet v. Clark, 9 Cranch, 292. 
 
 17 Colson V. Lewis, 2 Wheat. 377. 
 
 18 Chappedelaine v. Dechenaux, 4 Cranch, 308; Brown v. Strode, 3 
 Cranch, 303. 
 
 19 Cherokee Nation v. Ga. 5 Peters, 1 ; Worcester v. Ga. 6 Peters, 619. 
 
 20 Hepburn v. EUzey, 2 Cranch, 445 ; New Orleans v. AVinter, 1 Wheat. 
 91; Gassies 17. Ballon, 6 Peters, 761 ;_ Brown v. Reene, 8 Peters, 112; 
 
 Picquet v. Swan, 4 Mason, 443; 5 Ibid. 35; Case v. Clarke, 5 Mason, 70; 
 Wilsbh V. City Bank, 5 Bank. Reg. 270; Catlett v. Pac. Ins. Co. 1 Paine, 
 594; Lessee of Cooper V. Galbraith, ' '" " "^ 
 
 na,n, 2 Blatchf . 164 ; Chappedelaine % 
 
 21 Brown v. Strode, 5 Cranch, 303. 
 
 594; Lessee of Cooper v. Galbraith, 3 Wash. C. C. 546; Prentiss v. Bren- 
 na,n, 2 Blatchf. 164; Chappedelaine v. Dechenaux, 4 Cranch, 306. 
 
221 JURISDICTION. Art. Ill, §2 
 
 22 So.ciety for Prop, of Gosp. v. N. H. 8 Wlieat. 464; Comml. &c. Bank 
 V. Slocoml), 14 Peters, 60. 
 
 23 Jackson v. Twentymen, 2 Peters, 136 ; Baird v. Byrne, 3 Wall. Jr. 1. 
 
 24 Jones ?;. McMasters, 20 How. 20; Lanfear v. Hunley, 4 Wall. 209; 
 McDonbgh v. Millandon, 3 How. 6S3 ; Semple v. Hager. 4 Wall. 433 ; 
 Barges v. Hogg, 1 Hayw. 435; Orser v. Hoag, 3 Hill, 79; White v. SaUar- 
 iego, 28 Tex. 246. 
 
 25 Kemp v. Kennedy, 5 Cranch, 173; Peters C. C. 40. 
 
 26 Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 55; Mass. v. R. 1. 12 Peters, 755. 
 
 Admiralty and maritime.— The Constitution confers 
 not only admiralty, but all "maritime" jurisdiction.! 
 "Maritime" was added to guard against a narrow inter- 
 pretation of the word " admiralty." ^ These words refer 
 to the general system of maritime law familiar to this 
 country when the Constitution was adopted,^ and regard 
 must be had to our legal history, Constitution, legislation, 
 usages, and adjudications. ^ The grant was not intended 
 to be limited to cases of admiralty jurisdiction in England 
 when the Constitution was adoj)ted.5 The maritime law 
 is a part of the common law.o The term belongs to the 
 law of nations as well as to domestic and municipal law." 
 The jurisdiction is entirely distinct from the power of 
 Congress to regulate commerce. ^ It makes the judicial 
 co-extensive with the legislative power,^ and covers not 
 merely the cognizance of the case, but the jurisprudence 
 and principles by which it is administered, ^o The whole 
 subject belongs exclusively to the General Government, ii 
 and jurisdiction in the Federal courts is exclusive. !- 
 Jurisdiction in admiralty is expressly granted by the 
 Constitution, 13 but its exercise depends on congressional 
 legislation, !•* and Congress may limit or control it,io or 
 modify the pra.ctice.i6 The terin includes jurisdiction of 
 all things done u^dou and relating to the sea, and all 
 transactions relating to commerce and navigation, and to 
 damages or injuries upon the high seas,i7 and to the navi- 
 gable lakes and rivers of the United States, is and to inland 
 navigable waters, although nob affected by the ebb and 
 flow of the tide ; lo but the grant does not extend to waters 
 ceded to the several States, nor to the general jurisdiction 
 Over the same;'-^" so, the power to regulate the fisheries 
 Was not surrendered by the grant of admiralty and mari- 
 time jurisdiction. 21 
 
 1 De Lovio v. Boit, 2Gall. 398. And see The Seneca, Gilp. 28 ; The 
 Huntress, 2 Ware (Dav.) 82; The S. C. Ives, Newb. 205. 
 
 2 rretz?;.Bul],12How.466; The Hine v. Trevor, 4 Wall. 555, 561 ; The 
 Moses Taylor, 4 Wall. 411. 
 
 3 N. J. S. N. Co. V. Merch. Bank, 6 How. 344; Waring v. Clarke, 5 
 How. 441; The Genessee Chief v. Fitzhugh. 12 How. 443; The Ldtta- 
 wauna, 21 Wall. 558; The Huntress, 2 Ware (Dav.) 83. 
 
Art. Ill, § 2 juitisDicTiON. 222 
 
 4 The St. Lawrence, 1 Black, 522 ; The Lottawanna, 21 Wall. 576. 
 
 5 New Jersey Co. v. Morch. Bank, 6 How. 344; Waring v. Clarke, 5 
 How. 441; Do Lovio v. Boit, 2 Gall. 393; The Seneca, Gilp. 10, 34; The 
 Gold Hunter, Blatchf. & II. 300; Steel v. Thatcher, 1 Ware, 91; The 
 Huntress, 2 Ware (Dav.) 82; The S. C. Ives, Newb. 205; The Volunteer, 
 1 Sum. 551. 
 
 6 Thompson v. The Catharina, 1 Pet. Adra. 104. 
 
 7 The Huntress, 2 Ware (Dav.) 82. 
 
 8 The Genessee Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 How. 443 ; The Belfast, 7 Wall. 
 624.; The Sarah Jane, 1 Low. 203. 
 
 9 The Huntress, 2 Ware (Dav.) 82. 
 
 10 The Chusan, 2 Story, 455. 
 
 11 The Chusan, 2 Story, 455. 
 
 12 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter. 1 Peters, 
 ,511; The Moses Taylor, 4 Wall. 411; The Hiue v. Trevor, 4 Wall. 555; 
 The Wave, Blatchf. & H. 252. 
 
 13 Carpenter v. The Emma Johnson, 1 Cliff. G33. 
 
 14 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 337; Jackson v. The Magnolia, 20 How. 
 
 206. 
 
 15 Carpenter v. The Emma Johnson, 1 Cliff. 633. 
 
 16 The Genessee Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 How. 443. 
 
 17 De Lovio v. Boit, 2 Gall. 3!)8; The Young America, Newb. 101. 
 
 18 The Genessee Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 How. 451. 
 lO The Genessee Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 How. 451. 
 
 20 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 337; Smith v. Maryland, 18 How. 71; The 
 Wave, 2 Paine, 131; Blatchf. & H. 235; Genessee Chief v. Fitzhugh, 12 
 How. 443. 
 
 21 Smith V. Maryland, 18 How. 71; Bennett v. Boggs, Bald. 60; Cor- 
 field V. Coryell, 4 Wash. C. C. 371. 
 
 Maritime contracts.— Admiralty and maritime juris- 
 diction embraces all maritime contracts, all torts commit- 
 ted in its jurisdiction,! and all suits for liens of material- 
 men and for services,^ States cannot create maritime 
 liens nor give tlieir courts jurisdiction over them.3 It 
 extends over contracts, tliougli the voyage is within the 
 State and only on waters of the State ;'^ and over torts on 
 navigable waters, though committed Avithin the body of 
 a county ; 5 and over seizures for breach of revenue laws;° 
 or for engaging in the Rebellion; " and for all crimes and 
 offenses against the laws of the United States. ^ In cases 
 purely dependent on locality it is limited to the sea, and 
 to tide- waters as far as tlie tide flows, and up to high- 
 water mark.9 It includes captures made jure belli upon . 
 certain waters, and all questions of prize, crimes, and of- 
 fenses upon the same; civil acts, torts, and injuries com- 
 mitted thereon, collisions, illegal seizures, depredations on 
 property, and salvage, and otljer services. ^^ States can- 
 not by local legislation enlarge or limit the jurisdiction 
 
223 JURISDICTION, Art. Ill, § 2 
 
 of tlie Federal Courts; 11 nor confer jurisdiction on them 
 in cases not cognizable in admiralty. i- 
 
 1 New York v. Connecticut, 4 Dall. 1 ; Waring- v. Clarke, 5 How. 489; 
 Gloucester lus.' Co. v. Younger, 2 Curt. 322 ; De Lovio v. Boit, 3 Gall. 398. 
 
 2 The General Smith, 4 Wheat. 433 ; Gardner v. New Jersey, 1 Peters, 
 227; Stevens i;. The Sandwich, Ibid. 233; Davis?;. A New Brig, Gilp. 473; 
 Wick V. The Samuel Strong, (i McLean, 587 ; The Robert Fulton, 1 Paine, 
 620; Zane v. The President, 4 Wash. C. C. 453. 
 
 3 The Belfast, 7 Wall. G24. 
 
 4 The Belfast, 7 Wall. fi24; The Mary Washington.! Abb. TJ. S. 1; 
 The Leonard, 3 Ben. 203; Carpenter v. The Emma Johnson, 1 Cliff. 633; 
 The Voiuuteer, 1 Ch. L. N. 185; The Sarah Jane, 1 Low. 20. But see, 
 contra, Maguire v. Card, 21 How. 248; Allen v. Newberry, 21 How. 244; 
 New Jersey Co. v. Merchants' Bank, G How. 344; The Troy, 4 Blatchf. 
 355. 
 
 5 Koberts v. Skolfield, 8 Am. Law Reg. 156. 
 
 6 U. S. V. La Vengeance, 3 Dall. 297: U. S. v. The SaUy, 2 Cranch,406; 
 N. J. S. N. Co. V. Merchants' Bank, G How. 344. 
 
 7 Mrs. Alexander's Cotton, 2 Wall. 404. 
 
 8 Corfield v. Coryell, 4 Wash. C. C. 371 ; U. S. v. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 337. 
 
 9 U. S. V. Coombs, 12 Peters, 72. 
 
 10 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; U. S. v. McGill, 4 Dall. 426; 1 Wash. 
 C. C. 463; 'i'he Plymouth, 3 Wall. 20; Thomas v. Lane, 2 Sum. 9: Plum- 
 mer v. Webb, 4 Mason, 380 ; The Huntress, 2 Ware (Dav.) 85. / ^fjf'- ■ 
 
 11 TheBelfast,7Wall. 624; TheChusan,2 Storj^455. €^ 
 
 12 Cra-svford v. The Caroline Reed, 42 Cal. 469. 
 
 ^In all cases- affecting Ambassadors, ,ajt%er public,^ilinisters 
 and Consuls, and those in lohich a State shall h& party, the 
 Supremo Court shall have original \iiirisdiction. In all the 
 other cases before mentioned, the Supreme .Court shall have 
 appellate jurisdiction, both as to'laio and fact, with such ex- 
 ceptions and under such regulations as the Congress shall 
 make. 
 
 Original jurisdiction. — The first clause of this pro- 
 vision declares the extent of the judicial power, i which 
 Congress cannot abridge or extend ;2 nor can Congress 
 confer original jurisdiction in cases other than those enu- 
 merated. 3 The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is both 
 original and exclusive, '* and co-extensive with the judicial 
 i:)0wer,5 but special and limited, confined to particular 
 cases, controversies, and parties. ^ It has no jurisdiction 
 over questions of a political character, "i* In the absence 
 of legislation by Congress, the Court may prescribe the 
 mode and form of proceedings, so as to attain the object 
 for which jurisdiction was given. s It is left to Congress 
 to organize the Supreme Court, to define its powers con- 
 sistently with the Constitution, and to distribute the resi- 
 
Art. Ill, § 2 juRiSDiCTic>N. 224 
 
 due between it and the inferior courts.'-^ Although the 
 Constitution vests in the Supreme Court jurisdiction in 
 suits affecting ambassadors, ministers, and consuls, Con- 
 gress may vest a concurrent jurisdiction in such inferior 
 courts as may be established. ^^ A State court has no 
 jurisdiction over an offense committed by a consul ;ll but 
 an indictment against a private person for an assault upon 
 an ambassador or public minister is not a case affecting 
 such minister. 12 The original jurisdiction, in cases where 
 a State is a party, refers to cases where jurisdiction might 
 be exercised by reason of the character of the partj^ in 
 any suit in a Federal court, i^ and it must be a case wJiere 
 the State is nominally a party, and substantially af- 
 fected, i* a party to the record, ^^ or if it has a direct 
 interest in the controversy, is where disjDutes and contro- 
 versies arise between the respective States, ^'^ as on ques- 
 tions of boundaries. 1*^ A State may bring an original suit 
 against a citizen of another State, but not against one of 
 her own, 13 thoagh a State maybe authorized to sue in the 
 inferior courts.^*-' Where the State is a party, it may be 
 represented by the governor.^i The Supreme Court has 
 no jurisdiction in a case where a State is enforcing its 
 penal laws,-^ nor in a proceeding by an alien against a 
 citizen. 23 
 
 1 Pennsylvania v. Quicksilver Co. 10 Wall. 553; Delafield v. State, 2 
 Hill, 159. 
 
 2 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Crancli. 137; Ex parte Vallandigham, 1 
 Wall. 252; Ex parte Yerger, 8 Wall. 98. 
 
 3 Matt, of Metzger, 5 How. 176; In re Kaine, 14 How. 103; 3 Blatchf. 1. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Ortega, 11 Wheat. 467; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; 
 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137; Osborn v. Bank of U. S. J) Wheat. 
 738. But see U. S. v. Ravara, 2 Dall. 2,97; Chishohn v. Georgia, 2 Dall, 
 419; The Exchange v. McFaddin, 7 Cranch, 116. 
 
 5 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 733. 
 
 6 Khode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Peters, 657. 
 
 7 Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 1 ; State v. Stanton, 6 Wall. 50. 
 
 8 Florida v. Georgia, 17 How. 478. 
 
 9 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264; 
 Osborn v. Bank of U. S. 9 Wheat. 738: Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 419; 
 S.hode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Peters, 657. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Ravara, 2 Dall. 297; St. Luke's Hospital v. Barclay, 3 
 Blatchf. 259; Graham v. Stucken, 4 Blatchf. 60; Gittings v. Crawford, 
 Taney, 1. But see Davis v. Packard, 6 Peters, 41; Mannhardti;. Sou- 
 derstrom, 1 Binn. 138; Griffin v. Dominguez, 2 Duer, 656; Common- 
 wealth V. Kosloff, 5 Serg. & R. 545. 
 
 11 Commonwealth v. Kosloff, 5 Serg. & R. 545. 
 
 12 U. S. V. Ortega, 11 Wheat. 467. 
 
 13 Cohensw. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
§§S JURISDICTION. Art. Ill, § 2 
 
 14 Fowler v. Lindsey, 3 Dall. 411 ; New Jersey v. New York, 5 Peters, 
 287; Cherokee Na. v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 1; Ex parte Madrazo, 7 Peters, 
 627; Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Peters, 657; Pennsylvania v. 
 Whefeling &c. Br. 18 How. 421. 
 
 15 Bank of U. S. v. Planters' Bank, 9 Wheat. 904. 
 
 16 Pennsylvania v. Wheeling &c. Br. 9 How. 647; 13 How. 518. 
 
 17 Chancely v. Bailey, 37 Ga. 532. 
 
 .18 Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 Peters, 657; Florida v. Georgia, 
 17 How. 478; Virginia v. West Virginia, 11 Wall. 39; New York v. Cou- 
 nfecticut, 4 Dall. 1. 
 
 19 Pennsylvania v. Quicksilver Co. 10 Wall. 553; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 
 Wheat. 264. 
 
 20 State V. Atkins, 35 Ga. 315. Contra, State v. Trustees, 5 Bank Reg. 
 466; 1 Hughes, 133. 
 
 21 Kentucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 63. 
 
 22 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
 23 Ex parte Barry, 2 How, 65. 
 
 Appellate jurisdiction.— In every case to which the 
 judicial power extends, and in which original jurisdiction 
 is not given, the Supreme Court may exercise its appellate 
 jurisdiction.! Where original jurisdiction is founded on 
 the character of the parties, the judicial i3ower cannot he 
 exercised in its appellate form ; '^ but where it is founded 
 on the nature of tlie controversy the appellate jurisdic- 
 tion attaches.3 The essential criterion of appellate juris- 
 diction is, that it raises and corrects proceedings in a 
 cause alread;^ instituted. * In prize cases the Supreme 
 Court can exercise appellate jurisdiction only.s The ap- 
 pellate power is not limited to any particular courts. ^ It 
 may be exercised over territorial courts, "J" but not without 
 legislation by Congress, ^ or over State courts on questions 
 involving the constitutionality of legal enactments. ^ But 
 it cannot exercise appellate jurisdiction over the Court of 
 Claims,io nor can Congress grant appellate jurisdiction on 
 the inferior courts from the decisions of the State courts, ii 
 The principle on which appellate jurisdiction from State 
 courts is allowed is to grant efficient and just means of 
 self-protection. 1=^ The Supreme Court jurisdiction over 
 inferior courts is strictly appellate.i^ The jurisdiction on 
 appeal must be conferred by Congress,^'* with such excep- 
 tions and under such regulations as Congress may make,^^ 
 and the action of Congress excludes State legislation, i^ 
 All appellate jurisdiction must be exercised in pursuance 
 of positive statutes fully within constitutional grants. i7 
 The power of the Supreme Court to issue a mandamus is 
 in the exercise of an appellate jurisdiction only. is So as 
 to the writ of habeas corpus.^^ The power to award this 
 writ by any court of the United States must be given by 
 
Art. Ill, § 2 JTTRISDICTION. 226 
 
 law. 20 It exists in all cases of commitment by the judi- 
 cial authority of the United States not expressly excepted 
 by Congress.^ ' It is only when the proceedings below are 
 entirely void that relief may be given on review by habeas 
 corpus.^'^ The repeal of an act authorizing appeal in cases 
 of habeas corpus does not aifect the jurisdiction anteced- 
 ently exercised. 23 An enactment of the Confederate 
 States enforced as a law of one of the States composing 
 the Confederacy is a statute of such State, as to the juris- 
 diction of the supreme court over judgments and decrees 
 in State courts.'-^* 
 
 1 Cohens i;. Virginia, 6 Wtieat. 264; Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 
 137; Ex parte Vallancligliam, 1 Wall. 252; Ex parte Yerger, 8 Wall. 98; 
 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304. 
 
 2 Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738. 
 
 3 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
 4 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137. 
 
 5 TheAlicia, 7 Wall. 571. 
 
 6 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304 ; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264; 
 Dodge V. Woolsey, 18 How. 331; Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 506; 3 Wis. 
 1; Ferris v. Coover, 11 Cal. 176; Piqua Bankt;. Knoup,6 Ohio St. 342; 16 
 How. 369. 
 
 7 Benner v. Porter, 9 How. 244 ; Hunt v. Palao, 4 How. 589; Freeborn 
 V. Smith, 2 Wall. 173. 
 
 8 McNulty V. Batty, 10 How. 79. 
 
 9 Bridge Prop. v. Hoboken &c. Co. 1 Wall. 116; Furman v. Nichol, 8 
 Wall. 57; TDelmas v. Ins. Co. 14 Wall. 667; Home Ins. Co. v. Augusta, 93 
 U. S. 116; Ferris v. Coover, 11 Cal. 176. But see Johnson v. Gordon, 4 
 Cal. 368. 
 
 10 Gordon v. U. S. 2 Wall. 561. 
 
 11 Patrie v. Murray, 43 Barb. 323 ; Wetherbee v. Johnson, 14 Mass. 412. 
 
 12 Scott V. Jones, 5 How. 343. 
 
 13 Gaines?;.Relf, 15 Peters, 17. 
 
 14 Barry v. Mercein, 5 How. 119; Ex parte McCardle, 7 Wall. 506; U. 
 S. V. New Bedford Br. 1 Wood. & M. 437 ; Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 
 Johns. 507 ; Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137; Ex parte Bollman, 4 
 Cranch, 75; U. S. v. Hamilton, 3 Dall. 17; Ex parte Kearney, 7 Wheat. 
 38; Weston ?;. Charleston, 2 Peters, 449; Ex parte Crane, 5 Peters, 190. 
 
 15 Scott V. Jones, 5 How. 374; Ex parte McCardle, 7 Wall. 506; Ex 
 parte Yerger, 8 Wall. 93 ; Darousseau v. U. S. 6 Cranch, 313; Ex parte 
 Vallandigbam, 1 Wall. 252; U. S.v. Moore, 3 Cranch, 159; Murdock v. 
 Memphis, 20 Wall. 590; Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304. 
 
 16 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; Prigg v. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 
 539. 
 
 17 Wixartv. Dauchy, 3 Dall. 321; Clarke ». Bazadone, 1 Cranch, 212; 
 D. S. V. Moore, 3 Cranch, 159 ; Darousseau v. U. S. 6 Cranch, 307; Ex 
 parte Kearney, 7 Wheat. 38; Ex parte Watkins, 3 Peters, 193. 
 
 18 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137; Ex parte Yerger, 8 Wall. 97. 
 
 19 Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75. 
 
 20 Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75. 
 
 21 Kane's Case, 14 How. 103; Ex parte Yerger, 8 Wall. 99. 
 
227 JURISDICTION. Art. Ill, § 2 
 
 22 Ex parte Parks, 93 IT. S. 18. 
 
 23 Ex parte McCardle, 7 Wall. 506. 
 
 24 Ford v. Surget, 97 U. S. 594; Williams v. Bruffy, 96 U. S. 176. 
 
 3 The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, 
 shall he hy jury; and such trial shall be held in the State 
 where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when 
 not committed loithin any State, the trial shall be at such 
 place or places as the Congress may by law have directed. 
 
 Trial for crimes. — This applies to proceedings in 
 Federal courts, i and is not suspended by tlie intervention 
 of war.2 A citizen in civil life in nowise connected with 
 military service cannot be tried by a military commission 
 where courts are open to hear criminal accusations and 
 redress grievances. ^ As soon as it judicially appears of 
 record that the party lias pleaded not guilty, an issue has 
 arisen which courts are bound to direct to be tried by a 
 jury .4 The trial is the examination before a competent 
 tribunal, according to the law of the land.^ Congress 
 must first make an act a crime, affix the penalty, and 
 declare the court having jurisdiction ;6 and any law dis- 
 pensing with the requisites to constitute a jury is uncon- 
 stitutional.'^ A crime committed against the laws of the 
 United States out of the limits of a State is not local, but 
 may be tried at such place as Congress shall designate by 
 law. 8 A statute which i^rovides that a party may be tried 
 by the court on a charge of libel is void, although it gives 
 him a right of appeal to a court where trial may be had 
 by jury.y A statute to confiscate the property of a person 
 engaged in rebellion, in any district in which property 
 may be found, is void.^o A proceeding to annul the 
 license of a pilot for neglect of duty is not a criminal 
 proceeding.il 
 
 1 Murphy v. People, 2 Cow. 815 ; Anderson v. Durin, 6 Wheat. 215. 
 See Amend. Arts. IV, V, VI. 
 
 2 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 123. 
 
 3 Ex parte MlUigan, 4 Wall. 123. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Gilbert, 2 Sum. 10. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Curtis, 4 Mason, 232. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Hudson, 7 Cranch, 32; U. S. v. Coolidge, 1 Wheat. 415. 
 
 7 Work V. State, 2 Ohio St. 296; State v. Cox, 3 English, 436. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Dawson, 15 How. 467. And see Anderson v. Dimn, 6 
 Wheat. 215. 
 
 9 Ex parte Dana, 7 Ben. 1. 
 
 10 Norris v. Domisshan, 4 Met. (Ky.) 346. 
 
 11 Low V. Commissioners, K. M. Charlt. 302. 
 
Art. Ill, § 3 TREASON. 228 
 
 Section 3. 
 Treason. 
 
 1. Definition and evidence of. 
 
 2. Punishment of. 
 
 Sec 3. 1 Treason against the United States shall consist 
 only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their 
 enemies, giving them aid and cornfort. No person shall he 
 convicted of treason unless on the testimony of tioo loitnesses 
 to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. 
 
 Treason. — The elements whicli constitute treason are : 
 A combination or conspiracy by which several are united 
 in one common purpose ;i the purpose must be to prevent 
 the execution of some public law,'-^ and actual force must 
 "be employed by such combination 3 to overthrow the Gov- 
 ernment or coerce its conduct.* It is the breach of alle- 
 giance, either perpetual or temporary. ^ So, war levied 
 under the pretended authority of the Confederate States 
 is treason. f5 The occupation of a fortress by men in mili- 
 tary array to detain it, is treason ;' the offense is com- 
 plete when force is directed to overthrow only certain 
 portions of the country. 8 The delivery of a prisoner to 
 an enemy is treason. ^ When an armed body is mustered 
 in military array for a treasonable purpose, every step 
 taken by any of them is an overt act.^*^ Though no man 
 can be convicted of treason who was not present when 
 war was levied, ii yet the crime may be committed by 
 those not personally present, if they are leagued with the 
 conspirators and perform any part,i'^ but the overt act and 
 the intention must concur to constitate the crime, i3 The 
 only compulsion which will excuse one marching with 
 rebels is force on the person and present fear of death. ^^ 
 The crime of treason is not to be extended by construc- 
 tion, i^ The conspiracy to levy war and actual levying of 
 war are distinct offenses. 1° So, resistance to the execu- 
 tion of a law must be of a political and not of a private 
 nature. 1"^ The mere enlistment of men who are not as- 
 sembled is not a levying of war. is Enemies refer to sub- 
 jects of a foreign power, and not to citizens of a State in 
 rebellion, 19 If a party, being with a squadron, comes 
 peaceably to the shore to procure provisions, it does not 
 constitute an overt act, 20 That two witnesses are required 
 refers to the proof on the trial, and not to isroceedings 
 before the grand jury, or to preliminary investigations. ^1 
 , 1 Inre BoUman, 4 Cranch, 75; Druecker v. Salomon, 21 Wis, 621. 
 
 2 Druecker v . Salomon, 21 Wis. 621. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Burr, 9 Wheat. 529; 2 Cranch C. C. 379; U. S. v. Mitchell, 2 
 Dall. 348; U. S. v. Hanway, 2 Wall. J. 139; U. S. v. Hoxie, 1 Paine, 265; 
 U. S. V. Fries, 2 Whart. St. Tr, 482; 3 Pall, 515, 
 
229 TREASON. Art. Ill, § 3 
 
 4 U. S. V. Greathouse, 2 Abb. U. S. 364. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Wiltberger, 5 Wheat. 76; 3 Wash. C. C. 515. 
 
 6 Shortridge v. Macon, Chase, 136. 
 
 7 U. S. V. Greiner, 4 Phila. 396. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Greathouse, 2 Abb. U. S. 364. 
 
 9 U. S. Z7. Hodges, 2 Wheel. C. C. 477. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Greiner, 4 Phila. 396. 
 
 11 U. S. V. Burr, 4 Cranch, 469; 2 Bun-'s Tri. 401 ; U. S. v. Wiltberger, 5 
 Wheat. 76; 3 Wash. C. C. 515. 
 
 12 In re Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75 ; U. S. r. Burr, 4 Cranch, 469 ; Druecker 
 V. Salomon, 21 Wis. 621. 
 
 13 U. S. V. Fries, 3 Dall. 515; U. S. v. Hodges, 2 Wheel. C. C. 477; U. 
 S. V. Burr, 4 Cranch, 469. 
 
 14 U. S. V. Greiner, 4 Phila. 396; U. S. v. Hodges, 2 Wheel. C. C. 477. 
 
 15 In re Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75. 
 
 16 In re Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75; U. S. v. Mitchell, 2 Dall. 34S. 
 
 17 U. S. V. Hanway, 2 Wall. Jr. 139: U. S. v. Hoxie, 1 Paine, 265; U. S. 
 V. Fries, 3 DaU. 515. 
 
 18 Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch, 75; U. S. v. Burr, 4 Cranch, 469; U. S. 
 V. Hanway, 3 Wall. Jr. 140; People v. Lynch, 1 Johns. 553. 
 
 19 U. S. V. Greathouse, 2 Abb. U. S. 364; U. S. v. Cheneweth, 4 West 
 L. Mo. 165. 
 
 20 U. S. V. Pryor, 3 Wash. C. C. 334. 
 
 21 U. S. V. Hanway, 2 Wall. Jr. 138; U. S. u. Burr,4 Cranch, 469; I 
 Burr. Tri. 196; U. S. v. Greiner, 4 Phila. 396. But see U. S. v. Fries, 2 
 Whart. St. Tr. 480. 
 
 2 The Congress shall hate power to declare the punishment 
 of treason, hut no attainder of treason shall loork corruption 
 of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person at^ 
 tainted. 
 
 Punishment. — Power to punish for treason against tlie 
 United States is exclusive in Congress. ^ The confisca- 
 tion act provided against any forfeiture of real estate be- 
 yond the life of the offender.^ All that can be sold under 
 the confiscation act is the right to the property terminating 
 with the life of the person for whose offense it had been 
 seized. 3 Only the life estate is subject to condemnation 
 and sale. 4 This act is a mere exercise of the war iDower: 
 not a criminal procedure.^ This provision does not ap- 
 ply to the confiscation of enemies' property, even though 
 guilty of treason. 
 
 1 People V. Lynch, 11 Johns. 553. ■ 
 
 2 Bigelow i>. Forrest, 9 Wall. 350. 
 
 3 Bigelow V. Forrest, 9 Wall. 339. 
 
 4 Day v. Micon, 13 Wall. 156. 
 
 5 Miller v. U. S. 11 Wall. 304. 
 
 6 Confiscation Cases, 1 Woods, 221. 
 
 Desty Fed. Coif.— SO. 
 
Art. IV, § 1 STATE RIGHTS. 230 
 
 ARTICLE lY. 
 
 STATE EIGHTS. 
 
 Section l. 
 
 Acts and official records of States. Authentication and effect of. 
 
 Sec. 1. 1 Full faith and credit shall be given in each State 
 to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every 
 other State. And the Congress 7nay by general laios prescribe 
 the manner in ivhich such acts, records, and proceedings shall 
 be proved, and the effect thereof. 
 
 Faith and credit. — These terms point to the attributes 
 and qualities which judicial proceedings and records shall 
 have as evidence. i Records are all acts legislative, exec- 
 utive, judicial, and ministerial, which constitute the 
 public records of the State, ^ and the object of the section 
 is to declare that full faith and credit should be given to 
 such, the manner of authenticating the same, and their 
 effect when properly authenticated ; ^ and to this end Con- 
 gress has full power to legislate as to the effect of judicial 
 proceedings in the courts of the States and Territories. * 
 Legislative acts are to be authenticated by the seal of the 
 State,5 which imports absolute verity. *5 The object of this 
 clause was to preclude judgments from being disregarded 
 in other States, when a proper tribunal with compe<;ent 
 jurisdiction had rendered them," but only so far as they 
 have jurisdiction, 8 the record being subject to contradic- 
 tion as to facts necessary to give jurisdiction, ^ as where 
 judgment was rendered against a citizen of another State 
 not served with process, and who did not voluntarily 
 appear. 10 The Constitution has effected no change in the 
 nature of a judgment, ii it simply places judgments in 
 another State on a different footing from what are com- 
 monly called foreign judgments, as to their force and 
 effect. 12 A judgment in any State is to be regarded as a 
 domestic judgment,!^ but this clause relates only to judg-- 
 ments in civil actions, and not to judgments in criminal 
 prosecutions,!* nor to decrees in divorce. i^ 
 
 1 McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters, 312; Carter v. Bennett, 6 Fla. 214; 
 Joice V. Scales, 18 Ga. 725; Brengle v. McClellan, 7 Gill & J. 434; Sheltou 
 V. Johnson, 4 Sneed, 672; Wilson v. Robertson, 1 Tenn. 464. 
 
 2 White V. Burnley, 20 How. 250; McGrew v. Watrous, 16 Tex. 509. 
 
231 STATE RIGHTS. Art. IV, § 1 
 
 3 Green v. Sarmiento, 1 Peters C. C. 74; 3 Wash. C. C. 17. 
 
 4 Hughes V. Davis, 8 Md. 271 ; Duvall v. Fearson, 18 McI. 502. But see 
 Adams V. Way, 33 Conn. 419; Haggin v. Squires, 2 Bibb, 334; Seton v. 
 Hauham, E. M. Cbarlt. 374. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Johns, 4 Dall. 412; 1 Wash. C. C. 363; Craig v. Brown, 
 Peters C. C. 354. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Johns, 4 Dall. 416; 1 Wash. C. C. 364; U. S. v. Amedy, 11 
 Wheat. 407. 
 
 7 People V. Dawell, 25 Mich. 247. 
 
 8 D'Arcy v. Ketchum, 11 How. 165; Board of Pub. Wks. v. Columbia 
 College, 17 Wend. 521. 
 
 9 Thompson v. Whitman, 18 Wall. 457; Pennywit v. Foote, 27 Ohio 
 St. 600. 
 
 10 D'Arcy v. Ketchum, 11 How. 165. 
 
 11 McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters, 312. 
 
 12 Oldens v. Hallet, 3 N. J. 466; Gibbons v. Livingston. 6 Ibid. 236; 
 Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1. 
 
 13 Baxley v. Dinah, 27 Pa. St. 247. 
 
 14 Commonwealth v. Green, 17 Mass. 514. 
 
 15 Hood V. StAte, 53 Ind. 263 ; Sewall v. Sewall, 122 Mass. 156. 
 
 EJBFect of judgments. — The judgment of a State court 
 has the same validity, credit, and effect in any State that 
 it has in the State where rendered,i and where juris- 
 diction attaches it is conclusive as to the merits ;2 but no 
 greater effect can be given than is given in the State where 
 rendered. 3 If a decree is enforceable in the State where 
 rendered, it is enforceable in any other State. ^ The clause 
 does not give validity to a void decree. ^ The records and 
 judicial proceedings to which full faith and credit are to 
 be given are only such as are duly rendered by a compe- 
 tent court, having full jurisdiction, o without reference to 
 whether they be superior courts of record or inferior tri- 
 bunals. 'i' The legislature of a State has the constitutional 
 power to require a less amount of proof than is required 
 by the act of Congress.^ A judgment can only be contro- 
 verted on the ground of want of jurisdiction.^ The pro- 
 vision in this section is binding on the States, ^o 
 
 1 Westervelt v. Lewis, 2 McLean, 511; Warren Manuf. Co. v. ^tna 
 Ins. Co. 2 Paine, 502; Hampton v. McConnell, 3 Wheat. 234; Mayhew v. 
 Tliatcher, 6 Wheat. 129; Sarchet v. The Davis, Crabbe, 185; Houston v. 
 Dunn, 13 Tex. 480; Benton v. Bergot. 10 Serg. & R. 242; Green v. Sar- 
 miento, 3 Wash. 0. 0. 17; Bank of Ala. v. Dalton, 9 How. 520; MiUs v. 
 Duryee, 7 Cranch, 484; Whitwell v. Barbier, 7 Cal. 54. 
 
 2 McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters, 312; Christmas v. Russell, 5 Wall. 
 302 ; U. S. Bank v. Merchants' Bank, 7 GIIL 430; Bissell r. Briggs, 9 Mass. 
 482; Ingram w. Droukard, 14 Tex. 352. 
 
 3 Public Works v. Columbia College, 17 Wall. 529; Suydam v. Barber, 
 18 N. Y. 468. 
 
 4 Caldwell v. Carrington, 9 Peters, 86. 
 
Art. IV, § 1 STATE RIGHTS. 232 
 
 5 Ogden V. Saunders, 12 "Wheat. 213 ; Vanuxem v. Hazlehursts, 4 N. J. 
 192. And see Mitchell v. Lenox, 14 Peters, 49. 
 
 G Aldrich v. Kenney, 4 Conn. 3S0; Bissell v. Briggs, 9 Mass. 462. 
 
 1 Taylor v. Barron, 30 N. H. 78 ; Silver Lake Bank v. Harding, 5 Ohio, 
 545; Pelton v. Platner, 13 Ohio, 209. 
 
 8 Whitwell v. Barbier, 7 Cal. 54. 
 
 9 Price V. Ward, 1 Dutch. 225; Smith v. Smith, 17 111. 482; Black 
 V. Black, 4 Brad. 174; Keed v. Wright, 2 Iowa. 15; McLaurine v. Monroe, 
 30 Mo. 4(j2; Wright v. Boynton, 37 N. H. 9; Judkins v. Union L. Ins. Co. 
 Ibid. 470; Eape v. Heaton, 9 Wis. 328. 
 
 10 Livestock &c. Asso. v. Crescent City, 1 Abb. U. S. 396. 
 
 Power of Congress. — The authenticity of a judgment 
 and its effect depend upon the law made in pursuance of 
 the Constitution/^ which declares that Congress may mark 
 out the effect and define the general power given, ^ and to 
 give a conclusive effect to judgments in State courts. s The 
 Constitution does not confer the power to give to a judg- 
 ment all the legal properties, rights, and attributes to 
 Avhich it is entitled by the laws of the State where ren- 
 dered, ^ nor that the effects and consequences of a litiga- 
 tion shall follow it into other States,^ nor to extend the 
 local jurisdiction, or the operation of a local decree ;<5 so 
 as to judgments in insolvency proceedings." So, a dis- 
 charge from imprisonment for debt in one State will not 
 prevent an arrest under the laws of another State. 8 So, 
 the probate of a will, being but a decree in rem, is confined 
 in its operation to things within the State ; o but the record 
 in x^roceedings in bankrujjtcy is comi^etent evidence, i*^ 
 The record of a judgment certified according to law is ad- 
 naissible in evidence in any State ; but the legislature of 
 a State has power to require a less amount of proof, ii 
 So, a State may giv^e the judgment of anotlier State any 
 effect it may think proper, so that it does not derogate 
 from the effect secured by the Constitution and the acts 
 of Congress. -^^ Thus, the law of a State may fix different 
 times for barring the remedy in a suit upon a judgment of 
 another State. ^^ -Q^xt where full faith and credit is not 
 given to judicial jiroceedings of another State, the judg- 
 ment based thereon will be erroneous.^* 
 
 1 McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters, 312. 
 
 2 Curtis V. Gibbs, 1 Pen. (N. J.) 405. 
 
 3 Mills V. Duryee, 7 Cranch, 481 ; McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters, 312; 
 Warren Manuf. Co. v. Etna Ins. Co. 2 Paine, 501; Green v. Savmiento, 1 
 Peters C. C. 74; 3 Wash. C. C. 17. 
 
 4 Brengle v. McClellan, 7 Gill & J. 434. 
 
 5 Shelton v. Johnson, 4 Sneed, G72. 
 
 6 Bowen v. Johnson, 5 R. 1. 112. 
 
233 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. Art IV, § 2 
 
 7 McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters, 312; Brengle v. McClellan, 7 Gill & 
 J. 434; Cameron v. Wurtz, 4 McCoixl, 278; Harness v. Green, 20 Mo. 316; 
 Colt's Estate, 4 Watts & S. 314. 
 
 8 Joico V. Scales, 18 Ga. 725. 
 
 9 Darby v. Mayer, 10 Wheat. 465. 
 
 10 Carr v. Gale, 3 Wood. & M. 60. 
 
 11 Parke v. Williams, 7 Cal. 247 ; Whitwell v. Barbier, 7 Cal. 54. 
 
 12 Bissell V. Briggs, 9 Mass. 462. 
 
 13 McElmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Peters, 312 ; Bacon v. Howard, 20 How. 22; 
 Robinson f. Peyton, 4 Tex. 276. 
 
 14 Green v. Van Buskirk. 7 Wall. 139. 
 
 Section 2. 
 Frivilerfes and itnmunities of citizens. 
 
 1. Entitled to same alike in every State. 
 
 2. Fugitives from justice. 
 
 3. Fugitives from servitude. 
 
 Sec. 2. ^ The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all 
 privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States. 
 
 Citizens. — The word "citizens" means citizens of tlie 
 United States. l It imports the same as the word "free- 
 men," and includes every jDerson who, by birth or natu- 
 ralization, is or may be qualified to exercise and enjoy all 
 the rights which a native-born inhabitant does or can 
 enjoy. ^ Citizens are all white inhabitants who, born in 
 the colonies, adhered to the cause of independence up to 
 July, 177G.3 When Congress receives a foreign nation 
 into the Union, its citizens become citizens of the United 
 States.^ So, all free inliabitants of Texas at the time of 
 its annexation, 5 and all inhabitants under the Treaty of 
 Florida, 6 and all inhabitants of California by the treaty, 
 who remained and adliered to the United States, became 
 citizens.'' A citizen of the United States is a citizen of 
 the State where he resides. § So, a free colored person 
 might be a citizen of the United States.'-^ The guaranty 
 applies to people of the United States, whether in the 
 States or Territories.!'^ The term applies only to natural 
 persons, members of the body politic owing allegiance 
 to the State, and not to corporations. ^i Birth and alle- 
 giance go together, except in case of the child of an am- 
 bassador. i^ As to the Indian tribes, a child of a member 
 thereof, though bom iu the United States, is not a citi- 
 zen. i3 
 
 1 Davis V. Pierce, 7 Minn. 13. 
 
 2 Douglass V. Stephens, 1 Del. Ch. 465; Slaughter-House Cases, 16 
 Wall. 129. 
 
Art. IV, § 2 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZKNS. 234 
 
 3 Orr V. Hodgson, 4 "Wheat. 453; Dawson v. Godfrey, 4 Cranch, 321; 
 Fairfax v. Hunter, 7 Crancli, 603; Inglis v. Sailors' Snug Harb. 3 Peters, 
 99; U. S.v. Ritchie, 17 How. 538; Orson v. Hoag, 3 Hill, 80; Kelly v. 
 Harrison, 20 Johns. Cas. 29; Jackson v. White, 20 Johns. 313; Snanks v. 
 Dupont, 3 Peters, 242. 
 
 4 Sahariego v. McKenney, 18 How. 240 ; Cryer v. Andrews, 11 Tex. 105. 
 
 5 Calkins v. Cocke, 14 How. 227. 
 
 6 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511; U. S. v. Gratiot, 4 Peters, 
 526; Cross v. Harrison, 16 How. 189. 
 
 7 Sahariego v. McKenney, 18 How. 289; U. S. v. Richie, 17 How. 538. 
 
 8 Gassies v. Ballon, 6 Peters, 761 ; Smith v. Moody, 26 Ind. 299. 
 
 9 Smith V. Moody, 26 Ind. 305. Contra, Pendleton v. Arkansas, 6 
 Ark. 509; Hickland v. Indiana, 8 Blackf. 365; Indiana v. Cooper, 5 
 Blackf. 253; Baptiste v. Indiana, Ibid. 283; Shaw v. Brown, 35 Miss. 246; 
 Amy V. Smith, 1 Litt. 326. But see 2^ost, Amendment XIV, sec. 1, and 
 note. 
 
 10 Anonj'mous, 6 Op. Att.-Gen. 304. 
 
 11 Bank of U. S. v. Devaux, 5 Cranch, 61; Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 
 13 Peters, 586; Slocomb v. Bank of Vicksburg, 14 Peters, 60; Louisville 
 K. E. Co. V. Letson, 2 How. 556; Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall. 180; Warren 
 Manuf. Co. v. Etna Ins. Co. 2 Paine, 502. And see Liverpool Ins. Co. v. 
 Massachusetts, 10 Wall. 566: Pensacola Tel. Co. v. West. U. T. Co. 96 
 U.S.I; People v. Imlay, 20 Barb. 68; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Common- 
 wealth, 5 Bush, 68; Slaughter v. Commonwealth, 13 Gratt. 767; Ducat 
 P.Chicago, 10 Wall. 410; 48 111. 172; Louisiana v. Latlirop, 10 La. An. 
 398; Commonwealth v. Milton, 12 B. Mon. 212; Patern v. Wright, 23 N. 
 J. 429; West. U. T. Co, v. Mayer, 28 Ohio St. 521; Fire Dep. v. Helfen- 
 stein, 16 Wis. 142. 
 
 12 Inglis V. Sailors' Snug Harbor, 3 Peters. 99; U. S. v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. 
 XJ. S. 40; Lynch v. Clarke, 1 Sand. Ch. 583; McKay v. Campbell, 2 Sawy. 
 122. 
 
 13 McKay v. Campbell, 2 Sawy. 122. 
 
 Privileges and immunities.— These expressions are 
 confined to those j)rivileg;es and immunities which are in 
 their nature fundamental, ^ such as protection hy the Gov- 
 ernment; tlie enjoyment of life and liberty; the right to 
 acquire and possess property, and to pursue and obtain 
 happiness and safety, subject to such restraints as the 
 Government may justly prescribe for the general good;'^ 
 the right to pursue a lawful employment in a lawful man- 
 ner,3 and to be exempt from any higher taxes or excises 
 than those imposed on its own citizens ;4 such privileges 
 and immunities as belong to general citizenship,^ includ- 
 ing the right to pass freely into and through any State for 
 the purposes of commerce, trade, residence, etc.,6 the 
 meaning being that no privilege or immunity allowed to 
 the most favored class shall be withheld from citizens of 
 another State," such rights to be determined in view of the 
 particular rights asserted or denied, s It does not embrace 
 privileges conferred by the local laws of a State,o as the 
 rights of representation and election, ^o or a right peculiar 
 
235 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. Art. IV, § 2 
 
 to some individual or body.n The right to institute 
 actions is one of the privileges and immunities of citizens 
 of each State ;i'-^ so, the right to sue out an attachment 
 in another State ; 13 so, a citizen of one State may sue a 
 foreigner in another State. ^^ Congress cannot grant j)riv- 
 ileges to citizens of one State over those of another, and 
 cannot give a State the power to do so.i^ The right to sell 
 liquor is not a privilege or immunity of citizenship,-" 
 nor the right to practice a profession. i''' One may be a 
 citizen without having all the privileges and immunities 
 of citizenship. IS 
 
 1 Corfleld v. Coryell, 4 Wash. C. C. 380. 
 
 2 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 76 ; Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall. 430; 
 Corfleld v. Coryell, 4 Wash. C. C. 371; Bennett v. Boggs, Bald. 60; Com- 
 monwealth V. Milton, 12 B. Mon. 212 ; Campbell v. Morris, 3 Har. & McH. 
 535; Ward v. Morris, 4 Ibid. 330; State v. Medbury, 3 R. I. 142; Live 
 Stock Co. V. Crescent City, 1 Abb. U. S. 398. 
 
 3 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 106. 
 
 4 Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall. 430; Wiley v. Parmer, 14 Ala. 627; 
 Oliver v. Washington Mills, 93 Mass. 268; Smith v. Moody, 26 Ind. 299. 
 
 5 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 580. 
 
 6 Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall. 430; Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 49; 
 Lemmon v. People, 20 N. Y. 607; 26 Barb. 270; Ex parte Archy, 9 Cal. 
 147; Willard v. People, 5 111. 461; Julia v. McKinney, 3 Mo. 270; State v. 
 Medbury, 3 R. 1. 142. 
 
 7 Tennessee v. Claiborne, 1 Meigs, 331. 
 
 8 Conner v. Elliott, 18 How. 593; Live Stock &c. Asso. v. Crescent 
 City &c. Co. 1 Ab,b. U. S. 397; Ex rel Hobbs, 1 Woods, 542. 
 
 9 Conner v. Elliott, 18 How. 593; Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall, 76; 
 1 Woods, 28; Live Stock &c. Asso. v. Crescent City &c. Co. 1 Abb. U. S. 
 397. 
 
 10 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 580; Murray v. McCarty, 2 Munf. 393; 
 Allen V. Sarah, 2 Har. 434; Smith v. Moody, 26 Ind. 299; Campbell v. 
 Morris, 3 Har. & McH. 535. 
 
 11 Ex parte Coupland, 26 Tex. 420. 
 
 12 Davis V. Peirse, 7 Minn. 13 ; McFarland v. Butler, 8 Ibid. 116 ; Jack- 
 son V. Butler, Ibid. 117; Morgan v. Neville, 74 Pa. St. 52; Reynolds v. 
 Geary, 26 Conn. 183. 
 
 13 Morgan v. Neville, 74 Pa. St. 52. But this right may be limited— 
 Kincaid v. Francis, Cooke, 49; Campbell v. Morris, 3 Har. & McH. 535. 
 
 14 Barren v. Benjamin, 15 Mass. 354. 
 
 15 Chapman v. Miller, 2 Spear, 769. 
 
 16 Bartemeyer v. Iowa, 18 Wall. 133; Harris v. State, 4 Tex. Ct. App. 
 131; Bertholf v. O'Rielly, 18 Am. L. R. N. S. 119; Wynehamer v. People, 
 13 N. Y. 378; Groversville v. Howell, 70 N. Y. 287; Slaughter-House 
 Cases, 16 Wall. 36; O'Dea v. State, 57 Ind. 119; Metrop. Bd. of Excise v. 
 Barrie, 34 N. Y. 657; Beer Co. v. Massachusetts, 97 U. S. 25. 
 
 17 Languille v. State, 4 Tex. Ct. App. 312 
 
 18 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 583, denying Amy v. Smith, 1 Litt. 326. 
 See post, Amendment XIV. 
 
Art. IV, § 2 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. 236 
 
 state rights. — The main object of tliis clause was to 
 prevent each State from discriminating in favor of its 
 own people, or against those of any other State. ^ Citi- 
 zens do not by this clause acquire any peculiar privileges 
 in another State, except upon the condition on which they 
 may be held or enjoyed by the citiz ens of such other 
 State; 2 and where the laws differ, a citizen of one State, 
 claiming rights in another, must claim according to the 
 laws of tliat State and not of his own.^ This clause does 
 not apply to oue who migrates to another State, the State in 
 which ho takes up his residence may determine his status; '^ 
 such person must be regarded as a citizen of the State. ^ 
 This clause does not exempt the citizens of another State 
 from any condition which the laws of the State impose on 
 its own citizens, G nor to interfere with the local policy of 
 State governments as to their own citizens." This clause 
 prohibits discrimination by one State against citizens of 
 another State; § but it is not intended to secure the citizens 
 of any State against discriminations made by their own 
 State in favor of citizens of other States, nor of one class 
 against another class of citizens of the same State. ^ So, 
 statutes of limitations discriminating as to residence are 
 not unconstitutional. '^'^ A State law imposing a discrim- 
 inating tax on non-resident traders is void,ii but the 
 property of anon-resident may be taxed equally with that 
 of a resident, i^ A tax on those who sell goods brought 
 into the State and not owned by residents is valid. ^^ A 
 license on the sale of goods by non-resident traders is 
 valid if there is no discrimination; i* so, a license required 
 to vend foreign merchandise is valid, i^ or for all articles 
 except those manufactured by themselves within the lim- 
 its of the State; 10 so, a State tax on articles manufactured 
 in the State is valid. ^"^ A State is not prohibited from reg- 
 ulating or restricting the business of a corporation created 
 by the laws of another State, •"■^ and may impose terms or 
 conditions on its right to carry on business within its ter- 
 ritory, i'-^ A State may impose reasonable conditions on a 
 foreign corporation for the privilege of doing business 
 within its limits.-'^ The provisions of this section do not 
 apply to corporations.'^! 
 
 1 Davis V. Pierce, 7 Minn. 13. 
 
 2 Paul V. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168; Kevnolds v. G-eary, 26 Conn. 179; 
 Commonwealths Milton, 12 B. Mon. 212; Lemmon t;. People, 5 Santlf. 
 631 ; 20 N. Y. 562 ; 26 Barb. 270 . 
 
 3 Lemmon v. People, 5 Sandf . 681 ; 20 N. Y. 562; 26 Barb. 270. 
 
 4 Groves t?. Slaughter, 15 Peters. 449; Strader v. Graham, 10 Ho vr; 
 82; Moore v. Illinois, 14 How. 13; New Y'ork v. Miln, 11 Peters, 102, 
 Ex parte Siimnons, 4 Wash. C. C. 396; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393. 
 Bradwell v. State, 16 Wall. 130. But see Abbot v. Bayiey, 23 Mass. 89. 
 
237 PKIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. Art. IV, § 2 
 
 5 Commonwealtli v. Towles, 5 Leigh, 743. 
 
 6 Paul V. Virginia, 8 "Wall. 180; Commonwealth v. Milton, 12 B. Mon. 
 212; Lemmon v. People, 20 N. Y. 607; 26 Barb. 270; Jackson v. Bullock, 
 12 Conn. 38. 
 
 7 Kincaid v. Francis, Cooke, 49. 
 
 8 Paul V. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168; Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall. 418; 
 Williams v. Bruffv, 96 U. S. 183; Corfield v. CoryeU, 4 Wash. C. C. 371; 
 Lemmon v. People, 20 N. Y. 608. 
 
 9 Commonwealth v. Griffin, 3 B. Mon. 208; Bradwell v. State, 16 
 Wall. 138. 
 
 10 Chemung Bank v. Lowery, 93 U. S. 77. 
 
 11 Ward V. Maryland, 12 Wall. 418; Wiley v. Parmer, 14 Ala. 627; 
 Osborne v. Mobile, 16 Wall. 482; Weltou v. Missouri, 55 Mo. 288; State v. 
 Browning, 62 Mo. 591. 
 
 12 Duer V. Small, 4 Blatchf . 263 ; Battle v. Corporation, 9 Ala. 234. 
 
 13 People V. Coleman, 4 Cal. 46. 
 
 14 Woodruff V. Parhatn, 8 Wall. 123; Hinson v. Lott, 8 Wall. 148; 
 Mount Pleasant v. Clutch, 6 Iowa, 546. 
 
 15 Sears v. Commissioners, 36 Ind. 267. 
 
 16 Seymour v. State, 51 Ala. 52. 
 
 17 Downing v. Alexandria Co. 10 Wall. 173. 
 
 18 PaulT. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168; Ducat v. Chicago, 10 Wall. 410 ; Liv- 
 erpool Ins. Co. V. Massachusets, 10 Wall. 567. 
 
 19 Lafayette Ins. Co. v. French, 18 How. 404; Ducat v. Chicago, 10 
 Wall. 410. 
 
 20 Ins. Co. V. Morse, 20 Wall. 457; Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 13 Pe- 
 ters, 519; Liverpool Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts, 10 Wall. 566; Louisiana 
 V. Lathrop, 10 La. An. 398; Doyle v. Continental Ins. Co. 94 U. S. 540; 
 In re Comstock, 11 Bank. Reg. 172; Lamb -y. Lamb, 6 Biss. 420; Hoff- 
 man i;. Banks, 41 Ind. 1 ; Rising Sun Ins. Co. v. Slaughter, 30 Ind. 520; 
 Wash. Co. M. Ins. Co. v. Hastings, 84 Mass. 398; Williams v. Cheney, 74 
 Mass. 206; PauU. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168; Ins Co. v. N. 0.1 Woods, 89; Ex 
 parte Robinson, 12 Nev. 263; Ex parte Cohn, 13 Nev. 424. 
 
 21 Warren Manuf . Co. v. Etna Ins. Co. 2 Paine, 516. 
 
 2 A person charged in any State loith treason, felony, or 
 other crime, loho shall flee from justice, and be found in 
 another State, shall, on demand of the executive authority of 
 the State from which he fled, he delivered up, to he removed 
 to the State having jurisdiction of the crime. 
 
 Fugitives from justice. — A fugitive from justice is 
 any person who commits a crime and withdraws himself 
 from the jurisdiction to avoid the punishment ;i or one 
 who secretly commits a crime and suddenly departs ;2 or 
 who commits a crime and leaves without waiting to be 
 tried ; ^ or who, conscious of being liable to prosecution, 
 leaves the State, or if admitted to bail forfeits the same 
 and again flees. ^ Treason, felony, or other crime embrace 
 every act made punishable by the laws of the State where 
 committed. 5 It is not necessary that the crime charged 
 
Art. rV, § 2 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. 238 
 
 should be an offense at common law, 6 it is enough if it is a 
 crime against the Stated and includes any act punishable 
 by law,*^ misdemeanors as well as treason. ^ The word 
 "crime" embraces every species of indictable offense, i" 
 and even an act which was not criminal at the time of the 
 adoption of the Constitution, but was made so by subse- 
 quent legislation.!^ Whether the act charged be a crime 
 is to be determined by the laws of the State from which 
 the accused has fled, although it may be no crime in the 
 State into which he has come. 12 A fugitive may be de- 
 tained and arrested until a formal requisition can be made 
 by the proper authority, is 
 
 1 Voorliees' Case, 32 N. J. 147. 
 
 2 Adams' Case, 7 Law Rep. 386. 
 
 3 Certain Fugitives, 24 Am. Jur. 226. 
 
 4 Ex parte Greenougli, 31 Vt. 279. 
 
 5 Kentucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 107 ; Comm. v. Green, 17 Mass. 515; 
 18 Alb. L. J. 207; Morton v. SMnner, 48 Md. 215; Burns' Case, 112 Mass. 
 410; Wright v. Deacon, 5 Serg. & R. 62; People v. Brady, 56 N. Y. 187; 
 Ex parte Claris, 9 Wend. 212; Ex parte Greenough, 31 Vt. 279. 
 
 6 InreFetter, 3Zab. 311. 
 
 7 Jolinson v. Riley, 13 Ga. 97; In re Clark, 9 "Wend. 221; Common- 
 wealtli V. Daniels, 6 Pa. L. J. 428; Hay ward's Case, 1 Am. L. J. 231. 
 
 8 Kentucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 99. 
 
 9 Kentucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 100. 
 
 10 Voorliees' Case, 32 N. J. 147. 
 
 11 Voorliees' Case, 32 N. J. 147 ; People v. Brady, 56 N. Y, 182 ; Ex parte 
 Hughes, Phill. (N. C.) 57. 
 
 12 Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 How. 103; Johnson v. Riley, 13 Ga. 133. 
 
 13 Gardner's Case, 2 Johns. 477;- Comm. v. Deacon, 10 Serg. & R. 135; 
 Dow's Case, 6 Har. 39; In re Fetter, 3 Zab. 311; State v. Buzine, 4 Har. 
 572; In re Clark, 9 Wend. 221; Goodhue's Case, 1 City H. Rec. 153. 
 
 Demand for surrender.— The demand and accom- 
 panying charge are conclusive as to the criminality of the 
 offense. 1 Where the indictment substantially charges a 
 criminal offense, the court will not go behind it, nor in- 
 quire into the circumstances.^ A copy of the indictment 
 authenticated by tlie governor is conclusive. ^ The pre- 
 cept is prima facie evidence for the protection of the 
 agent of the truth of the recitals. * The executive au- 
 thority of the State is not authorized to make demand 
 imless the party is charged in the regular course of judicial 
 proceedings, 5 The whole effect of the Constitution is to 
 confer on each member of theUnion a right to demand from 
 every other member a fugitive, and to make obligatory 
 the surrender which was before discretionary. ^ The right 
 to claim the surrender of a fugitive can be carried into 
 effect only through the medium of laws and the interven- 
 
239 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. Art. IV, § 2 
 
 tion of magistrates.''' The Constitution does not assume 
 to deal with the question before the proper executive de- 
 mand has been made, nor undertake, in the absence of 
 demand, to define the duties nor limit the authority of the 
 State within which the fugitive may be found. ^ 
 
 1 Johnson v. Riley, 13 Ga. 133; Kentucky v. Olilo, 24 How. 100; Es 
 parte Clark, 9 Wend. 212; People v. Brady, 56 N. Y. 182. 
 
 2 Taylor v. Taintor, 16 Wall. 366; 36 Conn. 242; Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 
 How. 66; Kingsbury's Case, 106 Mass. 223: Brown's Case, 112 Mass. 409; 
 Voorhees' Case, 32 N. J. 141 ; In re Clark, 9 Wend. 212 ; Johnson v. Riley, 
 13 Ga. 97; In re Greenough, 31 Vt. 279. 
 
 3 Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 How. 66; Taylor v. Taintor, 16 Wall. 366; 
 Johnson v. Riley, 13 Ga. 97; Brown's Case, 112 Mass. 409; People v. 
 Brady, 56 N. Y. 182; Voorhees' Case, 32 N. J. 141; Work v. Corrington, 
 34 Ohio St. 64; Clark's Case, 9 Wend. 212; In re Fetter, 3 Zab. 311. 
 
 4 Commonwealth v. Hall, 9 Gray, 267. 
 
 5 Kentucky v. Ohio, 24 How. 66. 
 
 6 In re Fetter, 23 N. J. 311. 
 
 7 Commonwealth v. Tracy, 46 Mass. 536. 
 
 8 Ex parte White, 49 Cal. 433; Ex parte Cuhreth, Ibid. 435; Com- 
 monwealth v. Tracy, 46 Mass. 536. 
 
 Surrender of fugitives.— The duty to surrender is 
 not one resting in discretion, it is obligatory on the States, i 
 So far as seeing that the case is a proper one, the governor 
 acts judicially.2 The governor or executive authority of 
 the State or Territory to which the fugitive has fled shall, 
 upon demand, deliver him up,^ and the State upon which 
 the demand is made cannot look behind the indictment or 
 affidavit in which the crime against the State is charged.* 
 The delivery up of fugitives from justice is not an ordi- 
 nary exercise of the police powers of the State. ^ The 
 States may pass laws auxiliary to the provisions of the 
 Constitution. *5 In case of a conflict of jurisdiction be- 
 tween two States, the surrender may be postponed.'^ A 
 law authorizing the arrest of a fugitive from justice be- 
 fore a demand for his surrender has been made, and his 
 detention for a reasonable time to afford an opportunity 
 for such demand, is not in conflict with this section. ^ 
 Congress has the power to vest in any national officer au- 
 thority to cause the arrest and to surrender the fugitive on 
 the proper requisition.^ A State law intended to aid in 
 the enforcement of the act of Congress relating to the sur- 
 render of fugitives is valid j^*^ so, a law requiring the 
 officer making the arrest to take the party before the 
 nearest judge for identification is valid; ^ so, a law which 
 makes it the duty of the executive to issue the warrant 
 upon a proper requisition is constitutional, i^ State courts 
 cannot control the executive discretion, nor compel the 
 
Art. IV, § 2 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. 240 
 
 surrender of a fugitive; but the executives having acted, 
 its discretion may be inquired into.i^ Foreign extradition 
 jurisdiction is purely political, and belongs to the Execu- 
 tive of the National Government.!'^ A State cannot reg- 
 ulate the surrender of fugitives from justice to foreign 
 countries, although no action has been taken by the Fed- 
 eral Government. 15 A law allowing fugitives from jus- 
 tice to be arrested and delivered up to the State having 
 jurisdiction, is not in conflict with this provision. i6 a 
 State may retain a fugitive from justice, although his 
 arrest was without legal authority. i'^ This provision is in 
 the nature of a treaty stipulation between the States, and 
 equally binding on each and all the ofScers thereof, even 
 in absence of congressional legislation, i^ 
 
 1 Kentucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 103 ; Taylor v. Taintor, 16 Wan. 370 ; 
 Johnston v. Kiley, 13 Ga. 135 ; Matter of Briscoe, 51 How. Pr. 422 ; State 
 V. ScMeiman, 4 Har. 577; State v. Buzine, Ibid. 572; Commonwealth v. 
 Green, 17 Mass. 547; Voorhees' Case, 32 N. J.- 145; In re Fetter, 3 Zab. 
 311; Work v. Carrington, 34 Ohio St. 64; Wyeth v. Richardson, 10 Gray, 
 240. 
 
 2 In re Greenough, 31 Vt. 279. 
 3. Burns' Case, 112 Mass. 409. 
 
 4 Johnston v. Riley, 13 Ga. 97: Voorhees' Case, 32 N. J. 145. 
 
 5 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540. 
 
 6 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540; Moore v. Illinois, 14 How. 21; 
 Matter of Romaine, 23 Cal. 585 ; Ex parte Cubreth, 49 Cal. 436 ; Ex parte 
 Rosenblat, 51 Cal. 285; Robinson v. Flanders. 29 Ind. 10; Ex parte 
 Smith, 3 McLean, 121; Comm. v. Hall, 75 Mass. 262; Comm. v. Tracy, 46 
 Mass. 536. 
 
 7 Hagan v. Lucas, 10 Peters, 400; Taylor v. Carryl, 20 How. 584; Tay- 
 lor V. Taintor, 16 Wall. 366; 36 Conn. 242; Ex parte Jenkins, 2 Am. L. R. 
 144; In re Briscoe, 51 How. Pr. 422; State v. Allen, 2 Humph. 258; In re 
 Troutman, 4 Zab. 604. 
 
 8 Ex parte Cubreth, 49 Cal. 436; Ex parte White, 49 Cal. 434; Dow's 
 Case, 6 Har. 39; State v. Buzine, 4 Har. 572; Goodhue's Case, 1 Wheel. 
 C. C. 427; 1 City Hall Rec. 153; Gardner's Case, 2 Johns. 477; Common- 
 wealth V. Wilson, Phila. 80; Commonwealth v. Deacon, 10 Serg. & R. 
 135; In re Fetter, 3 Zab. 311; People v. Schenck, 2 Johns. 479; People v. 
 Wright, 2 Caines, 213; Ex parte Heyward, 1 Sand. 701. 
 
 9 Voorhees' Case, 32 N. J. 145. 
 
 10 Commonwealth v. Hall, 75 Mass. 262. 
 
 11 Robinson v. Flanders, 29 Ind. 10. 
 
 12 Ex parte Smith, 3 McLean, 121. 
 
 13 Ex parte Manchester, 5 Cal. 237. 
 
 14 Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 540; In re Kaine, 14 How. 103; In re 
 Washburn, 4 Johns. Ch, 106; Commonwealth v. Green, 17 Mass. 546; 
 Commonwealth v. Deacon, 10 Serg. & R. 125 ; In re Fetter, 3 Zab. 311. 
 
 15 People V. Curtis, 50 N. Y. 321. See Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Peters, 
 540. 
 
 16 Ex parte White, 49 Cal. 434; Ex parte Culbreth, 49 Cal. 436. 
 
 17 New Jersey v. Noyes, 11 Ch. L. N. 9. 
 
 18 Ex parte Hibler, 43 Tex. 197. 
 
241 PRIVILEGES OF CITIZENS. Art. IV, § 2 
 
 3 JSFo person held to service or labor in one State, under the 
 laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of 
 any laio or regulation therein, he discharged from such serv- 
 ice or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party 
 to whom such service or labor may be due. 
 
 Fugitives from labor.— Congress has exclusive power 
 to legislate concerning fugitives from labor, i The act of 
 Congress in relation to the surrender of fugitives in the 
 Northwest Territory is constitutional.^ The Constitution 
 and laws do not confer, but secure, the right to reclaim. 3 
 The word "person" includes slaves,* and apprentices,^ 
 but it does not extend to a slave voluntarily carried by 
 his master into a free State.^ The words "in one State" 
 extend to the Territories, the District of Columbia, and 
 the Indian Territory."^ The words "shall be delivered 
 up" contemplate summary and informal proceedings. ^ 
 The Constitution recognizes the i")lenary and exclusive 
 power of States over the status of slaves within their terri- 
 tory, subject to the express limitation in case of fleeing 
 from service.9 
 
 1 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 539 ; Jones v. Vanzandt, 5 How. 
 215: 2 McLean, 612; In re Martin, 2 Paine, 348; In re Susan, 2 Wheel. 
 Cr. Cas. 594. 
 
 2 Jones V. Vanzandt, 5 How. 230; Johnson v. Tompkins, Bald. 571 •, 
 Hill V. Low, 4 Wash. C. C. 326; Glenn v. Hodges, 9 Johns. 67 ; Comm. v. 
 Aves, 18 Pick. 215; Jack v. Martin. 12 Wend. 311 ; Anonymous, 6 Op. Att. 
 Gen. 713; Wright v. Deacon, 5 Serg. & R. 62. 
 
 3 Ableman?;. Booth, 21 How. 526; 3 Wis. 1; Johnson v. Tompkins, 
 Bald. 571; The Fugitive Slave Law, 1 Blatchf. 635; Giltner v. Gorham, 
 4 McLean, 402; Sims' Case, 61 Mass. 285; Long's Case, 3 Am. Law J. 201; 
 9 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 73; Anonymous, 6 Op. Att. Gen. 713. 
 
 4 Lemmon v. People, 20 N. Y. 624. 
 
 5 Boaler v. Cummins, 1 Am. L. R. 654. 
 
 6 Straderv. Graham, 10 How. 82; Vaughan «. Williams 3 McLean, 
 530; Miller ■!;. McQuerry, 5 McLean, 460; Butler v. Hopper, 1 Wash. C. 
 C. 499; In re Perkins, 2 Cal. 424; Pierce's Case,] West. L. Obs. 14; Kauff 
 
 1 man v. Oliver, 10 Pa. St. 517. 
 
 7 Anonymous, 3 Op. Att. Gen. 370; Anonymous, 6 Op. Att. Gen. 302, 
 304. 
 
 8 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 667; Jack v. Martin, 14 Wend. 
 507; 12 Wend. 511; Sims' Case, 61 Mass. 285; Wright v. Deacon, 5 Serg. 
 & K. 62. 
 
 9 Groves v. Slaughter, 15 Peters, 449; Moore v. Illinois, 14 How. 20, 
 Lemmon v. People, 20 N. Y. 563; New York v. Milne, 11 Peters, 102. 
 
 Dksty Fed. Con.— 31. 
 
Art. IV, § 3 NEW STATES, 242 
 
 SECTIOIf 3. 
 
 New States. 
 
 1. Aflmission of. 
 
 2. Power of United States over Territorial and other property. 
 
 Sec. 3. '^Neiio States may he admitted hy the Congress 
 into this Union; hut no new State shall he formed or erected 
 within the jurisdiction of any other State ; nor any State he 
 formed hy the junction of two or more States, or parts of 
 States, without the consent of the legislatures of the States 
 concerned as loell as of the Congress. 
 
 Admission of new States.— This clause refers to 
 and includes new States to be formed out of territory yet 
 to be acquired, as well as that already ceded. l The 
 power to acquire territory by conquest or by treaty is 
 consequent on the absolute grant of power of making 
 war and making treaties.'-^ New States, when admitted, 
 have equal sovereignty with the older ones,3 but stipula- 
 tions imposed by Congress on a new State as a condition 
 of its admission into the Union may be effectual as a 
 regulation of commerce or other exercise of a conditional 
 grant of power,^ but a stipulation granting municipal 
 rights of sovereignty would he void and inoperative, •'• and 
 when a condition annexed to a State constitution is legally 
 and formally rescinded, the powers disclaimed may be 
 resumed and immediately exercised by the State author- 
 ities.^ If Congress, upon application of a Territory, con- 
 sents to admit it as a State upon condition of certain 
 alterations in the proposed constitution, which alterations 
 are accepted, such alterations become part of the State 
 constitution.'' The Ordinance of 1787 is of no effect in 
 any State formed out of the old Northwest Territory, un- 
 less re-enacted by such State. ^ The consent of the legis- 
 latures of the States may be given upon conditions which, 
 if accepted by the United States, are binding upon the Gen- 
 eral Government. ^ Congress is vested with the sole power 
 of admitting new States into the Union. lo 
 
 1 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 612. 
 
 2 American Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 542; Sere v. Pitot, 6 Cranch, 
 336; Fleming v. Page, i) How. 614; Cross v. Harrison, 16 How. 189; Scott 
 V. Sandford, 19 How. 395. And see Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 515; 
 New Orleans v. De Armas, 9 Peters, 224 ; Holden v. Joy, 17 Wall. 211. 
 
 3 Pollard Hagan, 3 How. 212; Withers v. Burkley,20 How. 84; 29 
 Miss. 21; Permoli v. First Municipality, 3 How. 610. 
 
 4 Pollard V. Hagan, How. 229. 
 
 5 Pollard V. Hagan, 3 How. 229; Strader v. Graham, 10 How. 82-, 
 Depew V. Trustees, 5 Ind. 8. 
 
 6 Duke V. Navigation Co. 10 Ala. 82. 
 
,243 TERKITORIAL PROPERTY. Art. IV, § 3 
 
 7 Brittle v. The People, 2 Neb. 198. 
 
 8 Permoli v. First Municipality, 3 How. 610; Strarter v. Graham, 10 
 How. 82. 
 
 9 Pollard V. Hagan, 3 How. 223. 
 10 Brutle v. People, 2 Neb. 198. 
 
 I 2 TJiQ Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all 
 ^needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other 
 propertij belonging to the United States ; and nothing in this 
 Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice amj claims 
 of the United States, or of amj particular State. 
 
 Territorial property.— " To dispose of" means to 
 make sale of tlie lands, or otherwise to raise money from 
 them 1 The power of Congress is not limited to a sale, 
 hut includes the power to lease; ^ but all disposition of 
 the lands must be by authority of Congress.^ So, a mili- 
 tary officer at the head of a provisional government is 
 not authorized to make a grant of publiclands.4 It may 
 dispose of the public lands as homesteads secured from 
 debts prior to issue of patent.s This clause does not con- 
 fer on Congress any power to grant the shores of naviga- 
 ble waters, or the soil under them, within a btate «> 
 "Needful rules" means appropriate legislation ' includ- 
 ing the passage of all laws necessary to secure the rights 
 of the United States to the public lands, and to provide 
 for their sale, and to protect them from ta^xation « It can 
 make all needful rules and regulations, but only for the 
 disposition and protection of lands withm the l^its of a 
 State 9 So, it may provide that all contracts and trans- 
 fers relating to such land, made before the patent issues, 
 shall be voicl." It has the absolute right to prescribe the 
 timei conditions, and modes of transfer of the public 
 domain, and to whom transfers shall be made," and it 
 has the sole power to declare the dignity and effect ot 
 United States titles ;i2 and when the acts of Congress 
 make a patent necessary to complete the title no state 
 can make anything else evidence of title, is nor can a State 
 pass a law depriving a patentee of the POf es^ion of^rop- 
 erty by reason of delay in the transfer of title afteim^^^^^^ 
 ation of nroceedings for its acquisition.i4 reiritory is 
 earvaleS^to theVord " lands," ^^ and the words "re- 
 s^ectinff the territory" refer only to the "territory 
 owS by the Sed^ States at th'e time of the adoption 
 of the Constitution ;i« subsequently acquired territory is 
 subject to the legislation of Congress as an incident to its 
 ownership ;i^ thi right to govern is the inevitable conse- 
 
Art. IV, § 3 TBEKITORIAL PROPERTY. 244 
 
 quence of the right to acquire. is In legislating for the 
 Territories, Congress exercises the combined powers of 
 the General and of the State Governments.i^ It has the 
 absolute power of governing and legislating for the Terri- 
 tories, and may give jurisdiction to territorial courts, 20 but 
 such courts are not courts of the United States. '^J- The 
 general jurisdiction over the place subject to this grant of 
 power adheres to the Territory as a portion of the States 
 not yet given away.^- Where territory has once been 
 solemnly ceded by the Indians it cannot afterwards be 
 treated as Indian country, "-^s 
 
 1 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 615. 
 
 2 TJ. S. V. Gratiot, 1 McLean, 454; 14 Peters, 526; Shawks' Case, 4 Op. 
 Att.-Gen. 487. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Nicol, 1 Paine, 646; Seabury v. Field, 1 Wall. 1; U. S. v. 
 Fitzgerald, 15 Peters, 407; McConnell v. Wilcox, 2 111. 344. 
 
 4 Seabury v. Field, 1 McAU. 1. 
 
 5 Miller v. Little, 47 Cal. 348; Eussell v. Lowth, 21 Minn. 167; Gile v. 
 Hallock, 33 Wis. 523. 
 
 6 Pollard v. Hagan, 3 How. 212. 
 
 7 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 615. 
 
 8 Pollard v. Hagan, 3 How. 212. 
 
 9 U. S. V. Railroad Br. Co. 6 McLean, 517; Rose v. Buckland, 17 lU. 
 309; Dyke v. McVey, 16 111. 41. 
 
 10 Dyke v. McVey, 16 111. 41: Rose v. Buckland, 17 111. 309. 
 
 11 Irvine v. Marshall, 20 How. 558; Gibson v. Chouteau, 13 Wall. 92. 
 
 12 Bagnell v. Broderick, 13 Peters, 436. 
 
 13 Wilcox V. Jackson, 13 Peters, 498. 
 
 14 Gibson z). Chouteau, 13 Wall. 92. , 
 
 15 U. S. V. Gratiot, 14 Peters, 537. 
 
 16 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 442. 
 
 17 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511. 
 
 18 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511; U. S. v. Gratiot, 14 Peters, 
 526; 1 McLean, 454; Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393; Cross v. Harrison, 
 16 How. 164. 
 
 19 Amer. Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511/ 
 
 20 Sere v. Pitot, 6 Cranch, 332; Leitersdorfer v. Webb, 20 How. 182. 
 
 21 Hunt ?;.Palas, 4 How. 589; Clinton v. Englebrecht,'13 Wall. 448, 
 explaining Orchard v. Hughes, 1 Wall. 73. 
 
 22 U. S. V. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 337; Smith tj. Maryland, 18 How. 71; The 
 Wave V. Hyer, Blatchf. & H. 235; 2 Paine, 131. 
 
 23 Clark V. Bates, 1 Dakota, 42. 
 
245 
 
 STATE GOVERNMENT. Art. IV, § 4 
 
 Territorial government.— Congress may govern the 
 Territories mediately or immediately, either by the crea- 
 tion of a territorial government or by the passage ot laws 
 directly operating upon the Territory.^ The power of Con- 
 gress to establish a territorial government is implied from 
 the necessity of the protection of the rights of person and 
 property beyond the limits of any State ;'-i the form of 
 such government resting in the discretion of Congress 
 within the definition and limitations of the Constitution 3 
 A territorial legislature is a creation of Congress, and 
 derives its power .therefrom,^ and it| acts will i^ot avail 
 if adopted after its admission as a State.s a territorial 
 legislature may pass an act authorizing judgment against 
 suleties on an appeal bond, as well as against appellants.s 
 Shas no power to deprive United States courts of c^^^^^^ 
 cerv as well as common-law jurisdiction. ^ Teriitorial 
 courts are invested with powers conferred by Congress in 
 the exercise of those general powers which Congress pos- 
 sesses over the territory. « They have ^^^l^r^^,l^r?Ze 
 writs of habeas corpus like ^edera courts^ Wheie the 
 organic act confers only the power '^o change the loca- 
 tion, the legislature has no power to fix the location ot 
 the seat of government. 1° 
 
 1 Edwards v. Panama, 1 Oreg. 418. 
 
 9 TJ s V. Gratiot, 14 Peters, 537; U. S. v. R. R. Bridge Co. 6 McLean, 
 517; State v. Navigation Co. 11 Mart. 309. 
 
 3 Scott V. Sandford, 19 How. 393; Ex parte Perkins, 2 Cal. 424. 
 
 4 Treadway v. Schnauber, 1 Dakota, 236. 
 
 5 State V. Hitchcock, Kans. 178. 
 
 6 BealliJ.NewMexico, leWall. 535. 
 
 7 Dunphy V. Kleinsmith, 11 Wall. 614. 
 
 8 American Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Peters, 511; Stacy v. Abbott, 1 Am. 
 L. T. 84. 
 
 9 U. S. V. Burdick, 1 Dakota, 142. 
 
 10 Seat of Gov. 1 Wash. Terr. 135. 
 
 SECTION 4. 
 
 Republican form of government guaranteed. Protection against invasion. 
 
 Sec. 4. 1 The United States shall guarantee to every State 
 in this Union a republican form of government, (mcl shall 
 protlct each of thei against invasion; ^ri^l^W^^aUo^^^^ 
 the legislature, or of the executive, {when the legislature can 
 not be convened) against domestic violence. 
 
Art. IV, § 4 !>TATro oovKKNiiK^s r. 240 
 
 It is t\n- Ooaixross' to doeido Avluit government is the es- 
 tablished one in a State, and whetlier it is renubliean or 
 not, and its decision is bindini^jou every other aepartment 
 of the Clovernment.^ Congress may delegate to the Presi- 
 dent the power to decide whethev'a State government is 
 tlie dnly coustitnted government of that State.- The State 
 liere meant must be a member of tlie Union."' a people or 
 community.-* Xo particular government is designated as 
 republican, nor is the exact form in any manner espec- 
 ially indicated.^' The term ''form of government" cast 
 irpou Congress the duty, upon the suppression of the Ee- 
 bellion. to' re-establish the broken relations of States which 
 had seceded. "^^ It is the only department of Government 
 authorized to reorganize and reconstruct the rebellious 
 States." In the exercise of tliis power a discretion as to 
 the means is necessarily implied. =^ Congress may require 
 that the new State constitution shall adopt any measure 
 which Congress has the power to enact and enforce.-^ 
 "Where a rebellious State frames a new constitution, 
 which is a]>proved by Congress, s\ich State is estopped to 
 deny its validity :i'^ but the approval of such constitution 
 does not make it an act of Congress. i^ 
 
 1 Luther c. Bonlon. 7 How. 42; Toxa^^i i-. "White. 7 Wjvll. 730. Aiul see 
 XT. s. r. Khoae-i. I Abb. V. S. 47 ; Ex iMUte Oouplaud, 26 Tex. 434; White 
 V. Hiut. IS ^Yall. tUii; oi) Ga. SOtJ. 
 
 2 Luther r. Borden, 7 How. 44. 
 
 8 Scott V. Jones. 5 How. 377 ; Cherokee Nation r. Georgia, 5 Petoi-s. IS. 
 
 4 Texas r. White, 7 Wall. 700. 
 
 5 Minor r. Happei-sett, •:! W;\ll. l(ii\ 
 
 6 Texas*! r. White. 7 Wall. 727. 
 
 7 Powell r. Boon, 43 Ala, 469. 
 S Texas r. White. 7 Wall. 727. 
 
 9 H;\rdenian r. Downer, 39 Ga, 425. 
 
 10 White r. Hart. 13 Wall. CA6; 351 Ga. 3i>fi. 
 
 11 White r. Hart. 13 Wall. lU6; 39 Ga. 306; Mai"sh c. Burroughs. 1 
 Woods, 463 ; Homestead Cases, 23 Gratt. 266; In re Kennedy. 2 Kioli. 116. 
 
247 . AMENDIVIENTS. Art. V, § 1 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 amendments. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Manner of making Amendments to Constitution. 
 
 1 Tim Conc/ress,- whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall 
 deem it necessarij, shall propose Amondinents to this Consti' 
 tution ; or, on the application of the legislatures of tioo-thirds 
 of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing 
 Amendments, ivhich, in either case, shall be valid to all intents 
 and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by 
 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States, or bij 
 conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or the other 
 mode of ratification may be iwoposed by the Congress ; pro- 
 vided, that no Amendment ivhich may be made jorior to the 
 year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any 
 manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth Section 
 of the first Article ; and that no State, roithout its consent, 
 shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. 
 
 Amendments. — No limit can be imposed on the peo- 
 I-)le in tlieir sovereign capacity in amending the Constitu- 
 tion, i Tlie approval by the I'resident of a proposed 
 amendment is not necessary .2 All amendments adopted 
 at the lirst session of Congress, consisting of the first ten, 
 were intended to apply to the General Government only, 
 and not as restrictions on the State governments.^ 
 
 1 Ex parte Griffin, 25 Tex. Supp. G2a; Chase, 364. 
 
 2 Hollingsworth v. Virginia, 3 Dall. 378. 
 
 3 Barron r. Baltimore, 7 Peters, 250; Livingston v. Moore, 7 Peters, 
 469; Bald. 424; Fox v. Ohio, 5 How. 434; Smith v. Maryland, 18 How. 
 76; Withers v. Buckley, 20 How. 90; 29 Miss. 21; Legal Tender Cases, 12 
 "Wall. 535; North Mo. R. K. Co. v. McGuire, 20 Wall. 46; 49 Mo. 490; 
 Edwards v. Elliott, 21 Wall. 557; Twitchell v. Commonwealth, 7 Wall. 
 325; Pervoari;. Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 479; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. 
 S. 552; 1 Woods, 308; U. S. v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 43; Colt v. Eves, 12 
 Conn. 243; .Tackson v. Woods, 2 Cow. 819; Murphy v. People, 2 Cow. 815; 
 Barker v. People, 3 Cow. 686; Hill v. State, 53 Ga. 472; Baker v. Wise, 16 
 Gratt. 139; Bryan v. State, 4 Iowa, 349; State v. Barnett, 3 Kans. 250; 
 Commonwealth 'i7.Hit('hings,71 Mass. 482; Commonwealth r. Pomeroy, 
 71 Mass. 486; State v. Shricker, 29 Mo. 265; State v. Millain, 3 Nev. 407; 
 State V. Paul, 5 R. 1. 185; James v. Commonwealth, 12 Serg. & R. 220; 
 Lincoln v. Smith, 27 Vt, 328; Livingston v. Mayor, 8 Wend. 85; Matt, of 
 Smith, 10 Wend. 449; Lea v. Tillotson, 24 Wend. 337. 
 
Art. VI, § 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS. 248 
 
 ARTICLE VI. 
 
 PROMISCTJOUS PEOVISIOKS. 
 
 Section l. 
 General provisions. 
 
 1. DeMs. Existing obligations ratified. 
 
 2. Supreme law of the land. 
 
 3. Oath to support Constitution. No religious test. 
 
 1 All debts contracted and engagement sentered into, before 
 the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the 
 United States under this Constitution, as binder the Confed- 
 eration. 
 
 The debts of the first Confederation were assumed. 
 
 Terrett v. Taylor, 9 Crancli, 50; Kelly v. Harrison, 2 Johns. Cas. 29; 
 Jackson v. Lampshire, 3 Johns. Cas. 109. 
 
 2 This Constitution, and the laws of the United States 
 which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties 
 made, or lohich shall be made, under the authority of the 
 United States, shall be the supreme laio of the land ; and the 
 nidges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the 
 Constitution or laivs of any State to the contrary notivith- 
 standing. 
 
 Government supremacy.— The objecit of the Consti- 
 tution was to establish a Government which to the extent 
 of its iDowers should be supreme i within its sphere of 
 action,'-^ the Constitution being the paramount law of 
 the land,3 and the Ordinance of 1787 being a part thereof.'^ 
 The Constitution, treaties, and laws made by the General 
 Government on the rights, duties, and subjects specially 
 enumerated and confided to their jurisdiction are exclu- 
 sive and supreme as well by express i^rovisions as by nec- 
 essary implication. 5 The Constitution is by this clause 
 made a part of the organic law of each State. <5 The Gov- 
 ernment of the United States and that of the States are to 
 be considered as parts of the same system.'^ The laws of 
 the United States are supreme only when made in pursu- 
 ance of the Constitution, 8 and an act of Congress repug- 
 nant to the Constitution is void.^ From the supremacy of 
 
249 GENERAL PROVISIONS, Art. VI, § 1 
 
 the Constitution and laws of the United States it neces- 
 sarily results that the interpretation of the laws by the 
 highest tribunal created by the law itself, must be equally 
 supreme over the constitutions and laws of the several 
 States. 10 The law of a State, though enacted in the exer- 
 cise of powers not controverted, if they interfere with the 
 laws of CJongress must yield to them.ii A treaty has the 
 binding force of a law.i-^ 
 
 1 Dobbins v. Commrs. of Erie Co. 16 Peters, 435; Ableman v. Booth, 
 21 How. 520 ; 3 Wis. 1 ; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264 ; U. S. v. Rhodes, 
 1 Abb. U. S. 44. 
 
 2 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316. 
 
 3 Prigg V. Commonwealth, 16 Peters, 628; New Jersey v. Wilson, 7 
 Cranch, 164; Terrett v. Taylor, 9 Cranch, 43; Von HofEman v. Quincy, 4 
 WaU. 535; Taylor v. Taintor, 16 Wall. 366; Matter of Komaine, 23 Cal. 
 585. 
 
 4 Pollard V. Kibbe, 14 Peters, 417. 
 
 5 Dodge V. Woolsey, 18 How. 331 ; Farmers & M. Bank v. Deering, 91 
 TJ. S. 29; Farrington v. Tennessee. 95 U. S. 685; Pensacola T. Co. v. 
 West. U. Tel. Co. 96 U. S. 1; Sims' Case, 7 Cush. 729; U. S. v. Rhodes, I 
 Abb. U. S. 44. 
 
 6 Taylor v. Taintor, 16 Wall. 366; Matter of Romaine, 23 Cal. 585. 
 
 7 Stearns v. U. S. 2 Paine, 300; Gilmer v. Lime Point, 18 Cal. 229. 
 
 8 Marbiiry v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137; McCuUoch v. State, 4 Wheat. 
 316, 
 
 9 Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137 : Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 520 ; 
 3Wis. 1. 
 
 10 Warner v. The Uncle Sam, 9 Cal. 697. 
 
 11 Gibbens v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 488; 4 Johns. Ch. 150; 
 Brown v. State, 12 Wheat. 419; Sinnot v. Davenport, 22 How. 227 ; Bank 
 of Commerce v. New York, 2 Black, 620; 23 N. Y. 192; 32 Barb. 509. 
 
 12 The British Prisoners, 1 Wood. & M. 72; U. S. t). New Bedford 
 Bridge, 1 Wood. & M. 449. 
 
 Treaty as supreme law. — A treaty is a solemn 
 agreement between nations.^ . It binds the nation in the 
 aggregate and all its subordinate authorities and judges 
 of every State. 2 When duly ratified, a treaty is the 
 supreme law^ — the law of the land.^ It is to be regarded 
 as equivalent to an act of Congress whenever it operates 
 of itself, without the aid of any legislative provision; 
 and where a treaty and an act of Congress are in conflict, 
 the latest in date must control.^ Where money is re- 
 quired to be appropriated to carry out a treaty, the con- 
 currence of Congress is required to give it effect. ^ Whether 
 an act of Congress shall prevail over a treaty is a question 
 solely of municipal law, as distinguished from public law.'^ 
 It is supreme only when made in pursuance of that au- 
 thority which has been conferred upon the treaty-making 
 department, and in relation to subjects over which it has 
 
Art. VI, § 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS. 250 
 
 jurisdiction. 8 What is forbidden by the Constitution can- 
 not be done by treaty.''^ Congress has the power to repeal 
 a law contained in a treaty when it relates to subjects 
 placed under the legislative power, i*^ When the terms of 
 a stipulation import a contract, a treaty addresses itself 
 to the iDolitical, and not the judicial, department, and 
 Congress must execute it before it becomes a rule of 
 court. 11 Xo right can be incident to one department 
 which necessarily goes to the suspension of a right inci- 
 dent to another. 1^ After a treaty has been executed and 
 ratified, courts cannot go behind it for the purpose of 
 annulling its operation. i3 Federal and State judges are 
 bound to determine any constitution or laws of any 
 State contrary to any treaty null and void, i^ The validity 
 of a treaty is necessary and voluntary. The necessary 
 validity is of a judicial nature, and the voluntary of a 
 political nature. 15 if the Supreme Court has the power to 
 declare a treaty void., it will exercise it only in a clear 
 case. 15 The word "treaty" is applied to Indians as well 
 as to other nations, i' 
 
 1 Foster v. Neilson, 2 Peters, 314; Worcester v. State, 6 Peters, 515; 
 Taylor v. Morton, 2 Curt. 454. 
 
 2 Ware v. Hylton, 2 Dall. 199; Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 176; 
 Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 575; Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; Owings 
 ». Norwood, 5 Cranch, 348; Satterlee «. Matthewson, 2 Peters, 413; Ex 
 parte Garland, 4 Wall. 399; Cummings v. Missouri, 5 "Wall. 329; People 
 V. Gerke, 4 Amer. L. R. 604; 6 Op. Att.-Gen. 291; Fellows v. Denniston, 
 23 N. Y. 420. 
 
 3 Pollard v. Kibbe, 14 Peters, 414; Doe v. Branden, 16 How. 635; Wil- 
 son V. Wall, 34 Ala. 288. 
 
 4 Pollard v. Kibbe, 14 Peters, 414; Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 12 
 Peters, 657. 
 
 5 Foster v. Neilson, 2 Peters, 314; U. S. v. Arredondo, 6 Peters, 691; 
 U. S. V. Percheman, 7 Peters, 51; Gordon v. Kerr, 1 Wash. C. C. 322. 
 
 6 Turner v. Missionary Union, 5 McLean, 344. 
 
 7 Taylor v. Morton, 2 Curt. 454. 
 
 8 People V. Naglee, 1 Cal. 231. 
 
 9 Cherokee Tobacco, 11 Wall. 616; 1 Dill. 264; People v. Washington, 
 36 Cal. 658; U. S. v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 43. 
 
 10 Talbot ». Seaman, 1 Cranch, 1; Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199; U. S. v. 
 Tobacco Fact. 1 Dill. 266; Webster v. Reid, 11 How. 437; Morris, 467; 
 Ropes w. Clinch, 8 Blatchf. 304; Taylor v. Morton, 2 Curt. 434; Scott v. 
 Sandford, 19 How. 629; Gray v. Clinton Br. 10 Wall. 454; Wool. 150; 
 Cherokee Tobacco, 11 Wall. 621; Ropes v. Clinch, 8 Blatchf. 304; Bucker 
 V. State, 7 Bank Reg. 257. 
 
 11 Foster V. Neilson, 2 Peters, 314; U. S. v. Ferreira, 13 How. 40; 
 Turner v. Missionary Union, 5 McLean, 344; Taylor v. Morton, 2 Curt. 
 454; In re Metzger, 1 Park Cr. Cas. 108. 
 
 12 Taylor v. Morton, 2 Curt. 454; Jones v. Walker, 2 Paine, 688; Wilson 
 V. Wall, 34 Ala. 288. 
 
251 GENERA!, PKOVISIONS. Art. VI, § JL 
 
 13 Fello-ws V. Blacksmith, 19 How. 366. 
 
 14 Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199; Society v. New Haven, 8 Wheat. 464. 
 
 15 Jonesv.WaUter, 2Paine, 688. 
 
 16 Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199. 
 
 17 Worcester v. Georgia, 6 Peters, 515; Turner v. Missionary Union, 
 5 McLean, 344; Fellows v. Denniston, 23 N. Y. 420. 
 
 3 The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and 
 the members of the several State legislatures, and all execu- 
 tive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the 
 several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to sup- 
 port this Constitution ; but no religious test shall ever be re- 
 quired as a qualification to any office or public trust under 
 the United States. 
 
 Oath of office. — This provision is merely directory, 
 and the omission to take the oath does not affect the valid- 
 ity of their legislation.! The pledge required is to support 
 this Constitution. 2 The legislature may superadd such 
 other oath of office as its wisdom may suggest.^ A referee 
 is not such an officer as is required to take this oath.* The 
 provisions in a ^tate constitution requiring a test oath are 
 void.5 
 
 1 Hill V. Boyland, 40 Miss. 618. But see Thomas v. Taylor, 42 Miss. 
 651; White v. McKee, 19 La. An. 111. 
 
 2 Ableman v. Booth, 21 How. 525. 
 
 3 McCuUoch V. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 416 ; U. S. d. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. 
 S. 43. 
 
 4 Underwood v. McDuffle, 15 Mich. 361. 
 
 5 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 398; Andrew v. Bible &c. Soci. 4 Sand. 
 156; Ayers v. M. E. Church, 3 Sand. 351. 
 
Art. VII, § 1 RATIFICATION. 252 
 
 ARTICLE Vn. 
 
 ratification of constitutioit. 
 
 Sectiok 1. 
 
 What sufficient for ratification. 
 
 "^ The ratification of the conventions of nine States shall be 
 sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution between 
 the States so ratifying the same. 
 
 Note. — The Constitution was ratified by tlie several 
 States in the following order : Delaware, December 7tli, 
 1787 ; Pennsylvania, December 12tli, 1787 ; New Jersey, 
 December 18tli, 1787; Georgia, January 2nd, 1788; Con- 
 necticut, January 9th, 1788 ; Massachusetts, February 
 6th, 1788 ; Maryland, April 28th, 1788 ; South Carolina, 
 May 23rd, 1788 ; New Hampshire, June 21st, 1788 ; Vir- 
 ginia, June 26th, 1788; New York, July 26th, 1788; North 
 Carolina, November 21st, 1789 ; and Rhode Island, May 
 29th, 1790. 
 
 Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States 
 present, the seventeenth day of September, in the year of 
 our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty -seven, 
 and of the independence of the United States of America 
 the twelfth. In toitness whereof, we have hereunto sub- 
 scribed our names. 
 
 GEO. WASHINGTON, 
 
 President, and Deputy from Virginia. 
 
 New Hampshire. Connecticut. . 
 
 JOHN LANG DON, WM. SAMUEL JOHNSON, 
 
 NICHOLAS OILMAN. ROGER SHERMAN. 
 
 Massachusetts. Neio York. 
 
 NATHANIEL GORHAM, ALEXANDER HAMILTON. 
 
 RUFUS KING. 
 
SIGNERS. 
 
 New Jersey. 
 
 WILLIAM LI VING S TON, 
 DAVID BREARLEZ, 
 WILLIAM PA TER S OiV^ 
 JONATHAN DAYTON 
 
 Pennsylvania. 
 
 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, 
 THOMAS MIFFLIN, 
 ROBERT MORRIS, 
 GEORGE CLYMER, 
 THOMAS FITZ SIMMONS, 
 JARED INGERSOLL, 
 JAMES WILSON, 
 GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. 
 
 Delaware. 
 
 GEORGE READ, 
 GUNNING BEDFORD,^ Jr., 
 JOHN DICKINSON, 
 RICHARD B AS SETT, 
 JACOB BROOM. 
 
 Maryland. 
 JAMES McHENRY-, 
 DANIEL, of ST. THC^ENIFER, 
 DANIEL CARROLL. 
 
 Virginia. 
 
 JOHN BLAIR, - 
 JAMES MADISON, Jr. 
 
 North Carolina. 
 
 WILLIAM BLOUNT, 
 RICHARD DOBBS SPAIGHT, 
 HUGH WILLIAMSON. 
 
 South Carolina . 
 
 JOIfN R UTLED GE, 
 CHARLES C. PINCKNEY, 
 CHARLES PINCKNEY, 
 PIERCE BUTLER. 
 
 Georgia. 
 
 WILLIAM FE W, 
 ABRAHAM BALD WIN. 
 
 Attest : 
 
 WILLIAM JACKSON, Secreiary. 
 
 Destt Fed. Con.— 88. 
 
Am. I, § 1 FREEDOM OF SPEECH. 254 
 
 Amendments 
 
 to the constitutiois- of the united states, rat- 
 ified accoeding to the provisions of the 
 Fifth Article of the Foregoing 
 Constitution. 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 RESTRICTIONS ON POWER OF CONGRESS. 
 
 Section l. 
 Religious liberty— freedom of speech— right of petition. 
 
 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of 
 religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ; or abridg- 
 ing the freedom of speech or of the press ; or the right of the 
 people peaceably to assemble, and to pjetition the Government 
 for a redress of grievances. 
 Amendment, proposed 25th September, K89; ratified Ibth December, 1791. 
 
 Religion. — This Article, and the clause in the Vlth 
 Article, that " no religious test shall ever be required as a 
 qualification " for office, are the only provisions in the Fed- 
 eral Constitution upon the subject of religion; the whole 
 power over the subject is left with the States ; i nor is there 
 any inhibition placed on the States. 2 The constitutional 
 guaranty of religious freedom applies only to Congress 
 and not to the States ;3 and it takes from Congress the 
 power to legislate in respect to mere religious opinion and 
 belief, but leaves it free to act as to the violation of social 
 duties, and as to peace and good order. * Congress has no 
 power to punish for disturbance of public assemblies of 
 peaceable citizens, the preservation of the peace is a pre- 
 rogative of the several States. ^ These rights existed be- 
 fore the Constitution, and this amendment merely pro- 
 hibits their abridgment. 6 States may regulate the ob- 
 servance of the Sabbath, "ii 
 
255 EIGHT TO BEAK ARMS. Am. II, § 1 
 
 1 Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 397. 
 
 2 Permoli v. First Municipality, 3 How. 609; Ex parte Garland. 4 
 Wall. 399. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 43; Barron v. Baltimore, 7 Peters, 
 243; Withers v. Buckley, 20 How. 84; Murphy v. People, 2 Cowen, 815. 
 
 4 Reynolds v. U. S. 7 Am. L. R. 9. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 7 Commonwealth v. Has, 122 Mass. 42; Specht-y. Commonwealth, 8 
 Pa. St. 312; Frolickstein v. Mobile, 40 Ala. 725; Ex parte Andrews, 18 
 Cal. 678; Neuendorff v. Duryea, 69 N. Y. 557. 
 
 ARTICLE II. 
 
 right to bear arms. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Might not to be denied to people. 
 
 A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a 
 free State, the right of the people to keep and hear arms shall 
 not be infringed. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 25th /September, 1789; ratified 15th December, llQl. 
 
 Right to bear arms.— The right to bear arms is not 
 herein granted, but only protected from infringement, i 
 This provision is restrictive only of the powers of the 
 Federal Government; 2 it does not prevent the regulation 
 of the subject by States, as the passage of a law to pre- 
 vent carrying concealed weapons, ^ or for prescribing pun- 
 ishment for an assault with dangerous weapons ;4 but 
 a statute prohibiting the bearing of arms openly is un- 
 constitutional. ^ This clause is based upon the idea that 
 the people cannot be oppressed or enslaved who are not 
 first disarmed. 6 
 
 1 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 556; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308; North Carolina v. 
 Newsom, 5 Ired. 250 ; Andrews v. State, 3 Heisk. 165; Fife v. State, 31 
 Ark. 455. 
 
 3 State V. Buzzard, 4 Ark. 18; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243; Louisiana v. 
 Chandler, 5 La. An. 489; Louisiana v. Smith, 11 Ibid. G33; Louisiana r, 
 Jumell, 13 Ibid. 399; English v. Texas, 35 Tex. 473 ; Comm. v. McNulty, 
 8 Phila. 610; Bliss v. Comm. 2 Litt. 90; Wright v. Comm. 77 Pa. St. 470. 
 And see State v. Reid, 1 Ala. 612; State v. Mitchell, 3 Blackf. 229; Coch- 
 ran V. State, 24 Tex. 394. 
 
 4 Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394; New York v. Miln, 11 Peters, 139. 
 
 5 Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243. 
 
 6 Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 401. 
 
Am. IV, § 1 PERSONAL SEOUKITT. 256 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 quartering of soldiers. 
 Section 1. 
 
 No soldier to be quartered, etc , 
 
 No soldier shall, in time of peace, he wartered in any 
 house without the consent of the owner, no" in time af war, 
 but in a manner to he prescribed by law. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 25th September, 1189; ratified 15th December, 1791. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. 
 
 personal sbcitritt. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Unreasonable searches, seizures, and warrants prohibited. 
 
 The right of the people to he secure in their persons, houses, 
 papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seiz- 
 ures, shall not he violated, and no loarrants shall issue hut 
 upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and 
 particularly describing the place to he searched, and the per- 
 sons or things to he seized. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 25t1i of September, 1789 ; ratified 15th December, 
 1791. 
 
 Search, seizure, and warrants. — This amendment 
 was adopted with intent to restrict and limit the power of 
 the United States,i and place the powers under strong pro- 
 hibitions and checks. 2 The security of personal liberty was 
 such as wisdom and experience demonstrated to be neces- 
 sary.3 The amendment only protects those who are parties 
 to the Constitution,^ and api^lies to criminal cases only.^ 
 So, provisions for searches and seizures to aid in the collec- 
 tion of revenue are not repugnant to this clause. o It does 
 not prohibit a search or seizure made in attempting to 
 execute a military order;"^ but an order of the War De- 
 partment directing an arrest without warrant is void.^ 
 A warrant of commitment which does not state some 
 good cause certain, supported hj an oath, is illegal ; ^ but 
 an executive officer can justify his acts by showing a 
 regular warrant, without showing that it was founded on 
 a complaint under oath. It is only necessary that the 
 
257 PERSONAL BIGHTS. Am. V, § 1 
 
 order or precept shall be lawful on the face of it."^° A 
 warrant directing a search in the house of A & Co. will 
 not justify a search in the house of A.n A specification 
 of the character, quality, number, weight, or other circum- 
 stances, to distinguish the goods, is necessary .1^ ' ' And no 
 warrants shall issue but upon probable cause " refers only 
 to process issued under the authority of theUnited States, i" 
 It has no aisplication to i^roceedings for the recovery of 
 debts." 
 
 1 Lxitlier V. Borden, 7 How. 66; Smith v. Maryland, 1 How. 71. 
 
 2 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 83; Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 66; Payne 
 V. Baldwhi, 3 Smedes & M. 673. 
 
 ai Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 120. 
 
 4 Commonwealth v. Griffith, 19 Mass. 11. 
 
 5 Ex parte Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 317; Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 
 How. 272. 
 
 6 Ex parte Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 317 ; Stanwood v. Green, 2 Ibid. 184: 
 Matt, of Piatt, 7 Ben. 2G1; 19 Int. Rev. Rec. 132; U. S. v. Distillery, 8 
 Chic. L. N. 47; Ex parte Strouse, 1 Sawy. (j05. 
 
 7 Allen v. Colby, 45 N. H. 544. 
 
 8 Ex parte Field, 5 Blatchf . 63. 
 
 9 Ex parte Burford, 3 Cranch, 448; Anonymous, 2 Op. Att.-Gen. 266. 
 
 10 Sanford v. Nichols, 13 Mass. 286. 
 
 11 Sanford v. Nichols, 13 Mass. 286. 
 
 12 Sanford y. Nichols, 13 Mass. 286. 
 
 13 Smith V. Maryland, 1 How. 71. 
 
 14 Ex parte Burford, 3 Cranch, 448; Murray v. Hoboken L. & I. Co. 18 
 How. 272; Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 119; Wakely v. Hart, 6 Bimi. 316; 
 BeU V. Clapp. 10 Johns. 263; Sailley v Smith, 11 Johns. 500. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 personal rights. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Rights of parties accused of crime — rights as to property. 
 
 No person shall he held to answer for a capital, or otherwise 
 infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a 
 grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, 
 or in the militia, lohen in acttial service in time of war or 
 public danger ; nor shall any person be subject for the same 
 offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb ; nor shall 
 be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against 
 
Am. V, § 1 PERSONAL BIGHTS. 258 
 
 himself > nor he deprived of life, liberty, or property, without 
 due process of laio ; nor shall private property he taken for 
 public use, without just compensation. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 2bth September, 1789 : ratified I5th December, 
 1791. 
 
 Construction.— The prohibitions in this article are ex- 
 clusively restrictions upon the Federal powers to prevent 
 interference with the rights of States and their citizens. i 
 The words "infamous crime " are descriptive of an offense 
 that subjects the person to infamous punishment, or pre- 
 vents his being a witness.^ Misdemeanors cannot be 
 brought within the term "infamous."^ As respects of- 
 fenses, not capital and not infamous, there is no rest^c- 
 tion upon Congress as to the mode of procedure. ^ An 
 indictment must be found by a grand jury ; an informa- 
 tion may be preferred by an oll&cer of the court. ^ A grand 
 jury is a body of men varying from twelve to twenty- 
 three, who, in secret, hear the evidence offered by the 
 Government only, and find or ignore bills of indictment. ^ 
 This clause relates to time of war as well as peace. '^ 
 ""When in actual service in time of war or public danger " 
 refers to the militia ;8 it cannot be extended in time of 
 war on a plea of public danger.^ Cases arising in the 
 land and naval forces, etc., are excepted from present- 
 ment and indictment and right of trial by jary.i*' An 
 offense committed by a party while actually in the naval 
 service is a " case arising in the naval forces. "^ And a 
 paymaster's clerk on duty in the navy is a person "in 
 the naval forces." 12 The power to punish military and 
 naval officers is distinct from the power to define judicial 
 powers, 13 and the power of Congress to provide for the 
 Government of the land and naval forces is not affected 
 or limited by this article ;^^ but a military commission for 
 the trial of persons not in the military service is uncon- 
 stitutional. ^^ A court-martial is a lawful tribunal under 
 the Constitution, 16 hut if it had no jurisdiction, or should 
 inflict punishment forbidden by law, the civil courts 
 could inquire into the jurisdiction and give redress. i'^ This 
 article creates no new principles, but is simply declarative 
 of great fundamental principles, is 
 
 1 Barron v. Baltimore, 7 Peters, 243; Livingston v. Moore, 7 Peters, 
 469; Fox v. Oliio, 5 How. 410; Withers v. Buckley, 10 How. 84; Clark v. 
 Dick, 1 Dill. 8; Bonaparte v. Camden and A. R. R. Co. Bald. 220; Mur- 
 phy V. People, 2 Cow. 815; Barker v. People, 3 Cow. 686; Bering v. 
 Williams, 17 Ala. 516; Jackson v. Wood, 2 Cow. 819; Railroad Co. v. 
 Davis, 2 Dev. & B. 451; James v. Commonwealth, 12 Serg. & R. 220; 
 HoUister v. Union Co. 9 Conn. 436; Powers v. Dougherty, 23 Ga. 65; 
 Boyd V. Ellis, 11 Iowa, 97; State v. Jackson, 21 La. Am. 574; Weimer v. 
 
259 PERSONAL EIGHTS Am. V, § 1 
 
 Banbury, 30 Mich. 201; Concord E. R. v. Greely, 17 N. H. 47; Prescott 
 V. State, 19 Ohio St. 184; State v. Sliumpert, 1 Kicb. N. S. 85; Griffins' 
 V. Gibb, McCall. 220; Twitchell v. Comm. 7 Wall. 321; State v. Webb, 
 46 Iowa, 662. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Shepparrt, 1 Abb. U. S. 431 ; U. S. v. Block, 9 Ch. L. N. 234; 
 U. S. V. Maxwell, 3 Dill. 275; 21 Int. Rev. Rec. 148; U. S. v. Waller, 1 
 Sawy. 701. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Elbert, 1 Cent. L. J. 205. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Maxwell, 3 Dill. 275; 21 Int. Rev. Rec. 148. 
 
 5 Clepper v. State, 4 Tex. 244. 
 
 6 People V. King, 2 Caines' Cas. 98; Commonwealtli v. Ward, 2 Gush. 
 149. 
 
 7 In re Kemp, 16 Wis. 359. 
 
 8 In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 406. 
 
 9 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 123. 
 
 10 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 123. 
 
 11 In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 406. 
 
 12 In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 406. 
 
 13 Dynes v. Hoover, 20 How. 78; In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 401. 
 
 14 In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 406. 
 
 15 Milligan v. Hovey, 3 Biss. 18; In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 402; Ex parte 
 Field, 5 Blatchf . 79. 
 
 16 In re Bogart, 2 Sawy. 406. * 
 
 17 Marshall's Case, 10 Cranch, 76; Dynes v. Hoover, 20 How. 82. 
 
 18 Young V. McKenzie, 3 Ga. 31 ; Campbell v. State, 11 Ga. 353. 
 
 Jeopardy; — A prisoner is not once put in jeopardy 
 until the verdict of tlie jury is rendered for or against 
 liim,i and twice in jeopardy does not relate to a mistrial,'-^ 
 nor when the jury is discharged from necessity, or the 
 ends of justice would be defeated, ^ as where one of the 
 jury becomes insane, '^ or is attacked with a sudden ill- 
 ness,5 or if a juror is so biased that he is unfit to sit on 
 the case,<5 or where the jury fail to agree,'' or where they 
 do not agree on the last day of the term. 8 Jeopardy 
 attaches where t^ie verdict of guilty is rendered, and 
 judgment is arrested for want of arraignment and plea.^ 
 The court may, in its discretion, discharge the jury in a 
 capital case as well as in a case of misdemeanor. 1° Where 
 the jury is empanneled and sworn by inadvertence before 
 an argument, the proceeding may be disregarded, and a 
 jury empanneled in regular order. n Where the jury was 
 discharged on account of the absence of witnesses, it does 
 not prevent a subsequent trial. ^^ Where the indictment 
 on demurrer is held bad, the prisoner may be remanded 
 for further proceedings. i3 The provision is intended to 
 shield the prisoner from a second trial, except at his 
 election and request, which is manifested by his applica- 
 
Am. V, § 1 PERSONAL RIGHTS. 260 
 
 tion for a new trial. ^^ If the District Attorney enters a 
 nolle prosequi after the jury is empanneled and sworn, the 
 accused cannot be again indicted for the same offense i5 
 if the court had jurisdiction. i6 Where either a fine or 
 imprisonment can be imposed, the court cannot, after 
 payment of the fine, render a new judgment of imprison- 
 ment. i'' This constitutional right may be waived, i*^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Perez, 9 Wheat. 579; U. S. v. Haskell, 4 Wash. C. C. 402; 
 People V. Goodwin, 18 Johns. 187; Hoffman v. State, 20 Md. 425; State 
 V. Moor, Walk. 134; Conunonwealth v. Merrill, Thach. C. C. 1. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Haskell, 4 Wash. C. C. 410. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Perez, 9 Wheat. 579; U. S. v. Gilbert. 2 Sum. 19; Common- 
 wealth V. Cook, 6 Serg. & R. 577; U. S. v. Wilson, Bald. 95; U. S. v. 
 Kerry, 1 McLean, 434. 
 
 4 U. S. V. HaskeU, 4 Wash. C. C. 402. 
 
 5 Commonwealth v. Merrill, Thach. C. C. 1. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Norris, 1 Curt. 23. 
 
 7 U. S. V. Perez, 9 Wheat. 579; Peonle v. Goodwin, 18 Johns. 187. 
 
 8 State V. Moor, Walk. 134. 
 
 9 State ^^ Parish, 43 Wis. 395. And see State t?. Norvell, 2 Yerg. 24. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Haskell, 4 Wash. C. C. 402. 
 
 11 U. S. V. Riley, 5 Blatchf . 20^. 
 
 12 Hoffman v. State, 20 Md. 425. And see U. S. v. Watson, 3 Ben. L 
 
 13 U. S. V. Townmaker, Hemp. 299. 
 
 14 U. S. V. Williams, 1 Cliff. 5; U. S. v. Keen, 1 McLean, 434; U. S. v. 
 Connor, 3 McLean, 573; U. S. v. Macomb, 5 McLean, 286; TJ. S. v. Hard- 
 ing, 1 Wall. Jr. 127. 
 
 15 TJ. S. V. Shoemaker, 2 McLean, 114. 
 
 16 Thompson v. State, 6 Neb. 107; Commonwealth v. Peters, 53 Mass. 
 387; State v. Odell, 4 Blackf . 156. 
 
 17 Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 170. But see Brown v. Swineford, 44 
 Wis. 282. 
 
 18 Veatch v. State, 60 Ind. 291. 
 
 Witness.— The provision as to a party not being a wit- 
 ness against himself applies only to criminal cases, i 
 Forcing a man to be a witness against himself is con- 
 trary to the principles of a republican government. 2 
 The words " criminal case " mean a case involving pun- 
 ishment for crime in an ordinary criminal proceeding, 3 or 
 on a charge of misconduct against a public officer.* 
 
 1 Ex parte Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 317; Ex parte Strause, 1 Sawy. 605; 
 In re Phillips, 10 Int. Rev. Rec. 107. 
 
 2 Wyneham v. People, 13 N. Y. 392. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Distillery, 8 Chic.X. N. 57; U. S. v. Parker, 21 Int. Rev. 
 Rec. 251. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Collins, 1 Woods, 499. 
 
261 PERSONAL RIGHTS. Am. V, § 1 
 
 Depriving of life, liberty, or property. — TMs 
 
 amendment simply declares tlie great common-law prin- 
 ciple as to personal rights, applicable to both State and 
 Federal Governments.^ The right to life includes the 
 right to the body in its completeness and without dismem- 
 berment; to liberty — the right to exercise the faculties 
 and follow lawful avocations; to property — the right to 
 acquire, possess, and enjoy it in any way consistent with 
 thie equal rights of others and the just demands of the 
 State. ^ No person can be deprived of his liberty on the 
 ground of neglect to assert his rights. ^ This section pro- 
 hibits an act authorizing the arrest of a citizen without 
 just cause ; * yet a rebel in battle may be slain or captured, 
 and thus deprived of his liberty ; ^ but a statute which 
 makes an order of the President a sufficient defense for 
 an act personally done, is void.o A law which authorizes 
 commitment, as an inebriate to a lunatic asylum, on an ex 
 parte affidavit, violates this provision.'^ This section was 
 intended as a constitutional safeguard in the trial of those 
 cases for which it was stipulated the courts shall remain 
 open, and those wherein a party shall have his remedy by 
 due course of law.^ Legislative authority cannot reach 
 life, liberty, or property, except for crime, or when the sac- 
 rifice is demanded by a just regard for the public welfare.^ 
 The right to acquire, hold, and enjoy property is guaran- 
 teed by the fundamental law. i'' All property is held un- 
 der the implied liabilitj'" that its use shall not be injurious 
 to others. ^^ A j)arty is protected in the enjoyment of all 
 property, whether real or personal, i^ including the right 
 to the use of a patented machine. ^^ The legislature has 
 no power to take property from one individual and give it 
 to another. ^^ 
 
 1 Young V. McKenzie, 3 Ga. 42; Parkham v. Justice, 9 Ga. 341; Er. 
 vine's Appeal, 16 Pa. St. 256. 
 
 2 Bertholf v. O'Reilly, 18 Am. L. Reg. N. S. 115. 
 . 3 AUen v. Sarah, 2 Har. 434. , ^. , , ,„ 
 
 4 Gri&n V. Wilcox, 21 lnaAr&' ^' ^'''^■l} ' 
 
 5 Norris v. Doniphan, 4 Met. (Ky.) 385. 
 
 6 Johnson v. Jones, 44 111. 142. ,^^_ 
 
 7 In re Janes, 30 How. Pr. 446. Wm W^ mf'l'^C '. 
 
 8 Bonaparte v. Camden &c. R. R. Go. Bald. 220; Mason v. Kennebec 
 &c. R. R. Co. 31 Me. 215; Stevens v. Middlesex Canal, 12 Mass. 466; 
 Stowellt;. Flagg, 11 Mass. 364; Aldrich v. Cheshire &c. R.R. Co. 21 N. 
 H. 359; Beekman v. Saratoga &c. R. R. Co. 3 Paige, 45; B. B. &c. R. R. 
 Co. V. Ferris, 26 Tex. 588; Wheelock v. Young, 4 Wend. 647; Bloodgood 
 V. Mohawk &c. R. R. Co. 14 Wend. 51. 
 
 9 Atchison &c. R. R. Co. v. Baty, 6 Neb. 37: Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill; 
 745; Wikinson v. Leland, 2 Peters, 658. 
 
jLaa. V, § 1 PERSONAL EIGHTS. 262 
 
 10 Commonwealtli v. Bacon, 13 Bush, 214, 
 
 11 Commonwealtli v. Alger, 7 Cush. 84; Bertholf v. O'Reilly , 18 Am. 
 L. Reg. N. S. 120; Comm. v. Bacon, 13 Bush, 214. 
 
 12 Ervine's Appeal, 16 Pa. St. 256. 
 
 13 Bloomer v. McQuewan, 14 How. 539. 
 
 14 Turner ?;. Althaus, 6 Neb. 54. 
 
 Due process of law means sucli an exertion of the 
 powers of government as the settled maxnns of the law 
 permit and sanction, l It simply requires that a person 
 should be brought into court and have an opjportunity to 
 prove any fact for his protection. 2 It means law in its 
 regular course of administration through courts of jus- 
 tice 3 — a timely a.nd regular proceeding to judgment and 
 execution. '^ It generally implies and includes parties, 
 judge, regular allegations, and a trial according to some 
 settled course of judicial proceedings ;5 a legal proceed- 
 ing under direction of a court ;G intending to secure the 
 right of trial according to the forms of law ;7 the law of 
 the land ;8 a present existing rule, and not an ex post facto 
 law ;^'* a law existing at the time of the vesting of rights. i'' 
 That it means a trial according to some settled course of 
 procedure is not universally true.ii It does not necessa- 
 rily import a jury trial, 12 but includes summary reme- 
 dies. i3 Civil proceedings for contempt are not included. 1* 
 A statute making the property-owner liable for damages 
 resulting from the illegal use of property by a tenant is 
 valid. 1^ An assessment for grading and improving streets 
 is not a taking of property without compensation, or with- 
 out due process of law.i^ Private property may be taken 
 by a commander in war in case of exigency, but the case 
 must be urgent. i'' Provisions for searches and seizures 
 to aid in the collection of the revenue are not repugnant 
 to this amendment. 18 So, processes for seizure and assess- 
 ment are within the discretion of the legislature, i^ but 
 Congress has no power to i^rovide for the absolute forfeit- 
 ure of land as a penalty for the non-payment of taxes, 
 without any process. 20 A confiscation act does not author- 
 ize seizure and confiscation without due process of law.21 
 Congress has no power to organize a board of revision to 
 nullify confirmed titles. 22 A trial before a board of elec- 
 tion officers is not due process of law. 23 By "without 
 due process of law" is meant all the guarantees set forth 
 in the sixth amendment.24 
 
 1 Bertholf v. O'Rielly, 18 Am. L. Reg. N. S. 119; Ex parte Ah Fook, 
 49 Cal. 402. 
 
 2 People V. Essex Co. 70 N. Y. 229. 
 
263 PEBSONAL EIGHTS. Am. V, § 1 
 
 3 Barker v. Kelly, 11 Minn. 480; Rowan v. State, 30 Wis. 129; State 
 V. Becht, 23 Minn. 413. 
 
 4 Dwight V. Williams, 4 McLean, 586. 
 
 5 Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 272; Huber v. Reily, 53 Pa. St. 
 112; Rees v. City of Watertown, 19 Wall. 122; Westervelt v. Greg, 12 
 N.Y.202. 
 
 6 Newcomb v. Smith, 1 Chand. 71. 
 
 7 Parsons v. Russell, 11 Mich. 113. 
 
 8 Matt, of Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 331; Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 
 How. 272; James v. Reynolds, 2 Tex. 251. 
 
 9 Ho Ke V. Henderson, 4 Dev. 15; Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill, 146; 
 Wynehamer v. People, 13 N. Y. 393 ; Norman v. Heist, 5 Watts T. S. 171 ; 
 Murray v. Hoboken «fcc. Co. 18 How. 272. 
 
 10 Wilkinson v. Leland, 2 Peters, 658; Osborn v. Nicholson, 13 Wall. 
 €62; Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill, 146; Wynehamer v. People, 13 N. Y. 378. 
 
 11 Greene v. Briggs, 1 Curt. 311; Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 
 272 ; Hoke v. Henderson, 4 Dev. 15; Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill, 146; Van 
 Zandt V. Waddel, 2 Yerg. 260; State Bank v. Cooper, 2 Yerg. 599; Jones 
 «7. Perry, 10 Yerg. 59. 
 
 12 Ex parte Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 317. 
 
 13 Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 19 ; U. S. v. Ferreira, 13 How. 40 ; Ex 
 parte Meador, 1 Abb. U. S. 317; Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 272. 
 
 14 State V. Becht, 23 Mimi. 411. 
 
 15 Bertholf v. O'Rielly, 18 Am. Law Reg. N. S. 124; Dobbins v. U. S. 
 96 U". S. 395. 
 
 16 Griffin v. Mayor, 4 N. Y. 419. 
 
 17 Mitchell v. Harmony, 13 How. 115. And see Ex parte Milligan, 4 
 Wall. 2; Clark v. MitcheU, 64 Mo. 564. 
 
 18 Matt, of Piatt, 7 Ben. 261; 19 Int. Rev. Rec. 132; Murray v. Hobo- 
 ken &c. Co. 18 How. 277; Ames v. Port Huron &c. Co. 11 Mich. 139. 
 
 19 PuUan V. Kinsmger, 2 Abb. U. S. 94; Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 
 U. S. 97. 
 
 20 Martin v. Snowden, 18 Gratt. 100. 
 
 21 Hodgson v. Millward, 3 Grant, 406. 
 
 22 Reichart v. Felps, 6 Wall. 160. 
 
 23 Huber v. Rielly, 53 Pa. St. 112. 
 
 24 James v. Reynolds, 2 Tex. 251; Jones v. Montes, 15 Tex. 353. 
 
 Eminent domain. — The power of the Government 
 respecting public improvements is a sovereign power, 
 resting in the discretion of Congress. ^ Under the police 
 power, persons and property are subject to all kinds of 
 restrictions and burdens to secure general comfort, health, 
 and prosperity.^ This power of eminent domain is not 
 impaired by the Constitution.^ The terms in the Consti- 
 tution are declaratory and not restrictive.* Where there 
 is an apparent jDublic interest to be subserved, the legisla- 
 ture, or person or body it may designate, is the proper 
 judge of the necessity.^ Governments more frequently 
 effect these objects through the aid of corporations than 
 
Am. V, § 1 PERSON AI. RIGHTS. 264 
 
 by their immediate agents. 6 Private property embraces 
 all private property, 7 including franchises. ^ Any injury 
 to the property is a taking within the meaning of this 
 provision,^ as an interruption to the use of property. i* 
 Where the law strips property of its attribute the owner 
 is within this provision, n This provision refers only to a 
 direct appropriation, and not to consequential injuries 
 resulting from the exercise of lawful power. 12 The power 
 to take private property is limited to purposes for public 
 uses.i3 It is not a limitation on the taxing power, but on 
 the power of eminent domain. i^ Public use means a use 
 concerning the whole community as distinguished from 
 particular individuals, is The legislature cannot take pri- 
 vate property for purely private uses ; i^ so, a tax law in 
 aid of a private enterprise and business is void.i^ A rail- 
 road company cannot condemn a site for the erection of 
 manufactories of railroad cars ; i^ but a statute authoriz- 
 ing the taking of private property for mill sites and dams 
 is valid.i9 Extraordinary and unforeseen occasions arise 
 in cases of impending danger when private property may 
 be appropriated to the public use, but the emergency 
 must be extreme and imperative. 20 If movable property 
 is taken in good faith by a military commander, the title 
 vests in Government, although it was subsequently dis- 
 covered not to have been actually necessary ;"-2i the courts 
 cannot interfere with such acts. 22 Every attempt of a 
 public officer to take jirivate property for public use, un- 
 less justified by some pressing necessity, is a simple tres- 
 pass, for which the Government is not responsible. 23 The 
 power to appropriate land or other property within the 
 States for its own use belongs exclusively to the Federal 
 Government, and can in no wise be afPected by the State 
 legislature .24 Courts may determine a use is a public use, 
 but not the extent to which property may be taken. 25 
 
 1 Avery v. Fox, 1 Abb. U. S. 246 ; Swan v. Williams, 2 Mich. 427. 
 
 2 Thorpe v. Eutland & R. R. B. Co. 27 Vt. 140; Slaughter-House 
 Cases, 16 Wall. 36; Munn v. lUinois, 94 U. S. 123; Bertholf v. O'Keilly, 
 18 Am. Law Reg. 121. 
 
 3 Dyer v. Tuscaloosa Br. Co. 2 Port. 296; West Riv. Br. Co. v. Dix, 6 
 How. 539. 
 
 4 Young V. McKenzie, 3 Ga. 31. 
 
 5 Newcomb v. Smith, 1 Chand. 71. 
 
 6 Ches. & O. Com. Co. v. Key, 3 Cranch C. C. 599; Bait. & O. R. R. Co. 
 V. Van Ness, 4 Cranch C. C. 593; Swan v. Williams, 2 Mich. 427. 
 
 7 Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 272; U. S. v. Harding, 1 Wall. 
 Jr. 127. 
 
 8 West Riv. Br. Co. v. Dix, 6 How. 507 ; Wilkinson v. Leland, 2 Peters, 
 658: Charles Riv. Br. v. Warren Br. 11 Peters, 645; Bonaparte v. Cam- 
 
265 PERSON AI. EIGHTS. Am. V, § 1 
 
 den «S;c. R. R. Co. Bald. 205; Enfield Br. Co. v. Hartford &c. R. R. Co. 
 17 Conn. 40; Lexington &, O. R. R. Co. v. Applegate, 8 Dana, 289; Tuck- 
 alioe Co. V. Railroad Co. 11 Leigh, 42; Plscataqua &c. Br. v. N. H. Br. 7 
 N. H. 35; Barber V. Andover,8 N. H. 398; Piercer. Somersworth, 10 N. 
 H. 370; Backus v. Lebanon, 11 N. H. 20; Varick v. Smith, 5 Paige, 146; 
 Dyer v. Tuskaioosa Br, Co. 2 Port. 296; Boston W. P. Co. v. Boston &c. 
 R. R. Corp. 41 Mass, 360; L. &c. R. R. Co. v. Chappell, 1 Rice, 383; 
 Armington v. Barnet, 15 Vt. 745; West Riv. Br, Co. v. Dix, 16 Vt. 446; 
 Bloodgood V. M. &c. R. R. Co. 18 "Wend. 14. 
 
 9 Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co. 13 Wall. 180 ; Pratt v. Brown, 3 Wis. 613 ; 
 Walker v. Shepardson, 4 Ibid. 511; Goodall v. Milwaukee, 5 Wis. 39; 
 Weeks v. Milwaukee, 10 Wis. 242; Fisher v. Horicon Iron Co, Ibid. 353; 
 Newell V. Smith, 15 Wis. 104. But see Alexander v. Milwaukee. 16 Wis. 
 248. 
 
 10 Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co. 13 Wall. 166; Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 
 144. 
 
 11 Wynehamer v. People, 13 N. Y. 378. 
 
 12 Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457. 
 
 13 U. S. V. Chicago, 7 How. 195; U. S, v. Ames, 1 Wood. & M. 76. 
 
 14 Gilmer v. Shellenberger, 2 Black, 510. 
 
 15 Gilmer v. Lime Point, 18 Cal. 229; Heyneman v. Blake, 19 Cal. 579. 
 See People v. Kerr, 3 Barb, 357. 
 
 16 Consol, Chan. Co. v. Cent, Pac. R, R, Co, 51 Cal, 269; Newcomb v. 
 Smith, 1 Chand, 71. But see Ex parte Barnard, 4 Cranch C. C, 294. 
 
 17 Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co, 13 Wall, 177; Bertholf v. O'Reilly, 18 
 Am. Law Reg, N, S, 116; Wynehamer v. People, 13 N. Y, 378; Weismer 
 V. Vill. of Douglass, 64 N. Y. 92. 
 
 18 Eldridge v. Smith, 34 Vt. 484. 
 
 19 Newcomb v. Smith, 1 Chand. 71. 
 
 20 U. S, t7. Russell, 13 Wall. 623; Taylor v. Railroad Co. 6 Cold. 646; 
 as in case of military necessity — Clark t?. Mitchell, 64 Mo. 564; or in 
 case of a conflagration— Bishop v. City of Macon, 7 Ga, 200. 
 
 21 Taylor v. R. R. Co. 6 Cold. 646; Williams v. Wickerman, 44 Mo. 484. 
 
 22 Newcomb v. Smith, 1 Chand, 71, 
 
 23 Pitcher v. U. S. 1 Nott. & H. 7. 
 
 24 Kohl V. U. S. 91 IT. S. 367; Trombley v. Humphrey, 23 Mich. 471; 
 Darlington v. U, S, 33 Leg, Int, 409, But see Gilmer v. Lime Point, 18 
 •Cal. 229; Burt v. Merchants' Ins. Co, 106 Mass, 356. 
 
 25 St. Louis Co. Court v. Griswold, 58 Mo. 175, 
 
 Compensation on condemnation.— The Constitu- 
 tion does not recognize any necessity as authority for tak- 
 ing property for public use without compensation,! even 
 on the rightful taking of property for public use or de- 
 struction by a military officer ;2 but the power to confis- 
 cate the property of public enemies is not affected by the 
 restrictions of this amendment, ^ Private property can- 
 not be taken for public use without just compensation, * 
 
 Desty Fed, Con,— 33. 
 
Am. V, § 1 PEKSOKAL EIGHTS, 266 
 
 There raust be a condemnation or an agreement consum- 
 mated.s The actual occupant of vacant land is entitled 
 to damages, even where it is taken under an act of Con- 
 gress. ^ So, the rights of owners to adjacent streets is as 
 much property as the lots they own.'? Congress cannot 
 authorize a telegraph company to construct its lines over 
 private property without just compensation. 8 In the ex- 
 ercise of its power over post-offices and post-wards, Con- 
 gress cannot take property without the consent of the 
 owner, or a just compensation ;9 nor, in improving naviga- 
 tion, can it divert waters from their natural channel with- 
 out compensation to riparian owners. i^ The making of 
 compensation must be as absolutely certain as that the 
 property is taken. H Just compensation means just in 
 regard to the public as well as to the individual, i^ the 
 means of ascertaining which is to be in the discretion of 
 Congress. 13 if the congressional act provides a special 
 tribunal, no other can be resorted to.i-* The advantage to 
 land not taken cannot be set off against its intrinsic 
 value. 15 
 
 1 Norrls v. Doniphan, 4 Met. (Ky.) 385; Corbin v. Marsli, 2 Duvall, 
 193. 
 
 2 Grant v. U. S. 1 Ct. CI. 41 ; 2 Ibid. 551 ; Wiggins ?;. U. S. 3 Ct. CI. 412. 
 
 3 Miller v. U. S. 11 Wall. 268. 
 
 4 Barron v. Baltimore, 7 Peters, 243; Bucker v. State, 7 Bank. Reg. 
 262; Case of De Groot, 9 Op. Att.-Gen. 481; Young ■;;. McKenzie, 3 Ga. 
 31; DanviUe &c. R. R. Co. v. Comm. 73 Pa. St. 29. 
 
 5 Whitman v. Boston &c. R. R. Co. 85 Mass. 138. 
 
 6 California &c. R. R. Co. v. Gould, 21 Cal. 254. 
 
 7 Lackland v. North. Mo. R. R. Co. 31 Mo. 180. 
 
 8 Atlantic & Pac. Tel. Co. v. Chicago &c. R. R. Co. 6Biss. 158. 
 
 9 Dickey v. Turnp. Co. 7 Dana, 119. 
 
 10 Avery v. Fox, 1 Abb. U. S. 246. 
 
 11 Young V. Harrison. 6 Ga. 130; Carr v. Georgia &c. R. R. Co. 1 Kelly, 
 524; Miller v. Craig, 3 Stock. 106; Buffalo &c. R. R. Co. v. Ferris, 26 
 Tex. 588; Bloodgood v. Mohawk &c. R. R. Co. 18 Wend. 9. 
 
 12 Chesapeake & O. Can. Co. v. Key, 3 Cranch C. C. 599. 
 
 13 Chesapeake & O; Can. Co. v. Key, 3 Cranch C. C. 599; Swan v. 
 Williams, 2 Mich. 427; Mann v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113; 69 111. 80. 
 
 14 Meade v. U. S. 2 Ct. CI. 224. 
 
 15 People ». Mayor of Brooklyn, 6 Barb. 309; Jacob tj. Louisville, 9 
 Dana, 114; Rogers v. Railroad Co. 3 Me. 310; Iwale v. Baltimore, 5 Md. 
 314; Buffalo &c. R. R. Co. v. Ferris, 26 Tex. 588; Hatch v. Vermont 
 Cent. R. R. Co. 25 Vt. 49; State v. Miller, 3 Zab. 383. 
 
267 CRIMINAL PBOCEDUKE. Am. VI, § 1 
 
 ARTICLE VI. 
 
 mode of trial, in criminal proceeding. 
 
 Section 1, 
 
 Accused entitled to speedy trial ; to confront witnesses; to have counsel; 
 place of trial, etc. 
 
 In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the 
 right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of 
 the State and district loherein the crime shall have been 
 committed, which district shall have been previously ascer- 
 tained by laio, and to be informed of the nature and cause of 
 the accusation ; to be confronted with the witnesses against 
 him ; to have compidsory process for obtaining vntnesses in 
 his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 2!)th September, llSd; ratified I5th December, lldl. 
 
 These prohibitions are exclusively restrictive on the 
 Federal powers, to prevent interference with the rights of 
 States and their citizens; i it does not apply to acts of the 
 legislatures of the several States,- though it applies to the 
 case of oif e^ses committed within the limits of the State. 3 
 This article does not apply to the power to confiscate the 
 property of public enemies, ^ nor to a proceeding to annul 
 the license of a pilot for neglect of duty.^ The exception 
 as to trial by military and naval courts, expressed in the 
 Fifth Amendment, governs this amendment by implica- 
 tion, c The guaranty of the right of trial by jury is in- 
 tended for a'state of war as well as for a state of peace, 
 and is equally binding on rulers and people." The indict- 
 ment must set forth the offense with clearness and cer- 
 tainty.8 Where the accused wrongfully kept away the 
 witnesses, he waives his right to be confronted by them ;0 
 so, where he admits that absent witnesses will testify to 
 the facts set forth in the affidavit produced on behalf of 
 the United States. i*> The jury are not constituted judges 
 of the law in criminal cases. ^i 
 
 1 Barron 17. Baltimore, 7 Peters, 243; Fox u. Ohio, 5 How. 410. 
 
 2 Twitchellv. Commonwealth,? Wall. 321; Murphvt;. People, 2 Cow. 
 815: Jackson v. Woorl, 2 Cowen, 819; Campbell v. State, 11 Ga. 353; 
 Guillote V. New Orleans. 12 La. An. 432; Ex parte Smith, 10 Wend. 449; 
 Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Dawson, 15 How. 4fi7. 
 
 4 Miller v. U. S. 11 Wall. 268. 
 
 5 Low V. Commissioners, K. M. Charl. 302. 
 
 6 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 123 ; In re Bogert, 2 Sawy. 402. 
 
Am. VII, § 1 TRIAL BY JURY, 268 
 
 7 Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 119. 
 
 8 U. S. V. Crulkshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 9 Reynolds v.TJ.S.l Am. L. R. 9. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Sacramento, 2 Mont. 239. 
 
 11 U. S. V. Morris, 1 Curt. 23; U. S. v. Shive, Bald. 510; U. S. v. Bat- 
 tiste,2Sum. 243; Townsend v. State, 2 Blackf. 151; Pierce v. State, 5 
 How. 504; 13N. H. 336; Commonwealth v. Porter, 51 Mass. 268; Moutee 
 V. Comm. 3 J. J. Marsh. 150. 
 
 AETICLE YII. 
 
 THIAL BY JURY. 
 SECTIOIf 1. 
 
 Right of, in civil actions. 
 
 In suits at common law, where the value in controversy 
 shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial hy jury shall he 
 preserved, and no fact tried hy a jury shall he otherioise re- 
 examined in any court of the United States, than according 
 to the rules of the common law. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 25th September, 1789; ratified I5th December, 1791. 
 
 Trial by jury. — This provision relates to trials in the 
 United States courts, and not to trials in State courts. ^ 
 It does not extend to suits against the Government."^ The 
 restriction is general and applies to all the departments 
 of Government alike, 3 the governor as much as any other 
 department,* and to the legislative and judiciary of the 
 Territories,^ and to tribunals established under a provis- 
 ional government. 6 The phrase "common law" is used 
 in contradistinction to equity, admiralty, and maritime 
 jurisdiction, and embraces all suits at common law, what- 
 ever may be their peculiar form, brought to settle legal 
 rights.'' The " trial by jury " means a trial by a tribunal 
 of twelve men acting only upon a unanimous determina- 
 tion ; hence, a territorial statute allowing a verdict upon 
 agreement of three-fourths of the jury is void ;^ but it 
 does not prevent such legislature from extending the 
 right to cases involving less than twenty dollars. ^ The 
 benefit of the right herein secured may be waived, but 
 the act of waiver should be plain and explicit, i*^ The in- 
 hibition contained in this article refers to suits at common 
 law alone, and not suits in admiralty, although the courts 
 of common law have a concurrent jurisdiction, H in which 
 suits in admiralty the trial is never by jury, ^^ nor does 
 the provision embrace the established exclusive jurisdic- 
 
269 TKIAIi BY JURY. Am. VII, § 1 
 
 tion of courts of equity, i^ nor to a proceeding under 
 statutory provisions and forms specially provided ;i4 
 as to an examination of a claim under a fugitive slave 
 law, ^5 or a proceeding to assess damages, is 
 
 1 Livingston v. Moore. 7 Peters, 469; Fox v. Oliio, 5 How. 434; Jus- 
 tices V. Murray, 9 Wall. 274; Edwards v. Elliott, 21 Wall. 532; Walker v. 
 Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 92; 27 La. An. 14: Boring v. Williams, 17 Ala. TjIO; 
 Dawson v. Shaver, 1 Blackf. 204; Colt v. Eves, 12 Conn. 243; Foster r. 
 Jackson, 57 Ga. 206; Railroad Co. v. Heath, 9 Ind. 558; State v. Keyes, S 
 Vt. 57; Huntington v. Bishop, 5 Vt. 186; Livingston v. Mayor, 8 Wend. 
 85; Lee v. Tillotson, 24 Wend. 337. 
 
 2 McElrathi;. U. S. 12 Ct. CI. 312. 
 
 3 Kleinschmidt v. Dunphy, 1 Mont. 118. 
 
 4 Claim of Reside, 9 Op. Att.-Gen. 200. 
 
 5 Webster v. Reid, 11 How. 437; Morris, 487; Whallou v. Bancroft, 4 
 Minn. 109. 
 
 6 Scott V. Billgerry, 40 Miss. 119. 
 
 7 Parsons v. Bedford, 3 Peters, 433; Ins. Co. v. Comstock, 16 Wall. 
 258; U. S. V. La Vengeance, 3 Dall. 297; Webster v. Reid, 11 How. 437; 
 Bains v. The James & Catherine, Bald. 554. 
 
 8 Kleinschmidt v. Dunphy, 1 Mont. 118. 
 
 9 Whallon v. Bancroft, 4 Minn. 109. 
 
 10 Bank v. Okely, 4 Wheat. 235; Parsons v. Armor, 3 Peters, 415; U. S. 
 V. Rathbone, 2 Paine, 578. 
 
 11 Waring v. Clarke, 5 How. 441; The Huntress. 2 Ware, (Dav.)8r; 
 U. S. 17. Bright, Bright, 19; Bains v. The James & Catherine, Bald. 544. 
 
 12 IT. S. V. La Vengeance, 3 Dall. 297; The Margaret, 9 Wheat. 421; 
 The Betsey, 4 Cranch, 443; Whelan v. U. S. 7 Crancli, 112; U. S. v. The 
 Queen. 4 Ben. 237'; Clark v. U. S. 2 Wash. C. C. 519; U. S. v. Irma, 12 Int. 
 Rev. Rec. 42. 
 
 13 Shields v. Thomas, 18 How. 353; Woodworth v. Rogers, 3 Wood. & 
 M. 135; Ely v. M. & B. Manuf. Co. 4 Fish. 64; Scott v. Billgerry, 40 Miss. 
 119; Motts V. Bennett, 2 Fish. 642. 
 
 14 Ableman t;. Booth, 21 How. 506; 3 Wis. 157; Miller v. McQuerry, 5 
 McLean, 469; Ex parte Martin, 2 Pame, 348. 
 
 15 Miller v. McQuerry, 5 McLean, 469; Ex parte Martin, 2 Paine, 348. 
 
 16 Bonaparte v. Camden &c. R. R. Co. Bald. 205. 
 
 Right, when not to attach. — This section does not 
 apply to a motion for summary relief, ^ as that judgment 
 may he entered against the surety on an appeal bond,^ 
 or a judgment by default for failure to produce books and 
 papers, 3 or for judgment on a forfeited recognizance;* 
 nor does it apply to j^reliminary inquiries which do not 
 involve a trial of the merits, ^ nor to cases where the 
 facts are conceded, ^ nor to a proceeding to annul the 
 license of a pilot,'' nor to the imposition of a fine for 
 failure to comply with the inspection laws,^ nor where 
 there is default in proceedings under confiscation laws, in 
 a seizure on land ;3 but in an information in rem, the 
 claimant is entitled to a trial by jury.^"^ A trial by 
 
Am. VII, § 1 TRIAL BY JURY. 270 
 
 referees without the consent of the parties is not sanc- 
 tioned ;ii so, a nonsuit cannot be ordered in any case 
 without the consent of the plaintiff. 12 A statute appoint- 
 ing commissioners to determine titles, and making their 
 award fina,!, does not take away the right of trial by 
 jury; 13 but the State legislature cannot direct the Federal 
 courts, in a trial at common law, to appoint commission- 
 ers on questions which should be submitted to a jury.i^ 
 
 1 Banning v. Taylor, 12. 
 
 2 Hiriart v. Ballou, 9 Peters, 156. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Distillery, 8 Cli. L. N. 57. 
 
 4 People V. Quigg, 59 N. Y. 83. 
 
 5 Ex parte Martin, 2 Paine, 348. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Anthony, 11 Blatchf. 210. 
 
 7 Low V. Commissioners, R. M. Charl. 302. ' 
 
 8 Green v. Savannah, R. M. Charl. 368. 
 
 9 Miller v. U. S. 11 Wall. 268. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Barrels, 1 Bond. 587; U. S. v. Distillery, 8 Ch. L. N. 57; 
 U. S. V. Packages, Gilp. 235. 
 
 11 U. S. V. Rathbone, 2 Paine, 578. 
 
 12 Elmore t;. Grymes, 1 Peters, 469; D'Wolf v. Rabaud, 1 Peters, 476- 
 
 13 Barker v. Jackson, 1 Paine, 559. 
 
 14 Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1; Bank of Hamilton v. Dudley, 2 
 Peters, 492. 
 
 Re-examination of causes. — The second clause of 
 this article is substantial and independent, and applies 
 to cases coming into Federal courts from State courts, 
 and protects the verdicts rendered therein. 1 The only 
 mode of review is on motion for a new trial. ^ Since this 
 amendment. Congress cannot confer authority to grant a 
 new trial by a re-examination of the facts tried by a jury, 
 except to redress errors of law.^ An act of Congress, so 
 far as it authorizes the removal of causes after verdict, 
 and trial and determination of the facts and law, is in 
 violation of this amendment ;4 but an act requiring the 
 appellant to advance the jury fee is valid. ^ 
 
 1 Justices V. Murray, 9 Wall. 274. 
 
 2 Parsons v. Bedford, 3 Peters, 433; U. S. v. Wonson, 1 Gall. 20; 
 Patrieu. Murray, 43 Barb. 323; 29 How. Pr. 312; Wetherbee v. Johnson, 
 14 Mass. 412. 
 
 3 Parsons v. Bedford, 3 Peters, 433; Bank of Hamilton v. Dudley, 2 
 Peters, 492. 
 
 4 Benjamin v. Murray, 28 How. Pr. 193; Patrie v. Murray, 43 Barb. 
 323; 14 Mass. 412. And see Spencer v. Lapsley, 20 How. 264; People v. 
 Murray, 5 Park. C. C. 577. 
 
 5 Venine v. Archibald, 3 Colo. 163. 
 
271 EIGHTS KOT DENIED. Am. IX, § 1 
 
 ARTICLE YIII. 
 
 B All,— B'lNES— PUNISHMENT S . 
 
 - Section 1. 
 
 Not to he excessive. 
 
 Excessive hail shall not he required, nor excessive fines im- 
 posed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. 
 
 Amendment, proposed ibth September, 1789; ratified l5tJi December, 1791. 
 
 This provision applies to National and not to State legis- 
 lation.! The Supreme Court cannot on habeas corpus re- 
 vise the sentence of an inferior court on the ground that 
 the fine was excessive.^ Tlie constitutional right to hail 
 is not operative after trial and conviction. ^ 
 
 1 Barron v. Baltimore, 7 Peters, 243; Pervear v. Commonwealth, 5 
 Wall. 480; James v. Commonwealth, 12 Serg. & R. 220; Barker v. Peo- 
 ple, 3 Cowen, 686. 
 
 2 Ex parte Watkins, 7 Peters, 568. 
 
 3 Ex parte Schwartz, 2 Tex. Ct. App. 74. 
 
 ARTICLE IX. 
 
 certain rights not denied to the peopiib. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Rights of j^eoiJle not disparaged by Constitution. 
 
 TJie enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, 
 shall not he construed to deny or disparage others retained by 
 the people. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 25th Se.ptember,lim; ratified I5th December, lldl. 
 
 This provision applies to National and not to State leg- 
 islation. 
 Livingston v. Moore, 7 Peters, 551. 
 
Am. X, § 1 STATE EIGHTS. 272 
 
 ARTICLE X. 
 
 STATE RIGHTS. 
 
 Section l. 
 
 Powers reserved to the States or to the people. 
 
 The poioers not delegated to the United States by the Con- 
 stitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the 
 States respectively , or to the people. 
 
 State rights. — The powers, proceed not from the peo- 
 ple of America but from the people of the several States, 
 and remain what they were before the adoption of the 
 Constitution, except so far as they may be abridged by 
 that instrument.! The powers not delegated to the United 
 States, nor prohibited to the State, are reserved to the 
 States respectively, or to the people.'^ " Delegated " is not 
 qualified by "expressly," such qualification was moved 
 and rejected. 3 The United States and the States exercise 
 jurisdiction within the same territorial .limits, and are 
 separate and independent sovereignties, acting separately 
 and independently within their respective spheres, " as if 
 a line of division was traced by landmarks and monu- 
 ments visible to the eye." ^ The General Government 
 can claim no powers except such as are expressly 
 granted, or are given by necessary implication.^ Its 
 powers are limited in number, but not in their nature. ^^ 
 So, it has no power to impose on a State officer, as such, 
 any duty whatever, and compel him to perform it."^ Pro- 
 hibitions on the States are not to be enlarged by construc- 
 tion. « That which is forbidden to the States is not neces- 
 sarily in the Federal Government, but if that which is 
 essential to government is prohibited to one, it is equiva- 
 lent to a grant on the other.^ 
 
 1 Sturges V. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122. 
 
 2 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 74; McCulloch v. Mel. 4 Wheat. 
 316; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1; 17 Johns. 488; Osborn v. Bank of 
 United States, 9 Wheat. 738; Brown v. Md. 12 Wheat. 419; Weston v. 
 Charleston, 2 Peters, 449; Dobbins v. Commissioners, 16 Peters, 435; 
 Collector 17. Day, 11 Wall. 113; National Banic v. Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 
 353; Sweatt v. Boston &c. K. R. Co. 5 Bank. Reg. 248; U. S. i'. Cruik- 
 shank, 92 U. S. 550; U. S. v. New Bedford Bridge, 1 Wood. & M. 426; 
 Inman S. S. Co. v. Tinker, 94 U. S. 238. 
 
 3 McCulloch V. Md. 4 Wheat. 316; Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; 
 Houston V. Moore, 5 Wheat. 1; Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 226; U. S. 
 V. Bailey, 1 McLean, 234. 
 
273 STATE RIGHTS. Am. X, § 1 
 
 4 McCuUoch V. Md. 4 Wheat. 316; Gibbous v. O^clen, 9 Wheat. 1: 17 
 Johns. 488; Osbora v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738; Brown v. 
 Md. 12 Wheat. 410; Weston v. Charleston, 2 Peters, 449; Dobbins v 
 Commissioners, 16 Peters, 435; Collectors. Day, 11 Wall. 113- National 
 Bank v. Comm. 9 Wall. 353; Sweatt v. Boston &c. K. R. Co 5 Bank 
 Reg. 248; Frasher v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 273; Ableman v. Booth, 21 
 How. 506; Fifleld v. Close, 15 Mich. 505; State v. Garton, 32 Ind. 1 ; State 
 V. Gibson, 36 Ind. 383; People v. Brady, 40 Cal. 198; Lane Co. v Oreo-on 
 7 Wall. 76; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308; Bradwell v. 
 State, 16 Wall. 130. , , uw «; 
 
 5 Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheat. 304; 4 Munf. 1; Thrasher v. State. 3 
 Tex. Ct. App. 273. 
 
 6 Kneedler v. Lane. 45 Pa. St. 233; 3 Grant, 465. 
 
 7 Commonwealth v. Dennison, 24 How. 66. 
 
 8 Anderson v. Baker, 23 Md. 531. 
 
 9 Van Husan v. Kanouse, 13 Mich. 303. 
 
 No right of secession.— The right of secession is not 
 reserved, and any statute or ordinance to that effect is a 
 nullity,! and a State continues a member of the Union, 
 notwithstanding the Ordinance of Secession. 2 A State 
 can have no political existence outside and independent 
 of the Constitution of the United States,^ and the attempt 
 to separate from the Union does not destroy its identity 
 nor free it from the binding force of that Constitution, 4 
 nor release citizens from their obligation of loyalty to the 
 Government.5 The so-called Confederate Government 
 and the rebel government of a State were not de facto 
 governments during the Rebellion. c The confederation 
 of the Southern States was in direct violation of the Con- 
 stitution. "^ 
 
 See Ante, pp. 116, 193. 
 
 1 Keith V. Clark, 97 U. S. 461; U. S. v. Morrison, Chase, 521; Texas 
 V. White, 7 Wall. 726; White v. Cannon, 6 Wall. 443; Hall v. Hal), 43 Ala. 
 488. Andsee White v. Hart, 13 Wall. 64S; Sequestration Cases, 30 Tex. 
 688; Chancely 1?. Bailey, 37 Ga. 532; Cent. R. R. Co. v. Ward, 37 Ga. 515; 
 Hood V. Maxwell, 1 W. Va. 219; Penny wit v. Foote, 27 Ohio St. 600; TJ. 
 S. V. Cathcart, 1 Bond, 556. 
 
 2 Texas V. White, 7 Wall. 700. 
 
 3 Penn v. Tollison, 26 Ark. 545. 
 
 4 Keith v.. Clark, 97 U. S. 451. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Cathcart, 1 Bond, 556. 
 
 6 Chishohn v. Coleman, 43 Ala. 204; Powell v. Boon, 43 Ala. 459. 
 Contra, Watson v. Stone, 40 Ala. 451; Michael v. State, Ibid. 361; 
 Scheibel v. Bachs, 41 Ala. 423. And see Shepherd v. Reese, 42 Ala. 
 329. 
 
 7 Florida v. Georgia, 17 How. 478. 
 
Am. X, § 1 STATE RIGHTS. 274 
 
 Reserved powers of State.— The several States, for 
 all purposes, except those of a national character, are for- 
 eign to and independent of each other, i The State legis- 
 lature retains all the powers of legislation delegated to it 
 by the State constitution, which are not expressly taken 
 away by the Constitution of the United States ; 2 so, every 
 State has the right to determine the status or domestic and 
 social condition of the persons domiciled within its terri- 
 tory. 3 The protection of citizens in their religious lib- 
 erty is left to the State constitution and laws.* So, the 
 power to regulate suffrage belongs exclusively to the 
 State, with which Congress cannot interfere. ^ The power 
 to direct and regulate the mode of selling goods by citi- 
 zens is in the State government. 6 A State may biud it- 
 self by contract.'^ There is nothing in the Constitution 
 which forbids the legislature of a State to exercise judi- 
 cial functions. 8 The establishment of courts of justice, 
 appointment of judges, and the regulation of the admin- 
 istration of justice within each State, are within the pe- 
 culiar and exclusive province of State legislatures. ^ States 
 have tlie power to regulate the tenure of real property 
 within their limits, the mode of acquisition, rule of descent, 
 and extent of testamentary disposition. ^^ Measures cal- 
 culated to produce public benefits through the medium 
 of corporations are within the reserved powers of the 
 States. 11 The Constitution does not furnish the correct- 
 ive for the abuse of power by State governments. This 
 is left to the interest, wisdom, and justice of the represent- 
 ative body, and its relations with its constituents. ^^ 
 
 1 Buckner t?. Finley, 2 Peters, 586; Bank of U. S. v. Daniel, 12 Pe- 
 ters, 33; Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 13 Peters, 520; Dodge v. Woolsey, 
 18 How. 350. 
 
 2 Calcler v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; 2 Root, 350; Commonwealth v. Kimball, 
 41 Mass. 359; People v. Naglee, 1 Cal. 231. 
 
 3 Stracler v. Graham, 10 How. 82. 
 
 4 Permeli v. First Municipality, 3 How. 587. 
 
 5 Huber v. Reily, 53 Pa. St. 112. 
 
 6 Commonwealth v. Kimball, 41 Mass. 359. 
 
 7 Piqua Bank v. Knoop, 16 How. 369; Ohio T. Co. v. Debolt, 16 How. 
 416; 1 Ohio St. 563; Boston &c. R. R. Co. v. Salem &c. R. R. Co. 68 
 Mass. 1. 
 
 8 Satterlee v. Mathewson, 2 Peters, 380. 
 
 9 Calcler v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386; 2 Root, 350; Lapsley v. Brashears, 4 
 Litt. 47. 
 
 10 U. S. V. Fox, 94 U. S. 315: Commonwealth v. Kimball, 41 Mass. 359; 
 Frasher v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 273. 
 
 11 Willson V. Blackbird C. M. Co. 2 Peters, 245; S. & V. R. R. Co. v. 
 Stockton, 41 Cal. 189. 
 
 12 Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Peters. 514. 
 
275 juDiciAi, POWERS. Am. XI, § 1 
 
 ARTICLE XI. 
 
 jttdicial powers. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Limitation on. 
 
 The judicial poioer of the United States shall not he con- 
 strued to extend to any suit in laio or equity commenced or 
 prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of an- 
 other State, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign State. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 5th March, 1794; ratified Sth January, 1798. 
 
 Extent of restriction. — This provision was held fco 
 extend to all pending suits, as well as to future case, si 
 but applies only to original suits, and not to appeals or 
 writs of error ; 2 nor does it extend to suits of admiralty 
 or maritime jurisdiction. ^ The amendment is of neces- 
 sity limited to those suits in which a State is a party to 
 the record,* or where the chief magistrate is sued in a 
 flaim upon him in his official character. 5 The amend- 
 ment provides that no suit shall be commenced or prose- 
 cuted against a State,6 and for those cases only.'^ If the 
 State be not necessarily a defendant, although its interest 
 may be affected, this amendment does not apply. ^ A 
 State by becoming interested in a corporation lays down 
 its sovereignty so far as respects the transactions of the 
 corporation. 9 So, a suit may be maintained against a cor- 
 poration, although a State be a member thereof, lo or even 
 the sole corporator-i^ A mere suggestion of title in the 
 State to property in the possession '^of an individual will 
 not prevent a Federal court from looking into the validity 
 of the title; and if the court decides that the State has no 
 title, the State cannot resist legal process in the case.i"^ 
 Although an independent sovereign cannot be sued,!^ yet 
 there is nothing in the Constitution to deprive a State 
 oourt of jurisdiction over suits which it possessed before 
 the Constitution was adopted. i* 
 
 1 HolUngswortli v. Virginia, 3 Dall. 378 ; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 
 294; Georgia v. Brailsford, 2 Dall. 402; 3 Dall. 1. 
 
 2 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264. 
 
 3 Olmstead's Case, Bright. 9; Ex parte Madrazo, 1 Peters, 127. 
 
 4 Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738; Chisholm v. Geor- 
 gia, 2 Dall. 419 ; Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 5 Peters, 1 ; U.S. v. Peters, 
 5 Cranch. 115; Davis i?. Gray, 16 Wall. 203; Olmstead's Case, Bright. 9; 
 U. S. V. Bright, Bright. 19; Swases'- v. N. C. R. K. Co. 1 Hughes, 1; 71 N. 
 C. 571. 
 
 5 Governor of Ga. v. Madrazo, 1 Peters, 123. 
 
Am. XII,~§ 1 PRESroENTIAL ELECTIONS. 276 
 
 6 U. S. V. Peters, 5 Cranch, 139 ; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 
 Wheat. 738. 
 
 7 Cohens v. Virginia, 6 "Wheat. 264. 
 
 8 Fowler v. Lindsay, 3 Dall. 411 ; New York v. Connecticut, 3 Dall. 
 1 ; U. S. V. Peters, 5 Cranch, 139 ; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 
 Wheat. 738; Louisville &c. R, R Co. v. Letson, 2 How. 550. 
 
 9 Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, 11 Petex's, 324 ; Dayton v. Bank of 
 Alabama, 13 How. 12; Curran v. Arkansas, 15 How. 309. 
 
 10 Bank of United States v. Planters' Bank, 9 Wheat. 904; Louisville 
 &c. K. R. Co. V. Letson, 2 How. 297. 
 
 11 Bank of Kentucky v. Wister, 2 Peters, 318; 3 Ibid. 431. 
 
 12 U. S. V. Peters, 5 Cranch, 115 ; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 
 Wheat. 738. 
 
 13 Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738. 
 
 14 Garr v. Bright, 1 Barb. Ch. 157. 
 
 ARTICLE XII. 
 
 ELECTION OF PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT. 
 
 Section l. 
 Manner of election, etc. 
 
 Tlie Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote 
 by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at 
 least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same State with them- 
 selves ; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for 
 as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as 
 Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all per- 
 sons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as 
 Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, lohich 
 lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the 
 seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the 
 President of the Senate ; — The President of the Senate shall, 
 in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, 
 open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted ; — 
 The person having the greatest number of votes for President 
 shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the 
 whole number of Electors appointed ; and if no person have 
 such majority, then from the persons having the highest 
 numbers, not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as 
 President, the House of Representatives shall choose immedi- 
 ately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the Presi- 
 dent, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation 
 from each State having one vote ; a quorum for this purpose 
 shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the 
 
277 SLAVERY. Am. XIII, § 1 
 
 States, and a majority of all the States shall be necessary to 
 a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not 
 choose a President tohenever the right of choice shall devolve 
 upon them, before the fourth day of J^arch next following, 
 then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case 
 of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. 
 
 The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice- 
 President shall be the Vice-President, if such oiumber be a 
 majority of the whole number of electors appointed ; and if 
 no person have a majority, then from thetwo highest numbers 
 on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President ; a quo- 
 rum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole 
 number of Senators, and a 'majority of the whole number 
 shall be necessary to a choice. 
 
 But no person constitutionally ineligible to the offlce of 
 President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the 
 United States. 
 
 Amendment, ratified September 25th, 1804. 
 
 ARTICLE Xni. 
 
 SLAVERY. 
 
 Section l. 
 
 Slavery prohibited. 
 
 Sec. 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except 
 as a punishment for crime lohereof the party shall have been 
 didy convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any 
 place subject to their jurisdiction. 
 
 This section was not intended to afford relief to par- 
 ties unlawfully deprived of their liberty, its purpose is sat- 
 isfied when such restraint is rendered illegal, i The object 
 of this provision was to deprive both Congress and the 
 respective States of the power to reduce any persons to 
 the condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except 
 as a punishment for crime.^ Servitude has a larger mean- 
 ing than slavery .3 The utmost effect of this clause is to 
 declare the colored as free as the white race — it gives the 
 colored race nothing more than freedom.* It is a positive 
 declaration that slavery shall not exist. ^ That personal 
 servitude was meant is shown by the word "involun- 
 tary." 6 Indenture of appenticeship in violation of State 
 laws is an involuntary servitude within this provision. ' 
 Contracts relating to slaves, if valid when made, are not 
 
 Desty Fed. Con.— 34. 
 
Am. XIII, § 2 SLAVERY. 278 
 
 impaired by this amendment. ^ Emancipation made slaves 
 citizens of the United States.^ So, emancipation under a 
 State constitution makes tliem citizens, lo 
 
 1 People V. Brady, 40 Cal. 198. 
 
 2 People V. Wasliington, 28 Cal. 658. 
 
 3 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 69; Matter of Turner, 1 Abb. U. 
 S.84. 
 
 4 Bowlin V. Commonwealth, 2 Bush, 5. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 543; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 6 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 74; Matter of Turner, 1 Abb. TJ. 
 TJ. 84. 
 
 7 Matter of Turner, 1 Abb. U. S. 84. 
 
 8 Osborn v. Nicholson, 13 Wall. 654; 1 Dill. 219; White v. Hart, 13 
 Wall. 646; 39 Ga.306; Boyce v. Tabb, 18 Wall. 540; McElvain v. Mudd, 
 44 Ala. 48; Koundtree v. Baker, 52 111. 241; Calhoun v. Calhoun, 2 Rich. 
 N. S. 283 ; Hall v. Keese, 31 Tex. 504. But see Gautden v . Stoddard, 41 
 Ga. 329; Cherry v. Jones, 41 Ga. 579; Wainwright v. Bridges, 19 La. An. 
 234; Austin V. Sandel, Ibid. 309; Halley v. Hoeffner, Ibid. 518; Lytle v. 
 Whicher, 21 La. An. 182; Rodrigues v. Bienvenu, 22 La. An. 300; Suc- 
 cession of Woodward, Ibid. 305. 
 
 9 U. S.v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 28. 
 10 Matt, of Turner, 1 Abb. U. S. 84. 
 
 Section 2. 
 
 Sec. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article 
 hy appropriate legislation. 
 Amendment, proposed \st Feb., 1865 ; declared ratified, ISth Dec, 1865. 
 
 This clause authorizes Congress to pass such laws as 
 are appropriate, hut not to annul State laws, or control 
 their operation.i Legislation which practically tends to 
 securing the full enjoyment of personal freedom is appro- 
 priate. ^ A law which only permits the same class of per- 
 sons to testify against a black man as are allowed to tes- 
 tify against a white man, in a matter where personal lib- 
 erty is concerned, tends to enforce this amendment.^ 
 Power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation 
 imports nothing more than to uphold the emancipating 
 section, and prevent a violation of the contemplated lib- 
 erty of the enfranchised race.* This clause does not au- 
 thorize Congress to pass laws for the punishment of ordi- 
 nary crimes and offenses against persons of the colored 
 race— that belongs to the State government.^ 
 
 1 People V. Brady, 40 Cal. 198. 
 
 2 People V. Washington, 38 Cal. 658. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 34; People v. Washmgton, 38 Cal. 658. 
 But see Bowlin v. Commonwealth, 2 Bush, 5. 
 
 4 Bowlin V. Commonwealth, 2 Bush, 5. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 543; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
279^ CIVIL BIGHTS. Am. XIV, § X 
 
 ARTICLE XIY. 
 
 CITIZENSHIP, REPRESENTATIOK, AND PtTBLIO DEBT. 
 
 Section l. 
 Who are citizens — rights of. 
 
 Sec. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United' 
 States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens oj 
 the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No 
 State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the 
 privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ; nor 
 shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property 
 loUhout due process of law ; nor deny to any person within its 
 jurisdiction the equal protection of the laios. 
 
 Citizens. — "Citizen" and "person" are synonymous 
 terms, and this section refers to natural persons, i An in- 
 corporated company is not a citizen of the United States, 
 nor a person within the meaning of this section. 2 " Citi- 
 zen" is entirely analogous to "subject" at common law.^ 
 A person may be a citizen of the United States without 
 being a citizen of any State. ^ Women may be citizens. ^ 
 This section does not confer citizenship upon jaersons of 
 foreign birth. ^ The words "subject to the jurisdiction 
 thereof" exclude the children of foreigners transiently 
 within the United States, as ministers, consuls, or sub- 
 jects of a foreign nation.'^ This amendment does not in- 
 clude Indians or others not born in and subject to the ju- 
 risdiction of the United States;*^ but an Indian, if taxed, 
 after tribal relations have been abandoned, is a citizen. ^ 
 Colored persons equally with whites are citizens, ^o but an 
 escaped slave, resident of Canada, or his children, are not 
 citizens. ^1 This section recognizes the difference between 
 citizens of the United States and citizens of the State. 12 
 The main purpose of this amendment was to establish the 
 citizenship of the negro. i3 This clause applies only to 
 citizens removiDg from one State to another. 1* 
 
 1 People V. C. & A. R. R. Co. 6 Chic. L. N. 280. 
 
 2 Insurance Co. v. New Orleans, 1 Woods, 85. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Rhodes, 1 Abb. U. S. 39; North Carolina v. Manuel, 4 Dev. 
 & B. 20; McKay v. Campbell, 2 Sawy. 129. 
 
 4 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 74 ; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 
 543; 1 Woods, 308; CuUy v. Baltimore &c. R. R. Co. 1 Hughes, 536. 
 
 5 Miner?;. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162. 
 
 6 Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43. 
 
 7 Slaughter-House Cases, 1 Abb. N. C. 73. 
 
Am. XIV, § 1 CIVIL RIGHTS. 280 
 
 8 McKay v. Campbell, 2 Sawy. 129. 
 
 9 U. S. V. Elni, 23 Int. Rev. Rec. 419. 
 
 10 In re Turner, 1 Abb. U. S. 88. 
 
 11 Hedgman v. Board, 26 Mich. 51. 
 
 12 Frasher v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 267. 
 
 13 Slaugbter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36 ; Prasher v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. 
 App. 267. 
 
 14 Ex parte Hobbs, 1 Woods, 542 ; Live Stock &C. Asso. v. Crescent 
 City, 1 Abb. U. S. 397. 
 
 Civil rights. — The jjurpose of this amendment was to 
 secure to the colored race in the South the benefit of the 
 freedom previously accorded to them.i Privileges and 
 immunities of citizens include such as are derived from 
 or recognized by the Constitution, ^ and are not identical 
 with those referred to in section two of article f our.^ This 
 amendment adds nothing to the rights of one citizen as 
 against anotherj'i nor does it add to the privileges and im- 
 munities existing at the time of its adoption; ^ it is merely 
 a guaranty that they shall not be impaired by the States 
 or by the United States. ^ It not merely requires equality 
 of privileges and immunities, but demands that they 
 shall be absolutely unabridged and unimpaired. ' State's 
 may pass laws to regulate the privileges and immunities 
 of its own citizens, provided they do not abridge the 
 privileges and immunities of citizens of the U^nited 
 States ; *^ so, a State may jjass laws for the protection of 
 the lives, health, and property of its citizens. ^ Congress 
 cannot protect a citizen in the right to the use of a public 
 conveyance for local travel. i'^ The right of intermarriage 
 between the races is not a privilege or immunity pro- 
 tected by this amendment, the marriage laws being under 
 control of the State ;ii so. States may provide against 
 miscegenation, and make it a felony. 12 Nor is the right 
 of trial by jury,i3 nor the right to practice law^* or med- 
 icine, ^^ nor the right to sell intoxicating liquors, 1° nor the 
 right of fishery. 1'^ The possession of all political rights 
 is not essential to citizenship, ^s So, a State may regulate 
 the conditions for the tenure of oflice,^-^ or determine the 
 class of inhabitants who may vote."-^*^ The elective fran- 
 chise is not a natural right, nor an immunity.^i By this 
 amendment all persons born in the United States are cit- 
 izens thereof and capable of becoming voters, but the 
 provision is not self-executing.-- But it abrogates the 
 provision in a statute discriminating in votes for corpo- 
 ration commissioners on account of race or color. 23 By 
 this amendment Congress had the right to pass the Civil 
 Bights Bill,24 which is constitutional.'^s Congress cau only 
 
281 CIVIL RIGHTS. , Am. XIV, § 1 
 
 legislate in protection of the rights of citizens of the 
 United States, as such.26 This amendment authorizes an 
 act providing for the equal enjoyment of accommoda- 
 tions, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, con- 
 veyances, theaters, etc.^" It was not intended to transfer 
 the protection of all civil rights to the Federal Govern- 
 ment, nor to bring within the power of Congress the 
 entire domain of civil rights heretofore belonging exclu- 
 sively to the several States. ^s 
 
 1 ^ Slaughter-House Cases, 16 "Wall. 71. 
 
 2 State V. McCaun. 21 Ohio St. 198. 
 
 3 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 71. The meaning of " privileges " 
 in Art. IV, Sec. 2, (I) is such as each State gave to its own citizens, 
 while its meaning in tliis section embraces much more, and applies to 
 all citizens of tlie United States. Live Stock &c. Asso. v. Crescent 
 City, 1 Abb. U. S. 398; U. S. v. Anthony, 11 Blatchf. 204. The meaning 
 to be determined by the court in each particular case. Ex parte 
 Hobbs, 1 Woods, .542; Live Stock &c. Asso. v. Crescent City, 1 Abb. U. 
 S. 397. See ante. Art. IV, Sec. 2. 
 
 4 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 543; 1 Woods, 308; Ward v. Flood, 48 
 Cal. 36. 
 
 5 Miner y. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162; Ward v. Flood, 48 Cal. 36; Fra^ 
 sher V. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 267. 
 
 6 U. S. V. Cruiksliank, 92 U. S. 543; 1 Woods, 308; Van Valkenburg v. 
 Brown, 43 Cal. 43. But see U. S. v. Hall, 13 Int. Rev. Rec. 181 ; 3 Ch. L, 
 N. 260. 
 
 7 Live Stock &c. Association v. Crescent City, 1 Abb. U. S. 398. 
 
 8 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36. 
 
 9 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36; Thorpe v Rutland &c. E. R. 
 Co. 27 Vt! 149; New York v. Main, 11 Peters, 102; Prigg v. Comm. 16 Pe- 
 ters. 539; Comm.t;. Kimball, 24 Pick. 359; Frasher v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. 
 App. 273. Tliis amendment was not intended to interfere witli State 
 laws for the regulation of pursuits, professions, or the use of property. 
 Munn V. People, 69 111. 80. 
 
 10 Cully V. Bait. & O. R. R. 1 Hughes, 536. 
 
 11 Ex parte Hobbs, 1 Woods, 537; Lonas v. State, 3 Heisk. 287; State 
 V. Gibson, 36Ind. 389; Commr. v. Elliott, 18 How. 591; Frasher tj. State, 
 3 Tex. Ct. App. 263. But see Burns v. State, 48 Ala. 195. 
 
 12 Frasher v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 262; State v. Gibson, 36 Ind. 389. 
 
 13 Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90. 
 
 14 Bradwell v. State, 16 Wall. 130; U. S. v. Anthony, 11 Blatchf. 204. 
 
 15 Ex parte Spinney, 10 Nev. 323. 
 
 16 Bartemeyer v. Iowa, 18 Wall. 129. 
 
 17 McCready v. Virginia, 94 U. S. 391. 
 
 18 People V. De La Guerra, 40 Cal. 311. 
 
 19 Kennard v. Louisiana, 92 U. S. 480; Spencer v. Board, 1 McArth. 
 169. 
 
 20 Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43; U. S. v. Anthony, 11 Blatchf. 
 200; U. S. «. Crosby, 1 Hughes, 448; Minor w. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162^ 
 U. S. V. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 543. But see Dillard v. Webb, 55 Ala. 468. 
 
Am. XIV, § 1 civiii RIGHTS. 282 
 
 21 Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162 ; U. S. w. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 ; 
 1 Woods, 308; U. S. v. Anthony, 11 Blatchf. 200; Spencer v. Board, 1 
 McArth. 169; Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43. 
 
 22 Spencer v. Board, 1 McArth. 169. 
 
 23 Dillard v. Webb, 55 Ala. 488. 
 
 24 Smith v. Moody, 26 Ind. 307. 
 
 25 In re Turner, 1 Abb. U. S. 88; Chase, 157. 
 
 26 Cully V. Bait. &c. E,. R. Co. 1 Hughes, 536; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 
 U. S. 560; 1 Woods, 303. 
 
 27 U. S. V. Newcomer, 22 Int. Rev. Rec. 115; 2 Am. L. T. Rep. N. S. 
 198. 
 
 28 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Cal. 33; Fraslier v. State, 3 Tex. Ct. App. 
 267. 
 
 Protection of citizens. — The protection of life and 
 personal liberty rests in the State alone. i The Federal 
 Government cannot punish an individual for conspiring 
 to deprive a person of life or liberty without due process 
 of law. "2 An arrest made by an officer of the State mili- 
 tia, in pursuance of authority granted in time of insurrec- 
 tion, is not a deprival of liberty without due process of 
 law. 3 A law allowing overseers to commit a vagrant on 
 an ex parte hearing deprives of liberty without due pro- 
 cess of law.4 A State law regulating a pursuit or profes- 
 sion, or regulating the use of i^roperty, does not abridge 
 the liberty of the citizen.^ A statute regulating the use 
 and even the price of property does not, in all cases, 
 deprive of property without due process of law;^ nor does 
 a law which prohibits common carriers from discriminat- 
 ing against passengers on account of race and color.'!' 
 Private property devoted to public use ceases to be pri- 
 vate property to the extent of that use. 8 Due process of 
 law means such an exertion of the power of government 
 as the settled maxims of law permit and sanction, 9 in 
 the regular course of administration, according to pre- 
 scribed forms, '0 according to the law of the land.H It 
 means more than a special act authorizing the depriva- 
 tion, i'-^ Where the statute makes ample provision for 
 judicial inquiry, it is due process of law.i^ A party is 
 not deprived of property without due process of law, 
 although the case was tried without a jury.i* The require- 
 ment is met if the trial is liad according to the settled 
 course of judicial i)roceedings.i^ So, the fact that the 
 judgment of the commissioner is final does not deprive 
 such person of due process of law;i6 and an entry of 
 judgment on a forfeited recognizance does not take prop- 
 erty without due process of law.i" This amendment does 
 not apply to revenue collection. is Assessment of taxes 
 is necessarily summary, and need not be by judicial pro- 
 
283 CIVIL KiGHTs. Am. XIV, § 1 
 
 cedure;!^ so, a levy by a collector, in pursuance of a State 
 law, is due process of law.'-^** A statute regulating pro- 
 ceedings in contestations between claimants for a judicial 
 office is not in violation of this section.21 
 
 1 U, S. V. Cruibshank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 2 XT. S. V. Cruiksliank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 3 In re Bergen, 2 Hughes, 512. 
 
 4 Portland v. Bangor, 65 Me. 120. 
 
 5 Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113 ; 69 111. 80 ; Ex parte Spinney^ 10 
 Nev. 323; Railroad Co. v. Richmond, 96 U. S. 521. 
 
 6 Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113; 69 111.80. 
 
 7 De Cuir v. Benson, 7 La, An. 1. 
 
 8 Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113 ; 69 111. 80. 
 
 9 Ex parte Ah Fook, 49 Cal. 402. 
 
 10 Rowan v. State, 30 Wis. 129. 
 
 11 Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 93; Kennard v. Louisiana, 92 U. S. 483. 
 
 12 Clark v. Mitchell, 64 Mo. 564. 
 
 13 Pearson v. Yewdall, 95 U. S. 296. 
 
 14 Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90. 
 
 15 Murray v. Hoboken &c. Co. 18 How. 280; Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 
 
 U.S. 93. 
 
 16 Ex parte Ah Fook, 49 Cal. 402. 
 
 17 People V. Quigg, 59 N. Y. 83. 
 
 18 Davidson v. -New Orleans, 6 Am. Law Reg. 1. 
 
 19 McMillan v. Anderson, 6 Am. L. J. 335. 
 
 20 McMiUan v. Anderson, 6 Am. L. J. 335. 
 
 21 Kennard v. Louisiana, 92 U. S. 480. 
 
 Equal protection of the laws.— Equal protection 
 implies not only equal accessibility to courts for the pre- 
 vention or redress of wrongs, and the enforcement of 
 rights, but equal exemption with others of the same class 
 from all charges and burdens of every kind.i This amend- 
 ment does not create any new rights, but operates on 
 rights as it found them established.^ It applies to all 
 persons, whether native or foreigners, while within the 
 jurisdiction of the United States,3 including persons of 
 color,4and operates as a guaranty. ^ It means that per- 
 sons made citizens by this amendment should be pro- 
 tected by law in the same manner and to the same extent 
 that white citizens are protected. ^ A statute excluding 
 colored children from the benefits of the school system 
 denies them the equal protection of the laws,''' but a stat- 
 ute providing for the education of colored children in sep- 
 arate schools is valid.8 A law imposing a tax on minors 
 
Am. XIV, § 1 CIVIL EIGHTS. 284 
 
 which discriminates in its operation as to race, is in con- 
 flict.s A State may legislate as to the rules of evidence,!^ 
 and may exclude Chinese from the right to testify where 
 a white person is a party, i^ The Civil Kights Bill had the 
 effect in California of excluding the testimony of Chinese 
 for or against negroes equally with whites, i- This clause 
 does not prevent States from imposing a more severe pun- 
 ishment for adultery or fornication where the parties are 
 of different races. ^^ A statute authorizing the recovery 
 of double the value of property destroyed by a railroad 
 train does not deprive of the equal protection of the 
 laws;i* nor does a statute regulating slaughter-houses ;i5 
 nor a statute regulating the charges for storage in ware- 
 houses. ^^ A State may legislate to prevent lewd and de- 
 bauched women from landing as passengers,!'^ or to pro- 
 hibit females from being in places where liquor is sold.^'^ 
 This jDrovision simply prevents States from doing that 
 which will deprive of property, not from regulating the 
 use of property. 1^ 
 
 1 Ex parte Ah Fong, 3 Sawy. 144. 
 
 2 Ward v. Flood, 48 Cal. 36. 
 
 3 Ex parte All Fong, 3 Sawy. 144. 
 
 4 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36. 
 
 5 U. S. V. Crulkshank, 92 Wall. 543; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 6 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36. 
 
 7 Ward v. Flood, 48 Cal. 36. But see Marshall v. Donovan, 10 Bush. 
 681. 
 
 8 Ward v. Flood, 48 Cal. 36; Cory v. Carter, 48 Ind. 327; State v. 
 McCann, 21 Ohio St. 198. 
 
 9 U. S. ». Jackson, 3 Sawy. 61. 
 
 10 People V. Brady, 40 Cal. 198; Duffy v. Hobson, 40 Cal. 240. 
 
 11 People V. Brady, 40 Cal. 198, overruling People v. Washington, 36 
 Cal. 658. 
 
 12 People V. Washington, 36 Cal. 658. 
 
 13 Ford V. State, 53 Ala. 150; Ellis v. State, 42 Ala. 525. 
 
 14 Tredway v. S. C. & St. P. R. Co. 43 Iowa, 527. 
 
 15 Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36. 
 
 16 Munn v. lUinois, 94 U. S. 113; 69 111. 80. 
 
 17 Ex parte Ah Fook, 49 Cal. 402. 
 
 18 Ex parte Nellie Smith, 38 Cal. 709. 
 
 19 Mimn v. lUinois, 94 U. S. 134. 
 
285 REPRESENTATION. Am. XIV, § 3 
 
 Section 2. 
 Apportionment of representation. 
 
 Sec, 2. Representatives shall he apportioned among the 
 several States according to their respective numbers, count- 
 ing the lohole 7iumber of persons in each State, excluding In- 
 dians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election 
 for the choice of Electors for President and Vice-President of 
 the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive 
 and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the legisla- 
 ture thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such 
 State, being twenty-one years of age and citizens of the United 
 States, or in any loay abridged, except for participation in 
 rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein 
 shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such 
 male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens 
 twenty-one years of age in such State. 
 
 Disability for office. — The intent of this section was 
 to create a disability to be made to operate by legislation 
 of Congress. 1 The prohibition did not instantly on the 
 day of its promulgation vacate all offices and make offi- 
 cial acts since that day null and void.2 A person who 
 held office under the Confederate Government or aided 
 in the Rebellion is disqualified. So, a sheriff who took an 
 oath to support the Constitution is within this section.^ 
 So as to a county attorney.* As to the effect of this 
 amendment as a bar to any other punishment, qucere?^ 
 
 1 Griffin's Case, Chase, 364 ; 25 Tex. Supp. 623 ; Powell v. Boon, 43 
 Ala. 469. 
 
 2 Griffin's Case, Chase, 364; 25 Tex. Supp. 623. 
 
 3 Worthy v. Barrett, 63 N. C. 199. 
 
 4 In re Tate, 63 N. C. 308. 
 
 5 Ex parte Jeff. Davis, Chase, 1. 
 
 SECTION 3. 
 
 Certain persons disqualified from holding office. 
 
 Sec. 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in 
 Congress, or Elector of President and Vice-President, or hold 
 any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under 
 any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member 
 of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a mem- 
 ber of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial offi- 
 cer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United 
 
Am. XIV, § 5 PUBLIC DEBT. 283 
 
 States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against 
 the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But 
 Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each house, remove 
 such disability. 
 
 Section 4. 
 
 Payment of public deht not to he questioned— Rebel debts not to be assumed. 
 
 Sec. 4, The validity of the public debt of the United 
 States, authorized by laio, inchiding debts incurred for pay- 
 ment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing 
 insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither 
 the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt 
 or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion 
 against the United States, or any claim for the loss or eman- 
 cipation of any slave ; but all such debts, obligations, and 
 claims shall be held illegal and void. 
 
 Confederate notes. — No contract to pay iu Confed- 
 erate notes is valid, as it is a payment of debt incurred in 
 aid of the Rebellion. 
 
 Smith V. Nelson, 34 Tex. 516. 
 
 Sectiok 5. 
 
 Enforcement of provisions. 
 
 Sec. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by 
 appropriate legislation, the x)rovisions of this Article. 
 
 Amendment, proposed lUli June, 1866; declared ratified 2'&th July, 1868. 
 
 Enforcement. — The war of race, in any form, even 
 by private outrage or intimidation, is subject to the juris- 
 diction of the United States Government ; and any atrocity 
 may be punished by the laws and in the courts of the 
 United States. i The Civil Eights Bill is constitutional,^ 
 but it does not prohibit the making of race and color a 
 constituent of an offense if there be no discrimination in 
 the punishment. 3 
 
 1 U. S. V. Cruiksliank, 92 U. S. 542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 2 In re Turner, Chase, 157. 
 
 3 Ellis V. State, 42 Ala. 525. 
 
2§7 KIGHT TO VOTE. Am. XV, § 2 
 
 ARTICLE XV. 
 
 elective fkanchisb. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 Right of all citizens to vote. 
 
 Sec. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote 
 shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any 
 State on account of race, color, or previous condition of serv- 
 itude. 
 
 This amendment invests the citizens of the United 
 States with a new right within the protecting power of 
 Congress. i It does not confer the right of suffrage on any 
 one.2 It takes away the authority ot the State to discrim- 
 inate against citizens of the United ' States on account of 
 either race, color, or previous condition of servitude,^ and 
 colored persons equally with whites are citizens of the 
 United States; ^ but the power of the States upon all other 
 grounds, including that of sex, remains intact.^ It does 
 not include persons who have merely declared their inten- 
 tions to become citizens.^ 
 
 1 U. S. V. Reese, 92 U. S. 218; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 543; 92 U. 
 S.542; 1 Woods, 308. 
 
 2 Minor v.'Happersett, 21 Wall, 178; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 555; 
 1 Woods, 308; U. S. v. Keese, 92 U. S. 214 ; Anthony v. Haldeman, 7 Kan. 
 50; Hedgman v. State, 26 Mich, 51; U. S. v. Petersburg Judges, 14 Am. 
 Law Keg. 105. 
 
 3 U. S. V. Reese, 92 U. S. 214; U, S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 543; 1 
 Woods,308; U. S. iJ. Petersburg Judges, 14 Am. Law Reg. 105; VanVal- 
 kenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43; Wood v. Fitzgerald, 3 Or. 568. 
 
 4 In re Turner, 1 Abb. U. S. 88, 
 
 5 Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43. 
 
 6 McKay v. CampbeU, 2 Sawy. 129; Hedgman v. State, 26 Mich. 51. 
 
 Section 2. 
 
 Power to enforce provisions. 
 
 Sec. 2. The Congress shall have poioer to enforce this 
 Article by appropriate legislation. 
 
 Amendment, proposed 21th February, 186,1; declared ratified SOtJi 
 March, 1870. 
 
Am. XV, § 2 RIGHT TO VOTE. 288 
 
 The rights of citizens created by or dependent on 
 the Constitution of the United States may be protected by 
 Congress. 1 Congress may make the non-performance of 
 duties of persons imposed by State laws, which affect the 
 rights of persons, an offense against the United States, 
 and may punish accordingly.'^ 
 
 1 U. S. W.Reese, 92 U. S. 214. 
 
 2 U. S. V. Given, 17 Int. Rev. Rec. 289. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Abolishment— of slavery, Amclt. art. 13, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 
 Absentee— from bouse, provisions concerning, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, 
 
 p. 50. 
 Acceptance— of office or gifts from foreign potentate, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 
 par. 8, p. 115. 
 
 Act of Congress— passage of, p. 55. 
 wben to take effect, p. 55. 
 power of Congress to enact, p. 84. 
 provisions, wben constitutional, p. 106. 
 
 Accounts of public money— to be published, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 7, Pr 
 
 115. 
 Actions— re-examination of causes of, Amdt. art. 7, sec. 1, p. 263. 
 
 to what section applies, p. 270. 
 Adjournment— of House, for want of a quorum, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1. p. 
 50. 
 restriction on power of, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 4, p. 52. 
 wben President may adjourn Congress, art. 2, see. 3, par. 1, x). 206. 
 Alteration— of charter of corporation. State authority, p. 174. 
 power may be reserved in charter, p. 175. 
 exercise of reserved power, p. 177. 
 Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction— where lodged, art. 3, sec. 2, 
 par. 1, p. 215. 
 interpretation and construction, p. 221. 
 
 Admission— of new States, power of Congress, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 
 242. 
 clause construed, p. 242. 
 
 Adoption— of anterior confederation debts and obligations, art. 6, sec. 
 l,par. 1, p. 248. 
 
 Advice and consent— of Senate, when required, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, 
 
 p. 203. 
 Affirmation— see Oath. 
 
 Agreements— or compacts, not to be entered into by States, art. 1, sec. 
 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 right and duty of protection, where lodged, p. 193. 
 Alliance— no State shaU enter into treaty of, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 
 116. 
 secession and confederation inhibited, p. 116. 
 no right of secession, p. 273. 
 
 Ambassadors— President may appoint, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 judicial power extends to, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 223. . 
 original jurisdiction over, p. 223. 
 Desty Fed. Con.— »5. [289] 
 
290 INDEX. 
 
 * 
 
 Amendments— to Constitution, proposal does not require President's 
 approval, p. 56. 
 
 when Congress shall propose, art. 5, sec. 1, p. 247. 
 
 convention for, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 247. 
 
 to be ratified by tln-ee-f ourths of the States, art. 5, sec. 1, p, 247. 
 
 power of people, without limit, p. 247. 
 
 what ones apnly exclusively to United States Government, p. 247. 
 
 of corporate charter, authority of legislature, p. 174. 
 
 power may be reserved in charter, p. 175. 
 
 exercise of reserved power, p. 177. 
 Appeal— right of, may be regulated by statute, p. 158. 
 Appellate jurisdiction— of Supreme Court, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 223. 
 
 clause construed, p. 225. 
 Appointment— and removal from ofBce, p. 204. 
 
 power of executive, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 
 to office, when void, p. 53. 
 
 senators and representatives cannot be appointed to civil oface, 
 art. 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 Apportionment— of representation and direct taxation, art. 1, sec. 2, 
 par. 3, p. 46. Repealed, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 
 of Representatives among the several States, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 
 2, p. 285. 
 
 construction of original clause, p. 46. 
 
 Intent of Fourteenth Amendment, p. 285. 
 Appropriate legislation— power of Congress, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 18, p. 
 106. 
 
 enforcement of Thirteentli Amendment, art. 13, sec. 2, p. 278. 
 
 enforcement of Fourteenth Amendment, art. 14, sec. 2, p. 286. 
 
 enforcement of Fifteenth Amendment, art. 15, sec. 2, p. 287. 
 
 Appropriate means— Congress may adopt, p. 53. 
 Appropriation— for army, limited to two years, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 12, 
 p. 9,9. 
 money not to be drawn but in consequence of, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 
 
 7 pp. L5. 
 disbursements of public money to be published, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 
 7, pp. 1,5. 
 Approval— bills to be presented to President for, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, 
 p. 54. 
 orders, resolutions, etc., to be approved, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 3, p. 55. 
 proposed amendments to Constitution need not be presented, 
 p. 56. 
 Armies- appropriations limited to two years, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 12, p. 99. 
 Congress to make rules for government of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 4, p. 
 
 100. 
 power to raise and support, construed, p. 99. 
 Congress may provide for trials by courts-martial, p. 100. 
 may provide for common defense, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 Arms— right of people to bear, Amdt. art. 2, sec. 1, p. 255. 
 
 riglit construed, p. 255. 
 Arrest— defined, p. 52. 
 
 privilege of members of Congress from, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 clause construed, p. 52. 
 extent of privilege, p. 53. 
 
 Arsenals— exclusive authority of Congress, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 
 Arts— Congress to promote, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 8, p. 94. 
 
 power defined, p. 94. 
 Attachment law— when superseded by bankrupt law, p. 86. 
 
INDEX. 291 
 
 Attainder— Congress cannot pass bill of, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 3, p. 111. 
 State shall not pass bill of, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 of treason not to work corruption of blood, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 
 
 229. 
 construction of clauses, pp. Ill, 120. 
 
 Attendance— of members of Congress may be compelled, art. 1, sec. 5, 
 
 par. 1, p. 50. 
 Authentication— of State record. Congress to prescribe manner of, 
 
 art. 4, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 230. 
 Authority— of State over judicial proceedings, p. 145. 
 
 of executive over conquered territory, p. 199. 
 Authors and inventors— Congress to secure rights of, art. 1, sec. 8. 
 par. 8, p. 94. 
 
 power defined, p. 94. 
 Bail— excessive, not to be required, Amdt. art. 8, sec. 1, p. 271. 
 
 section construed, p. 271. 
 Ballot— electors of President to vote by, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 
 when House to choose President by, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 Bank— State may establish, p. 120. 
 
 may regulate issuance of notes, p. 167. 
 
 may exempt from taxation, p. 105. 
 
 Banking corporations— charter a contract binding on State, p. 167. 
 
 State may incorporate, p. 118. 
 
 notes of, not bills of credit, p. 118. 
 Bankrupt act— effect of, on State insolvent laws, p. 86. 
 
 when superseded insolvent laws, p. 87. 
 
 what laws superseded by, p. 87. 
 Bankruptcies— Congress to pass uniform laws on, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 4 
 p. 81. 
 
 bankruptcy defined, p. 83. 
 
 laws to be uniform, p. 84. 
 
 power of Congress milimited, p. 84. 
 Basis of representation— what is, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 185. 
 
 when to be reduced, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 
 mtent of amendment construed, p . 285. 
 
 Belligerent— may by capture enforce authority, p. 98. 
 
 Bill of attainder— Congress cannot pass, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 3, p. 111. 
 clause construed, p. HI. 
 
 States shall not pass, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 120. 
 bill of attainder, what is, p. 120. 
 
 Bills of credit— Congress may issue, p. 61. 
 may make them legal tenders, p. 62. 
 Confedei-ate notes are not, p. 119. 
 States shall not emit, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 clause construed, p. 118. 
 bank bills are not, p. 118. 
 
 Bills- for raising revenue, to originate in House, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 1, p. 
 
 54. 
 on passage of both Houses to be presented to President, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54. 
 power of President to sign or disapprove them, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 
 
 2, p. 54. 
 two-thirds of each House may pass over his veto, art. 1. sec. 7, 
 
 par. 2, p. 54. 
 not returned by President within ten days, become law, unless, 
 
 etc., art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54. 
 
292 INDEX. 
 
 Borrow money— power of Government, what includes, p. 61. 
 
 State and municipal corporations may, p. 118. 
 Bounties— debt for, not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4. p. 286. 
 
 to volunteers, State may give, p. 99. 
 
 statutes granting, construed, p. 128. 
 Branches of G-overnment— separate and independent, p. 44. 
 Breach of peace— no privilege from arrest for, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, 
 
 p. 52. 
 Bribery— all ofiacers liable to impeachment, art. 2, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 207. 
 Bridges— authority to build, power conferred on Congress, p. 67. 
 
 power of Congress, when paramount, p. 74. 
 
 grant of franchise a contract, p. 168. 
 
 when State may charter, p. 74. 
 
 Canal companies— State may charter, p. 74. 
 Candidates— who deemed elected, p. 45. 
 
 Capitation tax— laid in proportion to the census, art. 1, sec. 9, par..4, 
 p. 113. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 113. 
 Captures— Congress to make rules for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 11, p. 97. 
 
 extent of power, p. 98. 
 Causes— of afttion at common law, trial by jury, Amdt. art. 7, sec. 1, p. 
 268. 
 
 re-examination of, Amdt. art. 7, sec. 1, p. 268. 
 
 to what section applies, p. 270. 
 
 trial by jury, p. 268. 
 
 right, when does not attach, p. 269. 
 
 Ceded property— authority of Congress over, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 over District of Columbia, p. 103. 
 over other places, p. 104. 
 over sites for forts, arsenals, etc., p. 104. 
 extent of State jurisdiction over crimes, p. 105. 
 
 Census— of people, when to be taken, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 eighth, when took effect, p. 46. 
 capitation tax iu proportion to, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 4, p. 113. 
 
 Certificates— to foreign corporations not a contract, p. 151. 
 of election of members to Congress, p. 50. 
 
 Charter— to private corporations, a contract with State, pp. 162, 172. 
 franchise, how construed, p. 162. 
 Legislature cannot contravene provisions of, p. 162. 
 rightto amend, alter, or repeal, p. 162. 
 includes laws defining its stipulations, p. 168. 
 to what laws subject in case of consolidation, p. 170. 
 effect of immunity from taxation, p. 172. 
 right of eminent domain, p. 172. 
 implied reservations in, 173. 
 
 may be altered or amended by assent of corporations, p. 174. 
 power to alter, amend, or repeal may be reserved in, p. 175. 
 exercise of reserved power, p. 177. 
 of power to repeal, p. 178. 
 granted by Confederate States, void, p. 116. 
 
 Cherokee Territory- laws of, construed, p. 81. 
 
 Chief Justice- to preside on impeachment of President, art. 1, sec. 3, 
 par. 6. p. 48. 
 
 Chinese— State cannot discourage immigration of, p. 71. 
 
 Choses in action— transfer of, caimot be prohibited, p. 156. 
 
INDEX. 293 
 
 Citizens— no other than, shall be Representatives in Congress, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 2 , par. 1, p. 45. 
 qualifications necessary for Senator, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 3, p. 47. 
 inhabitants of the District of Columbia are, p. 103. 
 no person but natural born shall be President, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 
 
 5, p. 196. 
 nor Vice-President, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 privileges and immunities preserved to, art. 4, sec. 2, par. l,p. 233. 
 citizens , who are, p. 233. 
 privileges and immunities construed, p. 234. 
 of other States, when bound by State insolvent laws, pp. 89, 90. 
 State rights as to citizens, p. 236. 
 all persons born or naturalized are citizens of United States, and 
 
 of the State, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 citizens under this amendment who are, p. 297. 
 not to be deprived of privileges or immunities, Amdt. art. 14, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 279. 
 civil rights, purpose of amendment, p. 280. 
 not to be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due proof 
 
 ess of law, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 protection to, guai'anteed, p. 282. 
 
 equal protection of the laws, amendment construed, p. 283. 
 right to vote shall not be denied or abridged, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 
 
 l,p.287. 
 amendment construed, p. 287. 
 rights of, may be protected by Congress, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 1, pd. 
 
 287, 288. 
 Citizenship— does not of itself give right to vote, p. 45. 
 
 right of suffrage not conferred by Fifteenth Amendment, p. 287. 
 effect of naturalization, p. 82. 
 what constitutes, p. 82. 
 Civil actions— trial by jury in, Amdt. art. 7, sec. 1, p. 268. 
 right, when not to attach, p. 269. 
 re-examination of causes, p. 270. 
 Civil officers— of United States, removal by impeachment, art. 2, sec. 
 
 4, par. 1, p. 207. 
 Civil rights— guaranteed to citizens of United States, Amdt. art. 14, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 279. 
 citizens of United States, who are, p. 279. 
 purposes of amendment, p. 280. 
 protection of citizens, p. 282. 
 
 equal protection of the laws not to be denied, p. 283. 
 Act of Congress, " Civil Rights Bill " constitutional, p. 286. 
 
 Civil war— when exists, p. 97. 
 
 Classification of Senators— into three classes, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 
 
 47. 
 Clearance— of vessels not required in interstate commerce, art. 1, sec. 
 
 9, par. 6, p. 114. 
 
 Coin— States not to coin gold and silver, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 not to make anything but a legal tender, art. 1, sec. 10. par. 1, p. 
 116. 
 Commander-in-chief— of army and navy, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 
 power as, construed, p. 198. 
 
 authority over conquered territory, p. 199. 
 
 power to proclaim martial law, p. 200. 
 
 Commerce— defined, p. 65. 
 
 what it includes, p. 65. , „ « n^ 
 
 Congress shall have power to regulate, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 3, p. 65. 
 
294 INDEX. 
 
 ComraeTce— Continued. 
 
 includes transportation and navigation, p. 65. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 65. 
 
 power of Congress construed, p. 66. 
 
 embraces all instruments by wliich carried on, p. 63. 
 
 power, wliat it embraces, p. 68. 
 
 exclusiveness of power of Congress, p. 70. 
 
 power as to passengers, p. 71. 
 
 police power of States, when may be exercised, p. 72. 
 
 power of State over internal commerce, p. 73. 
 
 State authority over fisheries, p. 75. 
 
 State license taxes valid, p. 76. 
 
 licenses for sale of goods, p. 77. 
 
 with Indians, power of Congress, p. 78. 
 
 intercourse with Indian tribes, p. 79. 
 
 Indian laws and customs, p. 81. 
 
 no preference to be given between ports of States, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 par. 6, p. 114. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 114. 
 
 vessels in interstate commerce, not to be obliged to enter, clear, 
 etc., art. 1, sec. 9, par. 6, p. 114. 
 
 State without consent of Congress not to lay imposts or duties, 
 art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 
 clause construed, p. 187. 
 
 State inspection laws maybe passed, p. 189. 
 
 State taxation, when valid, p. 189. 
 
 State without consent of Congress not to lay any duty on ton- 
 nage, art. 1 , sec. 9, par. 3, p. 190. 
 
 tonnage duties construed, p. 190. 
 
 duties on instruments of commerce, when invalid, p. 192. 
 Commercial agent— of foreign nation. United States Marshal cannot 
 
 be, p. 115. 
 Oommissions— to fill vacancies, to be granted by President, art. 2, 
 
 sec. 3, p. 206. 
 Common defense— Government to provide for. Preamble, p. 41. 
 
 construction of term, p. 43. 
 Common law— trial by jury, Amdt. art. 7. sec. 1, p. 268. 
 
 right, when not to attach, p. 269. 
 
 re-examination of causes, p. 270. 
 Compact— States not to enter into, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 193. 
 Compensation— of President, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 7, p. 197 
 
 of Senators and Representatives, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 
 persons holding two offices entitled to, for both, p. 54. 
 
 of Judges of Supreme Courts, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 
 private property not to be taken without making, Amdt. art. 5, 
 sec. 1, p. 257. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 265. 
 Compulsory process— accused to have, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 Condemnation— right of, construed, p. 263. 
 
 compensation on, p. 265. 
 Confederation— State not to enter into, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 debts of original, assumed, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 248. 
 
 confederate notes in aid of rebellion, void, pp. 116, 286. 
 
 charter granted by, void, p. 116. 
 
 was but organized treason, p. 116. 
 
 not a de facto government, p. 116. 
 
 all its acts null and void, p. 116. 
 
 bonds and notes of, void, p. 116. 
 
 charter granted by, void, p. 116. 
 
INDEX. 295 
 
 C onfederation— Continued. 
 
 treasury notes issued by, void, p. 116. 
 
 notes of, were not bills of credit, p. 119. 
 
 could not emit bills of creditp. 219. 
 
 validity of securities of, p. 126. 
 
 contracts made in Confederate States, not in aid of rebellion, 
 valid, p. 131. 
 Oonfiscation— Congress lias exclusive power of, p. 97. 
 
 Congress— legislative powers vested in, art. 1, sec. 1, p. 44. 
 of what to consist, art. 1, sec. 1, p. 44. 
 electionfor Senatoi-s and Kepresentatives, art. 1, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 
 
 48. 
 construction of clause as to elections, p. 48. 
 Congress to assemble at least once a year, art. 1, sec. 4, par. 2, p. 
 . 49. 
 Congress, each House to judge qualifications of members, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. 
 to determine rules of its proceedings, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 2, p. 51. 
 may expel a member, p. 51. 
 
 to keep journal of proceedings, art. 1, sec. 5, par. ,S. p. 52. 
 adjournment, restrictions on power of, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 4, p. 52. 
 compensation of members, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 privileged from arrest, when, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 members ineligible to hold other offices, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 revenue bills, where to originate, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 1, p. 54. 
 manner of passage of bill, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54. 
 how passed without President's approval, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, 
 
 p. 54. 
 course of proceedings, p. 55. 
 orders, resolutions, and votes, approval of President, art. 1, sec. 
 
 7, par. 3, p. 55. 
 
 proposal for amendment to Constitution, p. 56. 
 Powers of Congress. 
 in general, p. 56. 
 exclusive •when exercised, or when States expressly prohibited, 
 
 p. 85. 
 to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, art. 1, sec. 
 
 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 
 of taxation, extent of, p. 58. 
 
 to borrow money on credit of United States, art. 1, sec. 8. par. 2, 
 
 p. 61. 
 Implied power to create a legal tender, p. 62. 
 power to exempt national securities from taxation, p. 63. 
 to regulate commerce, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 3, p. 65. 
 commerce defined, p. 65. 
 extent of power to regulate commerce, p. 66. 
 what embraced in scope of power, p. 68. 
 when power to regulate is exclusive, p. 70. 
 power to tax passengers, p. 71. 
 police powers of State, not in conflict with, p. 72. 
 powers of State, when concurrent, p. 70. 
 powers of State over internal commerce, p. 73. 
 State authority over fisheries, p. 75. 
 State power of taxation, when constitutional, p. 76. 
 State licenses for sale of commercial products, p. 77. 
 power over commerce with Indians, p. 78. 
 with Indian tribes, p. 79. 
 effect of Indian laws and customs, p. 81. 
 Congress to establish uniform rule of naturalization, art. l,sec. 
 
 8, par. 4, p. 81. 
 power exclusive, how exerted, p. 82. 
 Congress may make laws on subject of bankruptcies, art. 1, sec. 
 
 8, par. 4, p. 81. 
 
296 INDEX. 
 
 Congress— Powers of— Continued. 
 
 bankrviptcy and "subiects of," construed, p. 83. 
 
 uniformity construed, p. 84. 
 
 extent of power over subject of bankruptcies, p. 84. 
 
 over bankruptcies, exclusive only wlien exercised, p. 85. 
 
 State insolvent laws, wlien operative, p. 86. 
 
 when superseded, p. 87. 
 
 validity of State insolvent laws, p. 83. 
 
 validity of discharge under State laws, p. 90. 
 
 Congress to coin money and regulate its value, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 
 5, p. 91. 
 to fix standard of weights and measures, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 5, p. 91. 
 money construed, p. f)l. 
 Congress to provide for punishment of counterfeiting, art. 1, sec. 
 
 8, par. 6, p. 92. 
 extent of power, p. 92. 
 
 to establish post-o faces and post-roads, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 7, p. 93. 
 " to establish," what includes, p. 93. 
 to promote progress of science and useful arts, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 
 8, p. 94. 
 power defined, p. 94. 
 copyrights to authors, p. 94. 
 patents to inventors, p. 95. 
 rights secured, p. 96. 
 
 to constitute inferior tribunals, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 9, p. 96. 
 to define and punish piracies and felonies on high seas, art. 1, sec. 
 
 8, par. 10, p. 96. 
 to define and piuiish offenses against law of nations, art. 1, sec. 
 
 8, par. 10, p. 96. 
 construction of clause, p. 96. 
 to declare Avar, and grant letters of marque and reprisal, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 8, par. 11, p. 97. 
 to declare war, power exclusive in Congress, p. 97. 
 power, what includes, p. 97. 
 
 to make rules concerning captures, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 11, p. 97. 
 construction of clause, p. 97. 
 to raise and support armies, restriction as to, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 
 12, p. 99. 
 power, what includes, p. 99. 
 
 to provide and jnaintain a navy, art. 1, sec, 8, par. 13, p. 100. 
 extent of power, and what it embraces, p. 100. 
 to make rules for goveriiment of forces, art. 1, sec. 8. par. 14, p. 
 
 100. 
 may provide for trials by courts-martial, p. 100. 
 to provide for calling out militia, to execute laws, etc., art. 1, 
 
 sec. 8, par. 15, p. 100. 
 power construed, p. 100. 
 to provide for organizing, arming, etc., the militia, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 
 par. 16, p. 102. 
 reserved power of States as to militia, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 16, p. 102. 
 power, when and how exercised, p. 102. 
 to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over ceded districts, art. 1, sec. 
 
 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 and over territory purchased from States for forts, etc., art. 1, 
 
 sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 jurisdiction over District of Columbia, p. 103, 
 exercise of power of legislation for the Union, p. 103. 
 extent of power over property ceded, p. 104. 
 what power retained by States, p. 105. 
 to make laws necessary to carry its powers Into execution, art. 
 
 l,sec. 8, par. 18. p. 106. 
 extent of incidental powers of Government, p. 106. 
 discretion as to use of means to carry out powers, p. 106. 
 
INDEX. 297 
 
 Congress— Powers of— Continued. 
 may make contracts, p. 107. 
 enumeration of means, pp. 107, 108. 
 to revise and control State imposts and duties, art. 1, sec. 10, 
 
 par. 2, p. 187. 
 so as to State inspection laws, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 construction of clause, p. 189. 
 may determine time of choosing presidential electors, art. 2, sec. 
 
 1, par. 4, p. 19(j. 
 to legislate for government of conquered province, p. 199. 
 to establish courts inferior to Supreme Court, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 
 
 1, p. 208. 
 provision construed, p. 208. 
 extent of power, p. 209. 
 
 may define jurisdiction of territorial courts, p. 212. 
 may provide for removal of causes, p. 214. 
 cannot limit compensation or term of judicial officers, p. 215. 
 may declare punishment for treason, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 229. 
 power exclusive in Congress, p. 229. 
 may prescribe manner of authentication of acts, records, and 
 
 proceedings, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 230. 
 power deflned, p. 232. 
 
 power to provide for surrender of fugitives, p. 239. 
 exclusive power as to surrender of fugitives from labor, p. 241. 
 may admit new States into the Union, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 242. 
 restriction on power construed, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 242. 
 to dispose of property and make rules to govern Territory, art. 
 
 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 243. 
 
 to guarantee republican government to State, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 
 
 l,p. 245. 
 to govern the Territories, p. 245. 
 to propose amendment to Constitution, when and how, art. 5, 
 
 sec. l,par. 1, p. 247. 
 laws of, are supreme, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 248. 
 may remove disability for office, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 
 
 285. 
 to protect and enforce the rights of citizens, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 1, p. 287. 
 to enforce amendments, pp. 286, 287. 
 
 may make infringement of personal rights an offense, p. 288. 
 Restriction on powers of Congress. 
 
 as to migration or importation of persons, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 1, 
 
 p. 109. 
 clause restrictive of powers of General Government, p. 109. 
 as to suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 2, 
 
 p. 110. 
 clause construed, p. 110. 
 to pass no bill of attainder or ex post facto laws, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 
 
 3, p. 111. 
 bill of attainder construed, p. 111. 
 ex post facto laws construed, p. 112. 
 to lay no capitation or other direct tax, unless, etc., art. 1, sec. 9, 
 
 par. 4, p. 113. 
 to lay no tax or duty on exports from a State, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 
 
 5, p. 114. 
 
 to give no preference to ports or vessels of one State over anoth- 
 er, art. 1, sec. 9. par. 6, p. 114. 
 
 clause construed, p. 114. 
 
 to draw no money from treasury but on appropriation, art. 1, 
 sec. 9, par. 7, p. 115. 
 
 to grant no title of nobility, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 8, p. 115. 
 
 cannot limit compensation or term of office of United States 
 Judges, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 
298 INDEX. 
 
 Congress— Restriction on powers of— Continued. 
 power of Congress construed, p. 208. 
 restriction on power to limit, p. 215. 
 not to abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens, art. 4, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 1, p. 233. 
 to make no laws respecting the establishment of religion, Amdt. 
 
 art. 1, sec. 1, p. 254. 
 religion, right of people secured, p. 254. 
 to make no laws abridging the freedom of speech or press, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 254. 
 to make no laws abridging the right of assembly and petition, 
 
 art. 1, sec. 1, p. 254. 
 not to infringe the right of people to bear arms, Amdt. art. 2, sec. 
 
 1, p. 255. 
 right construed, p. 255. 
 
 not to guarter soldiers, except, etc., art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 256. 
 not to infringe the riglit of the people as to security of persons, 
 
 papers, and eifects, Amdt. arc. 4, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 construction of clause, p. 256. 
 not to infringe personal rights of the people, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, 
 
 p. 257 
 as to right of trial by jury for crime, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 persons not to be twice put in jeopardy, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 
 
 257. 
 not to be compelled to testify against himself, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 
 
 1, p. 257. 
 not to be deprived of life, liberty, and property, without due proc- 
 ess of law, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 not to be deprived for public use without compensation, Amdt. 
 
 art. 5, sec. l,p. 257. 
 construction of clause, p. 258. 
 jeopardy construed, p. 259. 
 witness in criminal charge, p. 260 
 
 depriving of life, etc., without process of law, construed, p. 261. 
 due process of law construed, p. 262. 
 power of eminent domain, p. 263. 
 compensation on condemnation, p. 265. 
 not to abridge rights of parties accused of crime, Amdt. art. 6, 
 
 sec. l,p. 267. 
 prohibition construed, p. 267. 
 
 right of trial by jury to be preserved, Amdt. art. 7, sec. 1, p. 263. 
 to what courts clause refers, p. 268. 
 right, when not to attacli, p. 269. 
 re-examiuation of causes, p. 270. 
 not to require excessive bail, nor fines, Amdt. art. 8, sec. 1, p. 
 
 271. 
 rights retained by the people not disparaged by grant to Federal 
 
 Government, Amdt. art. 9, sec. 1, p. 271. 
 powers not delegated nor forbidden to States are reserved to the 
 
 States and people, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 State rights defined, p. 272. 
 no right of secession, p. 273. 
 reserved powers of States, what include, p. 274. 
 right of citizens to vote not to be impaired, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 1, 
 
 p. 287. 
 Conquest— authority of Executive over conquered territoiy, p. 199. 
 authority of Congress over United States Territory, art. 4, sec. 3, 
 
 par. 2. p. 243. 
 
 Conscription— Congress may authorize, p. 99. 
 
 Consent— of Congress, required for official to receive present, etc., 
 art. 1, sec. 9, par. 8, p. 115. 
 required for State to lay imposts, etc., art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 
ESTDEX. 299 
 
 onsent— Continued. 
 
 or to lay duty on tonnage, art. 1, sec, 10, par, 3, p, 190. 
 
 or to enter into agreement or compact with other State, art, 1, 
 
 sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 or to engage in war, art. 1, sec. 10, par, 3, p, 190, 
 or to form new State within another State, art, 4, sec, 3, par. 1, p. 
 
 242. 
 or for the junction of States, or parts of States, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 
 
 l.p.242. 
 neither House to adjourn without consent of other, art. 1, sec. 5. 
 
 par. 4, p. 52. 
 of Senate required in making treaty, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 or in appointing ambassadors, etc., art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 Conspiracy— to burn ship. Congress may punish for, p. 96. 
 Constitution— construction generally, p. 39. 
 terms in, how interpreted, p. 40. 
 preamble, purposes to be secured by, p. 41. 
 people of United States, who are, p. 41. 
 to form a more perfect union, p. 42. 
 to provide for the common defense, p. 43. 
 creates a government of enumerated delegated powers, p. 43. 
 construction of terms, to be reasonable, p. 106. 
 legislative department of Government, art. 1, pp. 44-115. 
 restriction on sovereign power of State, art. 1, sec. 10, pp. 116-194. 
 executive department of Government, art. 3, pp. 194-207. 
 judicial department of Govermnent, art. 3, pp. 208-229. 
 State rights, protection of, art. 4, pp. 230-246. 
 amendments to, manner of making, art. 5, p. 247. 
 power of people to amend, without limit, p. 247. 
 first ten amendments, not restrictions on State governments, p. 
 
 247. 
 governments created by, how far supreme, p. 248. 
 powers not delegated nor prohibited to States, are reserved, 
 
 Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 all power emanates from the people, p. 272. 
 promiscuous provisions in, art. 6, pp. 248-251. 
 ratification of, art. 7, p. 252. 
 names of States, and date of ratification, p. 252. 
 amendments restrictive of powers of United States Government, 
 
 pp. 254-372. 
 restriction on judicial powers, Amdt. art. 11, p. 272. 
 provision for election of President and Vice-President, Amdt. 
 
 art. 12, p. 276. 
 slavery prohibited, Amdt. art. 13, p. 277. 
 citizens of United States who are, and civil rights of, Amdt. art. 
 
 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 apportionment of representation in Congress, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 
 
 2, p. 285. 
 
 certain parties disqualified from holding oflSce, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 
 
 3, p. 285. 
 
 payment of debt and pensions not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 
 
 14, sec. 4, p. 283. 
 rebel debts not to be assumed, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, p. 283. 
 political rights not to be abridged on account of race, color, etc. 
 
 art. 15, p. 287. 
 
 Constitution of State— a law as to obligation of contracts, pp. 124, 153 
 amendment of, construed, pp. 124, 167, 
 
 Consuls— President may appoint, art. 2, sec. 2, par, 2, p. 203. 
 amenable to judiciary, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 223. 
 
 Contempt— power of House to punish for, p. 51. 
 
 warrant to commit for, when may be served, p. 51. 
 
300 I2JDEX. 
 
 Contracts— Statesprohibited to pass laws impairing obligation of, art. 
 
 l,sec. 10, par. 1. p. 116, 
 inhibition applies to the States, and not to Congress, pp. 57, 84, 124- 
 valid, cannot be Impaired by subsequent legislation, p. 125, 129. 
 laws merely retrospective, not necessarily invalid, p. 126. 
 contracts construed, p. 127. 
 
 with State, created by legislative enactment, p. 128. 
 appointment to ofBce not a contract, p. 128. 
 esecutorynot within prohibition, p. 128. 
 when cannot be impaired by subsequent legislation, p. 129. 
 obligations of, construed, p. 130. 
 impairment of obligation, what is, p. 131. 
 time, place, person, or thing to be done, cannot be changed by 
 
 subsequent statute, p. 131. 
 degree of impairment, p. 133. 
 what not a violation of obligation, p. 134. 
 validating statutes not inhibited, p. 134. 
 retrospective statutes, when valid, p. 134. 
 days of grace, no part of contract, p. 135. 
 curative statutes valid, p. 135. 
 State power of eminent domain, p. 135. 
 remedy as part of obligation, p. 136. 
 change of remedy, when not an impairment, p. 137. 
 what not impairment of remedy, p. 139. 
 attachment laws do not impair obligation, p. 139. 
 statutes of limitation and usury laws, when valid, p. 140. 
 exemption laws, how far valid, p. 141. 
 stay laws, when impair remedies, p. 142. 
 State insolvency laws, validity of, p. 144. 
 legislative authority over judicial procedure, p. 145. 
 statute rights may be modified, p. 147. 
 right of redemption no part of contract, p. 149. 
 taxation not impairment of obligation of, p. 150. 
 legislature may bind State by, p. 151. 
 licenses as contracts are revocable at pleasure, p. 151. 
 State exemption from taxation, as a contract, p. 151. 
 land grants as contx'acts, effect of, p. 153. 
 State grants generally, as contracts, p. 154. 
 acceptance by State of land grant a contract, p. 155. 
 vested rights cannot be divested by legislation, p. 155. 
 subsequent statute cannot impair vested rights, p. 156. 
 what not an impairment of rights, p. 157. 
 corporate franchises, charter construed, p. 159r 
 charter as a conti-act with State, p. 162. 
 may be exempted from taxation, p. 164. 
 effect of exemption from taxation, p. 165. 
 bank corporation, charter a contract, p. 167. 
 bridge, ferry, and turnpike franchises construed, p. 168. 
 railroad charter a contract, p. 170. 
 immunity from taxation, effect of, p. 172. 
 State authority over corporations generally, p. 172. 
 authority to alter or amend charter, p. 174. 
 reserved pov> er in charter to alter or amend, p. 175. 
 exercise of reserved power in charter, p. 177. 
 power to repeal may be reserved, p. 178. 
 municipal corporation, charter not a contract, p. 179. 
 legislature may authorize subscription to railroad stock, p. 180. 
 authority of legislature over, p. 181. 
 over municipal contracts, p. 182. 
 over municipal liabilities, p. 183. 
 over municipal bonds, p. 184. 
 treaty as contract, cannot divest Congress of its powers, pp. 203 
 
 249, 
 
INDEX. 301 
 
 C ontracts— Continued. 
 
 maritime jurisdiction of United States Courts over, p. 252. 
 to pay in confederate notes invalid, p. 286. 
 
 Contract with State— liow created, p. 128. 
 
 acceptance by State of land grant, a contract, p. 155. 
 cannot be improved by subsequent legislation, p. 129. 
 See Contracts, Corporations. 
 
 Convention— for proposing amendments, liovr called, art. 5, sec. 1. 
 par. 1, p. 247. 
 
 Copyrights— Congress may provide for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 8, p. 94. 
 power of Congress defined, p. 94. 
 what may be secured by, p. 94. 
 State legislation as to, p. 94. 
 
 Corporations— power of State to tax, pp. 63, 64, 150. 
 amenable to police power of State, p. 74. 
 State may impose license tax, p. 76. 
 as owner of patent, rights of, p. 95. 
 charter a contract, cannot be impaired by State, p. 159. 
 legislative control over, p. 159. 
 dissolution of, does not impair obligation, p. 160. 
 liabilities of extent of State power over, p. 161. 
 franchise of, construed, p. 162. 
 may be exempted from taxation, p. 164. 
 State concluded by exemption, p. 165. 
 charter of bank a contract, p. 167. 
 
 charter of bridge, ferry, etc., company construed, p. 168. 
 charter of railroad a contract, p. 170. 
 immunity from taxation on charter, effect of, p . 172. 
 State authority over, p. 172. 
 amendment or alteration of charter, p. 174. 
 restriction on power of legislature, p. 174. 
 power to alter or amend reserved in charter, p. 175. 
 exercise of reserved power by State Legislature, p. 177. 
 reservation of power to repeal, p. 178. 
 charter of municipal corporation not a contract, p. 179. 
 Legislature may authorize subscription to railroad stock, p. 180. 
 authority of Legislature over municipal ofQ.cers, p. 181. 
 over municipal contracts, p. 182. 
 over municipal liabilities, p. 183. 
 over municipal bonds, p. 184. 
 
 Costs— State Legislatures may regulate, p. 158. 
 
 Counsel— party accused to have right of, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 provision to apply to United States Courts, p. 267. 
 
 Counterfeiting— Congress shall provide punishment for, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 6, p. 92. 
 di«!tinguished from uttering, p. 92. 
 power of Congress construed, pp. 92, 107. 
 power, exclusive, when exercised, p. 92. 
 State power defined, p. 92. 
 
 Courts- irifei'ior may be constituted by Congress, art. 3, sec, 1, par. 1, 
 
 p. 208. 
 power construed, p. 208. 
 
 Judicial power vested in, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 judicial power, extent of, p. 209. 
 term of office of judges, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 
 See Judicial Power, Jurisdiction. 
 
 Courts-martial— Congress may provide for trials by, p. 100, 
 Desty Fed. Con.— 36. 
 
302 INDEX. 
 
 Credit— to be given to public acts and records, art. 4, sec. I, par. 1, 
 p. 230. 
 States not to emit bills of, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 bills of credit construed, p. 118. 
 
 Creditor— when bound by State insolvent laws, p. 89. 
 validity of discbarge, p. 90. 
 
 Crimes— State jurisdiction over, in territory ceded to Government, 
 
 p. 105. 
 removal from of&ce for, by impeachment, art. 2, sec. 4, par. 1, 
 
 p. 207. 
 authority to punish for counterfeiting, p. 213. 
 extent of judicial power, p. 217. 
 trial of, except in impeachments, to be by jury, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 
 
 3, p. 227. 
 
 place of trial for, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 227. 
 
 clause construed, p. 227. 
 
 treason defined, and evidence required, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 228. 
 
 punishment for treason, Congress may declare, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 
 
 2, p. 229. 
 rights of accused party— presentment or Indictment, Amdt. art. 
 
 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 not to be twice put in jeopardy, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 not to be compelled to be witness against himself, Amdt. art. 5, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 257. 
 not to be deprived of life or liberty without due process of law, 
 
 Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 258. 
 construction, article seciu'tng personal rights, p. 258. 
 jeopardy, what is, p. 259. 
 
 witness against himself, provision construed, p. 260. 
 depriving of life and liberty, construed, p. 261. 
 due process of law, what implies, i?. 262. 
 
 mode of trial in criminal proceedings, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 prohibitions in article construed, p. 269. 
 excessive bail, fines, or punishments forbidden, Amdt. art. 8, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 271. 
 Cruel or unusual punishments prohibited— Amdt. art. 8, sec. l,p. 271. 
 
 provision construed, p. 271. 
 Currency— punishment for counterfeiting, p. 92. 
 
 Days of grace— no part of contract, p. 135. 
 
 Debt ofUnited States— payment of, not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 
 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 
 Congress has power to pay, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 
 under prior confederation assumed, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 248. 
 Debts— incurred in aid of insurrection repudiated, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 
 
 4, p. 286. 
 
 such debts illegal and void, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 
 Declaration of war— how made, and effect of, p. 97. 
 
 power, what includes, p. 97. 
 Defense— Constitution adopted to insure, Preamble, p. 41. 
 
 right of Government to provide for common defense, p. 43. 
 
 power of Congress to provide for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 
 rights of accused in criminal prosecutions, Aiadt. art. 6, sec. 1, 
 p. 267. 
 Definitions— arrest, p. 52. 
 
 bill of attainder, pp. Ill, 120. 
 
 capitation tax, p. 113. 
 
 Constitution, p. 41. 
 
 direct tax, pp. 46, 113. 
 
INDEX. 303 
 
 Definitions— Continued. 
 duties, p. 58. 
 
 ea; j5os^/ac^o laws, pp. 112, 121. 
 high seas, p. 96. 
 impair, p. 131. 
 imposts, p. 68. 
 insolvency, p. 83. 
 invention, p. 95. 
 money, p. 91, 
 necessary means, p. 106. 
 organizing, p, 102. 
 people of United States, p. 41. 
 proper means, p. 106. 
 regulate, p. 66. 
 secure, p. 96. 
 taxation, p. 58. 
 to coin, p. 91. 
 to declare, p. 97. 
 uniform, p. 58. 
 uniformity, p. 84. 
 war, p. 97. 
 
 Departments— appointment of officers may be vested ia, art. 2, sec. 2, 
 par. 2, p. 203. 
 branches of government distinct and independent, p. 44» 
 See Government. 
 
 Desertion— of seamen, punishment for, p. 100. 
 
 statute forfeiture not a bill of attainder, p. 112. 
 
 statute not ex post facto law, p. 112. 
 Direct tax— when and how laid, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 4, p. 113. 
 
 what is, p. 113. 
 
 how apportioned, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 46. 
 
 clause repealed by, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 Disability— provisions in case of, as to President, etc., art. 2; sec. 1, 
 par. 5, p. 196. 
 
 for office, p. 285. 
 
 to hold office by engagement in rebellion, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, 
 p. 285. 
 
 may be removed by Congress, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 Discharge— in insolvency, who bound by, p. 90. 
 Discretion— of Congress as to use of means to carry out powers, p. 106. 
 
 Disqualification— of Senator or Representative for other office, art. 
 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 for membership of either House, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 by engaging in rebellion, Amdt. art. 14. sec. 3, p. 285. 
 for office of elector of President, art. 2, sec. 1, p. 195. 
 construction of clause, p. 195. 
 Distilleries— Congress may tax or impose penalties and forfeitures, 
 
 p. 58. 
 District of Columbia— Congress to exercise exclusive legislation, art. 
 l,sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 inhabitants of, citizens of United States, p. 103. 
 legislative power of Congress construed, p- 103. 
 Dockyards— exclusive control of Congress, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 Domestic violence— State right to protection from, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 
 
 l,p. 245. 
 Drawbridge— State may authorize erection of, p. 74. 
 
304 INDEX. 
 
 Due process of law— persons not to be deprived of life, liberty, or 
 
 property without, Anidt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 262. 
 construction of term, p. 262. 
 State not to deprive of life, liberty, or property without, Amdt. 
 
 art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 purpose of amendment, p. 280. 
 Duties— defined, p. 58. 
 
 imposts and excises, power of Congressto lay, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 
 1, p. 56. 
 to be uniform tbrougbout United States, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 no duty or tax to be laid on exports from a State, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 
 par. 5, p. 114. 
 vessels clearing from one State not to pay in another, art. 1, sec. 
 
 9, par. 6, p. 114. 
 exception as to insurrectionary States, p. 114. 
 vessels of one State not to pay duties in another, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 
 par. 6. p. 114. 
 no State to lay duty on imports or exports, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, 
 
 p. 187. 
 if laid by consent of Congress, net produce to be for use of 
 
 United States, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 all such laws subject to control and revision of Congress, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 
 Duties of President— when to devolve on Vice-President, art. 2, sec. 
 
 1, par. 6, p. 196. 
 
 in case of disability of both. Congress shall declare who shall act, 
 art. 2, sec. 1, par. 6, p. 196. 
 
 Duty on tonnage— no State to lay, without consent of Congress, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 definition of tonnage duty, pp. 190, 191. 
 as a tax on commerce, p. 192. 
 subject to alteration and regulation by Congress, art. 1, sec. 4, 
 
 par. 1, p. 48. 
 
 Election— of Representatives in Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 44. 
 
 of Senators, how conducted, art. 1, sec. 4. par. 1, p. 48. 
 
 each House to judge of returns and qualifications of its members, 
 art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. 
 
 of President, to be by chosen electors, art. 2, sec. 1. par. 2, p. 195. 
 
 of President, how conducted, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 
 of Executive, Congress may determine day of, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 
 4, p. 196. 
 
 day to be same throughout the Union, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 4, p. 196. 
 
 citizenship of itself does not give right to vote at, p. 45. 
 
 candidates, who deemed elected, p. 45. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 48. 
 
 of Kepresentative, tie vote, how determined, p. 49. 
 
 effect of refusal to give certificate of, p. 50. 
 
 certificate of, p. 50. 
 ■Elective franchise— right of citizen to vote, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 1, p. 
 287. • 
 
 construction of amendments, p. 287. 
 
 Congress may enforce provision, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 2, p. 287. 
 
 right denied by State, effect on apportionment of Representa- 
 tives, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 
 intent of section, p. 285. 
 Electors— citizenship of itself does not make, p. 45. 
 For President and Vice-President— each State to appoint, art. 2, 
 sec. 1, par. 2, p. 195. 
 
 nxunber equal to Senators and Representatives, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 
 
 2, p. 195. 
 
INDEX. 305 
 
 Electors— i^or President and Vice-President— Continued. 
 who not elis;ible, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 19o. 
 disQualiflcation of, p. 195. . , - ^. t, j. 
 
 Congress may determine time of choosmg and of votmg by, art. 
 
 day to be the sanie throughout the United States, art. 2, sec. 1, 
 
 Dcir 4 p 196. 
 to meet and vote by ballot, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 ballots for President and Vice-President to be distmct, Amdt. art. 
 
 one^at least to be inhabitant of another State, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 
 
 distinctHsttobemade.Amdt. art. 12, sec. l,p. 276. 
 
 to sign, certify, and transmit lists to President of Senate, Amdt. 
 
 art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 eliaibiMv for ofQce of, p. 2i7. 
 
 who disqualified for office of , Amdt. art. 14, see. 3, p. 285. 
 Congress may; remove disability, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 286. 
 intent of section, p. 285. 
 Emancipation— slavery prohibited, Amdt. art. 13, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 
 section construed, p. 277. , , - , » ^o. x. -,, „«„ a 
 
 of slave, claim for loss by, iUegal and void, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, 
 p. 286. 
 
 validity of act of Congress, p. 9*. 
 Embargo— power of Congress to impose, p. 69. 
 Eminent domain— sovereignty of people of State, p. 75. 
 
 corporations subject to, p. 172. 
 
 right of, construed, p. 263. 
 
 compensation on condemnation, p. 265. 
 Emoluments— United States ofaciai not to accept, from foreign king, 
 
 etc., art. 1, sec. 9, par. 8, p. 115. 
 Enactment of laws— bills, how passed, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 1, p. 54. 
 
 course of proceedings on, p. 55. , ^ , _ o kk 
 
 orders and resolutions, how passed, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 6, p. 55. 
 
 to be approved by President, p. 55. 
 
 laws, how passed without President's approval, p. 54. 
 Enlistment— of minors, power of Congress, p. 99. 
 Enumeration— of inhabitants, when to be made, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, 
 
 ratio" of 'representation, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45; art. 14, sec. 2, 
 
 X) 285 
 
 of rights^ not to disparage others retained, Amdt. art. 9, sec. 1, 
 p. 271. 
 
 of means' to enforce powers, pp. 107, 108. 
 Equal protection of the laws-no State shall deny, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 
 ^ l,p. 279. 
 
 purpose of amendment, p. 280. 
 
 equal protection construed, p. 283. 
 Equal suffrage in Senate— secured to States, art. 5, sec. 1, p. 247. 
 Excessive bail— shall not be required, Amdt. art. 8, sec. 1, p. 271. 
 
 provision construed, p. 271. 
 Excises— power of Congress to lay and collect, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, 
 
 to be'uniform, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 Exclusive legislation-by Congress over District of Columbia, art. 1, 
 
 over^pl'ac'es ceded to United States, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 
 1. 
 
306 INDEX. 
 
 Executive Department— powers vested in President, art. 1, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 1, p. 194. 
 power of, beyond control of judiciary, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 194. 
 election of President and Vice-President, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 2, 
 
 p. 195. 
 only native-ljom citizens, to be eligible to sucli ofiace, art. 2, sec. 
 
 l,par. .5, p. 196. 
 eligibility to office, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 5, p. 196. 
 heads of may be vested witli power to appoint inferior officers, 
 
 art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 
 See President. 
 EiXecutive officers— to be 1)0und by oath to support the Constitution, 
 
 art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 oath to be taken by President, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 8, p. 197. 
 of States to be bound by oatli, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 President may require written opinions of, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, 
 
 p. 197. 
 
 See President, Vice-President. 
 
 Executive power— vested in President, art. 2. sec. 1, par. 1, p. 194. 
 
 See President. 
 Exemption— validity of State laws, p. 141. 
 from taxation, a contract, p. 151. 
 of corporation from taxation, construed, p. 164. 
 effect of, p. 165. 
 Expenditures— of money to be published, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 7, p. 115. 
 Exports— from States, no tax to be laid on, by Congress, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 par. 5, p. 114. 
 construction of clause, p. 114. 
 no State to lay duties on without consent of Congress, art. 1, sec. 
 
 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 if laid, to be for use of Treasury, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 and be subject to revision of Congress, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 
 Ex post facto laws— defined, pp. 112, 121. 
 
 apply to criminal laws only, pp. 112, 121. 
 
 shall not be passed, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 3, p. 111. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 112. 
 
 State not to pass, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 prohibition construed, p. 121. 
 
 what not ex -post f ado, p. 123. 
 
 imposing higher punishment for second offense is not, p. 123. 
 
 depriving of right to object to grand juror is, p. 123. 
 
 when not invalid, p. 155. 
 Expulsion of member— by concurrence of two-thirds, art. 1, sec. 6, 
 
 par. 2, p. 51. 
 Expurgatory oath— when may be required, p. 120. 
 
 Faith and credit— to acts, records, and judicial proceedings of the 
 
 several States, art. 4, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 230. 
 Fees of office— State may abolish, p. 128. 
 
 Felony— members of Congress not privileged from arrest for, art. 1, 
 sec. 6, par. 1, p. 62. 
 on high seas. Congress shall have power to define and punish, art. 
 1, sec. 8, par. 10, p. 96. 
 Ferries- State may charter, p. 74. 
 
 grant of franchise construed, p. 168. 
 Ferry franchise— construction of, p. 168. 
 
 reserved power to alter or amend, p. 177. 
 
INDEX. 307 
 
 Fines— excessive, not to be imposed, Amdt. art. 8, sec. 1, p. 271. 
 construction of clause, p. 271. 
 
 Fisheries— State authority over, p. 75. 
 
 Forcible entry and detainer— State may deprive lessee of action for, 
 
 p. 148. 
 Foreign coin— Congress may regulate value of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 5, 
 
 p. 91. 
 
 Foreign corporations— State authority over, pp. 76, 151. 
 See CoRPORATioiS'. 
 
 Foreign nations— Congress to regulate commerce with, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 3, p. 65. 
 
 Foreign powers— State prohibited from entering into compact with, 
 art. 1, sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 
 Forfeiture— not to extend beyond life of party attainted, art. 3, sec. 3, 
 par. 2, p. 229. 
 
 Formation of new States— provisions for, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 242. 
 
 Form of government— States to be guaranteed republican, art. 4, 
 
 sec. 4, p. 245. 
 States to be protected from invasion and domestic violence, art. 
 
 4, sec. 4, p. 245. 
 
 Forts— exclusive legislation by Congress over sites, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 17. p. 102. 
 jurisdiction over sites exclusive in Congress, pp. 104-105. 
 
 Franchise— to corporations, State grant construed, p. 168. 
 statute essentially paralyzing, is void, p. 170. 
 reserved power to alter, amend, or repeal, pp. 177, 178. 
 
 Freedom of speech and of the press- guaranteed, Amdt. art. 1, sec. 
 1, p. 254. 
 
 Fugitives— from justice to be delivered up, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 237. 
 demand for surrender, p. 238. 
 surrender of, p. 239. 
 terms in clause defined, p. 237. 
 
 from service or labor to be delivered up, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 241. 
 exclusive power in Congress, p. 241. 
 " in one State," what includes, p. 241. 
 
 General laws— not contracts, but expressions of legislative wiU, p. 128. 
 
 General welfare— purpose of Constitution to secure. Preamble, p. 41. 
 Congress shall have power to provide for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, 
 p. 56. 
 
 Georgia— Representatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 
 Gold and silver coin— restriction on States as to tender in payment, 
 art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 Good behavior— term of judicial officers, p. 208. 
 
 Government— to provide for common defense, Preamble, p. 41. 
 
 right and duty of common defense, p. 43. 
 
 powers of, construed, p. 43. 
 
 powers invested by people of United States, p. 41. 
 
 as a political body, construed, p. 42. 
 
 branches of, distinct and independent, p. 44. 
 
 jurisdiction over ceded territory, p. 104. 
 
 over property purchased from individuals, p. 104. 
 
 power over militia— calling it forth, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 18, p. 106. 
 
 organizing, arming, etc., the militia, art. 1, sec. 8, pai". 15, p. 102. 
 
 when authority over militia is exclusive, p. 102. 
 
 authority over District of Columbia, p. 103. 
 
308 INDEX. 
 
 over forts, arsenals, etc., p. 104. 
 
 restriction on State authority, p. 105. 
 
 powers may be enforced by laws necessary and proper, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 8, par. 18, p. 106. 
 incidental powers of, p. 106. 
 what means may be employed, p. 106. 
 enumeration of means, pp. 107, 108. 
 power over public territory and otlier property, art. 4, sec. 3, 
 
 par. 2, p. 243. 
 to dispose of and make needful rules for, p. 243. 
 extent of power of, p. 245. 
 
 to guarantee republican form to States, art. 4, sec. 4, par. l,p.245. 
 to protect States from invasion and domestic violence, art. 4, 
 
 sec. 4, par. 1, p. 245. 
 what amendments apply exclusively to, p. 247. 
 created by Constitution, how far supreme, p. 248. 
 Constitution, laws of, and treaties, as supreme law, art. 5, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 2, p. 248. 
 powers not delegated are reserved to States, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 
 
 l,p.272. 
 oath to be taken by ofQcers of, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 not to grant any title of nobility, art. 1, sec. 9, p. 115. 
 Grovernment of States— republican form guaranteed, art. 4, sec. 4, 
 
 par. 1, p. 245. 
 protection from invasion or domestic violence, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 
 
 1, p. 245. 
 power of taxation, pp. 59, 76, 150, 189. 
 police powers, as to commerce, pp. 72, 185. 
 power over internal commerce, p. 73. 
 authority over fisheries, p. 75. 
 over licenses, pp. 77, 151. 
 as to insolvencies, pp. 86, 144. 
 validity of insolvent laws, p. 88. 
 over counterfeiting, p. 92. 
 to call out militia, p. 100. 
 organization of militia, p. 102. 
 authority over lands within borders, p. 105. 
 power to make contracts, p. 128. 
 land grants, p. 153. 
 
 to grant charters to corporations, p. 159. 
 may regulate rates of freights and fares, p. 170. 
 authority over corporations, p. 172. 
 may alter or amend charters, p. 174. 
 authority over municipal corporations, p. 179. 
 Government, seat of— legislative powers of Congress, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 
 par. 17, p. 102. 
 Grand jury— indictment or presentment, personal rights, Amdt. art. 
 
 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 crimes to be tried on presentment of, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 exceptions as to land and naval forces and militia, Amdt. art. 5, 
 
 sec. l,p. 257. 
 
 Grant— of letters of marque and reprisal, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 11, p. 97. 
 
 States inhibited, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 of titles of nobility prohibited to Government, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 
 6, p. 115. 
 
 States inhibited from grant of titles, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 by State, when not subject to subsequent legislation, p. 154. 
 
 of franchise, construction of, p. 168. 
 Grants— of land by State, contracts, cannot be impaired, p. 153. 
 
 of franchises are contracts, p. 168. 
 
INDEX. 309 
 
 Grievances— riglrt of petifion for retires^ of, Amdt. art. 1, sec. 1, p. 254. 
 Guarantee— of republican form of Government to States, art. 4, sec. 
 4, par. 1, p. 245. , , ^. . , 
 
 of protection of States from mvasion^nd domestic violence, art. 
 4, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 245. 
 Habeas corpus— writ not to be suspended, unless, art, 1, sec. 9, par. 2, 
 p. 110. 
 discharge of enlisted persons unrler, p. 99. 
 power to suspend wliere lodged, p. 110. 
 Congress may suspend writ, p. 97. 
 
 Heads of departments— may be vested with power to appoint offi- 
 cers, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 President may recLuire written opinions from, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 
 1, p. 197. 
 
 Health— State may pass laws for protection of, pp. 72, 185. 
 
 High crimes and misdemeanors— removal of officers on impeach- 
 ment for, art. 2, sec. 4, p. 207. 
 
 High seas— defined, p. 96. 
 
 House of Representatives— composed of members chosen every sec- 
 ond year, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 44. 
 
 qualification of electors, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 44. 
 
 qualification of member, age, and residence, art. 1, sec. 2, par. Z, 
 
 State' executives to issue writs of election, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 4, p. 
 
 46 
 shall choose Speaker and other officers, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 5, p. 47. 
 shall have sole power of impeachment, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 5, p. 47. 
 shall judge elections, returns, and qualifications of its members, 
 
 art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. , ^a 
 
 a majority to constitute a quorum, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. 
 less, may adjourn from day to day, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. 
 may determine its rule of proceeding, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 2, p. 51. 
 powers generally, p. 51. . r, 4. i 
 
 may punish for disorderly behavior, or expel a member, art. 1. 
 
 sec. 5, par. 2, p. 51. 
 constructionof clause, p.51. , , ^ „ r„ 
 
 shall keep journal of proceedings, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 3, p. 52. 
 restriction on power to adjoui'n, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 4, p. 52. 
 members not to be questioned for speech or debate, art. 1, sec. 6, 
 
 par. 1, p. 52. , , , . ^ , ,. 
 
 United States official not eligible to membership, art. 1, sec. 6, 
 
 par. 2, p. 53. , , . 
 
 members ineligible to offices created during their membership, 
 
 art. l,sec. 6, par.2, p. 53. . ^, „ i e^ 
 
 bills for raising revenue to originate m, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 1, p. 54. 
 clause construed, p. 54, , , ^ , . 
 
 votes for President and Vice-President to be comited in presence 
 
 of,Amdt. art. 12,sec. l,p. 276. , , ,„ 
 
 when and how to choose President, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 vote to be taken by States, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 quorum in such case, what to constitute, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 
 
 27fi 
 
 majority of States necessary to choice, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 disability to membership by participation in rebellion, Amdt. art. 
 
 14, sec. 3, p. 285. ,, „ „„^ 
 
 Congress may remove disability, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 See CoNGHESS. 
 Immigration— State cannot discourage, p. 71. 
 
310 INDEX. 
 
 Immimitiea— privilege of member of Congress from arrest, art. 1, sec. 
 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 soldiers not to be quartered iu time of peace, Amdt. art. 3, sec. 1, 
 
 p. 256. 
 rights of citizens, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 233. 
 immunities defined, p. 234. 
 no person to be twice in jeopardy for same offense, Amdt. art. 5, 
 
 SGC 1 T) 257 
 
 who are citizens of United States, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 privileges and immunities of citizens not to be abridged, Amdt. 
 art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 State not to deprive of life, liberty, or property without due proc- 
 ess of law, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 nor deny the equal protection of the law, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 
 279. 
 
 from taxation, in charter, construed, p. 172. 
 
 Impairment— defined, p. 131. 
 
 Impairment of obligations— State legislation inhibited, p. 116. 
 
 inhibition construed, p. 124. 
 
 retrospective statutes, validity of, p. 126. 
 
 contracts construed, p. 127. 
 
 contracts, what comprehend, p. 123. 
 
 contracts with State included, p. 129. 
 
 obligations construed, p. 130. 
 
 impairment construed, p. 131. 
 
 degree of impairment, p. 133. 
 
 what not a violation of obligation, p. 134. 
 
 what not an impairment of, p. 135. 
 
 impairment of remedy, p. 136. 
 
 change, not an impairment, p. 137. 
 
 what not an impairment, p. 139. 
 
 Statute of Limitations not an impairment, p. 140. 
 
 exemption laws, when an impairment, p. 141. 
 
 stay laws, when an impairment, p. 142. 
 
 State insolvent laws, validity of, p. 144. 
 
 legislature may regulate .iuuicial proceedings, p. 145. 
 
 statute rights may be modified, p. 147. 
 
 right of redemption may be modified, p. 149. 
 
 State, power of taxation, p. 150. 
 
 licenses may be modified, p. 151. 
 
 exemption from taxation, p. 151. 
 
 State grants of land, contract construed, p. 153. 
 
 State grants generally, construed, p. 154. 
 
 vested rights cannot be impaired, p. 155. 
 
 statutes impairing averred, p. 157. 
 
 corporate rigbts protected, p. 159. 
 
 power of State over corporate liabilities, p. 161. 
 
 protection of corporate franchise, p. 162. 
 
 exemption of corporations from taxation as a contract, p. 164. 
 
 how far extends, p. 165. 
 
 banking corporation a charter, p. 167. 
 
 franchises to bridges, ferries, and turnpikes, p. 168. 
 
 railroad charter a contract, p. 170. 
 
 immunity from taxation a contract, p. 172. 
 
 corporate charter, authority of State over, p. 172. 
 
 amendment of charter, p. 172. 
 
 power to amend, when reserved, p. 175. 
 
 exei'cise of reserved power, p. 177. 
 
 power of repeal, p. 178. 
 
 charter of municipal corporation not a contract, p. 179. 
 
 authority over municipal corporations, p. 180-184. 
 
INDEX, 311 
 
 Impairment of remedies— when prolaiMted, p. 136. 
 
 change of remedy, when may be made, p. 137. 
 
 what is not, p. 139. 
 
 exemption laws, when valid, p. 141. 
 
 stay laws, when valid, p. 142. 
 See Contracts. 
 Impairment of rights— construed, p. 156. 
 
 what is not, p. 156. 
 
 See CONTKACTS. 
 
 Impeachment— House to have sole power of, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 5, p. 
 
 Senate the sole power to try, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 to be on oath or alfirmation, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 when Chief Justice to preside, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 two-thirds necessary for conviction, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 .iudgment, extent of, on conviction, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 7, p. 48. 
 judgment, not to bar indictment and punishment, art. 1, sec 3, 
 
 par. 7, p. 48. 
 who removable on impeachment, art. 2, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 207. 
 cases not to be tried by jury, art, 3, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 227. 
 
 Importation of slaves— restriction on powers of Congress, art. 1, sec. 
 
 9,par. l,p. 109. 
 tax may be imposed, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 1, p. 109. 
 power of Congress construed, p. 69. 
 
 See Chinese. 
 
 Imports or exports— State shall not lay without consent of Congress, 
 
 ai-t. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 if laid by State, for use of Treasury, art. 1. sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 shall be subject to revision by Congress, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 
 
 187. 
 what imports include, p. 187. 
 
 Imposts -denned, n. 58. 
 
 Congress to lay, art, 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 
 Imposts and excises— Congress shall have power to lay and coflect, 
 art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 187. 
 
 definitions, p. 187. 
 
 to be uniform throughout States, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p^ 56. 
 Incidental power— of Government, p. 106. 
 
 to punish for offenses, p. 108, 
 
 power to enforce execution of judgment, p. 108. 
 
 to regulate proceedings on execution, p. 108. 
 Income tax— Salaries of State oflcers not subject to, p. 58. 
 
 Incompatible offices— members of Congress cannot hold other civil 
 office, art. 1, sec, 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 what offices are, p. 53, 
 United States Marshal cannot be commercial agent, p. 115. 
 
 Indians— excluded from representation, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45; 
 Amdt, art, 14, sec, 1, p, 285, 
 
 not foreign subjects, nor citizens, p, 78. 
 
 may enforce rights in State courts, p. 78. 
 
 may be sued in State courts, p. 78. 
 
 on reservation within State, how governed, p. 80. 
 
 laws and customs of, p, 81, 
 
 when may be naturalized, p. 82. 
 
 Indian Territory— within State, power of Congress construed, p. 79. 
 
 Indian tribes— Congress to regulate commerce with, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 3, p, 65, 
 commerce with Indians, p. 78. 
 construction of clause, p. 79. 
 
312 INDEX. 
 
 Indian tribes— Coftiinned . 
 
 within States, State larws no force OTer, p. 79, 
 
 right to use of soil can only be divested by Government, p. 80. 
 
 Indian laws and customs to rule, p. 81. 
 
 Indictment, or presentment— essential to trial for capital or infa- 
 mous crime, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 
 except in cases in land and naval forces and militia, Amdt. art. 
 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 
 of person convicted on impeachment, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 7, p. 48» 
 Inferior courts— power of Congress to establish, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 9, 
 p. 96. 
 
 judicial power vested in, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 
 judges to hold ofBce during good behavior, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 
 208. 
 
 compensation not to be diminished during ofB.cial term, art. 3, 
 sec. 1> par. 1, p. 208. 
 
 Inferior ofEcers— Congress may invest appointment of, where they 
 think proper, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 
 Inherent rights— protection of, p. 261. 
 Inhabitant— defined, p. 45. 
 
 status of, in sites purchased by Government, p. 105. 
 
 Insolvent laws— bankruptcy and insolvency equivalent terms, p. 83. 
 
 laws, when operative, p. 86. 
 
 when suspended by Bankrupt Act, p. 87. 
 
 validity of, pp. 88, 144. 
 
 citizens of other States, when bound by, pp. 89, 90. 
 
 Congress may make the United States a preferred creditor, p. 
 107. 
 Inspection laws— Congress may make, p. 67. 
 
 States may enact, pp. 72, 185. 
 
 State laws subject to revision by Congress, p. 189. 
 
 Insurrections— Congress to provide for suppression of, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 
 par. 15, p. 100. 
 participants in, disqualified for office, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 
 
 285. 
 Congress may remove disabilities, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 debts contracted in aid of, void, Amdt. 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 
 Internal commerce— States may regulate, p. 73. 
 
 Invasion— States may engage in war, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 
 writ of habeas corpus, suspension of, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 2, p. 110. 
 
 Congress may call militia out to repel, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 15, p. 100. 
 
 power to repel, construed, p. 100. 
 
 United States to protect each State against, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 1, 
 p. 245. 
 
 Invention— defined, p. 95. 
 
 Inventors— Congress to pass laws to secure rights to, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 8, p. 94. 
 
 Involuntary servitude— abolition of, except for crime, Amdt. art. 13 
 sec. l,p. 277. 
 power of Congress to enforce provision, Amdt. art. 13, sec. 2, p. 
 
 278. 
 clause construed, p. 278. 
 
 Jeopardy of life and limb— person not to be twice subject to, Amdt. 
 art. 5, sec. l,p. 257. 
 jeopardy construed, p. 259. 
 Joint resolution— approved, effect of, as law, p. 56. 
 Journal of proceedings— each House to keep, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 3, p. 5, 
 
INDEX. 313 
 
 Judges— of United States courts to hold oface dxiring good behavior, 
 
 art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 compensation not to be diminislied during term, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 
 
 1, p. 208. 
 Congress cannot limit, p. 215. 
 in every State, bound by Constitution, laws, and treaties of 
 
 United States, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 148. 
 
 Tudgment— in impeachment cases to extend only to removal from 
 oface, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 7, p. 48. 
 not a bar to indictment and trial at law, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 7, p. 48. 
 of State courts, efEect of authentication of, p. 231. 
 
 Judicial Department— power, where vested, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1. p. 
 
 208. 
 Supreme and inferior Courts, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 term of oface and compensation of judges, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 
 
 208. 
 judicial power of, p. 209. 
 extent of power, p. 215. 
 jurisdiction of courts, p. 210. 
 of United States courts, art. 3. sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 of territorial courts, p. 212. 
 authority of State courts, p. 213. 
 removal of causes, p. 214. 
 
 jurisdiction of Supreme Court, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 223. 
 extent of jurisdiction, p. 215. 
 extent of judicial power, p. 217. 
 as to persons, p. 219, 
 original jurisdiction construed, p. 223. 
 appellate jurisdiction construed, p. 225. 
 
 Judicial notice— of close of rebellion, p. 110. 
 of general statute, p. 55. 
 
 Judicial power— where vested, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 
 Congress may constitute inferior tribunals, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 9, p. 
 
 96. 
 power of Congress, p. 208. 
 
 lodged in Supreme and inferior courts, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 judges to hold oface during good behavior, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, 
 
 p. 208. 
 compensation not to be diminished during continuance in oflace, 
 
 art, 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 constitutional provision construed, p. 209. 
 jurisdiction of United States courts, p. 210. 
 of territorial courts, p. 212. 
 authority of State courts, p. 213. 
 removal of causes, p. 214. 
 
 authority of Congress as to judges and tenure of office, p. 215. 
 to extend to cases in law and equity, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 to cases arising under Constitution, laws, and treaties, art. 3, sec. 
 
 2,par. l,p. 215. 
 to all cases affecting ambassadors, ministers, and consuls, art. 3, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 to admiralty and maritime cases, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 to controversies to which United States is a party, art. 3, sec. 2, 
 
 par. l,p. 215. 
 to controversies between States, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 to controversies between a State and citizens of another State, 
 
 art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 or between a State or its citizens and foreign States or citizens, 
 
 art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 extent of jurisdiction, p. 215. 
 extent of judicial power, p. 217. 
 
 Desty Fed. Co:s.—2V. 
 
314 INDEX. 
 
 Judicial ^ovrer— Continued. 
 as to persons, p. 219. 
 admiralty and maritime, p. 221. 
 over maritims contracts, p. 222. 
 in cases affecting ambassadors, etc., Supreme Court to have 
 
 original jurisdiction, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 223. 
 in all other cases to have appellate jurisdiction, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 
 
 2, p. 223. 
 trial of crimes, except impeachment, to be by jury, art. 3, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 3, p. 227. 
 trial to be held in State where crime committed, art. 3, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 3, p. 227. 
 when not committed within State, Congress may direct, art. 3, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 3, p. 227. 
 not to extend to cases against a State by citizens of another State, 
 
 or a foreign State, Amdt. art. 11, sec. 1, p. 275. 
 extent of restriction, p. 275, 
 
 Judicial piHjceedings— of State, full faith and credit to be given, art. 
 
 4, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 230. 
 manner of proving, may be prescribed by Congress, art. 4, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 1, p. 230. 
 power of State legislation, p. 145. 
 
 Judicial officers— to be bound by oath to support Constitution, art. 
 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 
 Jurisdiction— of Supreme Court, appellate and original, art. 3, sec. 2, 
 par. 2, p. 223. 
 of inferior tribunals, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 9, p. 96. 
 of United States courts, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 extent of, p. 215. 
 as to the person, p. 219. 
 admiralty and maritime, p. 221. 
 over maritime contracts, p. 222. 
 of Supreme Court, p. 210. 
 original defined, p. 223. 
 appellate defined, p. 225. 
 of territorial courts, p. 212. 
 of State courts, when prohibited, p. 213. 
 of Government over ceded territory, p. 103. 
 of State, when attaches in insolvency, p. 86. 
 
 Jury— trial of crimes except on impeachment to be by jury, art. 3, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 3, p. 227. 
 accused to have speedy and public trial by, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 
 
 267. 
 suits at law where value over twenty dollars, Amdt. art. 7. sec. 1, 
 
 p. 268. 
 fact not to be re-examined except by rules of common law, Amdt. 
 
 art. 7, sec. 1, p. 268. 
 
 Just compensation— property not to be taken for public use without, 
 
 Amdt. art. 5. sec. 1, p. 257. 
 Justice— purpose of Constitution to establish. Preamble, p. 41. 
 
 fugitives from, to be delivered up, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 237. 
 
 fugitive defined, p. 297. 
 
 Labor— fugitives from, to be delivered up, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 241. 
 power of Congress exclusive, p. 241. 
 in one State defined, p. 241. 
 
 Land and naval forces— Congi-ess may govern and regulate, art. 1, 
 sec. y, par. 14, p. 100. 
 
 Land grants— by State, conclusive on future legislation, p. 153. 
 
INDEX. 315 
 
 Law of the land— Constitution, laws, and treaties constitute, art. 6, 
 sec. 1, par. 2, p. 248. 
 judges in every State bound by, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 248. 
 
 Law— what includes, p. 124. 
 
 retrospective, not necessarily invalid, p. 126. 
 
 limit of effect of State laws, p. 126. 
 
 iu conflict with acts of Congress, must give way, p. 126. 
 
 Law of nations— offense against, Congress may provide pimishraen. 
 for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 10, p. 96. 
 privacy vmder, p. 96. 
 slave trade, not privacy under, p. 96. 
 
 Laws— Congress may provide for execution of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 15, p 
 
 100. 
 and in powers vested in Government or any department or 
 
 officer, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 18, p. 106. 
 of United States, President to see faithful execution of, art. 2 
 
 sec. 3, par. 1, p. 206. 
 clause construed, p. 207. 
 judicial power to extend to all cases arising under, art. 3, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 1, p. 215. 
 
 Legal tender— power of Congress to create, p. 62. 
 discretion of Congress in creating, p. 91. 
 Acts of Congress construed, p. 91. 
 may make treasury notes a, p. 108, 112. 
 inhibition as to States, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 statutes creating, are void, p. 120. 
 
 Legislation— power of, vested in Congress, art. 1, sec. 1, p. 44. 
 
 political power not subject to judicial interference, p. 44. 
 
 powers of, how construed, p. 56. 
 
 exclusive in Congress, over District of Columbia, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 17, p. 102. 
 
 and over' places purchased for forts, arsenals, etc., art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 17, p. 102. 
 
 Congress to make laws necessary for operation of powers of Gov- 
 ernment, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 19, p. 106. 
 
 may enforce article prohibiting slavery, Amdt. art. 13, sec. 2, p. 
 278. 
 
 may enforce Fourteenth Amendment, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 5, p. 286, 
 
 may enforce Fifteenth Amendment, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 2, p. 287. 
 
 Legislative Department— powers vested in Congress, art. 1, sec. 1, p." 
 
 44. 
 House of Representatives, how composed, art. 1, sec. 2, par. h'p. 
 
 44. 
 electors of, who are, p. 45. 
 
 qualifications of members of House, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 45. 
 Representatives, how apportioned among States, art. 1, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 3, p. 45; repealed, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 construction of clauses, pp. 46, 285. 
 vacancies, how filled, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 4, p. 46. 
 shaU choose its own officers, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 5, p. 47. 
 Senate, how composed, art. 1, sec. 3, par. I, p. 47. 
 classes of Senators, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 47. 
 vacancy, how filled, p. 47. 
 
 qualification for Senator, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 3, p. 47. 
 construction of clause, p. 47. 
 Vice-President to be President of Senate, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 4, p. 
 
 48. 
 Senate to choose its own officers, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 as a court of impeachment, office of, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 Judgment of, in cases of impeachment, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 7, p. 48. 
 
316 INDEX. 
 
 Legislative power of United States— to be vested in Congress, art. 1, 
 
 SGC 1 13 44 
 
 of state, over judicial proceedings and remedies, p. 145. 
 of State, over corporations and corporate officers, p. 181, 
 
 Letters of marque and reprisal— Congress may grant, art. 1, sec. 8. 
 par. 11, p. 97. 
 State prohibited from granting, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 Liberty— purpose of Constitution to secure. Preamble, p. 41. 
 
 person not to be deprived of, without due process of law,-Amdt. 
 
 art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 of whom, entitled to protection, p. 261. 
 amendment construed, p. 261. 
 
 State cannot deprive person of, etc., Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 279. 
 purpose of amendment, p. 280. 
 
 Licenses— State authority over, pp. 66, 67. 
 
 license a contract, revocable at will, p. 151. 
 from United States, effect and operation of, p. 77. 
 
 Liens— created by law are subject to legislative control, p. 147. 
 validity of taxation, of laws, p. 150. 
 
 Life— no person to be deprived of, without due process of law, Amdt. 
 art. 5, sec. l,p. 257. 
 no person to be twice put in jeopardy of, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 
 
 257. 
 amendment construed, p. 261. 
 
 same restriction on powers of States, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 purpose of amendment, p. 280. 
 
 Limitation— statutes of, when do not impair obligation of contract, p. 
 
 140. 
 of powers of General Government, art. 1, sec. 9, pars. 1-8, pp. 109- 
 
 115. 
 of powers of State sovereignty, art. 1, sec. 10, pars. 1-3, pp. 116- 
 
 193. 
 of powers of Congress, Amdt. arts. 1-10, pp. 254-274. 
 of judicial power of United States, Amdt. art. 11, sec. 1, p. 275. 
 extent of restriction of judicial power, p. 275. 
 of actions, power of Congress to provide for, p. 108. 
 
 Loss of slave— claim for, illegal and void, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 
 Magazines, arsenals, etc— Congress to have special jurisdiction, art. 
 1, sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 jurisdiction over sites, p. 104. 
 jurisdiction exclusive, p. 105. 
 
 Mails— Congress may provide for carriage of, p. 93. 
 
 may prohibit transportation of certain circulars in, p. 93. 
 
 plenaiT power of Congress, p. 93. 
 
 contractor for carriage of, liable for State tolls, p. 93. 
 
 Maiority— of each House to constitute a quonim, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, 
 
 p. 50. 
 smaller number may adjourn, and compel attendance, art. 1, sec. 
 
 5, par. l;p. 50. 
 quorum of House in case of election of President, Amdt. art. 12, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 276. 
 of Senate in case of election of Vice-President, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 
 
 l,p.276. 
 two-thirds of Senate, on trial of impeachment, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 
 
 6, p. 48. 
 
 Maritime contract— jurisdiction over, p. 222. 
 
INDEX. ' 317 
 
 Maritime jurisdicrtion—juclicial power to extend to, art. 3, sec. 5, par. 
 I,p.2l5. 
 where lodged, p. 221. 
 over maritime contracts, p. 222. 
 Marque and reprisal— Congress may grant letters of, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 11, p. 97. 
 no State shall grant letters of, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 Marriage— between Indians, laws regulating, p. 81. 
 Marshal— of United States cannot he commercial agent of foreign 
 nation, p. 115. 
 
 Martial law— defined, p. 200. 
 
 power of President to proclaim, p. 200. 
 effect of, on privilege of witness, p. 110. 
 Maryland— Representatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 Massachusetts— Representatives infirst Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, 
 
 p. 45. 
 Means— of enforcement of power. Government to have, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 18, p. 106. 
 enumeration of means, pp. 107, 108. 
 Measures— Congress shall fix standard of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 5, p. 91. 
 Meeting of Congress— at least once a year, art. 1, sec. 4, par. 2, p. 49, 
 Members of Congress— and of State Legislatures, to be boimd by 
 
 oath, art. 6, sec. 3, p. 251. 
 Merchandise— State may license sale of, p. 77. 
 
 Migration— consti'ued, p. 109. 
 
 limitation of power of Congress, art. 1, sec. 9. par. 1, p. 109. 
 section not to apply to State Governments, p. 109. 
 
 See Chinese. 
 Military commander— cannot suspend privilege of writ of habeas cor. 
 
 pus, p. IW. 
 Military reservations— jurisdiction exclusive in Government, p. 105. 
 Militia— Congress shall provide for calling forth, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 15, 
 
 p. 100. 
 power of Congress, when supreme, p. 99. 
 limitation of power, p. 100. 
 shall provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, art. 1, sec. 
 
 8, par. 16, p. 102. 
 construction of clause, p. 102. 
 authority of Government, when exclusive, p. 102. 
 shall provide for governing, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 16, p. 102. 
 to execute laws, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions, art. 
 
 l,sec. 8, par. 15, p. 100. 
 concurrent power of State to call out, pp. 101, 102. 
 appointment of officers and training reserved to States, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 8, par. 16, p. 102. 
 discipline to be prescribed by Congress, art. l,sec. 8, par. 16, p. 102. 
 right of people to bear arms not to be infringed, Amdt. art. 2, 
 
 sec. l,p. 255. 
 right of State to maintain, Amdt. art. 2, sec. 1, p. 255. 
 
 Minister— appointment of, p. 203. 
 
 jurisdiction of courts over, p. 223, 
 Misdemeanors— impeachment and removal for, art. 2, sec. 4, par. 1, 
 
 p. 207. 
 Money— Congress may borrow on credit of United States, art. 1, sec. 
 8, par. 2, p. 61. 
 what power includes, p. 61. 
 
318 INDEX. 
 
 INloney— Continued. 
 
 shall have power to coin, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 5, p. 91. 
 
 may issue notes to circulate as, p. 61. 
 
 may restrict circulation of other notes, p. 61. 
 
 what constitutes, p. 61. 
 
 definition of , p. 91. 
 
 to be drawn trom treasury only in consequence of appropria- 
 tions, art. 1, sec. n,par. 7, p. 115. 
 
 statement of receipts and expenditures to he published, art. 1, 
 sec. 0, par. 7, p. 115. 
 
 no appropriation for armies to he for more than two years, 
 art. 1, sec. 8, par. 12, p. 99. 
 
 States not to coin silver or gold, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 States not to make other than coin a legal tender, art. 1. sec. 10, 
 par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 More perfect union— object of Constitution to form, Preamble, p. 41. 
 construction of term, p. 52. 
 
 Municipal bonds— authority of State over, p. 184. 
 
 Municipal contract— State authority over, p. 182. 
 
 Municipal corporation— charter not a contract, p. 179. 
 
 subscription to railroad stock, p. 180. 
 
 authority of Legislature over officers of, p. 181. 
 
 over contracts of, p. 182. 
 
 over liabilities of, p. 183. 
 
 over bonds of, p. 184. 
 
 Congress cannot tax revenues of, p. 58. 
 
 corporations may regulate sale of liquors, p. 77. 
 
 State may authorize to issue certificates of indebtedness, p. 118. 
 
 Municipal liabilities— authority of State over, p. 183. 
 Mutiny— Congress may punish for attempt to commit, p. 96. 
 
 If ations— power to regulate commerce with, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 3, p. 65. 
 
 power to punish offenses against law of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 10, 
 p. 96. 
 national banks— means to enforce powers delegated, p. 108. 
 
 State cannot tax, p. 64. 
 National conscription— Congress may authorize, p. 99. 
 ITational militia— how constituted, p. 101. 
 
 Naturalization— Congress to establish uniform rule of, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 
 par. 4, p. 81. 
 construed— effect of, p. 82. 
 citizens by, to be citizens of United States, and States where 
 
 they reside, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 purposes of amendment, p. 280. 
 
 Naval forces— Congress shall make rules and regulations for, art. 1, 
 sec. 8, par. 14, p. 100. 
 
 Navigable rivers— license to erect dams in, is revocable, p. 151. 
 State may erect draw-bridge, p. 74. 
 
 Navigable waters— of State and United States distinguished, p. 67. 
 
 power of Congress over, p. 67. 
 Navigation— a part of commerce, p. 67. 
 
 power of Congress to regulate, p. 67. 
 
 Navy— Congress to provide and maintain, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 13, p. 100. 
 grant of pover construed, p. 100. 
 
 Necessity— the test of incidental powers, p. 106. 
 
INDEX, 319 
 
 New Hampshire— Eepresentatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 3, p. 45. 
 New Jersey— Representatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, 
 
 ^. 45. 
 New States— may be admitted by Congress, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 242, 
 not to be fonned within jurisdiction of another witiiout consent 
 
 of Congress, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 242. 
 nor be formed by jmictiou of two States witiiout consent, art. 4 
 
 sec. 3, par. 1 , p. 242. 
 construction of clause, p. 242. 
 have same absolute riglits as other States, p. 75. 
 title to soil under tide waters, vests in, p. 75. 
 
 New York— Eepresentatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3. p. 45, 
 
 Nobility— titles of, not to be granted by United States, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 par. 8, X). 115. 
 no State to grant title of, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 Nominations— to office by President, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 
 North Carolina- Representatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 
 
 3, p. 45. 
 Number of electors— for President and Vice-President, art. 2, sec, 1, 
 
 par. 2, p. 195. 
 
 Oath of ofEce— of President, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 8, p. 197. 
 exclusively for the President, p. 197. 
 power of Congress to prescribe, p. 107. 
 what officers to take, art. 0, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 provision directory, p. 251. 
 Oath or affirmation— warrants to be supported by, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 
 
 1, p. 256. 
 to support the Constitution, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 to be taken by all officers, p. 251. 
 effect of omission to take, p. 251. 
 provisions of State Constitutions, requiring test oaths, void, p. 
 
 251. 
 religious test not to be required as a qualification for office, art. 
 
 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 Senators on trial of impeachment to be on, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, 
 
 tobe taken by members of Congress, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p.' 251. 
 ObjectionsbyPresident— on return of bill, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54. 
 Obligations— existing, ratified by Constitution, art. 6, sec. \, par. 1, 
 p. 248. 
 
 incurred in aid of rebellion, void, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 
 Obligations of contract— Congress not inhibited from violating, pp. 
 
 Congress may change currency in which to discharge contract, 
 
 p. 62. 
 State Constitution cannot impair, p. 124. 
 amendment to, cannot impair, p. 124. 
 not to be impaired by State legislation, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 
 
 116. 
 of other things than contracts not protected, p. 130. 
 validity, construction, and remedy are parts of, p. 130, 
 obligation construed, p. 130. 
 impair defined, p. 131. 
 degree of impairment, p. 133. 
 discharge of contract is an impairment, p. 131. 
 
320 INDEX. 
 
 Obligations of contract— Continued. 
 
 giving diminished value or divesting prior liens is, p. 131. 
 
 releasing one party from any stipulation in, is, p. 131. 
 
 validity may be affected by subsequent statute of frauds, is, p. 132. 
 
 any variation postponing or imposing conditions is, p. 133. 
 
 any statute in contravention is, p. 133. 
 
 what not impairment, pp. 134, 135. 
 
 remedy as part of obligation, p. 136. 
 
 remedy, how far may be changed, p. 137. 
 
 what not impairment of remedy, p. 139. 
 
 statute of imitations and usury laws, effect of, p. 140. 
 
 exemption laws, when invalid, p. 141. 
 
 stay laws, how lar invalid, x?. 141. 
 
 insolvency laws, when valid, i>. 144. 
 
 laws regulathig judicial proceedings, when valid, p. 145. 
 
 rights created by statute, legislative power over, p. 147. 
 
 right of redemption, p. 149. 
 
 confirmatory acts not an impairment, p. 154. 
 
 statute perfecting a voidable entry is not, p. 155. 
 
 Occupations— State may license exei-cise of, p. 76. 
 
 Offenses— against law of nations, Congress may provide punishment 
 
 for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 10, p. 96. 
 President may grant reprieves or pardons, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, 
 
 p. 197. 
 no person to be put twice in jeopardy, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 jeopardy construed, p. 259. j. 
 
 Office— who ineligible for members of House of Representatives, art. 
 
 l,sec. 2,par. 2,p. 45. 
 qualification for, p. 45. 
 Senator or Kepresentative not eligible for other office, art. 1, sec. 
 
 7, par. 2, p. 53. 
 holder of United States oflace not eligible for Congress, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 if created during his term, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 holder of, not to accept present or emolmnent from foreign king, 
 
 etc., art. 1, sec. 9, par. 8, p. 115. 
 term of, of President and Vice-President, art. 2, sec. 1, par. If 
 
 p. 194. 
 of President, when to devolve on Yice-President, art. 2, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 6, p. 196. 
 who precluded from oface of elector, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 195. 
 appointment to and removal from— power of President, art. 2, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 clause construed, p. 204. 
 
 appointment to, not a contract irrevocable, p. 128. 
 vacancy in, when may be tilled by President, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 3, 
 
 p. 206. 
 commissions to expire at end of next session, art. 2, see. 2, par. 
 
 3, p. 206. 
 who ineligible as Senator, Representative, or Presidential elector, 
 
 Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 religious test not required as qualification for, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 
 
 3, p. 251. 
 oath of, art. 6, see. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 
 OfUcers— Congress may vest apnointment of inferior officers where it 
 
 thinlis proper, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 removal on impeachment for certain crimes, art. 2, sec. 4, par. 1, 
 
 p. 206. 
 who removable on impeachment, art. 2, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 207. 
 of House of Representatives to be chosen by itself, art. 1, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 5, p. 47. 
 
INDEX. 321 
 
 O&cers— Continued. = „o 
 
 Senate to choose its own, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 5, p. 48. 
 civil, of United States, who are, p. 207. 
 
 Opinion of officers— of executive departments, may be required by 
 President, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 
 Orders— resolutions and vote to be presented to President, art. 1, sec. 
 7, par. 3, p. 55. 
 to be approved by President, p. 55. 
 
 Ordinance— of secession, null and void, p. 116. 
 effect of, p. 116. 
 
 Organizing— defined, p. 102. 
 
 militia. Congress to provide for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 16, p. 102. 
 
 Original jurisdiction— of Supreme Com-t, art. 3, sec. 2, pai\ 2, p. 223. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 223. 
 Overt act— necessary to treason, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 228. 
 Oysters— State may regulate planting and growth of, p. 75. 
 See Fisheries. 
 
 Papers— security from unreasonable searches, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 1. 
 
 p. 256. 
 Pardons— President may grant, escept in cases of impeachment, art. 2, 
 sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 pardontiig power construed, p. 201. 
 Passengers— State no power to levy tax on, p. 71. 
 
 power of Congress to pass laws concerning, p. 69. 
 State cannot impose burdens and conditions on, p. 71. 
 State may exclude criminals and paupers, p. 72. 
 can never be subject to State laws jn;itil tncorgprated m State, 
 p. 109. " .^^ c-< 
 
 See Chinese. '"_ * ,»-> 
 
 Patent rights— Congress may pass laws securing, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 8, 
 p. 94. 
 power of Congress defined, p. 94. 
 patent laws in general, p. 95. 
 rights of inventors secured, p. 96. 
 for medicine, does not confer right to use it, p. 95. 
 Payment— of public debt not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, 
 p. 286. 
 of pensions, not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 
 Penalties— of absentees in Congress, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. 
 Pensions and bounties— debts for, not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 
 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 Congress may secure receipt of, p. 107. 
 Pennsylvania— Representatives at first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, 
 
 p. 45. 
 People— Constitution formed by, Preamble, p. 41. 
 of United States, who are, p. 41. 
 powers devolve on people of United States, p. 59. 
 sovereignty of, dates from revolution, pp. 59, 75. 
 right of peaceable assemblage shall not be abridged, Amdt. art. 
 
 1, sec. 1, p. 254. 
 right to bear arms not to be infringed, Amdt. art. 2, sec. 1, p. 255. 
 to be secure in person and property from unreasonable seizures 
 
 and search, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 power of, as to amendments to Constitution, unlimited, p. 247. 
 right of, to petition for redress of grievances, p. 254. 
 
 I 
 
322 INDEX. 
 
 rights not disparaged by enumeration of powers in Constitution, 
 
 powers not deiegated'nor prohibited are reserved to the. Amdt. 
 
 art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 all powers emanate from, p. 272. 
 
 Persons— judicial power over, p. 219. 
 
 Personal rights— of security against unreasonable searches, seizures, 
 etc., Amdt. art. 4, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 
 of parties accused of crime, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 
 rights as to property, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 
 construction of section, p. 258. 
 
 jeopardy consti-ued, p. 259. 
 
 party'not to be compelled to be witness against himself, p. 260. ■ 
 
 depriving of life, liberty, etc., construed, p. 260. 
 
 due process of law construed, p. 262. 
 
 right of eminent domain, p.. 263. 
 
 compensation on condemnation, p. 265. 
 
 accused entitled to speedy trial, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 167. 
 
 to be confronted by witness, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 to have compulsory process, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 to have assistance of counsel, Amdt. art. 6. sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 provisions of section applicable to Federal powers only, p. 267. 
 
 right of trial by jurv in civil actions, Amdt. art. 7, sec. 1, p. 268. 
 
 excessive bail not to be required, Amdt. art. 8, sec. 1, p. 271. 
 
 provision construed, p. 271. 
 Petition for redress— right not to be abridged, Amdt. art. 1, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 1, p. 254. 
 Pilots— power of Congress as to, p. 68. 
 
 concurrent power of States, pp. 73, 114. 
 Piracies— Congress may define and punish, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 10, p. 96. 
 
 definition of, what constitutes, p. 96. 
 
 slave trade not, under law of nations, p. 96. 
 
 what constitutes, p. 96. 
 Police— power of State cannot obstruct commerce and navigation, 
 p. 67. 
 
 extent over trade and commerce, p. 72. 
 
 State power of, cannot be abandoned, p. 173. 
 
 power in general, pp. 72, 185. 
 Political power— not subject to judicial interference, p. 44. 
 
 See CoiTGHiESS, Government. 
 Ports— preference not to be given by any regulation of commerce or 
 revenue, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 6, p. 114. 
 
 vessels clearing not to pay duties, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 6, p. 114. 
 Post-ofEces and post-roads— Congress shall estabUsh, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 7, p. 93. 
 
 to establish , what comprehends, p. 93. 
 
 means necessary to exercise of power enumerated, p. 93. 
 
 Postage rates— bill establishing not a revenue bill, p. 54. 
 
 Powers— existence of, how deduced, p. 56. 
 
 devolve on people of United States, p. 59. 
 
 not delegated, are reserved to people, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 construction for purpose of conferring, to be resorted to with 
 caution, p. 106. 
 
 Powers of Congress— See Congress. 
 
 Powers of G-overnment- construed, p. 43. 
 
 incidental, to carry into execution, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 18, p. 106. 
 
INDEX. 323 
 
 Powers of CrOvemmenX— Continued. 
 
 not delegated nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the 
 
 States or the people, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 enumeration of, not to deny nor disparage others retained, Amdt. 
 
 art. 9, sec. l,p.271. 
 emanate from the people, p. 272. 
 See Congress. 
 Powers of President— See Executive, President. 
 Powers of State— See State. 
 
 Preamble to Constitution, p. 41. 
 
 Preference— not to be given to one port over another, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 par. 6, p. 114. 
 
 Present— or emolument from foreign potentate, not to be accepted 
 by United States official, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 8, p. 115. 
 
 Presentment or indictment— necessary to put party on trial, Amdt. 
 art. 5, sec. l,p. 257. 
 except in cases la land and naval forces, and militia, Amdt. art. 
 
 5, sec. l,p. 257. 
 
 Preside^it- Chief Justice to preside on impeachment of, art. 1, sec. 3, 
 
 par. (j,p. 48. 
 shall approve and sign all bills, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54. 
 approval of bills by, p. 55. 
 
 or return any bill with his objections, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54. 
 if not returned within ten days to become a law, art. 1, sec. 7, 
 
 par. 2, p. 54. 
 proceedings of two Houses in case of a veto, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, 
 
 p. 54. 
 orders, resolutions, or votes, when to be presented to, art. 1, sec. 
 
 7, par. 3, p. 55. 
 construction of clause, p. 56. 
 
 exclusive judge of exigency for calling out militia, p. 101. 
 how to exercise command of militia, p. 102. 
 cannot suspend writ of habeas corpus, but may be so authorized 
 
 by Congress, pp. 110, 194. 
 proceedings on retm'n the same as on a bill, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 3, 
 
 p. 55. 
 executive power to be vested in, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 194. 
 term of office four years, art. 2, sec. 1, p. 1, p. 194. 
 executive powers construed, p. 194. 
 electors of, how appointed, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 195. 
 where and how to meet and vote, art. 2, sec. 1, pax'. 3, p. 196. 
 superseded, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 time of choosing electors of, art. 2. sec. 1, par. 4, p. 196. 
 eligibility for office of, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 5, p. 196. 
 in case of removal, death, etc., Vice-President to act as, art. 2, 
 
 sec. l,par. 6, p. 196. 
 when Congress may designate officer to act as, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 
 
 6, p. 196. 
 
 compensation not to be increased or diminished during term of 
 
 office, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 7, p. 197. 
 to take oath of office, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 8, p. 197. 
 commander-in-cMef of army, navy, and militia, when called out, 
 
 art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 may require opinion of principal officer of departments, art. 2, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 may grant reprieves or pardons, except in cases of impeachment^ 
 
 art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 power as commandex'-in-chi.ef construed, p. 198. 
 authority over conquered territoi-y, p. 199. 
 declaring martial law a war power of, ]). 200. 
 pardoning power construed, p. 201. 
 
324 INDEX. 
 
 Fi*Gsid6ni'~~ Gofit'iTi'U/ECt 
 
 may make treaties by and with consent of Senate, art. 2, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 2, p. 203. 
 treaty construed, force and effect of, p. 203. 
 may appoint of&cers by and with consent of Senate, art. 2, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 2, p. 203. 
 power of appointment and removal defined, p. 204. 
 may fill vacancies that bappen in recess of Senate, art. 2, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 3, p. 206. 
 power, extent of, p. 206. 
 commissions to fill vacancies, when to expire, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 
 
 3, p. 206. 
 to give information and recommend measures to Congress, art. 
 
 2, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 206. 
 wben may convene botb or either House, art. 2, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 
 
 206. 
 when may adjourn Congress, art. 2, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 206. 
 shall receive ambassadors and public ministers, art. 2, sec. 3, par. 
 
 l,p.206. 
 shall take care that laws be faithfully executed, art. 2, sec, 3, par. 
 
 1, p. 206. 
 
 clause construed, p. 207. 
 
 shall commission all officers, art. 2, sec. 3, par. I, p. 206. 
 shall be removed on conviction on impeachment, art. 2, sec. 4, 
 par. 1, p. 207. 
 
 President and ■Vice-President— manner of choosing, art. 2, sec. l,par. 
 
 2, p. 195. * 
 
 who disqualified to be elector, art.2, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 195. 
 Congress may determine time of choosing electors, art. 2, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 4, p. 196. 
 electors to meet and vote by ballot, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 one at least not to be an inhabitant of State, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, 
 
 p. 276. 
 electors to name in distinct ballots persons voted for, Amdt. art. 
 
 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 distinct list of votes to be made, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 to be signed, certified, and transmitted to President of Senate, 
 
 Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 duty of President of Senate on receipt of returns, Amdt. art. 12, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 276. 
 person having greatest number of votes to be, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 
 
 1, p. 276. 
 if he have a majority of electoral votes, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 proceedings, if no person has a majority, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 
 
 276. 
 in choosing President by the Legislature, each State to have one 
 
 vote, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 quorum for this purpose to be two-thirds of States, Amdt. art. 12, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 276. 
 and a majority of States required to elect, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, 
 
 p. 276. 
 In case of no choice being made,Vice-President to act, Amdt. art. 
 
 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 
 President of Senate— Vice-President shall be, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 4, p. 
 
 48. 
 when Senate may choose pro tempore, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 5, p. 48. 
 shall have no vote except on equal division, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 4, 
 
 p. 48. 
 duty on return of votes of Presidential electors, Amdt. art. 12, 
 
 sec. 1, p. 276. 
 
 Press— freedom of, not to be abridged, Amdt. art. 1, sec. 1, p. 254. 
 
INDEX. 323 
 
 Private property— not to be taken for public nse-witlioTit compensa- 
 tion, Amclt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 Privilege— of members of Congress from arrest, except, art. 1, sec. 6, 
 par. 1 , p. 52. 
 
 members not to be questioned for speech or debate, art. 1, sec. 6, 
 par. l,p-52. 
 
 extent of privilege, p. 52. 
 
 of writ of habeas corpus, construed, p. 110. 
 Privileges and immunities— of vessels in ports of States to be com- 
 mon and equal, p. 114. 
 
 of citizens cf States, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 233. 
 
 citizens construed, p. 233. 
 
 construction of term privileges and immunities, p. 234. 
 
 State rights, extent of, p. 236. 
 
 soldiers not to be quartered without consent of owner, Amdt.. 
 art. 3, sec. l,p.256. 
 
 persons not to be put twice in jeopardy for same offense, Amdt. 
 art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 
 nor be deprived of property without due process of law, Amdt. 
 art. 5, sec. l,p. 257. 
 
 prohibitions, construed, p. 253. 
 
 citizens of United States are citizens of State where they reside,. 
 Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 not to be abridged by State laws, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 State not to deprive of life, etc., without due process of law,. 
 Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 nor deny to any person equal protection of the laws, Amdt. art» 
 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 section applies to citizens of United States, p. 279. 
 
 purpose of amendment, p. 279. 
 
 civil rights protected, p. 280. 
 
 protection of citizens, p. 282. 
 
 equal protection of tlie laws, construed, p. 283. 
 
 States cannot superadd requisites for alien to acquire, p. 82. 
 Frizes— Congress may make rules concerning, art. 1, sec. 8, par, 11, p. 
 
 97. 
 Procedure— Congress may regulate, in Federal Courts, p. 85. 
 
 regulation by State not an impairment of vested rights, p. 157. 
 
 Process of law— person not to be deprived of life, etc., without, Amdt. 
 
 art. 5, p. 257. 
 provision made applicable to States, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 for obtaining witnesses, rights of accused, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 
 
 267. 
 Profession— State may license the exercise of, pp. 76, 151. 
 Progress of science and art— Congress to have power to promote, 
 
 art. 1, sec. 8, par. 8, p. 94. 
 Property— parties not to be deprived of, without due process of law, 
 
 Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 protection of right to, p. 257. 
 depriving of, construed, p. 261. 
 duo process of law, construed, p. 262. 
 right of eminent domain, p. 263. 
 compensation on condemnation, p. 265. 
 States inhibited from depriving of without due process of law, 
 
 Amdt. ai't. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 protection of citizens, p. 282. 
 citizens who are, p. 279. 
 duo process of law, construed, p. 282. 
 equal protection of the laws as to, p. 283. 
 
 Desty Fed. Cok.— »8. 
 
S28 INDEX. 
 
 Property of United States— Congress may dispose of, and make rules 
 and re.Gailatioiis for, art. 4. sec. 3, par. 2, p. 243. 
 terms iu clause, construed, p. 243. 
 
 Prosecutions— accused to have speedy and public trialj Amdt. art. 6, 
 sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 to be tried by jury in State or district where crime was commit- 
 ted, Amdt. art. G, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 to bo informed of nature and cause of accusation, Amdt. art. 6, 
 sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 to bo confronted with witnesses, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 to have compulsory process for witnesses, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 
 267. 
 
 to have counsel for his defense, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 
 Protection— of interests of States devolves on Federal Government, 
 
 p. loy. 
 against invasion and from domestic violence, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 1, 
 
 p. 245. 
 of life, liberty, and pronerty of persons, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 
 
 257. 
 construction of clause, pp. 258-266. 
 
 Public debt— of United States, payment not to be questioned, Amdt. 
 art. 14, sec. 4, p. 286. 
 
 Public grants— may exempt from taxation, p. 152. 
 implied reservation in, p. 173. 
 as contracts, p. 153. 
 
 Public lands— State may exempt purchaser of, from taxation, p. 152. 
 
 effect of exemption upon subsequent purchaser, p. 152. 
 Public ministers— power of President to appoint, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, 
 p. 203. 
 
 extent of judicial power over, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 223. 
 
 Public moneys -statements of, to be published, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 7, p. 
 115. 
 
 Public ships— not subject to local jurisdiction, p. 100. 
 Public use— property not to be taken for, without just compensation, 
 Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 
 Punishment— judgment on impeachment not to bar trial, etc., art. 1, 
 sec. 3, par. 7, p. 43. 
 cruel and unusual, prohibited, Amdt. art. 8, sec. l,p. 271. 
 for treason, Congress to declare, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 229. 
 Congress may prescribe for offenses against commerce, p. 107. 
 for crimes on tJic high seas, p. ;;6. 
 for military and naval offenses, p. 100. 
 for crimes and offenses impeding operation of Government, p. 
 
 103. 
 power of, incidental to operation of sovereignty, p. 108. 
 statutes, wlien ex post facto, p. 121. 
 increased for second offense— not ex post facto, \). 122. 
 no distinction as to race or color, p. 286. 
 
 Qualification for ofEce— no religious test shall be required as, art. 6, 
 
 sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 of electors and members of House of Representatives, art. 1, sec. 
 
 2, par. 1, p. 44. 
 construction, p. 45. 
 of members of House as to age and inhabitancy, art. l,sec.2, par. 
 
 2, p. 45. 
 of Senators as to age and inhabitancy, art. 1 , sec. 3, par. 3, p. 47. 
 State cannot add to constitutional requirements, p. 47. 
 each House to judge of, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 60. 
 
INDEX. 327 
 
 Qualification for oSice— Continued. 
 
 of President of United States, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 5, p. 196. 
 as to age and residency, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 5, p. 196. 
 of Vice-President, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 
 Quarantine— State may legislate as to, pp. 72, 185. 
 
 Quartering soldiers— in time of peace, Amdt. art. 3, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 
 in time of war, manner to be prescribed by Congress, Amdt. art. 
 3, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 
 Quorum— a majority of each House constitutes, art. 1, sec. 5, par. l,p. 50, 
 
 a less number may adjourn and compel attendance, art. 1, sec. 5, 
 par. 1 , p. 50. 
 
 in case of ciioice of President, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 
 to elect Vice-President by Senate, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 276. 
 
 majority of whole number necessary for choice, Amdt. art. 12, 
 sec. l,p. 276. 
 Railroads— extent of powers of State over, p. 74. 
 
 State may fix maximum rates of freight, p. 74. 
 
 may authorize appointment of raUroad commissioners, p. 170. 
 
 State may tax property of, p. 76. 
 
 subject to public supervision, p. 170. 
 
 State may regulate signals, p. 170. 
 
 statute may render liable for injury to person or property, p. 170. 
 
 Legislature may authorize municipal corporations to subscribe 
 for stock of, p. 180. 
 
 charter construed, p. 168. 
 
 chai'ter a contract, p. 170. 
 
 law as part of contract, p. 170. 
 
 consolidated company, what law to govern, p. 170. 
 
 immunity from taxation in charter, p. 172. 
 
 effect of exemption from taxation, p. 172. 
 
 reserved power to alter or amend charter, p. 177. 
 
 reserved power to repeal, p. 178. 
 
 Railroad Commissioners— Legislature may authori:5e appointment 
 
 of, p. 170. 
 
 Race or color— rights of citizens not to be denied on account of, 
 
 Amdt. art. 15, sec. 1, p. 287. 
 Raise and support armies— power of Congress, li. 99. 
 
 Ratification of amendments— what required, art. 5, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 
 247. 
 of Constitution, number of States required, art. 7, sec. 1, par. l,p. 
 
 252. 
 required, art. 7, seo. 1, par. 1, p. 252. 
 names of States, with dates, p. 252. 
 
 Ratio of freight— State may fix maximum charges, p. 74. 
 
 Ratio of representation— art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 
 how apportioned among the several States, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, 
 
 p. 2d5. 
 Indians not taxed excluded from count, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 
 
 285. 
 when reduced, denial of right to vote, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 
 
 285. 
 
 Rebellion— Congress may suspend statute of limitation during, p. 97. 
 power of Congress to suppress, p. 100. 
 
 power of Congress to fix conditions of returning peace, p. 101. 
 close of, judicial notice to be taken, p. 110. 
 
 privilege of writ of habeascorpas may be suspended during, p. 110, 
 law affecting life or property for participating in, is a bill of at. 
 
 tainder, p. 112. 
 State no right to secede, p. 116. 
 
328 . INDEX. 
 
 ReheWion— Continued. 
 
 ordinance of secession null and void, p. 116. 
 
 Constitutional objections not aifected by, p. 116. 
 
 what legislation of rebel States is valid, p. 116. 
 
 contracts in and of, void, p. 116. 
 
 expurgatory oath, when may be required, p. 120. 
 
 States in, never were out of the Union, p. 126. 
 
 certain participants disabled from holding oflQ.ce, Amdt. art. 14, 
 
 sec. 3, p. 285. 
 Congress may remove disability, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 debts incurred to suppress not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 14, 
 
 sec. 4, p. 286. 
 debts incurred in aid of, illegal and void, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, p. 
 
 286. 
 exception as to suspension of writ of habeas corpus, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 
 par. 2, p. 110. 
 contracts to pay on Confederate notes, void, p. 286. 
 Receipts and expenditures— of public money to be published, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 9, par. 7, p. 115. 
 Recess of Senate— President may commission to fill vacancies in of- 
 fice, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 206. 
 Reconsideration of bill returned by President— art. 1, sec. 7, par. 
 
 2, p. 54. 
 Records— of State, full faith and credit to be given to, art. 4, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 1, p. 230. 
 Redemption— right of, power of State, p. 149. 
 Redress of grievances— right to petition for, cannot be abridged, 
 
 Amdt. art. 1, sec. 1, p. 54. 
 Re-examination of causes— art. 7, sec. l,p. 268. 
 
 section, to what apply, p. 270. 
 Regulations— for election of Senators and Representatives, art. 1, sec. 
 
 4, par. 1, p. 254. 
 Religion— Congress can make no laws as to establishment of, Amdt. 
 art. 1, sec. 1, p. 254. 
 power over, left with States, Amdt. art. l,sec. 1, p. 254. 
 Religious tests— shall never be required as qualification for office, 
 
 art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 Remedies— as part of contract, cannot be impaired, p. 136. 
 change of, not necessarily illegal, p. 137. 
 what not impairment of contract, pp. 139, 157. 
 statute of limitations and usury laws, p. 140. 
 exemption laws, when valid, p. 141. 
 stay laws, when invalid, p. 14:!. 
 what an impairment of, p. 156. 
 State may regulate right of appeal, p. 158. 
 
 Removal from ofBce— executive power of, p. 204. 
 on impeachment, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 6, p. 204. 
 respecting territory ceded to United States, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 2, 
 p. 243. _ 
 Removal of causes— Congress may provide for, p. 214. 
 Repeal— of charter, State power, p. 178. 
 
 Representation and direct taxation— how apportioned, art. 1, sec. 2, 
 par. 3, p. 45. 
 changed by amendment, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 until first enumeration, ratio of, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 State Executive to issue writs of election to fill vacancies, art. 1, 
 sec. 2, par. 4, p. 46. 
 
INDEX. 329 
 
 Representation and direct taxation— Continued. 
 
 no State to be deprived of equality in Senate, without consent, 
 
 art. 5, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 247. 
 among several States, according to population, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 
 
 2, p. 285. 
 excluding Indians not taxed, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 basis reduced on denial of riglit to vote, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 
 
 285. 
 
 Representatives— House of, a branch of Congress, art. 1, sec. 1, p. 44. 
 qualifications of electors of members, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 45. 
 construction of section, p. 45. 
 as to age and inhabitancy, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 45. 
 how apportioned among States, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 46. 
 changed by amendment, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 construction of section, i). 46. 
 may be expelled, causes tor, p. 51. 
 eifect of resignation, p. 46. 
 
 shall choose Speaker and other ofBcers, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 5, p. 47. 
 shall have sole power of impeachment, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 5, p. 17. 
 State Executive to issue writs of election to fill vacancies, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 4, p. 46. 
 Legislatures to prescribe times, places, and manner of elections, 
 
 art. 1, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 48. 
 Congress may alter regulations, except as to places, art. 1, sec. 4, 
 
 par. 1, p. 48. 
 compensation of Senators to be ascertained by law, art. 1, sec. 6, 
 
 par. l,p. 52. 
 shall be privileged from arrest, except, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 shall not be questioned for speech or debate, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, 
 
 p. 62. 
 shall be ineligible for oflce created during their term, art. 1, see. 
 
 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 who ineligible to office of. art. 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 bills for raising revenue to originate in House, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 
 
 l,p. 54. 
 ineligible to office of Presidential elector, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 
 
 195. 
 oath to be taken by, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 shall be bound by oath to support Constitution, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 
 
 3, p. 251. 
 ' provisions relative to apportionment of, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 
 
 285. 
 when basis to be reduced, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 intent of section construed, p. 285. 
 disability from participation in rebellion, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 
 
 285. 
 may be removed by Congress, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 Reprieves— President may grant, except, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 power construed, p. 201. 
 
 Reprisal— Congress may grant letters of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 11, p. 97. 
 no State shall grant, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 Republican form of government— guaranteed to States, art. 4, sec. 
 4, par. 1, p. 245. 
 
 Reserved power— of States and people, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 no right of secession, p. 273. 
 of States, construction of clause, p. 274. 
 Reserved rights— enumeration of rights, not to deny or disparage 
 others retained, Amdt. art. 9, sec. 1, p. 271. 
 powers not delegated to United States nor prohibited to States 
 
 are reserved, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 powers emanate from the people, p. 272. 
 
330 . INDEX. 
 
 Eeserved rigTsts— Continued. 
 
 no reserved riglit of secession, p. 273. 
 
 right to alter, amend, or repeal, charter may be reserved, p. 175. 
 not affected by consolidation Avith foreign corporation, p. 176. 
 extent of power or rights reserved, p. 177. 
 
 Resignation of President— Vice-President to act, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 6, 
 p. 196. 
 
 Congress may provide for case of, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 6, p. 1S6. 
 Resolution— concurrent, to be presented to President, art. 1, sec. 7, 
 
 par. 3, p. 55. 
 Retrospective statutes— when, and when not, invalid, p. 155. 
 Revenue— bills to originate in House, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 1, p. 54. 
 
 preference not to be given to poi'ts, art. 1, sec. !), par. G, p. 114. 
 
 Congress may use means to collect in its discretion, p. 108. 
 
 or means to protect collectors, p. 108. 
 Revenue stamp— not to be required on process in State courts, p. 58. 
 Rhode Island— Representatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, 
 
 p. 45. 
 Right of petition— not to be abridged, Amdt. art. 1, sec. 1, p. 254. 
 Right of redemption— legislative power over, p. 149. 
 
 Right to bear arms- not to be infringed, Amdt. art. 2, sec. 1, p. 255. 
 construction of section, p. 255. 
 
 Rights enumerated— not to deny or disparage other, retained, Amdt. 
 art. !), sec. 1, p.271. 
 
 not delegated to United States or prohibited to States are re- 
 served, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 Rights of citizens— protection of, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, pp. 257, 261. 
 
 State not to abridge, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 
 purpose of amendment, p. 280. 
 
 to vote, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 1, p. 287. 
 
 amendment construed, p. 287. 
 
 may be protected by Congress, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 2, pp. 287, 288. 
 
 Rights of property— in invention, p. 96. 
 
 Rights of people— not disparaged by enumeration of rights in Consti- 
 tution, Amdt. art. 9, sec. 1, p. 271. 
 Rights— growing out of statute, may be modified, p. 147. 
 
 of redemption, power of State Legislature, p, 149. 
 
 vested, under land grants, p. 153. 
 
 under State grants generally, p. 154. 
 
 vested, cannot bo divested, p. 155. 
 
 cannot be impaired by legislation, p. 156. 
 
 what not an impairment of, p. 157. 
 Roads— authority of Congress to establish, art. 1, ec. 8, par. 7, p. 93. 
 Robbery— on high seas is piracy, p. S6. 
 
 of mail, concurrent power to punish for, p. 93. 
 Rules— of proceedings, each House may determine, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 
 2, p. 51. 
 
 and regulations respecting territory and property of United 
 States, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 243. 
 
 of the common law, trial by jury, Amdt. art. 7, sec, 1, p. 268. 
 
 re-examination of facts by, Amdt. art. 7. sec. 1, p. 268. 
 
 of property, decision of State Supreme Coiirt bindmg on Federal 
 courts, p. 06. 
 
 of evidence, when statute not ex post facto, p. 121. 
 
 warrant, what necessary to obtain, p. 256. 
 
 Salaries— of office may be reduced, p. 128. 
 
INDEX. 331 
 
 Savings-banks— State law to regulate, p. 87. 
 
 Searches and seizures— security of people against, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 
 l.P-256. 
 •warrants, what essential to, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 1, p. 2o6. 
 construction of clause, p. 256. 
 Science and art— Congress may promote progress of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 
 8, p. y4. 
 Seat of government— exclusive legislation of Congress over, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 8, par. 17, p. 102. 
 Secession and confederation— prohibited to States, p. 116. 
 
 not a reserved right, p. 273. 
 Secretary of War— no right to suspend privilege of writ of habeas 
 
 corpus, \}. 110. 
 Secret sessions— in discretion, p. 52. 
 
 Securities— punishment for counterfeiting, art. 1, sec. 8. par. 6, p. 92. 
 of Government, Congress may exempt from taxation, p. 63. 
 of Confederacy invalid, p. 126. 
 Seizure— protection from, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 1 , p. 256. 
 
 warrants, what necessary to obtain, p. 256. 
 Senate and House of Representatives— components of Congress, 
 
 art. 1, sec. 1, p. 44. 
 Senate— composed of two Senators from each State, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 
 
 chosen by Legislatures for six years, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 47. 
 
 construction of clause, p. 47. 
 
 vacancies, how created, p. 46. 
 
 executive cannot appoint, p. 47. 
 
 qualiii cation 3 for, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 3, p. 47. 
 
 division into classes, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 47. 
 
 Vice-President to be President of, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 4, p. 48. 
 
 to choose officers and President pro tempore, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 5, 
 
 p. 48. 
 to have sole power to try impeachments, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 on such trial to be on oath or affirmation, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 Chief Justice to preside on trial of President, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 6, 
 
 concurrence of two-thirds required for conviction, art. 1, sec. 3, 
 
 par. 6, p. 48. . , ^ 
 
 shall be judge of returns and qualifications of its members, art. 
 
 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. 
 majority to constitute a quorum, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 1, p. 50. 
 smaller number may adjourn and compel attendance, art. 1, sec. 
 
 6, par. 1, p. 50. 
 may determine rules of its proceedings, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 2, p. 51. 
 may punish or expel a member, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 2, p. 51. 
 to keep journal of its proceedings, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 3, p. 52. 
 to publish the same, except, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 3, p. 52. 
 restriction on power to adjourn, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 4, p. 52. 
 may propose amendments to revenue bills, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 1, p. 
 
 54 
 shall advise and consent to ratifications of treaties, art. 2, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 2, p. 203. , , , . 
 
 shall advise and consent to the appointment of ambassadors, etc., 
 
 art. 2, sec, 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 and Judges of Supreme Court and other ofacers, art. 2, sec. 2, par. 
 
 2 T). 203. 
 when may be convened by President, art. 2, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 206. 
 no State without its consent to be deprived of its equal suffrage 
 
 in, art. 5, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 247. 
 
332 INDEX. 
 
 Senators— to be divided into three classes, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 48. 
 seats of classes, wlien vacated, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 43. 
 qualifications as to age and inhabitancy, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 3, p. 
 
 47. 
 time, place, and manner of choosing, how fixed, art. 1, sec. 4, par. 
 
 1, p. 48. 
 Congress may alter except as to places, art. 1, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 48. 
 construction of clause, p. 48. 
 
 to be privileged from arrest, except, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 compensation to be ascertained by law, ai-t. 1, sec. (j, par. 1, p. 52. 
 shall not be questioned for speech or ddbate, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, 
 
 p. 52, 
 ineligible to ofB.ces created during term of service, art. 1, sec. 6, 
 
 par. 2, p. 53. 
 who ineligible to office of, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 ineligible to office of presidential elector, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 
 
 195. 
 shall be bound by oath to support the Constitution, art. 6, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 3, p. 251. 
 certain persons disqualified, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 Congress may remove disability, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 Senators and Representatives— compensation of, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, 
 
 p. 52. 
 privilege from arrest, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 1, p. 52. 
 construction of clause, p. 52. 
 
 disqualified from lioldmg other offices, art. 1, sec. 6, par. 2, p. 53. 
 incompatible offices, p. 52. 
 
 Service or labor— delivery up of fugitives from, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 
 
 241. 
 Servitude— involuntary, except for crime, abolished, Amdt. art. 13, 
 sec. 1, p. 277. 
 rights of citizens not to be abridged on account of prior condition 
 of, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 1, p. 287. 
 Shipping— Congress, power to establish rules for, p. 68. 
 
 State may impose license tax. p. 76. 
 Ships of war— States shall not keep, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 Slave— claim for loss or emancipation of, void, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, 
 
 p. 286. 
 Slave trade- not piracy under law of nations, p. 93. 
 Slavery— abolished, Amdt. art. 13, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 section construed, p. 277. 
 
 power of Congress to enforce provision, Amdt. art. 13, sec. 1, p. 
 278. 
 Soldiers— not to be quartered in any house without consent of owner, 
 Amdt. art. 3, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 payment of bounties not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, 
 p. 286. 
 South Carolina— Representatives in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, 
 
 p. 45. 
 Sovereignty— power of punishment incident to, p. 108. 
 See Government, State. 
 
 Speaker— House to choose Speaker and other officers, art. 1, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 5, p. 47. 
 Speech— Congress not to abridge freedom of, Amdt. art.l, sec. l,p. 254. 
 Standard of weights and measures— Congress shall fix, art. 1, sec. 8. 
 
 par. 5, p. 91. 
 
INDEX. 333 
 
 States— executives shall issue writs of election to fill vacancies in 
 
 House, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 4, p. 46. 
 may regulate elective franchise, p. 49. 
 cannot tax means and instruments of Government, p. 59. 
 cannot tax Government securities, p. C3. 
 may tax estates composed of Government securities, p. 63. 
 commerce among, to be regulated by Congress, art 1, sec. 8, par. 3, 
 
 p. 65. 
 cannot lay tax on freight, p. 65. 
 cannot obstruct navigation, p. 67. 
 concurrent power over commerce, p. 70. 
 power wlien exclusive in Congress, p. 70. 
 no power beyond right of self-defense, p. 71. 
 may regulate sale of dangerous commodities, pp. 72, 96. 
 may regulate or prohibit sale of liquors, pp. 77, 151. 
 State authority as to naturalization, p. 82. 
 may punish for uttering counterfeit coin, p. 92. 
 or for cheating by base coin, p. 02. 
 or for keeping counterfeit implements, p. 92. 
 cannot punish frauds under color of right from United States, 
 
 p. 94. 
 power over militia construed, p. 99. 
 may punish for neglect to obey oixlers.p. 101. 
 concurrent power to call out militia, pp. 101, 102. 
 authority to officer and train militia, p. .102. 
 authority over owners, p. 105. 
 authority over corporations, p. 118. 
 no power to tax passengers, p. 71. 
 police powers of State supreme, p. 72. 
 power over internal commerce, p. 73. 
 authorities over fisheries, p. 75. 
 license taxes, pp. 76, 77. 
 State insolvent Jaws, validity of, p. 86. 
 when superseded, p. 87. 
 Territorial limit of authority, p. 88. 
 validity of insolvent discharge, p. 90. 
 resei'ved power as to militia, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 16, p. 102. 
 construction of clause, p. 102. 
 authority over land ceded to Government, p. 105. 
 ports of, not to have preference over other State ports, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 9, par. 6, p. 114. 
 no right to secede, p. 116. 
 shall not enter into treaties, alliance, or confederation, art. 1, sec. 
 
 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 shall not grant letters of marque or reprisal, art. 1, sec. 10, par. i, 
 
 p. 116. 
 shall not coin money, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 shall not emit bills of credit, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 bills of credit construed, p. 118. 
 
 restriction as to making a legal tender, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 construction, p. 120. 
 
 shall not pass bills of attainder, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 bill of attainder, what is, p. 120. 
 or ex post facto law, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 ex post facto laws construed, p. 121. 
 •what not, p. 123. 
 or law impairing obligation of contracts, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 
 
 116. 
 what legislation inhibited to States, p. 124. 
 inhibition to apply to States, and not to Congress, p. 125. 
 laws merely retrospective not inhibited, p. 126. 
 inhibition construed, p. 127. 
 may contract with individuals, pp. 128, 129. 
 
334 INDEX. 
 
 States— Continued. 
 
 l30uua by their contracts, p. 128. 
 
 obligations construed, p. 130. 
 
 impairment, what is, p. 131. 
 
 degreo of impairment, p. 133. 
 
 ■what not violation of obligation, pp. 134, 135. 
 
 shall not grant any title of nobility, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 subscription to raih'oad stock, by_ municipal corporation, p. 180. 
 
 impairment of remedy, when inhibited, p. 136. 
 
 change of remedy allowed, p. 137. 
 
 what not impairment of remedy, p. 139. 
 
 Statute of Limitation :, when inhibited, p. 140. 
 
 exemption laws, validity of, p. 141. 
 
 stay laws, when inliibited, p. 142. 
 
 State insolvent laws, when unconstitutional, p. 144. 
 
 authority over judicial proceedings, p. 145. 
 
 statute rights mav be modified, p. 147. 
 
 right of redemption, p. 149. 
 
 State power of taxation, p. 150. 
 
 State license laws, validity of, p. 151. 
 
 exemption from taxation, pp. 151, 164, 165. 
 
 grants of land conclusive, p. 153. 
 
 grants generally are contracts with State, p. 154. 
 
 vested, rights cannot be divested, p. 155. 
 
 statutes impairing riglits void, p. 156. 
 
 what not impairment of riglits, p. 157. 
 
 corporations, rights protected, p. 159. 
 
 corporate liabili'ty may be regulated, p. 161. 
 
 protection of corporate franchise, p. 162. 
 
 exemption of corporation from taxation, pp. 164, 165. 
 
 baniiing corporation charter a contract, p. 167. 
 
 bridges, ferries, ami turnpikes franchise construed, p. 168. 
 
 railroad ciiarter a. contract, p. 170. 
 
 immunity from taxation a contract, p. 172. 
 
 State authority over taxation, p. 172. 
 
 may amend or alter charter, p. 174. 
 
 reserved power in charter, p. 175. 
 
 exercise of reserved power, p. 177. 
 
 pov^erof repeal, p. 178. 
 
 municipal charter not a contract, p. 179. 
 
 may resume grant of municipal corporation, p. 179. 
 
 may authorize subscription to railroad stock, p. 180. 
 
 authority over municipal officers, p. 181. 
 
 over municipal contracts, p. 182. 
 
 over municipal liabilities, p. 183. 
 
 over municipal bonds, p. 184. 
 
 police powers of State, p. 185. 
 
 not to lay imposts or duties without consent of Congress, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 imposts and imports construed, p. 187. 
 net proceeds for use of United States Treasury, art. 1, sec. 10, 
 
 par. 2, p. 187. 
 State laws subject to revision of Congress, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 2, p. 
 
 187. 
 construed, p. 189. 
 
 power to pass inspection laws, p. 189. 
 taxation on commercial products, p. 189. 
 not to lay duties on tonnage, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 duty on tonnage a tax on commerce, p. 192. 
 tonnage duties, what are, pp. 100, 191. 
 not to keep troops or war-ships in time of peace, art. 1, sec. 10, 
 
 par. 3, p. 190. 
 
INDEX. 335 
 
 States— Continued. 
 
 not to enter into agreement or compact witli other State, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 agreements or compacts, what are, p. 193. 
 not to engage in war unless actually invaded, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 
 
 3, p. 190. 
 
 jurisdiction of State courts coextensive with its Territory, ex- 
 cept, etc., p. 213. 
 removal of causes from, p. 214. 
 faith and credit given to State official acts, etc., art. 4, sec. 1, par. 
 
 l,p.230. 
 effect of judgments of State courts, p. 231. 
 privileges and immunities of citizens secured, art. 4, sec. 2, par. 
 
 l,p.233. 
 citizens, who are, p. 233. 
 privileges and immunities construed, p. 234. 
 State rigbts as to citizens, p. 236. 
 
 rights on admission of new State, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 242. 
 Territorial property, claim to not prejudiced, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 2, 
 
 p. 243. 
 republican form of government guaranteed to, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 
 
 l,p. 245. 
 entitled to protection from invasion, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 245. 
 clause construed, p. 245. 
 oath of office of State officers, p. 241. 
 right to maintain militia, Amdt. art. 2, sec. 1, p. 255. 
 powers not delegated are reserved, Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 State rights construed, p. 272. 
 secession not a reserved riglit, p. 273. 
 what powers are reserved, p. 274. 
 personal rights protected, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1. p. 257. 
 States nottoabriage privileges andimmunities of citizens, Amdt. 
 
 art. 14, sec. I,x).279. 
 purpose of amendment, p. 280. 
 cannot deny or abridge the right of citizens to vote, Amdt. art. 
 
 15, sec. 1, p. 2,S7. 
 amendment construed, p. 287. 
 cannot without its consent be deprived of its equal suffrage in 
 
 Senate, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 247. 
 three-fourths of State may ratify amendments, Amdt. art. 5, sec. 
 
 1, p. 247. 
 State bonds— may be taxed, p. 150. 
 
 State officers— oath to be taken by, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 3, p. 251. 
 State records— manner of authentication of, art. 4, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 230. 
 effect of judgment of State courts, p. 231. 
 power of Congress construed, p. 232. 
 
 State rights— acts and official record to have full faith and credit, art. 
 
 4, sec. l,par. 1, p. 230. 
 
 Congress to prescribe manner of authentication and effect of, 
 
 art. 4, sec. 1, par. 1, x). 230. 
 power of Congress construed, p. 232. 
 
 privileges and immunities of State citizens, art. 4, sec. 2, p. 233. 
 construction of clause, p. 236. 
 republican form of government guaranteed, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 1, 
 
 p. 245. 
 right to protection by General Government, art. 4, sec. 4, par. 1, 
 
 p. 245. 
 Congress to decide form of government, p. 246. 
 powers not delegated nor prohibited, are reserved to the States, 
 
 Amdt. art. 10, sec. 1, p. 272. 
 secession not a reserved right, p. 273. 
 
336 INDEX. 
 
 Statement— of receipts and expenditures to be published, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 par. 7, p. 115. 
 
 Statute of Limitations— Congress may suspend during rebellion, p. 97. 
 
 validity of, as to obligation of contracts, p. 140. 
 
 Stockholders— State may control liability of, p. 161. 
 Subject of bankruptcies— what includes, p. 83. 
 Succession taz— Congress may impose, p. 58. 
 Suffrage— right not conferred by Fifteenth Amendment, p. 287. 
 
 mere citizenship does not confer, p. 287. 
 Summary process— State may control corporations by, p. 161. 
 
 Supreme Court— judicial power vested in, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 judicial powers construed, p. 209. 
 jurisdiction of, p. 210. 
 
 to what cases to apply, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 extent of, construed, p. 215. 
 jurisdiction over, what subjects, p. 217. 
 as to persons, p. 219. 
 
 original and appellate jurisdiction of, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 223. 
 clause construed, p. 223. 
 appellate jurisdiction of, p. 225. 
 See Judicial Powee. 
 
 Supreme law— Constitution, laws, and treaties to be, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 
 2, p. 248. 
 judges in every State bound by, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 2, p. 248. 
 Constitution as, p. 248. 
 treaty as, p. 249. 
 
 Suppression of insurrection— Congress to provide for, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 15, p. 100. 
 
 debt incurred for, not to be questioned, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 4, p. 
 286. 
 
 Suspension— of writ of habeas corpus, effect of, p. 110. 
 
 Taxation- bills for, to originate in House, p. 54. 
 
 power of Congress, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 56. 
 
 taxation construed, p. 53. 
 
 power concurrent in National and State government, p. 59. 
 
 State power of, pp. 5"), 76. 
 
 a means and instrument of government, p. 59. 
 
 State may provide for payment of, in gold and silver, p. 60. 
 
 what State can and cannot tax, pp. 5^, 60. 
 
 power of Congress to exempt from, p. 63. 
 
 exemption of securities from, p. G3. 
 
 by State, on exercise of police powers, p. 76. 
 
 by State, when not imiiairment of contract, p. 150. 
 
 State licenses, effect of, on, p. 151. 
 
 State may waive right of, p. 151. 
 
 State may exempt from, pp. 164, 165. 
 
 State prohibited from laying imposts or duties, except, art. 1, sec. 
 10, par. 2, p. 187. 
 
 Congress may exempt from taxation by State, p. 107. 
 
 on commercial products, validity of, p. 18"). 
 
 State not to lay tonnage duty on vessels, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 3. 
 
 tonnage duty, construction of, p. 190. 
 
 prohibition construed, p. 192. 
 Taxes— how appoi'tioned among the States, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 
 on passenger, when invalid, p. 71. 
 
 capitation or direct, to be in proportion to census, art. 1, sec. 9, 
 par. 4, p. 113. 
 
 capitation tax defined, p. 113. 
 
rSDEX. 
 
 337 
 
 Congress sliall have poAver to levy and collect, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 to be uniform througliout the United States, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, 
 
 dire^ct taxes, when and how levied, art. I, sec. 9, par. 4, p. 113. 
 
 direct tax, what is, p. 113. 
 
 on exports from State prohibited, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 5, p. 114. 
 
 exception as to insurrectionary States, p. 114. 
 
 levied on contingency, p. 166. 
 Telegraph companies— State may tax, p. 76. 
 
 Congress may authorize operation of, p. 93. 
 
 State cannot interfere with grant to, p. 93. 
 Tender in payment— restriction on power of State, art. l,sec. 10, par. 
 
 incidental power of United States Government, p. 62. 
 Tenure of office— of United States judges, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 
 Congress cannot limit, p. 215. 
 Term of office— of Presiaent and Vice-President, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 1, 
 p. 194. 
 
 of Representatives, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 45. 
 
 of Senators, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 47. 
 
 of United States judges, art. 3, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 208. 
 Territorial courts— Congress may define jurisdiction of, p. 212. 
 Territorial government— powers of Congress, p. 245. 
 Territorv— not entitled to Representative till admitted, p. 49. 
 
 acnuired by conqucdt, authority of Executive over, p. 199. 
 
 Congress to dispose of and to make rules to regulate, art. 4^sec. 
 3, par. 2, p. 243. 
 
 construction of section, p. 243. 
 
 title to soil under tide waters, p. 75. 
 
 Chcroiiee^ construed, p. 81. 
 Test— religious, not required as qualification for office, art. 6, sec. 1, 
 
 par. 3, p. 251. 
 Test oatli— constitutional provision for a bill of attainder, p. 111. 
 Testimo'iy— necessary to conviction for treason, art. 3, sec. 3, par. Ir 
 
 p. 2J8. 
 Time— fraction of a day, when noted, p. 55. 
 
 Times, places, and manner— of elections to Congress, art. 1, sec. 4,. 
 par. 1, p. 4 J. ^ a. , 1 1 JO 
 
 Congress may alter regulations, except, art. 1, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 48, 
 
 Title of no Jility- United States shall not grant, art. 1, sec, 9, par. 8, p. 
 
 no St;vto shall grant, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p._116. 
 Uiiitad Sta£3.3 oJioial not to accept, from kmg, etc., art. 1, sec. 9. 
 par. 8, p. 115. 
 Toll- mad contractor must pay, p. 93. 
 Tolls and freights— authority of Legislature, p. 170. 
 To v^ajTo— restriction on State as to duty of, art. I, sec. 10, par. 3, p 
 1 d. 
 defnition of, pp. 100, 101. 
 a t-ix o;i commerce, p. 192. 
 Trade-niarlzs- copyrights not to apply to, p. 94. 
 Tranriuillitj -purpose of Constitution to insure, Preamble, p. 41. 
 TransfoT of records-power of Congress to provide for, p. 108. 
 Desty Fed. Con.— 3!>. 
 
338 INDEX. 
 
 Transportation— an elemBiit of commerce, p. 65. 
 
 State may regulate speed of steamers and railroads, p. 72. 
 power of State over chartered companies, p. 74. 
 
 Treason— in what consists, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 228. 
 elements of, p. 228. 
 
 testimony necessary to convict of, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 228. 
 definition of offense, p. 228. 
 clause construed, p. 228. 
 
 Congress to declare punishment for, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 229. 
 power exclusive in Congress, p. 229. 
 attainder of, not to work corruption of blood, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 
 
 2, p. 229. 
 
 shall not work forfeiture, except during life, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 2, 
 
 p. 229. 
 removal from office on conviction of, art. 2, sec. 4, par. 1, p. 206. 
 privilege from arrest not to extend to cases of, art. 1, sec. (i, par. 1. 
 
 Treasury— money drawn from, only in consequence of appropriation, 
 art. 1, sec. 9,pai\ 7, p. 115. 
 accounts of receipts and expenditures to be published, art. 1, sec. 
 9, par. 7, p. 115. 
 
 Treasury notes— Congress may issue, p. 61. 
 may make legal tender, pp. 62, 108. 
 State cannot tax, p. 63. 
 
 Treaties— President, with concurrence of Senate, may maker art. 2, 
 
 sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 treaty construed, p. 203. 
 
 judicial power to extend to cases under, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 223. 
 to bo supreme law, binding on all judges, art. 6, sec. 1, par. 2, pp. 
 
 243, 249. 
 State prohibited from making, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 Treaty— no State shall enter into, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 1, p. 116. 
 
 Trial— and judgment after conviction, on impeachment, art. l,sec.3, 
 
 par. 7, p. 48. 
 Trial by jury— of all crimes except cases of impeachment, art. 3, sec. 2, 
 par. 3, p. 227. 
 provision, to what applies, p. 227. 
 to be held in State where crime was committed, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 
 
 3, p. 227. 
 
 when not committed within a State, to be where Congress di- 
 rects, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 227. 
 of accused to be speedy and public, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 in civil suits at common law, Amdt. art. 7, sec. 1, p. 268. 
 right, when not to attach, p. 269. 
 re-examination of causes, p. 270. 
 Tribunals— inferior to Supreme Court, Congress may establish, art. 1, 
 
 sec. 8, par. 9, p. 96. 
 Troops— State shall not keep in time of peace, art. 1, sec. 10, par. 3, p. 
 
 190. 
 Turnpikes— grant of franchise construed, p. 168. 
 State may charter, p. 74. 
 power of Legislature over franchise, p. 169. 
 Two-thirds- of Senate to concur in conviction on impeachment, art. 
 l,sec. 3, par. 6, p. 48. 
 of each House may expel a member, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 2, p. 51. 
 may pass a bill over President's veto, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54. 
 concurrence required to make treaty, ai't. 2, sec. 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 of States, for call of convention to propose amendments, art. 5, 
 sec. 1, p. 247. 
 
INDEX. 339 
 
 Two-thirds — Continued. , . . . _ „,_ 
 
 oi both Houses may propose amendments, art. 5, sec. 1, p. 247. 
 of States re presented, required for choice of President by House, 
 
 of stnators,\-equired for efection of Vice-President, Amdt. art. 
 
 of Coii«re*ss[ may remove disability to office, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 
 3, p!2d5. 
 Uniform— defined, p. 58. 
 Uniformity— required in bankrupt law, p. 83. 
 
 Union— purpose of Constitution to establish more perfect^P^eamble, 
 p. 4i. 
 perpetual and indissoluble, p. 116. 
 
 States were never out of, p. 12G. . , ^ . « „ 
 
 state of, to be given to Congress by President, art. 2, sec. 3, par. 
 
 new States may be admitted into, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 242. 
 restriction as to formation of new States, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 
 
 242. 
 Congress as Legislature of, p. 103. 
 
 United States— people of, defined, p. 41. 
 power of Government of, p. 43. 
 who are citizens of, Amdt. art. 14, sec. 1, p. 279. 
 See Government. 
 United States bonds— exemption from State taxation, p. 63. 
 United States courts— power of Congress to institute, art. 1, sec. 8, 
 par. 9, p. 96. 
 bound by rule of property of State Supreme Court, p. 96. 
 jurisdiction of, art. 3, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 215. 
 extent of jurisdiction, p. 215. 
 construction of clause, p. 217. 
 jurisdiction as to person, p. 219. 
 admiralty and maritime, p. 221. 
 powers over maritime contracts, p. 222. 
 United States marshal— cannot be commercial agent of foreign na- 
 tion, p. 115. 
 Unreasonable searches and seizures— prohibited, Amdt. art 4, sec. 
 
 1. p, 256. 
 Unusual punishments— not to be inflicted, Amdt. art. 8, p. 271. 
 Useful arts— Congress to promote progress of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 8, 
 
 p. 94. 
 Usury laws— validity of, p. 140. 
 
 Vacancy— in representation. Executive to issue writs of election to 
 fill, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 4, p. 46. 
 how created, p. 46. 
 
 in Senate, how filled, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 2, p. 47. , 
 during recess of Senate, to be filled by commission, art. 2, sec. 2, 
 
 par. 3, p. 206. 
 power of President to fill, p. 206. 
 by Executive appointed, etfect of, p. 49. 
 created by acceptance of incompatible office, p. 53. 
 Validity of public :-ebt— not to be questioned, Amdt. art 14, sec. 4, p. 
 
 266. 
 Vessels— frrm port of one Sate, not to be obliged to pay duties in 
 another, art. 1, sec. 9, par. 6, p. 114. 
 power of <;ongress to make regulations for, p. 68. 
 State may regulate positions in harbors, etc., p. 72. 
 Congress may provide punishment for conspiracy to burn, p. 96. 
 
340 INDEX. 
 
 Vessels— Continued. 
 
 of war, not subject to local jurisdiction, p. 100. 
 
 of war. Congress may build, p. 100. 
 
 State may make inspection laws, p. 114. 
 
 privileges and immunities of, p. 114. 
 
 not obliged to enter or clear in interstate commerce, p. 114. 
 Vested rights— Constitution does not deprive Congress of power ta 
 infringe, p. 84. 
 
 cannot be divested by State legislation, p. 155. 
 
 under land grants, p. 153. 
 
 under grants from State, generally, p. 155. 
 
 wbat not impairment of, p. 157. 
 
 Veto— of bill by President, proceedings of Congress on, art. 1, sec. 7, 
 par. 2, p. 54. 
 
 Vice-President— to be President of Senate, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 4, p. 48. 
 to have no vote except on equal division, art. l,sec. 3, par.4,p.48. 
 Senate may choose President pro tempore, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 5,. 
 
 p. 48. 
 to be chosen for four years, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 1, p. 194. 
 number of electors, and manner of appointing, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 
 
 2, p. 195. 
 
 duties of President, when to devolve on, art. 2, sec. 1, par. 6, p. 
 196. 
 
 Congress may provide by law for appointment of, in certain cases, 
 art. 2, sec. 1, par. 6, p. 196. 
 
 removal from office by impeachment, art. 2, sec. 4, p. 207. 
 
 manner of choosing, by electors, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 
 to be named by electors in distinct ballots, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, 
 p. 277. 
 
 distmct lists to be signed, certified, and sent to President of Sen- 
 ate, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 
 count of votes by President of Senate, Amdt. art. 12, seel, p. 277. 
 
 person having greatest number of votes to be, Amdt. art. 12, sec 
 l,p. 277. 
 
 if no person have majority. Senate to choose, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 
 
 1, p. 277. 
 
 quormn for such purpose to be two-thirds, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, 
 
 p. 277. 
 majority of whole number necessary to a choice, Amdt. art. 12, 
 
 SGc 1 X) 277. 
 ■when to ace as President, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 eligibility to office of, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 1, p. 277. 
 
 Violation of obligation— of contract, what is not, pp. 134, 135. 
 
 See Obligation op Contract. 
 Virginia— representation in first Congress, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 3, p. 45. 
 Volunteers— State may give bounty to, p. 39. 
 Vote— each Senator shall have one, art. 1, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 47. 
 
 Vice-President not to have, except on equal division, art. 1, sec. 
 
 3, par. 4, p. 48. 
 
 requiring concurrence of two Houses to be presented to Presi- 
 dent, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 3, p. 55. 
 
 right to, not to be abridged by reason of race, color, etc., Amdt. 
 art. 15, sec. 1, p. 287. 
 
 each House may expel a member by two-thirds, art. 1, sec. 5, par. 
 
 2, p. 51. 
 
 bill vetoed may be passed by a two-thirds, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, 
 
 p. 54. 
 of two-thirds requned for conviction on impeachment, art, 1, 
 
 sec. 3, par. 6. p. 48. 
 two-thirds of Congress necessary to propose amendments, art. 5, 
 
 sec. 1, par. 1. p. 247. 
 
INDEX. 341 
 
 Vote— Continued. . , , . 
 
 consent of two-thirds Senate necessary to make treaty, art. 2, sec. 
 
 2, par. 2, p. 203. 
 two-thirds necessary to remove disability for oflace, Amdt, art. 
 
 14, sec. 3, p. 285. 
 effect of denying right to, on apportionment of representation, 
 
 Amdt. art. 14, sec. 2, p. 285. 
 Intent of amendment, p. 285. 
 for President and Vice-President, how taken, Amdt. art. 12, sec. 
 
 l,p.276. 
 right of citizens, cannot be abridged, Amdt. art. 15, sec. 1, p. 287. 
 amendment construed, p. 287. 
 
 War— defined, p. 97. 
 
 power of Congress to declare, art. 1, sec 8, par. 11, p. 97. 
 
 power exclusive, p. 97. 
 
 power to make rules and articles of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 14, p. 100. 
 
 no State, without consent of Congress, to engage in, art. 1, sec. 
 10, par. 3, p. 190. 
 
 treason consists in levying, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 1, p. 228. 
 
 quartering soldiers in time of, to be regulated by Congress, Amdt. 
 art. 3, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 Warehouses— State may regulate storage, etc., p. 73. 
 War of races— subject to powers of Government, p. 286. 
 Warrants— to issue only on probable cause, Amdt. art. 4, sec, 1, p. 256. 
 
 on oath or affirmation, Amdt. art. 4, sec. 1, p. 256. 
 Washington— Congress to provide for repair of streets, p. 103. 
 See Seat op Government. 
 
 Weights and measures— Congress to fix standard of, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 
 5, p. 91. 
 power exclusive, when exercised, p. 91. 
 Welfare— purpose of Congress to secure, Preamble, p. 42. 
 
 Congress shall have power to provide for, art. 1, sec. 8, par. 1, p. 
 66. 
 Witnesses— no person to be compelled to testify against himself, 
 Amdt. art. 5, sec. 1, p. 257. 
 amendment construed, p. 260. 
 
 accused to be confronted by, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 accused to have compulsory process for, Amdt. art. 6, sec. 1, p. 267. 
 testimony necessary for conviction for treason, art. 3, sec. 3, par. 
 1, p. 228. 
 
 Writs— of election to fill vacancies in representation, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 
 4, p. 46. 
 
 Written opinion— of heads of departments, President may require 
 
 art. 2, sec. 2, par. 1, p. 197. 
 Yeas and nays— at desire of one-fifth, to be entered on journals, art 
 l,sec. 5, par. 3, p. 53. 
 passage over veto to be determined by, art. 1, sec. 7, par. 2, p. 54 
 
 '.n^^M^ 
 
UWv;'''^^i 
 
 r.^f- f 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 01 1 795 450 A