Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1853-04-16
PROPOSED PRIVILEGE TO ALIENS.

TO The EDITORS or THE NATIONAL INTELLIGEScEE.
GExTLENES: writer in your paper Of the sth has
thought proper TO call public attention question sup
posed to be pending in the Senate and growing out of
treaty said to be under consideration there The
ton is supposed have reference stipulation that
citizens Of foreign country shall be competent to inherit
real property in the United States and it is represented
that an objection been raised the constutonaty Of
such provision Whats passing in the Senate is not for
us TO know But the question how far the treaty-makng
power competent regulate the law of the several
States in regard the inheritance descent Of real
tate is one which involves the relative jurisdiction Of
the General and State Governments and is therefore
Of radical import
It's to be borne in mind that the question arises
in the Senate If it arise there at ALL is mixed question,
involving not only the abstract question Of the extent Of
the power but also the expediency Of its
exercise That body is not judicial body, is it its
province 10 determine authortatvey upon constitutional
questions As the advisers of the Executive in which
capacity alone they act far they concerned in
the formation Of treaties Senators called upon ode
eide each for himself this mixed question of power and
discretion with view the final action Of the Executive
power They not therefore, bound to follow even
judicial decisions the of being under obligation
to exercise any conceded power merely because it
ceded There is limit every constitutional power,
and however undputed the power may be-
may arise grave questions the consttutonaiiy
well as the erpediency of it. exercise in given instance
Whatever may have been the opinions Of the distin
Gushed Senator alluded to by your correspondent land
what they cannot definitely know at present,
they have been given in the view Of his duty here
presented
is neither proper expedient to 20 into argu
men length this occasion Of the question discussed
by your correspondent; but the tenor Of his remarks
certainly justify few words in reply
1t probably win be contended either by Senator
BUTLER orany body ese that the rule Of the common law
or as gcntium, that the lex loc rel s governs in res
ton real estate Of itself settles this question Of
stitutonal power But this rule in relation to real
may be important it bears upon the distinction every
where Observed between real estate fixed and local in its
character and personal estate which is the subject and
the fruit Of commercial intercourse between nations and
which is therefore proper subject Of commercial and d
plomac regulation. 1t would be difficult to separate
treaty stpulatons in relation to the latter from the
knowedged power Of the General Government over the
commercial intercourse Of the country But while the
control Of commerce is given by the Constitution the
Legislative, and it may be added the treaty making power
the Union the descent of real estate has always been
conceded to local or State legislation
The question supposed by your correspondent to have
been agated in the Senate clearly does not depend upon
the jus geaam upon the common law Of this country,
but upon the Constitution Of the United States and