The New York herald., 1870-02-05
sppSEMs cpuaT Of rM yslrEp STATES.

The Rights Of Naturniized Citizens to Be
aueaih Real Estate 20 AIie.s--A Question
Arising lrom the Treaty Of 1850 Between
switzerland aud the United states.
WASHINGTON, ID. c., Feb. 4, 1870
Jeeler et al. as. Magee a., Error to me court or
AppeaIs or Keatatckg.--In 1852 one Jecker native
OF Switzerland ana o natarazed eitizea OF the
United States, died without ISSUE owning certain
real estate property in Kentucky, and leaving
widow. by the laws OF that state, then IN opera
ton, aliens could not take or bold lands, anu the
courts OF the State aqjudged the title to the property
10 be IN the widow MS against the ciam OF the State
by escheat and that OF the plaintiffs lwho were
aliens as beirs and next Of KIN holding thatas tho
treaty OF 1879 not ratified uutn $780, two years
after the death or the intestate ana as Il was
amended after ITS date before It's ratification The
very articles on which the painthIs found their
claim may have been the only amendment
made Qor aught that appears and 1t may have been
inserted long after Jeckers death and the accrna OF
the Widows right. The plaintiffs in error, citizens
OF Switzerland rely on the uth article OF the treaty,
providing that the heirs OF ctzens or each country
may take 10y descent In the other tue same as II IN
their own country ana that IN case the neir IN con-
sequence Of Deing AN alien cannot take or hold lands
IN particular STATE (o TINS countryl or canton of
Swftzeriaud) tic shalt have such time accorded
by law In such state or canton IN Whcn to sell the
law sn Ken,ncky limiting the time wtln wiicH
Alien heirs may dispose OF the real estate OF tner
ancestors IS there any statute recognizing tnef
right to 40 80; ana the theory Of the plainu1s IS
mat the treaty gives indefinite une, subject TO
the Limitation OF the state; but tfat as the
treaty Is the supreme iaw,p tue state
cannot render IL imperative ana iluSory by
giylng no time. The treaty has lett the liking
OF the Jime the discretion Vi the States put this
discretion must necessarily be exercised IN sucn a
manner as not TO de.eat the treaty. reasonable
time must be allowed. The STATE must exercise It's
power the remedy given Dy the treaty III good
faitn, and consistent with the fair and e1ectunl
operation OF the treaty. The treaty was meant TO
confer valuable rights, wicn cannot be impaired by
the state appears to be assumed by the plalnClis
that treaty force irom the date or Its conclu-
sion: and tnat the ratncation, when made, relates
pack to the date when the treaty was concluded,
and Is dae buG the point Is not discussed
IN the brel liled. Ihe defendants MAINTAIN the
theory OF the courts below tnat the treat was not
the claw OF the iandn aiiecting individual
rights until ratified by the Senate. Until
then it did have the seal the authority OF the
United States.n No one Is bound by IL untii the
Senate consents. and until then II may be amended,
!. modified or wholly rejected. II rs also cOntended
that az by or kenIncky Lhe alien can neither
nod, iuherit sell lands, he has no rights which
ne can assert under the treaty and that SUCH Ii the
pOsiton Of the plalnLlIs. Iney being now resident
aliens, lncapactated by reason OF this by the laws
OF the state In 1853 when decker died. from holding
nherltlng or selling mo term being accorded TO
tnem To selll are account OF this prohibition or
the law, without remedy and have no legal ground
OF complaint
4. M Carlisle and John ID. Mcpherson for plaintiffs
j. 3. Beck u. T.. Porter and ~ Blair or defendants