New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-05-14

uavenon Of express stlpulaons Of the treaty Of 1868
Of supplemental treaty OF $780, but It Is not
that account invalid. The treaties Of greater
legal obligation the act OF Congress- The effect Of
legislation upon conflicting treaty stpulatons elab
oratey considered in the headmoney cases. and IL was
there sdJudged that far treaty made by the United
States with any foreign nation become the subject
OF judicial eoghEance in the Of this country. It
is subject such acts Congress may pass for us
enforcement modification, repeal 12 T. s., $50. 500
The question whether Government Is justified In
disregardng Its engagements with another nation Is
not for the determination of the courts This SUP
ject fully considered by Mr. Justice Curtis ana he
held that whether treaty with foreign sovereign
had been violated by him. whether the consideration OF
particular stipulation OF treaty had been voluntarily
Withdrawn by party to no longer be obligatory
upon tho other and whether the views ana aeb OF
foreign sovereign had given occasion 70 the political
departments OF Government TO withhold the eAeeu
ton OF q promise contained In treaty or 70 act IN
direct contraventon OF such promise were not judicial
questions; that the power to determine them mas
not been oonnded judiciary but to the executive
and legislative departments Of the Government Ihese
views were and fully adopted by this court In
whitney ast. Robertson (l24 U. D. $780, 1861. Ana we
may odd that tho power mentioned Is vested IN Con-
gress any reflection Its motives would De enurey
uncaed for This Ia not censor OF the morals OF
other departments OF the Government The province Oh
the courts is to pass upon the validity Of laws and when
their validity established to declare their meaning anu
apply their provisions
Continuing the opinion discusses another branch OF
the subject follows:
That the Government Of United States can exclude
aens from Its territory proposition which we % not
think open controversy II 1t could not exclude mems
II would be subject 70 the control oil another
power II the Government Of the country OF which inc
foreigners excluded subjects is dissatisfied Win THIS
action It complaint to the executive head OF cur
Government TO other measure when us IN
terests or dignity may demand and there lies It's only
remedy.
II there be any Just ground Of complaint on e pao
OF China be made TO the political department OF
our Government which is alone competent 10 act upon
the subject The rights and interests created by treaty
which have become vested that its expiration OF aero
cation will not destroy impair them, are such as are
connected with and lie IN property capable Of sale and
transfer or disposition, not such As are personal ana
untransierable in their character.
The order is affirmed
The court also affirmed. with costs, the judgment OF
the Supreme Court OF Appeals Of the State OF West Wiz
rnia in the case David Freeman plaintiff IN error.
aet Joseph V. Williams. The court holds that parties
cannot be held liable seizures of property committed
as acts OF legitimate during the recent rebellion
Judgment was secured In OF the State courts Tor
cattle seized by Confederate troops and bill OF ehancery
was filed to arrest the enforcement Of that Judgment
The court below enjonel the Judgment obtained, and
this court afnrnls that ruling.