The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-11-24

| allied. He accumulated considerable rea
property here, and committed suicide
about the end OF the war. But a forged
bond I'm Hauenstein's name for about as
much as his property was worth was
produced. and on II some conspirators
got a judgment and were proceeding to
sell his property to pay the bond wher
the affair got out. They were prosecuted
for forgery and punished. The State then
came forward and claimed Hauenstein's
property as being escheated to her upon
| the ground that he died without heirs.
and that even IL he had heirs he was an
alien: his property was real estate. and
that the heirs of an alien could not in
herlt his real estate in Virginia, which.
by her laws, escheated to her at his
death. Her escheator accordingly sold
the property and was about TO pay the
proceeds into the State Treasury.
At this point four or Eve persons came
forward, claiming hat they were brothers
and sisters OF the deceased and his natu-
raj neirs. They were citizens OF the Re-
public OF Switzerland, and they admitted
that the laws of Virginia forbade a for
eign citizen or subject TO inherit real
estate from an unnaturalized alien. But,
said they. the Constitution of the United
States makes itself and treaties made by
the Government of the United States the
supreme law Of the land. The treaty be-
tween the United States an1 Switzerland
provides that where a Swiss citizen &C
quires real property in America, IL the
laws Of the State where the property is
situated forbid his foreign heirs TO inherit
the property. they shall have reasona-
bic time within which to sell the property
and remove the proceeds to their own
country They claimed, therefore, that
they were entitled to what the property
sold for under this provision Of the treaty
and in spite of the laws of Virginia.
Virginias Court of Appeals held that to
allow the claim Of these Swiss heirs
would virtually admit the right of the
United States to dispose of Virginia's
territory under the treaty-making power
which was a claim that could not be con-
sidered. 1t decided the case, therefore,
against the heirs and In favor of the
State.
The heirs appealed to the Supreme
Court of the United States, which re-
versed the Virginia Court Of Appeals and
gave the fund to the Swiss heirs under
the provisions of the treaty, holding that
it OVERRIDE and abrogated the laws Of
Virginia.
1t must be confessed that the analogies
of the case would go as far as the result
pointed out by the Court Of Appeals of
Virginia. Yet it is difficult, conceding
that the Constitution and the Treaties are
TO be the supreme law of the land, to
deny this right to the treaty-making
power, when once the treaty has been
entered into according to the forms and
methods pointed out in the Constitution.
When the case was under discussion in
the Supreme Court of the United States,
counsel argued that If it should turn out
that all the powers of the world united
and dispersed her armies, and then gave
her as an ultimatum that she should
cede to them California or they would
part and divide her up and end her eX-
istence as power Of the earth, the ordl-
nary principle of self-preservation would
authorize the treatymaking power to
cede the State. Mr.. Justice Bradley In
terrupted at this point TO say that Mr..
Webster when Secretary OF State under
President Tyler, had given an opinion
that it was not within the treaty-making
power TO cede part OF States terri
tory. but counsel replied, very effectively.
that while this was true, yet. during that
very administration the famous Webster
Ashburton treaty, which settled the boun-
dairy between America and Canada, was
signed approved by the President and
his Cabinet and ratified by the Senate,
and that this treaty ceded to Canada
territory that was undoubtedly within
the limits OF the State of Maine.
The Court went no further than to de-
eide the case that was actually before 1t,
but it cannot be doubted that IT is
authority for the EXTREMIST doctrines
that advocates Of the treaty-making |
power could claim for it. In a series of
lectures which Mr.. Justice Miller after
wards gave to a law class in Georgetown
he referred to it as a case Of the last |
Importance.