The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1898-04-26
THE PRESIDENTS. PREROGATIvE
To Decide What Foreign Countries ar
Entitled to Recognition.

indianapolis. Ind. April 1.-THE
Journal will publish the following a r
from Ex-Attorney General ". n. H.
Miller:
To the editor Of the Indianapolis
Journal: As the question whether the
recognition OF a new government II
cuba is an executive or legislative
function has become a practical one. Ii
may be OF interest TO know hat some
Of the courts have said about this mat
ter.
In William versus the Suffolk IN
surance Company (3d Suznnes e72)
the decision OF the case turned up
On the disputed sovereignty over the
Falkland islands. The government OF
Buenos Ayres insisted hat those is
lands were a part OF its commons.
This the government OF the United
States denied. Mr.. Justice Story, being
asked 10 decide this question as an or
iginal judicial question, refused 70 do
50. and said: My Judgment is that
this court possesses no SUcn authority:
that il is bound by the doctrines and
claims insisted on by its own govern
ment. and that il must lake them u
be rightful until the contrary is estab-
lished 10y some formal and authorized
action Of that government. II is very
clear that it belongs exclusively 10 the
executive department OF our govern
T-ent TO recognize, from time to time,
any new government which may arise
in the political revolutions of the world.
and until such new governments are
SO recognized they cannot be admitted
by our courts of justice to la or ex-
ercise the common rights and preroga-
tiveS of sovereignty"
70 this proposition Justice Story cites
GelltOn versus Hoyt sd Wheaton, S46.)
and a number of English cases. The
same case in which this opinion was
delivered 10y Mr.. Justice Story having
been brought before the supreme court,
Mr.. Justice Mclean Q3 pet 415) speak
ing for the court said: Can there be
any doubt that hen the executive
branch of the government, which is
charged with our foreign relations,
shall in its correspondence with a for
eign nation assume a fact in regard TO
the sovereignty OF an island or
country, it is conclusive on the judi
cial department., and in this view 1t Is
not material to inquire, nor is 1t the
province of the court to determine
whether the executive be right or
wrong. 1t is enough TO know that in
the exercise of his constitutional func-
tons he has decided the question. HaV-
ing done this under the responsibilities
which belong to him, it is obligatory on
the people and the government OF the
union.
In the case of Luther versus Borden
9th Howard, - the question for de-
cisiOn was which of two alleged gov
ernments was the true state govern
ment of Rhode Island. 1t was there
held that under the constitutional re-
quirement that the United States guar
antee to each state a republican gov
eminent, it was for congress to decide
what government is established in the
state before it car determine whether
it is republican or not, and that, there
fore, the act of congress which had
been passed was in that case control
ling. But Mr.. Chief Justice fancy,
speaking for the court in that case,
said: I'm the case of foreign nations
the government acknowledged by the
president is always recognized in the
courts of Justice. And this principle
has been applied by the act of ON
gress to the sovereign states of the I'M
ion. It is said that his power in the
president is dangerous TO liberty, and
may be abused. All power may be
abused if placed in unworthy and
But it would be difficult, we think, to
point out any other hands in which
power would be more safe and at the
same time equally effectuaI."
Again, only a few years g in Jones
versus the United States, G37 u. s.,
202,) in which the question for decision
was as to the sovereignty of the init
ed States over Navassa, a small island
in the Caribbean sea, Mr.. Justice Gray.
delivering the opinion Of the court,
cited and quoted with approval the
language of Mr.. Justice Mclean in the
Suffolk Insurance case above set
forth.
These opinions seem to indicate pref
ty clear the trend of judicial Opinion
upon this question.
w. H. II. MILLER.
indianapolis, April II, 1898.