The news scimitar. (Memphis, Tenn.) 1907-1926, 1919-09-20
LAW AND FALLAcY

No treaty the United States makes can be higher than the const.
supreme court should decide that a paragraph in that treaty was in con.
% senator en- or Johnson GGsa11T Knows Ss' spI R@1ss'R 3 a ~T soSa = ia 1Ss '~d Of s' scur..
except the people; but %c johnson s%'T ~tte, ~ bs = sn SSnisp % :. override = ,SSs =.
ss y " With hr : foTsrn T po%Sr It f iosss s sa%s q re e. q InS.s.u s.ssss n make. 1ss;on =
course It's il contracts Srs Ge n msS i BY sns s%t u q can e. lnS.s1su mao. q
One statement in the quotation reeted from which there will
be no dissenting opinion is that Senator Johnson is a good
lawyer. He is a rafting good lawyer. He Is so sound and
logical in the law that he could leave the determination OF his
standing as a lawyer to an ex parte consideration Of the charge
OF unsoundness based upon the foregoing declaration, that the
supreme court has the right to declare null and void a paragraph
Of a treaty entered into between this nation and another nation,
and be reasonably assured Of vindication.
The power to invalidate a section OF a paragraph Of a
treaty carries with il the right to declare null and void a treaty
in its entirety. We have no record Of the supreme court having
abolished a treaty.
In defining the powers of the supreme court the constitution
says; The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and
equity, arising under this constitution, the laws OF the United
authority"
In other words, il It is possible to make it clearer, the
supreme court does not pass upon the treaty itself, but upon
the rights OF citizens of this and other countries guaranteed by
treaties,
A treaty is a contract between two nations. It is an agree.
ment made in good faith. The constitution says OF the power Of
the president in this regard: : "He shall have power, by and
with the advice and consent of the senate, to make treaties,
provided two-thirds Of the senators present concur
The supreme court does not assume jurisdiction over
treaties and determine whether they shall stand or fall, for the
reason that the jurisdiction of the supreme court does not
extend to any other country. ~
The fallacy of saying that the supreme court of the United
States can declare a treaty or a paragraph Of a. treaty null and
void is apparent when it il considered that the high court OF any
nation with which this country has a treaty has the same power,
so far as that country is concerned, as the supreme court OF the
United States has in this country.
The constitution places no Limitation upon the treaty-makng
power. Even IL the supreme court, with its increasing disposi-
ton to assume authority over all things, should declare a para
graph OF a treaty null and void, there would be no obligation
on the part Of any other nation to observe its construction.
Assuredly the supreme court Of the United States has no
right to ~repudiate a contract entered into between this nation
and another nation, and if a question of validity or meaning Of
a treaty should arise it would not go to the supreme court for
determination, but would be submitted TO a court of arbitration,
II arbitration were not successful then war would be the only
alternative. The supreme court speaks only for the United
States, and a treaty is an agreement between two nations.
Ne are so firmly Of the opinion that Senator Johnson Is
right that we are willing to back our judgment with a wager
to the extent of an option on a pair Of shoes and leave it to the
Commercial Appeals expert on international law. ~