Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:37:13.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Aspects of the Problem of Self-Executing Treaties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Alona E. Evans
Alona E. Evans*
Affiliation:
Wellesley College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Third Session
Information
Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at its annual meeting (1921-1969) , Volume 45 , 1951 , pp. 65 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1951

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Holman, F. E., “Treaty Law-Making,” American Bar Association Journal, Vol. 36 (Sept. 1950), pp. 707–710 Google Scholar; Orie L. Phillips, “The Genocide Convention: Its Effect on Our Legal System,” ibid., Vol. 35 (1949), pp. 623-625.

2 Article 13, Hearings on Executive O, The Genocide Convention, 81st Cong., 2d Sess., p. 7. The convention received its twentieth ratification on Oct. 17, 1950, New York Times, Oct. 17, 1950, 18:3.

3 217 Pac. (2d) 481 (1950). See Hudson, Manley O., “Charter Provisions on Human Eights in American Law,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 44 (July, 1950), pp. 543–548 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Crowell, E. H., “The Declaration of Human Bights, the UN Charter and their Effect on the Domestic Law of Human Bights,” Virginia Law Review, Vol. 36 (Dec. 1950), pp. 1059–1084 Google Scholar.

4 Deering’s General Laws (1944 ed.) 129; 332 U. S. 633 (1948).

5 217 Pac. (2d) 481, 488. Cf. Sipes v. McGhee, 25 N.W. (2d) 638 (1947). See Congressional Record, 81st Cong., 1st Sess., p. 9028.

6 Head Money Cases, 112 U. S. 580, 598-599 (1884); Congressional Globe, 30th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 619. The enforcement of the Load Lines Convention of 1930 was anticipated in the Act of March 2, 1929, 45 Stat. 1492, 47 Stat. 2228.

7 See the discussion of the Treaty for the Utilization of the Waters of the Colorado River with Mexico of 1944, Congressional Record, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 2343, 3106; see Richardson, J. D. (comp.), A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. 9, p. 4098 Google Scholar.

8 Secret Journals of the Acts and Proceedings of Congress, Vol. 4, pp. 204, 282-283, 295-296, 329-338.

9 4 Ops. Atty. Gen. 209-210.

10 E.g., Reciprocity Treaty with Great Britain of 1854, ibid., Vol. 6, pp. 749, 750; Immigration Treaty with China of 1894, ibid., Vol. 21, pp. 347, 348; Canadian Boundary Treaty with Great Britain of 1909, ibid., Vol. 30, pp. 219-220; Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Consular Rights with Germany of 1923, Hackworth, Digest of International Law, Vol. V, pp. 181-183; Hearings on Executive D and E, Conventions with Great Britain Respecting Income and Estate Taxes, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 60. See 49 Stat. 1648, 1658; 58 Stat. 21, 53.

11 Ford, Paul L. (ed.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I, pp. 268–269 Google Scholar; Congressional Globe, 41st Cong., 2d Sess., pp. 5588-5589.

12 The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 7, pp. 67-68.

13 Annals of Congress, 4th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 771-772.

14 E.g., Hearings on Executive O, The Genocide Convention, 81st Cong., 2d Sess., p. 31; North Atlantic Security Pact of 1949, Congressional Record, 81st Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 9100, 9277, 9582; Treaty of Peace with Spain of 1898, ibid., 55th Cong., 3d Sess., pp. 2116-2117; Treaty for Utilization of Waters of Colorado River etc., with Mexico of 1944, ibid., 79th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 3116, 3121; Senate discussion of United Nations Participation Act of 1945, ibid., 79th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 10969.

15 24 Stat. 975, 1018-1019. See Stone, Ivan M., “The House of Representatives and the Treaty-Making Power,” Kentucky Law Journal, Vol. 17 (1928-29), pp. 216–257, 235Google Scholar.

16 Reciprocity Treaty with Great Britain of 1854, 6 Ops. Atty. Gen. 760; Hackworth, op. cit., Vol. V, p. 179.

17 19 Ops. Atty. Gen. 278-279; Senate Report 717, 79th Cong., 1st Sess.; Cong Rec. 79th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 10965, 11175-11176; ibid., 81st Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 8894-8895.

18 Instruction of Nov. 24, 1886, from Secretary of State (Rayard) to Minister to France (McLane), Wharton, Vol. 3, Appendix, pp. 885-887.

19 Ex parte Toscano, 208 F. 938, 942 (1913).

20 United Shoe Machinery Co. v. Duplessis Shoe Machinery Co., 155 F. 842, 845 (1907).

21 Portuondo v. Columbia Phonograph Co., Inc., reported in United States Patents Quarterly, Vol. 36 (1938), p. 104. See Ladas, S. A., The International Protection of Literary and Artistic Property (2 vols., 1938), Vol. 2, p. 838 Google Scholar.

22 Annals of Congress, 14th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 1019-1020.

23 Congressional Record, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. (unbound, No. 8, Jan. 15, 1951), p. 303. The treaty, signed on July 15, 1949, was sent to the Senate on Aug. 22, 1950.

24 House Report 271, 78th Cong., 1st Sees.; Congressional Record, 78th Cong., 2d Sess., pp. 1836-1841; Treaty for Limitation of Naval Armament of 1922, ibid., 67th Cong., 2d Sess., pp. 7075-7076, 9745.

25 E.g., Hearings on Executive D and E, Conventions with Great Britain Respecting Income and Estate Taxes, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 60; see 58 Stat. 21, 53.

26 Treaty of Cession with France of 1803, Annals of Congress, 8th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 459-465; Commercial Convention with Great Britain of 1815, ibid., 14th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 74-79; Art. II, Treaty of Amity and Commerce with Great Britain of 1794, ibid., 8th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 481; Treaty for Limitation of Naval Armament of 1922, Congressional Record, 67th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 9745.

27 See Strother v. Lucas, 12 Pet. 410 (1838).

28 2 Pet. 253 (1829).

29 United States v. Percheman, 7 Pet. 51, 88-89 (1833).

30 Cameron Septic Tank Co. v. City of Knoxville, Iowa, 227 U.S. 39 (1913).

31 United States v. Flint, Fed. Cas. No. 15,121, 25 Fed. Cas. 1107, 1109 (1876); Parker v. Duff, 47 Cal. 554, 566 (1874).

32 Turner v. American Baptist Missionary Union, Fed. Cas. No. 14,251, 24 Fed. Cas. 344, 345-346 (1852).

33 Accumulator Co. v. Julien Electric Co., 57 F. 605, 615 (1893) ; In re Stoffregen, 6 F. (2d) 943, 944 (1925); Robertson v. General Electric Co., 32 F. (2d) 495, 499-500 (1929); Taylor v. Morton, Fed. Cas. No. 13,799, 23 Fed. Cas. 784, 787-788 (1855); Bartram v. Robertson, 122 U. S. 116, 120 (1887).

34 The Over the Top, 5 F. (2d) 838, 845 (1925).

35 United States v. Bobbins, Fed. Cas. No. 16,175, 27 Fed. Cas. 825 (1799); United States v. Schooner Peggy, 1 Cr. 103 (1801).

36 Head Money Cases, 112 U. S. 580, 598-599 (1884); Hamilton v. Erie B. Co., 114 N.E. 399 (1919).

37 United States v. Percheman, 7 Pet. 51, 88-89 (1833) ; United States v. Wiggins, 14 Pet. 334 (1840); Little v. Watson, 32 Me. 214 (1850).

38 John T. Bill Co., Inc. v. United States, 27 C.C.P.A. 26, 34, 104 F. (2d) 67 (1939); United States v. Garrow, 88 F. (2d) 318 (1937) ; Bacardi Corp. of America v. Domenech, 311 U. S. 150 (1940).

39 Hearings on Executive O, The Genocide Convention, 81st Cong., 2d Sess., p. 6.

40 Ibid., p. 13. See also Hearings (revised) on the Charter of the United Nations, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 56-57, 104-106, 208-209. Goodrich, L. M. and Hambro, E., The Charter of the United Nations: Commentary and Documents (2d ed., rev., 1949), pp. 319–324 Google Scholar.

41 252 U. S. 416 (1920); see Congressional Record, 81st Cong., 1st Sess., p. 9821.

42 133 U. S. 258, 266 (1890); Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199 (1796); see Warren, Charles, “The First Decade of the Supreme Court of the United States,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 7 (1939-40), pp. 631-654CrossRefGoogle Scholar.