Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

9

Art. 1. Sect. 9.

Direct taxes.

, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing pe employed in the service of the United States,(l) reservly the appointment of the officers, and the authority of ing to the discipline prescribed by congress : Eislation, in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not =) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptThe seat of the government of the United States ;(m) and over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature ame shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, ful buildings: (n) And shall be necessary(o) and proper for carrying into execuand all other powers vested by this constitution in the

States, or in any department or officer thereof. mportation of such persons as any of the states now existing āt, shall not be prohibited by the congress prior to the year ed and eight; but a tax or duty may be imposed on such g ten dollars for each person.(P) e writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, vasion, the public safety may require it.(9) r or ex post facto law shall be passed.(r)

30. No capitation, or other direct tax, shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed to be taken.(s)

31. No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.(t) No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of State exports. one state over those of another; nor shall vessels bound to or from one state be Port duties. obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in another.(u).

32. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropria- Receipts and tions made by law;(v) and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures. expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.

33. No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States; and no person Titles and receipt holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the of presents procongress

, accept of any present, emolument, office(w) or title of any kind whatever, from any king, prince or foreign state.

34. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance or confederation ; grant letters Art. 1. Sect. 10. of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit ;(2) make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder,(y) powers of the er post facto law, (z) or law impairing the obligation of contracts,(a) or grant any states. title of nobility.

Limitations of the

frees, 11 of congress to authorize it. Ex parte Merryman, Tan.

Dec. 248. McCall y. McDowell, 1 Deady 233. Ex parte ubject to Benedict, 4 West. L. Mo. 449. The effect of a suspen

into the sion of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is to Mott, 12 confer on the executive the power immemorially exerided for cised by the British Crown, before the passage of the Ts of the habeas corpus act, 31 Car. II. (but which was thenceheat. 51. forth taken away by that statute), namely, the power e legisla- to arrest by warrant, for treason in generality, or susurts-mar- picion of treason or treasonable practices, without neglect to specially expressing the nature of the treasonable acts le to the charged, as required by the habeas corpus

act, and

to Lisition of imprison the party so arrested on such warrant, for an

indefinite period, without bail or trial. See And. 297, Lough. pl. 305. 1 Hallam Const. Hist. 252. In the exercise of er of the such a power, there must be a warrant, and it must be rporation for treasonable practices. A suspension of the habeas nose laws corpus does not oust the civil courts of the right to in3 Wheat. quire into the legality of the detention of a person

claimed to have been enlisted into the army through ries with fraud or duress. Such power is inconsistent with the ed Statei existence of a free government; it is without precethe pur- dent to justify it; it is against the spirit of the constipurposes, tntion, and of all the foundations on which it is erected. tot, of it. Binney on Habeas Corpus, Part III. And it has been ch state, held, that a soldier illegally enlisted, and not charged 3 v. Cor- with an offence against the government, could not be the only held against a writ of habeas corpus, under the act of overeign 1863, suspending the privilege of the writ. People dividual v. Gaul, 44 Barb. 98. See Ex parte Keeler, Hemp. 306. Common- Ex parte Fagan, 2 Spr. 191. Ex parte Field, 5 Bl.

(8) Hylton v. United States, 3 Dall. 171. Lough- passing the statute, or which might hereafter be borough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 320-1. Veazie Bank v. entered into, should nevertheless be valid and binding Fenno, 8 Wall. 533.

upon the parties, all would admit the retrospective (1) A state law imposing a stamp duty on bills of character of such an enactment, but it would not be lading is unconstitutional. Almy v. California, 24 repugnant to the constitution of the United States. How. 169. This clause does not apply to the imposi- Satterlee v. Matthewson, 2 Pet. 412. See Martinetti tion of tonnage duties on foreign vessels. Aguirre v. V. Maguire, 1 Abb. U. S. 356. A state legislature may, Maxwell, 3 Bl. C. C. 140.

constitutionally, pass a private act authorizing a (U) A state law requiring the payment of pilotage court to decree, on the petition of an administrator, fees does not infringe this clause. Cooley v. Board a private sale of the real estate of an intestate, for of Wardens, 12 How. 314-15. See Pennsylvania v. payment of his debts, though it require no notice to Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Co., 18 Ibid. 421. the heirs, and though the subject be regulated by a

(1") Whether the public moneys at the disposal of general statute. Florentine v. Barton, 2 Wall. 210. the postmaster-general be technically in the treasury (a) This provision has never been understood to or not, the spirit of this provision applies to them, and embrace other contracts than those which respect ought to be faithfully observed in their expenditure. property, or some object of value, and confer rights 3 Opin. 13. No other remedy exists for a creditor of which may be asserted in a court of justice. Dartthe government, than an application to congress for mouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 629. A pripayment; he cannot have a lien on the public prop- vate charter is such a contract. Ibid. 518. Hawthorne erty in his possession or custody. United States v. v.Calef, 2 Wall. 10. See Aspinwall v.County of Daviess, Barney, 3 Hall L. J. 130; s. c. 2 Wh. Cr. Cas. 513. 22 How. 365. Turnpike Co. v. Maryland, 3 Wall. 210. Nor can a mandamus issue to the secretary of the Stone v. Mississippi, 101 U. S. 814. Slaughter House treasury, to cause a credit to be entered on the books Case, 1 Woods 32. Comm'th v. Transportation Co., of the department, when there is no special law requir- 107 P. S. 112. An act incorporating a banking instiing such a credit to be entered. Ex parte Reeside, 11 tution. Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Pet. 514. Law Rep. 448. See Kendall v. United States, 12 Pet. Gordon v. Appeal Tax Court, 3 How. 133. Planters' 524.

Bank v. Sharp, 6 Ibid. 301. Carran v. Arkansas, 15 (rr) Thus, a marshal of the United States cannot, Ibid. 304. Michigan State Bank v. Hastings, 1 Doug. at the same time, hold the office of commercial agent (Mich.) 225. A grant of land by the legislature of of France. 6 Opin. 409.

à state. Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cr. 87. Terrett v. Taylor, (7) To constitute a bill of credit within the consti- 9 Ibid. 43. And so is a compact between two states. tution, it must be issued by a state, involve the faith Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1. Allen v. McKean, 1 of the state, and be designed to circulate as money, Sum. 276. And see Pars. on Cont. 509. Hall v. Wison the credit of the state, in the ordinary uses of busi- consin, 103 U. S. 5. An appointment to a salaried Dess. Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, 11 Pet. 257. As office, however, is not a contract, within the meaning to what are such bills of credit; see Craig v. Missouri, of the constitution. Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. 4 Ibid. 410. Byrne v. Missouri, 8 Ibid. 40. Woodrufi 402. Commonwealth v. Mann, 5 W. & S. 418. Comv. Trapnall, 10 How. 205. Darrington v. State Bank monwealth v. Bacon, 6 S. & R. 322. Barker v. Pittsof Alabama, 13 Ibid. 12. Curran v. Arkansas, 15 burgh, 4 P. S. 49. All contracts are subject to the Ibid. 317–18. McCoy v. Washington County, 3 Wall. right of eminent domain existing in the several states ; Jr. C. C. 381. Poindexter v. Greenhow, 114 U. S. and the exercise of this power does not conflict with 270.

the constitution. West River Bridge Co. v. Dir, 6 (y) A bill of attainder is a legislative act which How. 507. Rundle v. Delaware and Raritan Canal inflicts punishment without a judicial trial; the states Co., 14 Ibid. 80. Nor does the exercise of the power of cannot, under the form of creating a qualification, in taxation. Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Pet. 514. effect, inflict a punishment for a past act which was See New York and Erie Railroad Co. v. Sabin, 26 not punishable at the time it was committed. Cum- P. S. 242. McGee v. Mathis, 4 Wall. 143. So, the mings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277. Pierce v. Carskadon, states may pass limitation acts. Jackson v. Lam16 Ibid. 234.

phire, 3 Pet. 289-90. Hawkins v. Barney's Lessee, 5 (2) See supra, noter. The constitution does not Ibid. 457. Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 315. Phalen v. prohibit the states from passing retrospective laws Virginia, 8 Ibid. 168. Bacon v. Howard, 20 Ibid. 23. generally, but only ex post facto laws.

Watson v. Koshkonong v. Burton, 104 U. S. 668. Exemption Mercer, 8 Pet. 110,

s. ¢.'1 Watts 356. Charles River laws. Bronson v. Kinzie, ut supra. Insolvent laws, Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 11 Pet. 420. Hess v. Werts, discharging the person of debtor from imprison4 S. & R. 364. Conkey v. Hart, 14 N. Y. 23. Hepburn ment. Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat. 370. Beers v.

. Curts, 7 Watts 300. Locke v. New Orleans, 4 Wall. Haughton, 9 Pet. 329. Penniman's Case, 103 U, S. 172. Retrospective laws divesting vested rights are 714. Recording acts, postponing an elder to a younger impolitic and unjust; but they are not er post facto title, after a limited period. Jackson v. Lamphire, laws within the meaning of the constitution, nor 3 Pét. 289. And laws relating to divorces. "Dartrepugnant to its provisions, Albee v. May, 2 Paine mouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 629. What74, unless they impair the obligation of a contract. ever belongs merely to the remedy may be altered Baltimore and Susquehanna Railroad Co. v. Nesbit, according to the will of the state, provided the altera10 How. 401. Lane v. Nelson, 79 P. S. 407. Should a tions do not impair the obligation of the contract; statute declare, contrary to the general principles of Holmes v. Lansing, 3 Johns. Cas. 75; Umbenhower v. law, that contracts founded upon an illegal or immoral Miller, 1 Woods 69, but if that effect be produced, it consideration, whether in existence at the time of is immaterial whether it be done by acting on the

[graphic]

?frey, 17 C. C. 63. Commonwealth y. Frink, 13 Am. L. R. 700. Wh. Cr. Leavenworth R. R. Co. v. Lowe, 114 U. 8. 525. Chias, how- cago, R. I. and P. R.W. Co. v. McGlinn, Ibid. 542. ax lands A 'suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas urposes, corpus does not suspend the writ itself; the writ not have issues as a matter of course, and on its return, the 7. Weise, court decides whether the applicant is denied the right bid. 299. of proceeding any further. Ex parte Milligan, 4 See Act Wall. 4.

(n) Where no other time is fixed for the operation ary, nor of a penal statute, it takes effect from the time of its ect and passage; and ignorance of the existence of such act

Com- forms no legal excuse for a violation of it. The Brig illoch v. Ann, 1 Gall. 62. Ex post facto laws are such as create that the or aggravate crime, or increase the punishment, or r should change the rules of evidence for the purpose of conswold, 8 viction. Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 390. Cummings v. ire, con- Missouri, 4 Wall. 278. King v. Missouri, 107 U. 8. United 221. Hoyt v. Utah, 110 Ibid. 589. The phrase only

of the applies to penal and criminal laws, which inflict forat. 316, feitures or punishments, and not to civil proceedings general which affect private rights retrospectively. Watson any of- v. Mercer, 8 Pet. 110; s.c. 1 Watts 356. Carpenter v. prevent Pennsylvania, 17 How. 463. Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cr. es, and 138. Society for the Propagation of the Gospel v. es may Wheeler, 2 Gall. 138. United States v. Hall, 2 W. C. 12 Pet. C. 366. Commonwealth v. Levis, 6 Binn. 271. Stod

dart v. Smith, 5 Ibid. 363-4. Hess v. Werts, 4 S. & R. ite gov- 364. There is nothing in the constitution which for

bids congress to pass laws violating the obligations of ind the contracts, though such a power is denied to the states. an act Evans v. Eaton, Pet. C. Č. 323.

Art. 1. Sect. 8.

tion.

To provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States,(!) reserving to the states respectively the appointment of the officers, and the authority of

training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by congress : Exclusive legisla- To exercise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not

exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of congress, become the seat of the government of the United States ;(m) and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals,

dock-yards and other needful buildings :(n) And Laws for carrying To make all laws which shall be necessary(o) and proper for carrying into execuout vested powers. tion the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the

government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

27. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.(P)

28. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when,

in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it.(9) Ex post facto laws. 29. No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.(r)

Art. 1. Sect. 9.

Slave trade.

Ibid.

Habeas corpus.

tin v. Mott, 12 Wheat. 19. See Tyler v. Defrees, 11 of congress to authorize it. Ex parte Merryman, Tan. Wall. 331.

Dec. 248. McCall v. McDowell, 1 Deady 233. Ex parte (1) The militia of the several states are subject to Benedict, 4 West. L. Mo. 449. The effect of a suspenmartial law, from the time they are called into the sion of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is to service of the United States. Martin V. Mott, 12 confer on the executive the power immemorially exerWheat. 19. So far as congress has provided for cised by the British Crown, before the passage of the organizing the militia, the legislative powers of the habeas corpus act, 31 Car. II. (but which was thencestates are excluded. Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheat. 51. forth taken away by that statute), namely, the power Moore v. Houston, 3 S. & R. 164. But a state legisla- to arrest by warrant, for treason in generality, or susture may lawfully provide for the trial by courts-mar picion of treason or treasonable practices, without tial, of drafted militia, who shall refuse or neglect to specially expressing the nature of the treasonable acts march to the place of rendezvous, agreeable to the charged, as required by the habeas corpus act, and to orders of the governor, founded on the requisition of imprison the party so arrested on such warrant, for an the president of the United States. Ibid.

indefinite period, without bail or trial. See And. 297, (m) This includes the power of taxation. Lough- pl. 305. i Hallam Const. Hist. 252. In the exercise of borough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 317. The charter of the such a power, there must be a warrant, and it must be city of Washington did not authorize the corporation for treasonable practices. A suspension of the habeas to force the sale of lottery-tickets in states whose laws corpus does not oust the civil courts of the right to inprohibited such sale. Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. quire into the legality of the detention of a person 264.

claimed to have been enlisted into the army through (n) The right of exclusive legislation carries with fraud or duress. Such power is inconsistent with the it the right of exclusive jurisdiction. United Stato existence of a free government; it is without preceV. Cornell, 2 Mas. 60, 91. 6 Opin. 577. But the pur- dent to justify it; it is against the spirit of the constichase of lands by the United States for public purposes, tution, and of all the foundations on which it is erected. within the territorial limits of a state, does not, of it. Binney on Habeas Corpus, Part III. And it has been self, oust the jurisdiction or sovereignty of such state, held, that a soldier illegally enlisted, and not charged over the lands so purchased. United States v. Cor- with an offence against the government, could not be nell, 2 Mas. 60. The constitution prescribes the only held against a writ of habeas corpus, under the act of mode by which they can acquire land as a sovereign 1863, suspending the privilege of the writ. People power, and, therefore, they hold only as an individual v. Gaul, 44 Barb. 98. See Ex parte Keeler,

Hemp. 306. when they obtain it in any other manner. Common- Ex parte Fagan, 2 Spr. 191. Ex parte Field, 5 Bl. wealth v. Young, Bright. 302. People v. Godfrey, 17 C. C. 63. Commonwealth v. Frink, 13 Am. L. R. 700. Johns. 225. See United States v. Travers, 2 Wh. Cr. Leavenworth R. R. Co. v. Lowe, 114 U. S. 525. ChiCas. 490. People v. Lent, Ibid. 548. It seems, how- cago, R. I. and P. R. W. Co. v. McGlinn, Ibid. 542. ever, that the states have not the right to tax lands A suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas purchased by the United States for public purposes, corpus does not suspend the writ itself; the writ although the consent of the legislature may not have issues as a matter of course; and on its return, the been given to the purchaser. United States v. Weise, court decides whether the applicant is denied the right 2 Wall. Jr. C. C. 72. Elliott v. Van Voorst, 3 Ibid. 299. of proceeding any further. Ex parte Milligan, 4 7 Opin. 628. 9 Ibid. 291. 117 U. S. 151. See Act Wall. 4. 13 June 1883, P. L. 118.

(r) Where no other time is fixed for the operation (0) This does not mean absolutely necessary, nor of a penal statute, it takes effect from the time of its does it imply the use of only the most direct and passage; and ignorance of the existence of such act simple means calculated to produce the end. Com- forms no legal excuse for a violation of it. The Brig monwealth v. Lewis, 6 Binn. 270-1. McCulloch v. Ann, 1 Gall. 62. Ex post facto laws are such as create Maryland, 4 Wheat. 413. But it requires that the or aggravate crime, or increase the punishment, or means used in the exercise of an express power should change the rules of evidence for the purpose of conbe appropriate to the end. Hepburn v. Griswold, 8 viction. Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 390. Cummings v. Wall. 603. 1 Story Const. § 1253. Therefore, con- Missouri, 4 Wall. 278. King v. Missouri, 107 U. S. gress had power to charter the bank of the United 221. Hoyt v. Utah, 110 Ibid. 589. The phrase only States, as à necessary and useful instrument of the applies to penal and criminal laws, which inflict forfiscal operations of the government. 4 Wheat. 316, feitures or punishments, and not to civil proceedings 422. So, also, they have power, under this general which affect private rights retrospectively. Watson authority, to provide for the punishment of any of- v. Mercer, 8 Pet. 110; s. c. 1 Watts 356. Carpenter v. fences which interfere with, obstruct or prevent Pennsylvania, 17 How. 463. Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cr. commerce and navigation with foreign states, and 138. Society for the Propagation of the Gospel v. among the several states, although such offences may Wheeler, 2 Gall. 138. United States v. Hall, 2 W. C. be done on land. United States v. Coombs, 12 Pet. C. 366. Commonwealth v. Lewis, 6 Binn. 271. Stod78.

dart v. Smith, 5 Ibid. 363-4. Hess v. Werts, 4 S. & R. (p) This section has no application to the state gov- 364. There is pothing in the constitution which forernments. Butler v. Hopper, 1 W. C. C. 499.

bids congress to pass laws violating the obligations of (9) The president has no power to suspend the contracts, though such a power is denied to the states. privilege of the writ of habeas corpus without an act Evans v. Eaton, Pet. C. Č. 323.

Art. 1. Sect. 9.

Direct taxes.

30. No capitation, or other direct tax, shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed to be taken.($)

31. No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.(1) No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of State exports

. one state over those of another; nor shall vessels bound to or from one state be Port duties. obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in another.(u)

32. No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropria- Receipts and tions made by law ;(v) and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures. expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.

33. No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States; and no person Titles and receipt holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the si presents procongress, accept of any present, emolument, office(w) or title of any kind whatever, from any king, prince or foreign state.

34. lo state shall enter into any treaty, alliance or confederation ; grant letters Art. 1. Sect. 10. of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit;(2) make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder,(y) powers of the er post facto law, (z) or law impairing the obligation of contracts,(a) or grant any states. title of nobility:

Limitations of the

(8) Hylton v. United States, 3 Dall. 171. Lough- passing the statute, or which might hereafter be borough v. Blake, 5 Wheat. 320–1. Veazie Bank v. entered into, should nevertheless be valid and binding Fenno, 8 Wall. 533.

upon the parties, all would admit the retrospective () A state law imposing a stamp duty on bills of character of such an enactment, but it would not be lading is unconstitutional. Almy v. California, 24 repugnant to the constitution of the United States. How. 169. This clause does not apply to the imposi- Satterlee v. Matthewson, 2 Pet. 412. See Martinetti tion of tonnage duties on foreign vessels. Aguirre v. v. Maguire, 1 Abb. L'. S. 356. A state legislature may, Jurvell, 3 BI. C. C. 140.

constitutionally, pass a private act authorizing a (U) A state law requiring the payment of pilotage court to decree, on the petition of an administrator, fees does not infringe this clause. Cooley v. Board a private sale of the real estate of an intestate, for of Wardens, 12 How. 314-15. See Pennsylvania v. payment of his debts, though it require no notice to Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Co., 18 Ibid. 421. the heirs, and though the subject be regulated by a

(2) Whether the public moneys at the disposal of general statute. Florentine v. Barton, 2 Wall. 210. the postmaster-general be technically in the treasury (a) This provision has never been understood to or not, the spirit of this provision applies to them, and embrace other contracts than those which respect ought to be faithfully observed in their expenditure. property, or some object of value, and confer rights 3 Opin. 13. No other remedy exists for a creditor of which may be asserted in a court of justice. Dartthe government, than an application to congress for mouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 629. A pripayment; he cannot have a lien on the public prop- vate charter is such a contract. Ibid. 518. Hawthorne erty in his possession or custody. United States v. v. Calet, 2 Wall. 10. See Aspinwall v. County of Daviess, Barney, 3 Hall L. J. 130; s. c. 2 Wh. Cr. Cas. 513. 22 How. 365. Turnpike Co. v. Maryland, 3 Wall. 210. Vor can a mandamus issue to the secretary of the Stone v. Mississippi, 101 U. S. 814. Slaughter House treasury, to cause a credit to be entered on the books Case, 1 Woods 32. Comm'th v. Transportation Co., of the department, when there is no special law requir- 107 P. S. 112. An act incorporating a banking instiing such a credit to be entered. Ex parte Reeside, 11 tution. Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Pet. 514. Law Rep. 448. See-Kendall v. United States, 12 Pet. Gordon v. Appeal Tax Court, 3 How. 133. Planters' 524.

Bank v. Sharp, 6 Ibid. 301. Carran v. Arkansas, 15 (or) Thus, a marshal of the United States cannot, Ibid. 301. Michigan State Bank v. Hastings, 1 Doug, at the same time, hold the office of commercial agent (Mich.) 225. A grant of land by the legislature of of France. 6 Opin. 409.

a state. Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cr. 87. Terrett v. Taylor, (2) To constitute a bill of credit within the consti- 9 Ibid. 43. And so is a compact between two states. tution, it must be issued by a state, involve the faith Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1. Allen v. McKean, 1 of the state, and be designed to circulate as money, Sum. 276. And see Pars, on Cont. 509. Hall v. W'is. on the credit of the state, in the ordinary uses of busi- consin, 103 U. S. 5. An appointment to a salaried Dess. Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky, 11 Pet. 257. As office, however, is not a contract, within the meaning to what are such bills of credit; see Craig v. Missouri, of the constitution. Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. 4 Ibid. 410. Byrne v. Missouri, 8 Ibid. 40. Woodruff 402. Commonwealth v. Mann, 5 W. & S. 418. Comv. Trapnall, 10 How. 205. Darrington v. State Bank monwealth v. Bacon, 6 S. & R. 322. Barker v. Pittsof Alabama, 13 Ibid. 12. Curran v. Arkansas, 15 burgh, 4 P. S. 49. All contracts are subject to the Ibid. 317–18. McCoy v. Washington County, 3 Wall. right of eminent domain existing in the several states; Jr. C. C. 381. Poindexter v. Greenhow, 114 U. S. and the exercise of this power does not contlict with 270.

the constitution. West River Bridge Co. v. Dir, 6 (y) A bill of attainder is a legislative act which How. 507. Rundle v. Delaware and Raritan Canal inflicts punishment without a judicial trial; the states CO., 14 Ibid. 80. Nor does the exercise of the power of cannot, under the form of creating a qualification, in taxation. Providence Bank v. Billings, 4 Pet. 514. effect, intlict a punishment for a past act which was See New York and Erie Railroad Co. v. Sabin, 26 not punishable at the time it was committed. Cum P. S. 242. McGee v. Mathis, 4 Wall. 143. So, the mings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277. Pierce v. Carskudon, states may pass limitation acts. Jackson v. Lam16 Ibid. 234.

phire, 3 Pet. 289–90. Hawkins v. Barney's Lessee, 5 (z) See supra, note ?". The constitution does not Ibid. 457. Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 315. Phalen v. prohibit the states from passing retrospective laws Virginia, 8 Ibid. 168. Bacon v. Howard, 20 Ibid. 23. generally, but only ex post facto laws. Watson v. Koshkonong v. Burton, 104 U. S. 668. Exemption Mercer, 8 Pet. 110, s. c. 1 Watts 356. Charles River laws. Bronson v. Kinzie, ut supra. Insolvent laws, Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 11 Pet. 420. Hess v. Werts, discharging the person of a debtor from imprison4 S. & R. 364. Conkey v. Hart, 14 N. Y. 23. Hepburn ment. Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat. 370. Beers v. Curts, 7 Watts 300. Locke v. New Orleans, 4 Wall. Haughton, 9 Pet. 329. Penniman's Case, 103 U. S. 172. Retrospective laws divesting vested rights are 714. Recording acts, postponing an elder to a younger impolitic and unjust; but they are not ex post facto title, after a limited period. Jackson v. Lamphire, laws within the meaning of the constitution, nor 3 Pet. 289. And laws relating to divorces. Dartrepugnant to its provisions, Albee v. May, 2 Paine mouth College v. Wooduard, 4 Wheat. 629. What74, unless they impair the obligation of a contract. ever belongs merely to the remedy may be altered Baltimore and Susquehanna Railroad Co. v. Nesbit, according to the will of the state, provided the altera10 How. 401. Lane v. Nelson, 79 P. S. 407. Should a tions do not impair the obligation of the contract; statute declare, contrary to the general principles of Holmes v. Lansing, 3 Johns. Cas. 75; Çmbenhower v. law, that contracts founded upon an illegal or immoral Miller, 1 Woods 69; but if that effect be produced, it consideration, whether in existence at the time of is immaterial whether it be done by acting on the

V. Art. 1. Sect. 10.

35. No state shall, without the consent of the congress, lay any imposts or duties

on imports(b) or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing Imposts.

its inspection laws; and the net produce of all duties and imposts, laid by any state on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the treasury of the United States; and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and control of the congress.

No state Tonnage duties. shall, without the consent of congress, lay any duty of tonnage, (c) keep troops or Troops and ships ships of war, in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact(d) with another

state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

of war.

Art. 2. Sect. 1.

President.
Term of office.

Ibid.

Mode of election.

Ibid.

Meeting of electors.

ARTICLE II. 36. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.(e) He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and together with the vice-president, chosen for the same term, be elected as follows: 37. Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may

direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of senators and representatives to which the state may be entitled in the congress; but no senator or representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

38. [The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the president of the senate. The president of the senate shall, in the presence of the senate and house of representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the president, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the house of representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for president; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said house shall, in like manner, choose the president. But in choosing the president, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members

remedy or directly on the contract itself. Bronson v. tract, and is void. And see Erie Railway Co. v. Kinzie, 1 How. 316. McCracken v. Hayward, 2 Ibid. Commonwealth, 66 P. S. 81. A state legislature 608. Howard v. Bugbee, 24 Ibid. 461. The extent of cannot, by dissolving a municipal corporation, and change is not material, any postponement or accelera- erecting another in its stead, release the people of the tion of the performance of the contract impairs its new municipality from the obligation of a judgment obligation. Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheat. 1, 75. Mc- recovered against its predecessor. United States v. Cracken v. Hayvoard, 2 How. 608. And see Louisi- Mobile, 4 Woods 536. ana v. New Orleans, 102 U. S. 203. United States v. (6) The term imports" embraces only articles Conway, Hemp. 313. Johnson v. Bond, Ibid. 533. from foreign nations, subject to the payment of duties Moore v. Fowler, Ibid. 536. Erie and N. E. Ruilroad to the United States, and not merchandise carried Co. v. Casey, 26 P. S. 287. Billmeyer v. Evans, 40 from one state to another. State v. Pinckney, 10 Ibid. 324. Breitenbach v. Bush, H Ibid. 313. Clark Rich. 474. Waring v. Mayor of Mobile, 8 Wall. 110. v. Martin, 49 Ibid. 299. This clause does not affect Woodruff' v. Parham, Ibid. 1233. Hinson v. Lott, Ibid. the laws of Texas passed before its admission into the 148. See Biddle v. Commonwealth, 13 S. & R. 408. Union. League v. De Young, 11 How. 185. Herman Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419. People v. Varv. Phalen, 14 Ibid. 79. A contract, to be within the ing, 3 Keyes 374. protection of this clause, must be one of persect obli- (c) See Steamship Co. v. Portuardens, 6 Wall. 31. gation. Aspinwall v. County of Daviess, 22 How. Cannon v. New Orleans, 20 Ibid. 577. Packet Co. v. 365.

Keokuk, 95 U. S. 80. Pucket Co. v. St. Louis, 100 It has been decided by the supreme court of the Ibid. 423. Vicksburg v. Tobin, Ibid. 430. Leathers v. United States, that a state legislature may, by con- Aiken, 9 Fed. Rep. 679. tract, surrender the right of taxation, as to the (d) These words are used in their broadest sense; property of a corporation; and that a succeeding they were intended to cut off all negotiation and inlegislature has not the power to pass a law impairing tercourse between the state authorities and foreign the obligation of such a contract. State Bank of Ohio nations. Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Pet. 572, 574. And v. Knoop, 16 How. 369. Dodge v. Woolsey, 18 Ibid. therefore, no state can, without the consent of con331. Mechanics and Traders' Bank v. Debolt, Ibid. gress, enter into any agreement or contract, express 380. Mechanics and Traders' Bank v. Thomas, or implied, to deliver up fugitives from justice from Ibid. 384. Jefferson Bank v. Skelly, 1 Bl. 436. Frank- a foreign state, who may be found within its liinits. lin Branch Bank v. Ohio, Ibid. 474. Wright v. Sill, Ibid. 3 Opin. 661. This prohibition is political in its 2 Ibid. 544. Railroad Co. v. Gaines, 3 Fed. Rep. 266. character, and has no reference to a mere matter of This doctrine, however, has been repudiated by the contract, or to the grant of a franchise which in supreme courts of Pennsylvania and Ohio. Mött v. nowise conflicts with the powers delegated to the Pennsylvania Ruilroad Co., 30 P. S. 9. Debolt v. general government by the states. Union Branch Ohio Life Insurance and Trust Co., 1 Ohio St. 563. Railroad Co. v. Tennessee and Georgia Railroad Co., Toledo Bank v. City of Toledo, Ibid. 623. Mechanics' 15 Ga. 327. A compact entered into between two and Traders' Bank v. Debolt, Ibid. 591. Plank Road states, with the assent of congress, is binding on those Co. v. Husted, 3 Ibid. 578. Norwalk Plank Road Co. states, and the citizens of each. Poole v. Fleeger, 11 v. Ilusted, Ibid. 586. Sandusky City Bunk v. Wilber, Pet. 185; s. c. 1 McLean 185. 7 Ibid. 481. But see Iron City Bank v. Pittsburgh, (e) An act done by one president, vesting a right 37 P. S. 340, where it is held, that if a state legisla- in a citizen, is not subject to review or reversal by ture, in creating a corporation, prescribe a law of his successor. 5 Opin. 603. It has been held, howtaxation, and expressly release the power to impose ever, that a conditional pardon, granted by one presifurther taxes, or do not reserve such power, a subse- dent, may be revoked by bis successor, before delivery quent tax law does impair the obligation of the con- to the prisoner. Ex parte De Puy, 3 Ben. 307.

Art. 2. Sect. 1.

Ibid.

Time of election,

Ibid.

Ibid.

from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the president, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the vice-president; but if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the senate shall choose from them by ballot the vice-president.](9)

39. The congress may determine the time of choosing the electors,(h) and the day on which they shall give their votes ;(i) which day shall be the same throughout the United States.

40. No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of

Qualitications of president; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have the president. attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years resident within the United States.

41. In case of the removal of the president from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the vice-president, and the congress may by law provide for the case of acancy, how

supplied removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the president and vice-president, declaring what officer shall then act as president, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a president shall be elected.

42. The president shall, at stated times, receive for his services a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he

His compensation. shall have been elected, and he shall not receive, within that period, any other emolument from the United States, or any of them.

43. Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation :

“I do solemnly swear, (or affirm,) that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States, and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States."

44. The president shall be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the L'nited States,(k) and of the militia of the several states, when called into the

Powers and duties. actual service of the United States;(l) he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices: and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons(m) for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.(n)

45. Ile shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur; and he shall Treaties.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Oath of otlice.

Art. 2. Sect. 2.

Ibid.

(g) This clause is altogether altered and supplied People v. Potter, 1 Parker C. R. 47. People v. Pease, by the 12th amendment.

3 Johns. Cas. 333. A conditional pardon is not com(h) On the Tuesday next after the first Monday in plete, until delivery Ex parte De Puy, 3 Ben. 307. November. 1R. S. $ 131.

The pardoning power includes that of remitting tines, (1) On the first Wednesday in December. 1 R. S. penalties and forfeitures under the revenue laws; $ 135.

Opin. 329; the passenger laws; 6 Ibid. 393; the laws (k) If a state of war exist, the president, as com- prohibiting the slave trade; 4 Ibid. 573; fines imposed mander-in-chief, has the authority without any act of on defaulting jurors; 3 Ibid. 317; 4 Ibid. 458; for congress, to exercise all belligerent rights, such as to a contempt of court; 3 Ibid. 622; Ex parte Mullee, 7 institute a blockade. The Tropic Wind, 24 Law Rep. Bl. C. C. 23; and in criminal cases; 3 Opin. 418. And 141. The F. W. Johnson, 18 Leg. Int. 334. The Sarah the same power is possessed over a judgment, after Starr, Blatch. Pr. Cas. 69. Or to levy contributions security for its payment shall have been given, as on the enemy. Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 615. Cross before. Ibid. But the president has no power to v. Harrison, 16 Ibid. 164, 190.

remit the forfeiture of a bail-bond. 4 Opin. 144. (1) The president is not obliged to take, personally, Nor a condemnation as prize of war; 10 Opin. 432; the command of the militia, when called into the ser- nor a forfeited recognizance; 11 Opin. 124. Nor, it vice of the general government, but he may place them seems, cau he, by a pardon, defeat a legal interest or under the command of officers of the army of the United right which has become vested in a private citizen; States, to whom, in his absence, he may delegate the as, for example, the vested right of an officer making powers vested in him by the constitution. Any officer a seizure. United States v. Lancaster, 4 W. C. C. 64. of the army may, therefore, be required, by orders 4 Opin, 576. 6 Ibid. 615. And see 5 Ibid. 532, 579. emanating from the president, to perform the appro- The effect of a pardon cannot be restricted by subsepriate duties of his station in the militia, when in the quent legislation. United States v. klein, 13 Wall. service of the United States, whenever the public 128. The grant of the pardoning power neither reinterest shall so require. But this power must be exer- quires nor authorizes the president to re-examine the cised in strict accordance with the right of appoint- case upon new facts; nor to grant a pardon upon the ment of militia officers, which is expressly reserved assumption of the new facts alleged. 1 Opin. 359. A to the states. 2 Opin. 711-12. See 2 Story Const. pardon is a private though official act; it must be de$$ 149–2.

livered to and accepted by the criminal; and cannot (m) He may pardon as well before trial and con- be noticed by the court, unless brought before it judiviction as afterwards. 6 Opin. 20. And after the cially by motion or otherwise. United States v. Il'ilexpiration of the imprisonment, which forms a part of son, 7 Pet. 150. The president alone can pardon the sentence. Stetler's Case, 1 Phila. 302. 9* Opin. offences committed in a territory, in violation of acts 478. And he may remit a fine, after the death of the of congress. 7 Opin. 561. He has power to order offender. 11 Opin. 35. He may grant a conditional a nolle prosequi in any stage of a criminal proceeding pardon; Ex parte Wells, 18 How. 307; 1 Opin. 341; in the name of the United States. 5 Opin. 729. provided the condition be compatible with the genius (n) As to the effect of a pardon, see Hoti'man v. of our constitution and laws. Ibid. 482. Where the Coster, 2 Wh. 453. United States v. Lukins, cited, condition is such that the government has no power 1 Chitty Cr. L. 770 n. 12 Opin. 81. Armstrong vi to carry it into effect, the pardon will be, in effect, United States, 13 Wall. 151; Pargoud v. United unconditional. 5 Opin. 368. See Flavell's Case, ó States, Ibid. 156. Gay's Goods, Ibid. 358. W. & S. 197. United States v. Wilson, 7 Pet. 161.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »