19I2-] OF THE UNITED STATES. 341 



the treaty might operate when it provided " that creditors on either 

 side shall meet with no lawful impediment to the recovery of the 

 full value, sterling money, of all bona fide debts heretofore con- 

 tracted"; (b) that the treaty should not be interpreted to repeal an 

 act known to the commissioners who framed the treaty, without 

 express language of repeal; (c) that the treaty, if it operated to de- 

 prive the debtor of a right which had vested in 1780 three years 

 before the date of the treaty, was beyond the power of Congress. 



The judgment of the Court was in favor of the creditor. Four 

 of the five judges delivered their opinions. All concurred in up- 

 holding the power of Virginia to pass the Act of 1777 and in its 

 efficacy apart from treaty stipulation. Mr. Justice Iredell alone dis- 

 sented on the ground that while the treaty operated to repeal the 

 Virginia statute, it could not properly be interpreted as operating 

 to annul acts done under it while in force and prior to its repeal. 



It will be observed that the annulment of the Virginia statute 

 might logically be maintained in either or both of two ways : First, 

 because of the operation to that extent of the treaty by virtue of the 

 Articles of Confederation and of the assent thereto by Virginia as a 

 State ; second, by the supreme efficacy given to the treaty by the 

 Constitution. A careful study of the opinions of Mr. Justice Chase 

 and of Mr. Justice Paterson^"*' shows that they placed their decision 

 upon both grounds ; Mr. Justice Wilson placed his concurrence on 

 the first, and was silent as to the second; Mr. Justice Iredell denied 

 the validity of the first ground, and acquiesced emphatically in the 

 validity of the second (dissenting in the interpretation he gave to 

 the treaty). Said Mr. Justice Chase upon the second ground: 



"If doubts could exist before the establishment of the present national 

 government, they must be entirely removed by the 6th article of the Consti- 

 tution, which provides ' That all treaties made, or wrhich shall be made, under 

 the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and 



"" Ibid., Vol. II., p. 352. 



^"^ The acquiescence of Mr. Justice Paterson in the first ground is shown 

 by these words: "If the Legislature had authority to make the act, the 

 Congress could, by treaty, repeal the act, and annul everything done under 

 it," at p. 249. His acquiescence in the second ground is shown by his rather 

 technical opinion having as its object the sustaining of the demurrer to the 

 second plea which demurrer relied wholly on the constitutional provision. 



