'912.] OF THE UNITED STATES. 361 



Said Mr. Justice Daniel : 



" Admitting this Fourteenth Article of the treaty to be in full force, and 

 that it purported to take from the State of New York the right to tax 

 aliens coming and commorant within her territory, it would be certaintly in- 

 competent for such a purpose, because there is not, and never could have 

 been, any right in any other agent than her own government to bind her by 

 such a stipulation."^' 



Said Mr. Justice Woodbury: 



" Measures which are legitimately of a police character are not pre- 

 tended to be ceded anywhere in the Constitution to the general government 

 in express terms : and as little can it be argued that they are impliedly to be 

 considered as ceded, if they be honestly and truly police measures. ""°' 



Before examining into the circumstances under which the above 

 expressions of judicial opinion have occurred and into the question 

 how far the development of constitutional law has sanctioned or 

 refuted their authority, it may be well to summarize the conclusions 

 from our detailed analysis of dccisio>is. These fundamental con- 

 clusions are three in number : 



First: That a treaty provision having such expressed intention, 

 will of its own force, operate as a Federal legislative act, and that 

 this principle obtains even though the subject of the treaty provision 

 be one committed by the Constitution to the legislation of Congress ; 



Second: That acts of Congress and treaty provisions stand under 

 the Constitution on an equal footing, and that the last expression of 

 the Federal will, be it by statute or by treaty, must prevail ; 



Third: That treaty provisions may deal with subjects not com- 

 mitted to the legislation of Congress, and that, when so declaratory 

 of the Federal will, they operate of their own force to annul the 

 constitution or law of any State in conflict therewith. 



The question presented is, whether an exception exists to the 

 third conclusion, and specifically, whether it be true that treaty pro- 

 visions conflicting with the exercise of its police power by a State, 

 are beyond the power of the Federal. government, and consequently 

 invalid. That question at perhaps tedious length but with an effort 

 toward complete analysis we will now attempt to determine. 



=" Ibid., p. 507. 

 ^==Ibid.. p. 524- 



