191^.] OF THE UNITED STATES. 377 



But before we turn to the examination of these decisions, it may 

 be well to consider certain of the incidents in the diplomatic rela- 

 tions of the United States in which has arisen the question of its 

 power to enforce treaty provisions. It will not be attempted to 

 examine these occurrences from the point of view of rights and 

 liabilities under international law, but wholly with respect to the 

 attitude taken by the Department of State toward the subject. 



On November lo, 1880, certain Chinese residents of Denver, 

 Colorado, were injured or killed and their property destroyed by a 

 mob moved by race hatred. In reply to the representations of the 

 Chinese minister, the Secretary of State, Mr. Evarts, said : 



"... As to the arrest and punishment of the guilty persons who com- 

 posed the mob at Denver, I need only remind you that the powers of direct 

 intervention on the part of this government are limited by the Constitution 

 of the United States. Under the limitations of that instrument, the govern- 

 ment of the Federal Union cannot interfere in regard to the administration 

 or execution of the munipical laws of a State of the Union, except under 

 circumstances expressly provided for in the Constitution. Such instances are 

 confined to the case of a State whose power is found inadequate to the 

 enforcement of its municipal laws and the maintenance of its sovereign 

 authority; and even then the Federal authority can only be brought into 

 operation in the particular State, in response to a formal request from the 

 proper political authority of the State. It will thus be perceived that so far 

 as the arrest and punishment of the guilty parties may be concerned, it is 

 a matter which, in the present aspect of the case, belongs exclusively to the 

 government and authorities of the State of Colorado."^" 



The Chinese minister replied : 



" I regret to learn from your note that the powers of direct intervention 

 on the part of the United States Government are limited by the Constitution. 

 It appears to me that treaties as well as the Constitution, are the supreme 

 law ot this land. The Chinese residents who were subjected to the wanton 

 outrage of the mob, came to this country, under the right of treaties between 

 China and the general Government of the United States, and not with 

 Colorado or any individual State. 



" Thus, the case under consideration should be a question of intercourse 

 between China and the United States, and different from that to be dealt 

 with under the ordinary internal administration of a State. It was with this 

 view that I had in my last note requested you to cause this case to be 

 examined. But I fail to learn from your note the number of the guilty 

 persons that have been arrested, and how they have been punished or dealt 



-°° William M. Evarts to Chen Lan Pin, Foreign Relations, 1881, p. 319. 



