AND UTTERANCES OF NATIONAL ORGANS. 149 



The United States Senate is presumed to be aware of reserva- 

 tions made by foreign powers on signature, before it consents to 

 ratification, consequently the United States is bound by such reserva- 

 tions. Thus, said the Supreme Court of a reservation attached by 

 the King of Spain to his ratification of the Florida cession treaty 

 of i8i9:3« 



" It is too plain for argument that where one of the parties to a treaty 

 at the time of its ratification annexes a written declaration explaining am- 

 biguous language in the instrument or adding a new and distinct stipulation 

 and the treaty is afterwards ratified by the other party with the declaration 

 attached to it, and the ratifications duly exchanged — the declaration thus 

 annexed is a part of the treaty and as binding as if it were inserted in 

 the body of the instrument. The intention of the parties is to be gathered 

 from the whole instrument as it stood when the ratifications were ex- 

 changed." 



In case foreign reservations are proposed upon exchange of 

 ratifications, the Senate has no opportunity to object unless the 

 reservations are especially submitted to it by the President. Pres- 

 ident Jefiferson thus submitted Napoleon's reservation to the treaty 

 of 1801 after exchange of ratifications and the Senate consented.^® 

 Doubtless, prompt notification of Senatorial objection, had it been 

 given, would have relieved the United States of responsibility 



same degree of eagerness by all the Delegations ; some concessions have 

 been made on one point in consideration of concessions obtained on another. 

 The whole, all things considered, has been recognized as satisfactory. A 

 legitimate expectation would be defeated if one Power might make reserva- 

 tions on a rule to which another Power attached particular importance." 

 Naval War College, Int. Law Topics, 1909, p. 155. Protocol No. 24 of the 

 Paris Congress of 1856 provided with reference to the Declaration of Paris, 

 " On the proposition of Count Walewski, and recognizing that it is for the 

 general interest to maintain the indivisibility of the four principles men- 

 tioned in the declaration signed this day, the plenipotentiaries agree that 

 the powers which shall have signed it, or which shall have acceded to it, can 

 not hereafter enter into any arrangement in regard to the application of the 

 right of neutrals in time of war, which does not at the same time rest on 

 the four principles which are the object of the said declaration." This was 

 recognized as a binding obligation on the powers and as a result the United 

 States being unwilling to accept one provision of the Declaration was ex- 

 cluded from the treaty, a situation which proved most disadvantageous upon 

 the outbreak of the Civil War five years later. Ibid., 1905, p. no. 



38 Doe V. Braden, 16 How. 635, 656 (1853). See also Crandall, p. 88, and 

 supra, note 28. 



3^ Crandall, op. cit., p. 86, and supra, note 27. 



