WRIGHT— POWER TO MEET RESPONSIBILITIES. 275 



February 22, 1888, for enforcing the International' Cable Conven- 

 tion of 1885; an act of January 5, 1905, amended in 1910 in pur- 

 suance of the Red Cross Conventions of 1864 (Arts. 27-28) and 

 1906, and the X Hague Convention of 1907 (Art. 29) applying 

 them to naval warfare, providing punishment for use of the Red 

 Cross symbol in advertising or in other unauthorized manner ; an 

 act of August I, 1912, providing punishment for masters of vessels 

 failing to give reasonable assistance in case of maritime accident as 

 required by the general convention on salvage of 1910; an act of 

 August 24, 191 2, providing punishment for persons taking seal in 

 the North Pacific in violation of the Behring Sea sealing convention 

 of 191 1 ; an act of August 13, 1912, for enforcing the international 

 radio convention of that year by providing punishment for per- 

 sons using radio without license and for operators wilfully inter- 

 fering with radio communication or otherwise violating the con- 

 vention, and an act of July 3, 19 18, providing for enforcement of 

 the migratory bird treaty with Great Britain of that year.*^ 



In view of the abundance of congressional legislation giving 

 effect to treaties and the apparently plain terms of the "necessary 

 and proper " clause of the Constitution there would seem no room 

 for questioning the power of Congress to pass such legislation. The 

 power has, however, been questioned when treaties have called for 

 legislation on subjects not otherwise within congressional power. 

 The Supreme Court has answered with no uncertain voice. Said 

 Justice Harlan in 1900: '^^ 



" The power of Congress to make all laws necessary and proper for 

 carrying into execution as well the powers enumerated in Section 8 of Article 

 I of the Constitution, as all others vested in the Government of the United 

 States, or in any department or officers thereof, includes the power to enact 

 such legislation as is appropriate to give efficacy to any stipulations which it 

 is competent for the President, by and with the advice and consent of the 

 Senate, to insert in a treaty with a foreign power." 



In the trademark cases, the Supreme Court held Congress incom- 

 petent to legislate on that subject, but, said Justice Miller:*^ 



*i40 Stat., c. 128; Comp. Stat., sec. 8837 a-c. 



*2 Neeley v. Henkel. 180 U. S. 109. 



43 Trade Mark Cases, 100 U. S. 82 (1879). 



PROC. AMER. PHIL., SOC, VOL. LX., S, MAKCH 9, I922. 



