That is directly, and not incidentally, and only by consequence. Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy, 4 Wall. 553.

The States may abolish imprisonment for debt. Beers v. Houghton, 9 Peters, 359; Mason v. Haile, 12 Peters, 373; Sturgis v. Crowninshield, 4 Peters, 200.) Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy, 4 Wallace, 553.

159. EXEMPTIONS.-And the States may exempt from forced How do sale the necessary implements of agriculture, the tools of a me- exemption laws impair chanic, and articles of necessity in household furniture-the things contracts? which in civilized communities belong to the remedy. Von Hoff- 157-160 man v. City of Quincy, 4 Wall. 553. The exact limit between right and remedy must be determined in every case upon its own circumstances. Id. If the right be impaired the law is void. (Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 Howard, 311; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 608.) Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy, 4 Wallace, 554. The question between the remedy and the other parts of the contract cannot be considered res integra. (1 Kent's Com. 456; Sedg. on Stat. and Const. Law, 652; Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat. 379.) Id.

A State may disable itself by contract from exercising its taxing power in particular cases. (New Jersey v. Wilson, 7 Cranch, 166; Dodge v. Woolsey, 18 How. 331; Piqua Branch v. Knoop, 16 How. 331.) Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy, 4 Wallace, 554.

legal obliga

The legal obligation of a contract consists in the remedy given In what by law to enforce its performance, or to make compensation for the does the failure of performance. Johnson v. Higgens, 3 Metcf. (Ky.), 566. tion consist? A law which forbade the rendering of judgments for a given time was constitutional. Id. So, where a State has authorized a muni- 157 cipal corporation to contract and tax, to meet its engagements, the power cannot be withdrawn until the contract is satisfied. (People v. Bell, 10 California, 570; Dominic v. Sayre, 3 Sand. 555.) Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy, 4 Wallace, 554. It is a trust which neither the State nor corporation can annul. Id.

160. STAY LAWS.-Statutes relating to levies on executions How do may be applicable to levies made before their enactment, as they stay laws impair affect the remedy and not the right. Grosvenor v. Chesley, 48 contracts? Maine, 369; Coriell v. Ham, 4 Greene (Iowa), 455; Swift v. Flet- 159 cher, 6 Minn. 550.

But redemption laws, as to judgments upon anterior contracts, are unconstitutional. Scobey v. Gibson, 17 Ind. 572; Iglehart v. Wolfin, 20 Ind. 32.

And the laws for the release and discharge of securities. Swift v. Fletcher, 6 Minn. 550.

So of laws allowing the debtor to remove without subjecting his property to sale, so far as concerns judgment liens accruing prior to their passage. Tillotson v. Millard, 7 Minn. 513.

The legislature cannot extend the time for redeeming lands sold at tax sales. Robinson v. House, 13 Wis. 341. Nor apply appraisement laws to anterior contracts. Rosier v. Hale, 10 Iowa (2 With.), 470.

How will

The Supreme Court of the United States will determine for itself, the S. C. conirrespective of the decision of the State courts, what is a contract strue?

By what

within the meaning of the Constitution. Jefferson Branch Bank v. will the S. Skelley, 1 Black, 443. A law authorizing a redemption of property be governed sold by forced sale, impairs the obligation of a contract, and is in defining a unconstitutional as to mortgages and contracts of anterior date to

C. of U. S.

contract?

155, 109.

Do laws

the redemption law. Bronson v. Kinzie, 1 How. 311; McCracken v. Hayward, 2 How. 612-615; Gantly v. Ewing, 3 How. 716–7; Howard v. Bugbee, 24 How. 464-5; Bunn v. Gorgus, 41 Penn. St. R. 441; Weaver v. Mailot, 15 La. 395; Billmeyer v. Evans, 40 Penn. St. R. 324. The legislature of a State has a right to bind the State by contract, so as to exempt persons, corporations, and things from taxation. The Richmond R. R. Co. v. The Louisa R. R. Co. 13 How. 71; Gordon v. The Appeal Tax Court, 3 How. 33; New Jersey v. Wilson, 7 Cr. 164; Jefferson Branch Bank v. Skelley, 1 Black, 447-8. But the intention to exempt must be clear. Id.; Gilman v. The City of Sheboygan, 2 Black, 513. And the privilegia favorabilia will be narrowly construed. Rector, &c. v. The County of Philadelphia, 24 How. 302.

161. LAWS WHICH AFFECT THE REMEDY ONLY.-Where there which affect is no direct constitutional prohibition, a State may pass retrospectthe remedy ive laws, such as in their operation may affect suits pending, and only impair? give to a party a remedy which he did not previously possess, or modify an existing remedy, or remove an impediment in the way of legal proceedings. (Hepburn v. Curts, 7 Watts, 300; Shenly v. Commonwealth, 36 Penn. State, 57; Foster v. Essex Bank, 16 Mass. 245; Rich v. Flanders, 39 N. H. 325.) Freeborn v. Smith, 2 Wall. 175. The legislature may pass private acts authorizing sales by administrators, in a different manner from the general statutes regulating the subject. (Mason v. Wait, 4 Scam. 134.) Florentine v. Barton, 2 Wall. 216-7. Judicial sales of lands to pay the debts of a decedent's estate, are in the nature of a proceeding in rem, and the purchaser need only look to the order of sale. The State court is presumed to have correctly settled every judicial question, including the constitutionality of the act of assembly. (Grignon v. Astor, 3 How. 319.) Florentine v. Barton, 2 Wall. 216. The inhibition against impairing the obligation of contracts is upon the States not the United States. (Evans v. Eaton, 1 Pet. C. C. Rep. 322; In the matter of Klein, 1 How. 277; Kunzler v. Kohaus, 5 Hill, 325.) Metropolitan Bank v. Van Dyck, 27 N. Y. 453.

What of usurious contracts?

Costs?

The cases which draw the distinction between ex post facto laws; the laws impairing the obligation of contracts; retrospective laws, and laws which only affect the remedy, will be found fully collected in Paschal's Annotated Digest, notes 61, 157, 168, 410, 1107-1109. And for a very learned and exhaustive treatise upon the whole subject, see Story's Const. Book III. ch. XXXIV., § 1374-1400.

The States may pass laws validating contracts which were usurious and void when made. Welsh v. Wadsworth, 30 Conn. 149. But not to operate unreasonably and unjustly upon antecedent rights. Id. And may change the interest laws relieving from penalties. Wood v. Kennedy, 19 Ind. 68. And the laws of costs as to pending suits. Taylor v. Keeler, 30 Conn. 324. But not the compensation of rights already vested. State v. Auditor,

33 Miss. 287. And providing for the validity of marriages. Goshen v. Richman, 4 Allen (Mass.), 458. And changing the presumptions in favor of tax sales. Hickor v. Tallman, 38 Barb. Evidence? N. Y. 608. And curing irregularities in conveyances, as to the parties and subsequent purchasers; but not to disturb vested Conveyrights. Thompson v. Morgan, 6 Minn. 292.

ances?

the inhibi

the States

consent of

[2.] No State shall, without the consent of the What are Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or ex- tions upon ports, except what may be absolutely necessary for without the executing its inspection laws; and the net produce of Congress? all duties and imposts, laid by any State on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the treasury of the United States; and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and control of the Congress. [3.] No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships-of-war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

162. For the definitions of "imposts and "duties" see 75–77. notes 75 to 77. For a history of this clause, see journals of the Convention, 222, 227, 275, 301, 303, 318, 377 and 378.

138.

274.

"AN IMPOST OR DUTY ON IMPORTS," is a custom or tax levied What is a on articles brought into the country. Brown v. Maryland, 12 duty on Wheat. 446, 447. Imports are things imported-the articles them-imports? selves which are brought into the country. It is not merely a duty on the act of importation, but it is a duty on the thing imported. It is not confined to a duty levied while the article is entering the country, but extends to a duty levied after it has entered the country. (Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419, 446, 447.) Story's 86-89. Const. 1019; see Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 199-201. The power to impose duties on imports is exclusive in Congress. Pervear v. The Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 479. A charge on vessels by the State for the benefit of the master and warders of the port is unconstitutional. The Southern Steamship Company v. The Master, &c. 6 Wall.

It was really intended to make the vast inter-state commerce as nearly free as possible. The ordinance of the city of Houston requiring wharfage duties of steamboats, does not infringe this provision of the Constitution. Sterrett v. Houston, 14 Tex. 166. "EXCEPT WHAT MAY BE ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY."-This is the Necessary? strongest qualification of necessary See McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; Kent's Com. 398-401; Story's Const. § 1033.

Inspection?

What is tonnage ?

Define troops?

122, 123.

Define agreement or compact?

152. 178.

223-225.

Where is the execu

"INSPECTION."-The tax or duty of inspection, is frequently, if not always, paid while the article is in the bosom of the country. Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 420.

The exception was made because the tax would otherwise have been within the prohibition. Id. See the subject discussed. Id.

The State has no right to tax the goods imported, in the hands of the importer. Id. This language means the same thing as the inhibition on the United States against laying a tax on articles exported from any State. Id. Story's Const. § 1030. Upon the same principles, or their analogies, it was held that the State of Maryland had not the constitutional right to tax the branch of the United States bank located in Maryland. McCulloch v. Maryland, 1 Wheat. 316; Kent's Com. 398, 401; Story's Const. § 1033-1053. The sale of liquors within a State is subject exclusively to State control. (License cases, 5 Wall. 462.) Pervear v. The Commonwealth, 5 Wall. 479.

163. "LAY ANY DUTY OF TONNAGE, &c."-This form of expression occurs nowhere else in the Constitution. TONNAGE [tonnagium] is a custom or impost upon wines or other merchandise exported or imported, according to a certain rate per ton. (Spelman ; Cowell.) Burrill's Law Dic.: A duty or impost upon ships estimated per ton. Webster's Dic., TONNAGE.

164. "KEEP TROOPS OR SHIPS-OF-WAR IN TIME OF PEACE."— This means organized troops, or armies, and a navy; because these are national powers. See Articles of Confederation, ante, p. 12, Art. VI.; Story's Const. § 1401-1409. In certain emergencies, States may raise troops to repel invasions or suppress insurrections. Story's Const. § 1404. Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 1.

"AGREEMENT OR COMPACT," properly applies to such as regarded what might be deemed mere private rights of sovereignty, such as boundaries, land, and other internal regulations for the mutual comfort and convenience of States bordering on each other. Story's Const. § 1403. These words are used in their broadest sense; they were intended to cut off all negotiation and intercourse between the State authorities and foreign nations. Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Pet. 572, 574. And, therefore, no State can, without the consent of Congress, enter into any agreement or compact, to deliver up fugitives from justice from a foreign State, who may be found within its limits. Id.; 3 Opin. 661. This prohibition is political in its character, and has no reference to a mere matter of contract, or to the grant of a franchise which in nowise conflicts with the powers delegated to the general government by the States. Union Branch R. R. Co. v. East Tennessee & Georgia R. R. Co. 14 Ga. 327. A compact entered into between two States, with the assent of Congress, is binding on those States and the citizens of each. Fleeger v. Pool, 1 McLean, 185. See Story's Const. § 1403; 1 Tucker's Black. Com. App. 301.

ARTICLE II.

SEC. I.-[1.] The executive power shall be vested tive power? in a President of the United States of America.

He

shall hold his office during the term of four years, and

together with the Vice-President, chosen for the same The term term, be elected as follows.

of office?

With object?

165. THE EXECUTIVE POWER.-The object of this department is What is the to insure the execution of the laws. 1 Kent's Com. 285. energy in the executive and safety to the people. Story's Const. §1417. The ingredients for energy, are unity, duration, adequate -provisions for its support; and, for safety, a due dependence on the people, and a due responsibility to the people. (Federalist, No. 70; 1 Kent's Com. Lect. 13, pp. 253, 254.) Story's Const. § 1418. The powers of the President are not executive only. The veto Define the power and the appointing power are not strictly executive powers; no more so than when exercised by Congress or the States. Bates power? on Habeas Corpus, 5th July, 1861. He is a civil magistrate, to 67, 199. whom all military officers are subordinate. Id. In calling out the militia to see the laws faithfully executed, he acts as a civil magistrate upon the same principle that a court calls out the posse. Id. In times of great danger, when the very existence of the nation is assailed, the President may order military arrests. Id.

We must not forget that this power of appointment to office is essentially an executive function. It belongs essentially to the executive department rather than to the legislative or judicial. If no provision on the subject had been made by the Constitution, it would have been held appurtenant to the President as the head of the executive department specially charged with the execution of the laws. Stanbery on the executive power. See Confederation, ante Article VI. p. 14; 2 Elliot's Debates, 358; Federalist, Nos. 67, 70, 1 Kent's Com. 271-303; Journal of Convention, 68, 89, 96, 136, 211, 222, 324, 332, 333; 2 Pitk.'s Hist. 252; 2 Curtis' Hist. of Const. cli. III., pp. 56-60; Story's Const. ch. XXXVI., § 1440-1448, and voluminous notes of the 3d edition.

A proposition was made in the Convention for an executive with a plurality of persons. Journal of Convention, 124. Mr. Calhoun advocated a dual executive at a later day. See Calhoun's Essay on the Const.; Story's Const. § 1426-1429.

executive

179.

174.

166. The following is the list of Presidents who have been who have chosen under this Constitution:

NAME.

SERVICE.

been the presidents?