FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59  
60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   >>   >|  
819). [20] For references and further details, see E.S. Corwin, _Court over Constitution_, 129-176 (1938). [21] [Transcriber's Note: Footnote 21 is missing from original text.] [22] In this connection, _see_ Oklahoma _v._ Civil Service Comm'n., 330 U.S. 127, 142-145 (1947). [23] 3 Dall. 54, 74. [24] 12 Wall. 457, 555 (1871). [25] 130 U.S. 581, 604. [26] Fong Yue Ting, 149 U.S. 698 (1893). [27] 299 U.S. 304, 316-318. [28] _See also_ University of Illinois _v._ United States, 289 U.S. 48, 59 (1933). In Lichter _v._ United States, 334 U.S. 742, 782 (1948), Justice Burton, speaking for the Court, says: "The war powers of Congress and the President are only those which are derived from the Constitution", but he adds: "the primary implication of a war power is that it shall be an effective power to wage war successfully", which looks very like an attempt to duck the doctrine of an inherent war power while appropriating its results. [29] Welldon (tr.), Book VI, chap. XIV (1888). Jowett and some others propose a different arrangement. [30] John Locke. The Second Treatise on Civil Government, Sec. 141. For the historical background of this principle, see P.W. Duff and H.E. Whiteside, "_Delegata Potestas Non P[=o]test Delegari_", _Selected Essays on Constitutional Law_, IV, 291-316 (1938). [31] Panama Refining Co. _v._ Ryan, 293 U.S. 388 (1935); Schechter Corp. _v._ United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935). [32] 343 U.S. 579 (1952). [33] 299 U.S. 304, 327-329. [34] 343 U.S. 579, 690. [35] Andrew C. McLaughlin, _A Constitutional History of the United States_, 81 (1935). [36] Locke, op. cit., Sec. 137. [37] Ibid., Sec. 159-161. [38] Meyers _v._ United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926). [39] For the famous debate between "Pacificus" (Hamilton) and "Helvidius" (Madison), see E.S. Corwin, _The President's Control of Foreign Relations_, chap. I (1917). [40] Writings of Thomas Jefferson, V, 209 (P.L. Ford, ed.; 1895). [41] 1 Cr. 137, 163 (1803). [42] Ibid., 165-166. [43] 7 How. 1. [44] Fleming _v._ Page, 9 How. 602 (1850). [45] United States _v._ Tingy, 5 Pet. 115, 122. [46] 6 _Op. Atty. Gen._ 466 (1854). [47] 2 Black 635 (1863). [48] 4 Wall. 2 (1866). [49] 4 Wall. 475 (1866). [50] United States _v._ Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220. [51] In Re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1, 64. [52] 158 U.S. 564. [53] _Autobiography_, 388-389 (1913). [54] _Op. cit._, 144 (1916). [55] _Constitutional
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59  
60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

States

 

United

 
Constitutional
 

President

 

Corwin

 

Constitution

 

famous

 
debate
 

Meyers

 

Pacificus


Madison

 

Writings

 

Thomas

 
Jefferson
 
Helvidius
 

Control

 

Foreign

 
Relations
 

Hamilton

 

Schechter


Transcriber
 

Refining

 
Panama
 

History

 

McLaughlin

 

Andrew

 

references

 

Autobiography

 

Neagle

 
details

Fleming

 

Justice

 

Burton

 
speaking
 

Lichter

 
derived
 
implication
 

primary

 

powers

 
Service

Congress

 
Oklahoma
 
connection
 

Illinois

 

University

 

Footnote

 

Government

 
historical
 
principle
 

background