Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />i <br /> <br />" <br />i: <br /> <br />Q <br />W <br />...:J <br />W <br /> <br />~ <br />, <br />I <br /> <br />recourse may be had to the neg"otiations and diplomatic <br />correspondence of the contracting" parties relating to the <br />subject matter and to their own practical construction <br />of it." <br /> <br />56 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />2. Whelher lhe 1944 Trealy Confers Rights Enforceable <br />By Individuals <br /> <br />vVe have stated earlier that, in oUr view, it appears to <br />have boen the contemplation of the parties that the United <br />States would deliver water of a quality similar to that <br />diverted by the last American users with an increase in <br />salinity only to the extent brought about by normal <br />irrigation operations. Whether the treaty is thereby a <br />source of rights for landowners whose lands or crops have <br />been damaged by discharges from the vVellton-Mohawk <br />project is now to be discussed. <br /> <br />Under United States law, a treaty may contain pro- <br />visons conferring rights upon nationals of the contracting <br />parties and in that ovent such provisions become the law <br />of the land.'o This rule was stated by the Supreme Court <br />in the Head Money Cases as follows: <br /> <br />A treaty, then is a law of the land as an Act of Con- <br />gress is, whenever its provisions prescribe a rule by <br />which the rights of the private citizen 01' subject may <br />be determined. And when such rights are of a <br />nature to bo enforced in a court of justice, that court <br />resorts to the treaty for a rule of decision for the case <br />before it, as it would to a statute."" <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />88 Nielsen v. Johnson, 21'9 U.S. 47 (1929). <br /> <br />80 U. S. Constitutioll, Article VI. <br /> <br />no 112 U.S. 580, 598.99 (1884). For n. treaty to provide a. rule of decision <br />by whieh private rights may be determined it is also necessary that the <br />treaty be self-executing, i.e., operate of itself without the aid of legislation. <br />Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 253 (1829). And {(, treaty may be self- <br />executing in pa.l't. Aguilm' v. Standard Oil Co., 318 U.S. 724, 738 (concurring <br />opinion). With refcrellce to the 1944 trc:l..t~r, we think thc wording of <br />Article 10 is such as ta indicate that legislation is not necessary to make the <br />allotment of water operative. <br /> <br />1"- <br /> <br />- ~-_.-:-. --~,.._,.~-;~~,~ <br /> <br />