[16] 100 U.S. 371. [17] 227 U.S. 308, 322. [18] Dobbins _v._ Commsrs., 16 Pet. 435 (1842); Collector _v._ Day, 11 Wall. 113. (1870). [19] 4 Wheat. 316, 431 (1819). [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 Government in the United States_, 70 (1908). [56] _See_ E.S. Corwin. _Total War and the Constitution_, 35-77 (1947). [57] 343 U.S. 579, 662. [58] _See_ E.S. Corwin. _Liberty Against Government_, Chaps. III, IV (1948). [59] "... the supreme power cannot take from any man any part of his property without his consent". _Second Treatise_, Sec. 138. [60] Van Home's Lessee _v._ Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304, 310 (1795).