154
CONSTITUTION OF THE U. STATES.
[BOOK III.
to adopt to secure themselves against delinquencies on the part of their own revenue or other officers. This objection, if of any avail, is an objection to the powers given by the constitution. The mischief suggested, so far as it can really happen, is the necessary consequence of the supremacy of the laws of the United States on all subjects, to which the legislative power of congress extends.[1]
§ 1274. It is under the same implied authority, that the United States have any right even to sue in their own courts; for an express power is no where given in the constitution, though it is clearly implied in that part respecting the judicial power. And congress may not only authorize suits to be brought in the name of the United States, but in the name of any artificial person, (such as the Postmaster-General,[2]) or natural person for their benefit.[3] Indeed, all the usual incidents appertaining to a personal sovereign, in relation to contracts, and suing, and enforcing rights, so far as they are within the scope of the powers of the government, belong to the United States, as they do to other sovereigns.[4] The right of making contracts and instituting suits is an incident to the general right of sovereignty; and the United States, being a body politic, may, within the sphere of the constitutional powers confided to it, and through the instrumentality of the proper department, to which those powers are confided, enter into- ↑ United States v. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 358; 1 Peters's Condensed Rep. 421; Harrison v. Sterry, 5 Cranch, 289; 2 Peters's Condensed Rep. 260; 1 Kent's Comm. Lect. 12, p. 229 to 233.
- ↑ Postmaster-General v. Early, 12 Wheat. R. 136.
- ↑ See Dugan v. United States, 3 Wheat. R. 173, 179; United States v. Buford, 3 Peters's R. 12, 30; United States v. Tingey, 5 Peters's R. 115, 127, 128.
- ↑ Cox v. United States, 6 Peters's R. 172.
