Assembly. The Federal Tribunal is called upon to settle boundary questions between two cantons, questions of the application of international treaties, and questions of competence between the authorities of different cantons. It decides in cases of extradition, when the demand is made under an existing treaty, in so far as the application of the treaty is questioned. It takes cognizance, moreover, under conditions established by law, of complaints by private persons and corporations relating, (1) to the violation of those rights which are guaranteed by the federal constitution, by federal legislation enacted to carry out the constitution, or by the constitution of the respective canton; (2) to the violation of agreements among cantons, as well as of treaties with foreign states.1

The questions thus far indicated as falling within the jurisdiction of the federal court are constitutional questions. Besides these, the same tribunal takes cognizance of certain civil law cases. These are enumerated in Article IIO of the constitution: "I. Those between the Federation and the cantons. 2. Those between the Federation on the one side and corporations or private persons on the other, when these corporations or these private persons are plaintiffs, and when the case is of the degree of importance

required by the federal legislature. 3. Those between cantons. 4. Those between cantons on the one side and corporations or private persons on the other, when the case is of the degree of importance required by federal legislation, and when one of the parties demands it. This court, moreover, decides cases relating to persons without citizenship, also controversies which arise. between communes of different cantons touching the right of citizenship." Other cases may be considered by this court when the parties agree to turn them over to it, and when the subject involved is of the degree of importance required by law. In order that a civil case, in which the matter in controversy can be estimated in money, may be brought before the Federal Tribunal on appeal or otherwise, it must involve at least three thousand francs.

The Federal Tribunal acts with the assistance of a jury in certain penal cases which are specified in the 112th article of the constitution as follows: "I. In cases of high treason towards the Federation, of revolt or of violence against the federal authorities; (2) in cases of crimes. and misdemeanors under international law; (3) in cases of political crimes and misdemeanors which are the cause or the consequence of disturbances occasioning federal military inter1 Swiss Federal Constitution, Art. III.

vention; (4) in cases where an officer appointed by federal authority is turned over to the court for a penal judgment."

The judgments of the Federal Tribunal, as well as the decrees of courts of arbitration in intercantonal conflicts, are executed by the Federal Council.' To the Federal Assembly, however, belongs the right of amnesty and pardon, with reference to those crimes and misdemeanors which fall within the jurisdiction of the Federal Tribunal.2

In commenting on the organization and powers of this court, Professor Dicey points out its weakness as compared with the Supreme Court of the United States. "Nothing," he says, "in the institutions of America has excited more admiration among foreigners than the position given under the Constitution to the federal judiciary. Nothing, on the other hand, is less satisfactory than the position occupied in Switzerland by the Federal Tribunal. That body, it is true, recalls the Supreme Court of the United States, but it has few of the claims to authority possessed by the American court. Its judges are not appointed for life; it is not empowered to adjudicate on the validity of laws passed by the Federal Assembly; it is incom1 Swiss Federal Constitution, Art. 102, Sec. 5.

2 Ibid., Art. 85, Sec. 7.

petent to deal with many matters which in England, no less than in America, would fall within the jurisdiction of the judges; its decisions are, it would appear, enforced by the action of the executive. The tendency, indeed, of opinion throughout the Confederacy is to strengthen the position of the Federal Tribunal. But even were the authority of the court greatly extended, it would never attain to anything like the power possessed not only by the Supreme Court of America, but even by the English bench. The truth is, that the traditions of Swiss history are unfavorable to the development of that regular supremacy of the law of the land which is the marked characteristic of the institutions founded by the English people an both sides of the Atlantic. The more closely the Swiss federal constitution and the cantonal constitutions of Switzerland are studied, the more apparent it becomes that the tendency of the Swiss people is still, as it has been for centuries, to allow to the legislature the exercise of judicial functions."1 1 The Nation, Oct. 8, 1885.

CHAPTER VII.

FOREIGN RELATIONS.

THE twenty-two cantons embraced in the Federation are named in the first article of the constitution, thus making it impossible to increase or diminish the territory of Switzerland except by a constitutional amendment. In the United States the power of annexing territory is exercised by the government under the Constitution. To quote from a decision of the Supreme Court rendered by Chief Justice Marshall, the Constitution confers absolutely on the government of the Union the power of making war and of making treaties; consequently that government possesses the power of acquiring territory either by conquest or by treaty."" If the acquisition is made by conquest, it is presumed that the result will be secured by treaty; and it is to be remembered that the treaty is made, not by Congress, but by the President,

1I Pet. 542.