of Congress has, by its conflict with some treaty obligation of the
Government toward a foreign power, taken effect as an _infraction_
of the treaty, and been judicially declared to be operative to that
result; but neither such legislation nor such judicial sanction of the
same has been regarded as an _abrogation_, even for the moment, of
the treaty. On the contrary, the treaty in such case still subsists
between the governments, and the casual infraction is repaired by
appropriate satisfaction in maintenance of the treaty.

The bill before me does not enjoin upon the President the abrogation
of the entire Burlingame treaty, much less of the principal treaty of
which it is made the supplement. As the power of modifying an existing
treaty, whether by adding or striking out provisions, is a part of
the treaty-making power under the Constitution, its exercise is not
competent for Congress, nor would the assent of China to this partial
abrogation of the treaty make the action of Congress in thus procuring
an amendment of a treaty a competent exercise of authority under the
Constitution. The importance, however, of this special consideration
seems superseded by the principle that a denunciation of a part of a
treaty not made by the terms of the treaty itself separable from
the rest is a denunciation of the whole treaty. As the other high
contracting party has entered into no treaty obligations except such
as include the part denounced, the denunciation by one party of the
part necessarily liberates the other party from the whole treaty.

I am convinced that, whatever urgency might in any quarter or by any
interest be supposed to require an instant suppression of further
immigration from China, no reasons can require the immediate
withdrawal of our treaty protection of the Chinese already in this
country, and no circumstances can tolerate an exposure of our citizens