Page:United States Reports, Volume 60.djvu/22

 Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana. It appears that a certain François Marie Prevost, an inhabitant of that State, died in the year 1848 intestate and without issue, and possessed of property to a considerable amount. He left a widow; and, as no person appeared claiming as heir of the deceased, the widow, according to the laws of the State, was put in possession of the whole of the property by the proper authorities, in December, 1851. She died in March, 1858.

In January, 1854, Jean Louis Prevost, a French subject residing in France, presented himself by his agent in Louisiana as the brother and sole heir of François Marie Prevost, and established his claim by a regular judicial proceeding in court.

The laws of Louisiana impose a tax of ten per cent. on the value of all property inherited in that State by any person not domiciliated there, and not being a citizen of any State or Territory of the United States.

This tax is disputed by the plaintiff in error, upon the ground that the law of Louisiana is inconsistent with the treaty or consular convention with France. This treaty was signed on the 23d of February, 1853, ratified by the United States on the 1st of April, 1853, exchanged on the 11th of Anugust, 1853, and proclaimed by the President on the 12th of August, 1853.

The 7th article of this treaty, so far as concerns this case, is in the following words:

“In all the States of the Union whose laws permit it, so long and to the same extent as the said laws shall remain in force, Frenchmen shall enjoy the right of possessing personal and real property by the same title and in the same manner as the citizens of the United States. They shall be free to dispose of it as they may please, either gratuitously or for value received, by donation, testament, or otherwise, just as those citizens themselves; and in no case shall they be subjected to taxes on transfers, inheritance, or any others, different from those paid by the latter, or to taxes which shall not be equally imposed.”

Proceedings were instituted in the State courts by the plaintiff in error to try this question, which were ultimately brought before the Supreme Court of the State. And that court decided that the right to the tax was complete, and vested in the State upon the death of François Marie Prevost, and was not affected by the treaty with France subsequently made.