The Sun.
London, England, 1868-01-14 00:00:00

CHANGE OF NATIONALITY.

t the weekly meeting of the Jurisprudence Department
of the Society for the Promotion of Social Science, a paper
was read by Mr. John Westlake, "Oh Naturalisation
and Expatriation, or a Change of Nationality." After a
discussion, in which Mr. Moseley, Mr. V. Harcourt, and
Mr. C. Anstey joined,

The Chairman, the Right lion. SirROBERT PHILLIMORE,
D.C.L., Dean of Arches, &c., said: A subject so im-
portant must sooner or later be pressed upon the attention
of our Government and the Government of the United
States, and probably must be pressed upon ths attention
of every civilised Government. If I entered the room
with a strong ponviction of the necessity for some
definite change., and of the difficulty of effecting it,
both these convictions are strengthened. The matter
requires most ample discussion, and is to be viewed
from many different positions, I entirely agree that
the true international law is that when a foreigner enters
the dominions of another State he is in all respects to
be amenable to the laws of that State. But the real
difficulty is to say when one of our subjects definitely
leaves us, for no one can say that a person travelling
abroad for; his pleasure has definitely left the country.
Such a person ought to travel with the protection
of his own country, but that does not extend, of
course, to his violation of the municipal law of the
foreign country at all. But he should not be placed
in a worse position than the citizen of the foreign country
guilty of a similar offence ; he should have fair play.
I should be sorry to countenance the idea that when a
citizen left England he ceased to have any care over him,
or that he ceased to have any claim upon the State. I
think the domicile itself would not be a discreet or sufficient
test of the expatriation of a person, for many circum-
stances may occur to protract it, constraining him to remain
abroad. Though the domicile might be an clement, it
could not be the only criterion of expatriation. (Hear,
hear.) ' The rule of law to be introduced must be one on
which the two States—the one he left and the one to
which be has gone—must agree. Very early during the
civil war in America was forced upon our attention the
absolute necessity of coming to some definite resolution
that should be adhered to as to the circumstances in which
the British Government should, extend protection to
British subjects in America, or refuse it ; and we
were all agreed that it could not be demanded as a
matter of right by a subject of Great Britain, who had
by his own acts incorporated himself in America by
domicile, by the purchase of laud, or by the establish.
ment of a manufactory ; or had exercised the privilege
of voting, or taken the steps necessary to make himself
a citizen of the United States. We thought we had a
right to say that he had made his option, and never would
have called upon us for assistance if circumstances did not
make it convenient for him to do so, meaning all the time
to remain in America when the war was over, and only
desiring to evade the duties of a citizen of the country to
which he belonged. The American Government seemed
to acquiesce in that opinion, and declared that every
British subject who had entered the American States,
but had not formally become a citizen, should have the
option to remain or not remain in the country. With
regard to the competence of a country to punish for a
crime committed against it in another country, I and in-
dined to agree with Mr. Harcourt. It is a monstrous
thinthat any technical rule of venue should prevent jus-
tice being done and criminals being properly tried for an
offence, committed in this country perhaps, but the execu-
tion of which was concocted in another ; but I am not pre-
pared to say if the criminal, being a foreigner, was accused
to of a crime against a third State, that this country oughttahntdirni,nNivsotelcrbinelisntarlettuhsitnigce
then dreugcatrlrdu,tomluucihn.
I further
than would he desired. Another absurdity i
.that_ if a
civil injury be done abroad to an English subject by a
foreigner he may recover damages here for. .act done,
for instance, in Naples, because the action civil and not
ndyncortim bee
triedcommittedin thi as gaiiis
country,t an Ihiyoual
if the criminal be in this po.untry. Where a conspiracy is
formed abroad against this country, the conspirator, if a
Englishcriininas2j edcotnalrsoeaed".sr
British subject, ought to be tried here ; and if he be a
foreigner, I don't see why. he should find refuge in the
State he tried to injure. It would be stretching the law of
hospitality very far to say that he should not be punished
in this country.
The discussion was then adjourned to Monday, the 27th
instant;

QUEEN'S THEATRE, Long-acre.
Lessee and Manager, Mr. Alfred Wigan.
THIS EVENING, Jan. 13, HE'S A LUNATIC. Mr. John
Clayton.
After which will be produced (6th Time in London) Mr. IL
J. Byron's New and Original Domestic Drama, in Three Acts,
entitled DEARER THAN LIFE. Michael Garner, Mr. J. L.
Toole
To conclude with THE BIRTHPLACE OF PODGERS; Mr.
J. L. Toole.
On Saturday, Jan. 18, DEARER THAN LIFE. After which
(First Time) a New and Original Operatic Extravaganza, by Mr.
W. S. Gilbert, called LA VIVANDIERE; or, TRUE TO THE
CORPS. The Scenery by Messrs. W. and T. Grieve, Johnson,
and AsElistants. Doors open at Half-past Six, commence at
Seven. Acting Manager, M. W. 11. Liston.
Box-office open daily from Ten till Four.