The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1813-12-18

4 w hsNouai Jaw uthcTcut tEOun tnat Seneraily
| pursued.
3. 70 justify the contradiction given TO Black
| stone.
View of the subject a, exhibited in the U. State,
Declaration of Independence announces the
Constitution Of the United States adopts it.
Adopted by the laws-Foreign allegiance to be
abiured.
On this point between the two great
Naturalization BY the States before the Constitu
ton.
Judicial DECISIONS & dicts.
talbot Va. Janson--in the s. c. OF the II. S.
fis"orth's opinion--erroneo given
Murray in the charming Betsy in the S. Court
Qaeston decided in the court of Appeals of
Virginia.
- Ellsworth's opinion again Observation-Disclosures &
Why
fuckers note on this subject.
Right OF expatriation maintained by the great bo.
ny ct the American people and their lawgi-
Respect due to them, whatl
Able Maby's opinion.
kaynevaPs do.
Idea OF perp. s'leg. originated in a barbarous aee
Not so rs to repatriation.
All sovereign States have right to prescribe terms
On which strangers shall be sdmitted-inference.
Mischiefs of the doctrine of p rpetual sllexancs
Law prescribing a mode Of e1patriati,n not ne oessa
Ae, desIaratory Of the right. better.
A,"p"o" Oh ehe character OF a citizen hy the
Emgrant in Foreign state not necessary TO
complete repatriation, 6 why.
coMMCNIcATIoa.
The history of the paper entitled "Notes
on the right OF Repatriation or perpetual
allegiance" is this
The writer of the essay mentioned in
this DAYS paper, had a conversation with
friend In this city on several of the Dronos;-
tions therein advanced. In this conversa-
uon' the writer OF the following notes,
young gentleman ROW engaged in the study
OF the law, took part. The writer of the
essay, being very much occupied with pro
isssionaI concerns. finding that the Young
gentleman had paid mere than common at'
tent'on IN the general course of his reading
TO the subject of expatriation, asked him to
no'e IN wiring any references which could
thrrw light upon it.
On the morning of the day succeeding the
conversation, the notes as now presented To
the public were communicated. II ia ma
nIfest that they were not intended for the
public eye: bnt the person to whom thev
were addressed, deems them, even in their.
present form, worthy Of notice. Thew are
obviously the work Of an active and v;po-
labor.
'Fofes on ne rtsht of Ertatriafion, or
PERPETUAL allegiance.
For it is principle OF uniuersai Ian
mat me natural born subject of one prince
cahhoe oy any act OF his own, no, not by
swearing allegiance to another, put OFF ~.
discharge his natural allegiance to the for
"Gr' II. Black. Comm. 500 !
In proof that this is principle of ..un;
yersai law" for it is by this law onlv. th . a,
snch allegiance is claimed, he refers to RI
Hal. p. G 6S. On looking into Hale's PIea
OF the Grown, we find that he divides allie
glance into e
l. Original, virtual. and implied.
2. Express, and declared by oaths snd
promises. anu
After which he proceeds to e,nor,d - .
English law relative to each, without mon
tioning universal law at ali. For all IN
Hale has omitted concerning allegiance he
refers US to Calvin's case reported in r.
Coke. Thus the principle for which placL
stone refers to Hale, is not found in IIaje
and as Hale refers to Coke for wbatsvar is
not found in his Plea Of the Crown Concern %
liog allegiance, it is proper that we examine
what is said in Coke.
Accordingly on turning to Calvin's case.
u Coke. Kep. A. we find these words
also IN their arguments of this cause con-
cermhg an aiien, they (the court and BARI
iA''IOiiCo, CltSu no foreign
laws, produced no alien precedents," &c g.
mere was an adjudication according to the
principles OF universal law" in which th =
court, the bar, and the reporter. stud;ouslv
| avoided all inquiry into the principle, even
of general and much more Of universal
law In another page of the same boo,,
we IND 1t resolved that allegiance is du. hv
the "law OF nature" and the law Of nat,,r.
My and that the law of nature is immnta
Bile. II. Coke IL b. IS a. But deny the in.
fe renee OF the immutability of alleeianc.
drawn from the inmutabiiity of pa,ura,
law" under which it is claimed. II followe
md ed, that allegiance is always TIE same
since the law urder which it is claimed is al
wavs the same but we are still tn ;nou;rs
whether allegiance was originally DerDetual
according &c the principles Of natural
law, as Coke. or Of universal law - a,
Blackstone calls it. We must fret IN or
suppose natural" and universal Ia,v,' e.
mean the same thing, as thew are svnonv.
mousiY used by these two writer's ond 80
ce.d to inquire what this law Is. P'''
Natural law has often been defined
jus naturaIe est, qnod Natural ,o,z :. ~.
| ns'ura 0mhia aninaha ture teaches all animals
doeuit l. Inst Ii Q.
presm.] ~
bSl qusn vera lex, rec he true law is right rea
\ "a r4uo, "sturS eongru' son, conformable to th,
ems, unusa IN omn's, nature of things; con
.', seHpH'rhs stant, eternal, diEuset
gpo woe. 81 orhciurn Ju- tbro all; which caIIs u
| yeauo' Nshno y iraufi to duty by command
| deterreat: que tamen ing deters us fron, a.,