Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-01-25

o. their legislation exerting in relation 10
the same subject, a more efficient opera
lion abroad than il could a, home. A
construction involving such conseuuen,
crs was ebsurd. Clauses were 10 be con.
s,rued IN consistency with their inten
non. Niia' was the iH,eniiou Of This
clause! The states by the adoption OF
HE Federal Constitution, became 10 Il
mortcerian extent, members cf one CON.
muni'y- Ii was an incident essen ial 10
The secure enjoymcpi of the advantages
oil tins community, that they should be
! restrained from any power O.! ininical rr-
| Suiatlon as respected The right OF re mnvsl
lrem one state and settlement in agoihrr.
| Tins was Tie design OF HE clause in aues
| ton not 10 inllbii In The STATES nor 10
restrain The power OF regulation, as req
peeled The conditions OF the enjoy mcni
and exercise al the privileges If citizen
SHIP, an essential indie !easitlc portion OF
sell government but 10 nIribii any pow.
er OF regulation on this smbjecr, 10 be di
teeted exclusively against citiz ms re
moving from other states, airy exercise OF
inimical discriminative regulation. The
discretion was left unimpaircd 10 adept
regulations affecting either the indigenous
Inhabitants or those removing from other
siaies, provided these regulations were
not rendered restrictive and peculiar in
relation TO this las! description Of inhab-
tan's Uuder this limitation thc reserved
po"er oI The states was unsusceptible of
employmeni 10 any serieus or injuriou
tnunterac,iOu OF HE social design of the
tedera! incorporation. This construction
had Tie advantage of reconCiliug the
rigllS al the STATES with the clause of the
coustnuiiOniH qursIiOn, affurding 10 each
ample and uniulerIrring scope for opera
ton. An opposite construction led la The
widest and most npgedeemed absuruties.
No one could conceive n to be the desigp
OF me constitution 10 communicate To per
sous removing from one slate to another,
privileges larger IN number or value
IMAM Trey had previously enjoyed yet,
under the construction which MAS com
DATED, such persons might mol only ac-
qulre an increase of privileges, The privi-
lfge OF suffrage for example, but Blacks
from abroad might acquire privileges 10
which indigenous whites were moi evil
tied. Women, in one of The states, Ger
sey) were, orhad formerly been, admitted
to oil the privileges of ciizcasl,ip, that of
suffrage inclusive. Under this construc.
non. wnnlrn, III states where there waSa
qualification on suffrage. a. in Virginia,
might become entitled, by migration, 10
privileges from which large proportion
ot lie indigenous White males were ex
cludcd. Constructions Of hi. k,nd we're
no SUBJECTS Tor discussion. Persons. bx
rcmnvol from one state to another, d q
nor, therei r., acquire any further or
greater privileges han were this alloimen
OF the Indigenous inhabitants OF tie sane
cl"sS aud description.
AHother consequence which had be. n
Impnted to the clause OF HE constitution
under review, fell with that which had
been examined. " had been imagined
iha' under The operation of Ills claus.
| colored persons, emaucipated on con-
dIiIon ofremoval from the stale i'm which
| they received their emancipation. might
| be returned upon HE cnancIp alinm state
I'D the character of citizens The validi
| ct this inference was excluded by tbeie
marks which had been stated. Ii was
equaliy excluded by other AMI indencu
dcmi considerations The condition Of
emancipation aIlud Il to would IAhuur, al
the TIME oi It's adoption, under no defect
| OF validity as presenting no conflict with
| any provision 81 the Federal Con,ilu
| ton.
II could not, then, be brought inio
conflict and rendered iuvaiii al any pos
terror time, or by any act of an authority
not superior TO that OF HE party impos-
| ing II, and which was no poriy 10 The
Compact IN which this condition was
comprehesdrd. YET, If tie Inference
above referred 10 were Just, this cOndl
non, thr creation 0f a competent authtr
riiy, and The consideration AZ benefit 10
the party accepting It, would be liable 10
invalIda'ion ny ihe pOsieTior Intervention
not Of superior but cxlfaueous and
merely co ordinate authority; aud be Ii,
able moi simply 10 inyalldaiion, but ia
be converted 10 an instrument cf lninyy
aud abuse 10 the parry who had made il
the subject Of stipulation. Al inference
OF Tins kind had onlg 10 be represented
in It's tine character TO be dis, laimed.
Ihe endeayOr had been made 80 shew
that there was nothing in the clause Gt
the constitution Of tie United States
which had been quoted, which could h,
construed az prohibiting The state GOV
; ernmenis from suii9ciing persons reniov
ing from other states, TO any resiri lion,
Az respected Tic privileges Of ciliZenshi.
; which II was thought proper 10 cxtcn,
10 indigenous inhabtan's of the same
> class and description. The power OF fin
. states would be found, upon fuf.ber IN
. quiry, 10 extend TOT point beyond lIis-
r To The capacity Of prohibiting tie ingrrss .
I cittzeHS OF Other states, provided The ex
. clnsiou were for causes affecting The in
diUidHat merely. and noi tie class iba
; is 10 say, provided The exclusion opcrst
. ed by What, in the technical languao
: Of The Law, would be denominated DIES
- cipilonem persona, or for causes acc
; dental in Their access, and liable lo RENO
f val. Thus, il would Dot be- denied, Ma
b a state might exclude citizens of oihc
= states, Tor contagious disease. by quar-
Q anime regulations that il bad compe
y iency TO exclude for crimes or 10 eXclud
= paupefs liable ~ bccOmr bufilcnsom