Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1851-12-29

term OF Two years. II. at the expiration of those Two
years, the applicant cannot produce satisfactory evil
dence OF his protesting our sacred religion, the letter
OF domlcit shall be taken away from him, and he will
then be considered in the light of merely transient
foreigner and as such, be compelled to leave this is
land at the expiration of three months, IN pursuance
OF the 2Sth article OF the royal decree"
But independently OF residence with intention to
continue such resi- dence; independently of any domi
citation; independently of the taking of any oath of
allegiance, or OF renouncing any formal allegiance,
1t is we'll known that by the public law alien
stranger born, for so long time as he continues
within the Commons OF a foreign government, owes
obediepce to the laws of that government, and may
be punished for treason, other crimes as a native
born subject might be unless his varied by
treaty stipuatons but this duty of obedience to the
laws, arising from local and temporary allegiance,
ceases the moment he transfers himself back to his
original country.
An American citizen by birth, owing OF course a
alive allegiance the United States going abroad
and obtaining no residence under foreign govern
ment and protesting to such government no allegi
ance, and who should yet commit acts oil hostility or
war against this country, would seem TO bring himself
within the OF Congress- which declares that if any
person persons owing allegiance TO the United States
| OF America shall levy war against them, or shall ad.
here TO their enemies, giving them aid and comfort,
within the United States elsewhere, he they I'll
be adludged guilty OF treason And the reason is plain
since his allegiance 10 such is original and ma
tive, and has not been transferred, lost in any other
ocai allegiance, arising from residence elsewhere but
continues TO be the primitive tie which bids hin TO him
| TO his country.
But as has been already said, every foreigner-born
| residing in country, owes to that country allegiance
and obedience to its laws long he remains in it,
| as duty imposed upon him by the mere fact of his
residence, and the temporary protection which he
joys, and is much bound to obey Its laws native
subjects citizens. This is the universal undestan
ding in all civilized States and nowhere more estab-
! lished doctrine than in this country.
Mr.. Jefferson when Secretary Of State, in his letter
| to Gouverneur Morris, OF the 10Th OF August, 1898
speaking of the right Of private citizens make war
with country with which the Government Of the
United States is at peace says:
III one citizen has right TO go 10 war of his own
authority every cisizen has the If every citizen
has that right, then the nation (Which composed of
all its ezens) has right GO war by the authori
y OF its individual citizens. But this is not true, either
the general principles OF society by our Constitu-
ton which gives that power to Congress alone, and
to the citizens individually. Then the first position was
not true; and no citizen has right to go to of his
| own authority. and Tor what he does without right he
ought TO be punished. Indeed, nothing can be more
obviously absurd than to say that all the citizens may
be at war and vet the nation at peace.
SIT has been pretended indeed that The engagement
OF citizen in enterprise OF this nature di
vestment OF the character OF citizen and transfer of
Jurisdiction over him to another sovereign. Our cti-
certainly free to divest themselves of that char
acer by emigration, and other acts manfestiug their
intention aud may then become the subjects another
power, andfree to do whatever the subjects of that
power may do. But the laws do not admit that
the bare commission OF crime amounts of itself
Investment OF the character OF citizens and wthdraws
| the criminal from their coercion They would lever
| prescribe an illegal act among the legal modes by
which citizen might dsranchse himself; nor render
treason Tor instance, innocent by giving it the force Of
| a dissolution, OF the obligation OF the criminal to
| his country"
| This is in accordance with the opinion of the cir
cult court OF the United States for Pennsylvania by
which it stated in l793 that 1t one citizen OF the
United States may take part in the present war ten
thousand may. II they may take part one side,
they may take part on the oher; and thus thousands of
fellow citizens may associate themselves with dje-
whom we have no hostility but destroying each other
In such case, can we expect peace among their
friends who stay behinds And will not civil war,
with all it's apentabe train OF evils be the natural eff
fect2"
Our citizens who resort to countries where the tra
by Jury il not known, and who may there be charged
with crime, frequently imagine, when the laws of
those countries are administered in the forms customa
ry therein, that they deprived Of rights to which
they entitled, and therefore may expect the in
reference of their own Government, But must be
remembered, in all such cases, that they have OF their
own free will elected residence out of their alive
land and preferred live elsewhere and under ano
er Government and in country in which different
They have chosen TO settle themselves 10 country
where jury trials no. known; where represent i've
government does not exist; where the privilege of the
writ OF hGbedS corpus is unheard OF; and where Judi
cal proceedings in criminal brief and sum
mary Having made this election, they must neccssa-
rily abide its consequences. No can carry the
egis his national American liberty into tor egn coun-
try, and expect to bold il up for his exemption from
the dominion and authority OF the laws and the
ereign power OF that country less he be authorized
so to by virtue oil treaty stpulaions.
The definition or crimes, the announcement of pen
aes for their commission, aud the forms Of proceed
ing by which guilt is be ascerained are high pre-.
negatives OF sovereignty, and one nation dictate
them to another without being liable to the die
taton herself
The friends of Mr.. Thrasher interpose in his be-
half the seventh article of The treaty of 1875 which
declares that in all of offences committed by
an or subipct will in he
risdction OF the other, the same shall be prosecuted
by order and authority of law only, and according to
the regular of proceeding in such cases. They
shall also be allowed to employ suca advocates as they
may Judge proper before the tribunal of the other par
y who shall have free to be present at the pre-
ceedngs IN such causes, and at the taking of all ex-
aminaons and evidence which may be exhibited in
the said trials.
AS the public law, however, does in no case impalt
to foreigners residing in any country privileges which
are denied to ITS own citizens subjects, except,
perhaps that of leaving the country, may be thought
doubtful whether by the article of the treaty referred
to- the parties could have contemplated any more than
to place citizens OF the United States within Spanish
jurisdiction on an equatywith Spanish subjects, and
Spanish subjects in the United States on an equality
with own citizens in criminal proceedings. CT
tlZen OF Spain in this country might complain, per-
haps of trial by jury here, because OF the supposed
parallties and preludces OF juries; while an Ameri-
can in Spain complains of condemnation, in summary
form, by Judges without the intervention of Jury to
ascertain his guilt. The question arising the lat
clause of this 9TH article OF the treaty with Spain
may not be entirely clear or Tree OF difficulty, eSpe
cally when is known that the minister who negotia-
ted this treaty the part of the United States appears
to have attached considerable importance this hight
of selecting and employing counsel Mr.. Thomas
Pinckney, the American negoha'or, says in letter
on the subject of the treaty, that the first part CT this
9TH article taken from the 10th article of
ty with Prussia, and that he added the latter part be-
cause he considered it good stipulation in all sua-
tons, but particularly 10 Spain
We can readily imagine why it should have been
stipulated in the treaty that the trial of an American
citizen in Spain should be open and public, because
we know that as late as the year 1875 there existed
in Spain ecclesiastical jurisdiction. having the pow
er over lite and death, whose proceedings We're al.
ways secret. Whether it intended by the parties
that this RICH: of selecting COUNSEL in the of the
arrest or the trial of American citizen should ex
tend further be broader than in the OF Span
ish subject prosecuted Tor similar offence may be
matter of doubt and controversy. The view which
the Spanish courts OF the highest jurisdiction take of
it, may be seen by the communication OF the Roy ii
Court of Judlcature accompanying the letter OF The
Governor General to Mr.. Calderon But however
be