The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-07-19
Judge Douglas on General SCOTS Sugges-
ton for tho Benefit OF Aliens who have
served the United States in time Of War.

Judge Douglas on General scott's Sugges-
ton for the Benefit OF Aliens who have
served the United States in time of War.
In his recent speech at Richmond, Judge
DOUGLAS favored his hearers with an elaborate
criticism on so much Of General ScoTT's letter
of acceptance as embraces his promise to re-
commend or approve of a ''sngle alteration in
our naturalization laws, suggested by my
Ibis military experience, viz: giving to all
foreigners the right Of citizenship who shall
faithfully serve, in time of war, one year on
board of our public ships, or in our land forces,
regular or volunteer, on their receiving an
honorable discharge from the SERVICE" On
this clause of the Generals letter the honor
able Judge makes the following comments:
"But it is a subject of doubt whether General
Scott proposes this single alteration as subs,-
tute for existing naturalization law, or whe.
her he proposes it as an additional law, 30 that
we shall have two distinct laws of naturalization.
i am compelled TO believe that he intends the
former proposition-for need not tell this audi
encc that the Constitution of the United States
gives Congress the power to pass "a uniform rule
of naturalization aud power to pass other.
IF, therefore, General Scott means that we shall
have two modes OF naturalizaton-one being the
existing form, and the other years. service in
the army-his proposition ia unconstitutional and
impossible, and an absolute absurdity. Is it pos
siblc that this candidate for the Presidency never
read the Constitution"
And again:
"Now, il this clause in the letter means that
General Scott dcsires addition to our natural
ization laws which would destroy their unifor-
nifty by giving unequal advantages, and Offering
different modes Of naturalization to different per-
sons, he proposes an alteration which is mpos-
sible under the Constitution"
Now we are aware that this opinion of the
honorable Judge is extra judicial; and that he
might not consider himself bound by it in a
court Of justice. But assuming this to be the
honorable Judges deliberate opinion, we think
it only shows that he is not SO good lawyer,
nor so well read in the Constitution, as General
SCorT.
The clause Of the Constitution touching the
subject is in the following words:
Congress shall have power to establish an
uniform rule Of naturalization, and uniform
laws on the subjects of bankruptcies, through
6 out The United States"
The meaning Of this is simply that the rules
of naturalization, whatever they may be, shall
be the same throughout the whole United
States. 1t was deemed 10 be announcement
that Maine should establish one role OF natu-
ralzatun, and South Carolina another; because
as the free inhabitants Of each State were en-
titled to all the immunitles Of citizens in all
the other States, the State of Maine, if the
law was not uniform throughout all the States,
might force on the State Of South Carolina, as
citizens, any foreigners that it might choose TO
make citizens By its local Ldus.
Now the honorable Judge leaves out the
controlling words Of the constitutional clause,
"m,itorm throughout the United States,' and
argues that "ofiering different modes Of natu-
rallzaton TO different persons" is ''impOssibLc
under the Constitution
If this is impossible under the Constitution,
General ScoTT has certainly made an unwise
suggestion; though it is not likely to damage
any one, in view Of this very "impossibiIity."
But let US see how far the Judge is right.
The very first Congress, March rs, 1880,
passed an "act u establish an uniform rule Of
Naturalization" q L.. S. S., 1852 This act
provided that any alien, being free white