Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1853-10-05


the court in New York in which koSzta made his
declaration in due form of law. To remove all
doubt on this subject certified copy OF that re-
cord is annexed to this communication.
is not commended that this iDitiatory stepin the
process of naturalization invested him with all the
civil rights of an American citizen; butt IS sufh-
cen for all the purposes of this case to show that
he was clothed with an American nationality; and
in virtue thereof the Government OF the United
States was authorized to extend to him It's pr0tec
ton at home and abroad. hir. Hulsemann, as the
undersigned believes, falls into a great efror-an
rForfatalt TO some of his most important conclu-
sions-by assuming that nation can properly ex-
tend its protection only to native born or natural-
lied citizens. This is not the doctrine of interna
tional law, nor is the practice of nations crcum-
scribed within. such narrow limits. This law does
not, as has been before remarked, compicate queS-
lions of this nature by respect for codes
In relation to this subject 1t has oleat and distinct
rules of lis own. 1t gives the national character
of the @ unity not onlyto natiye-born md nnturai-
lied citizens, but to all residents IN 1t who are
there with or even without an intention to become
citizens, provided they have domicil therein
Foreigners may, and often do, acquire adomlcll IN
q country, even thoughthey have entered 1t with
the ayowsd intention not 10 become naturall1ed
citizens but to return to their native land at some
remote and uncertain period; and whenever they
acquire domcil international law at once impress
SEES upon them the national character OF the coun-
try of that domici. 1t is q maxim of International
law that domicil confers national character; il
does not allow any one who has domcIl to de-
cline the national character thus conferred; 1t
forces tupon him, often very much against his
will and to his great detrlment. International law
looks only to the national character in determining
what country has the right to protect. If person
goes from this country abroad with the nationality
OF the United States, this law enjoins upon other
nations to respect him. in regard to protection, as
an American citizen. 1t comedies TO every coun'
try the right to protect any and all who may be
clothed with its nationality. These are important
Piles in their bearings upon the questions pre-
scented in Mr.. Hulsemann's note, and are too oovi-
Gus to be contested; but as they are opposed TO
some of the positions taken by Austria, the under
signed deems it respectful in such case to sustain
them by reference to authorities.
''The position is clear one that, 1t person
goes into foreign country and engages in trade
there, he is by the law OF nations, 10 be consider
ed merchant of that country, and subject torall
civil purposes, whether that country be hostile or
neutral."-l Kent CON-, IS.
Again: The same authority says that
SIN the law of nations, as to Europe, The rule is
that men take their national character from the
general character OF the country IN Which they re-
Side."-Ibid IS.
If Koszta ever had domicii in the United States
he was IN virtue thereof invested with the nation
atty of this country, and in this character contn
ued as long as that domicil was retained. There
cases in which it is difficult to settle the queS
ton of domicl; but that of Koszla is not one of
them. The most approved definitions of domi-
Gil are the following:
"a residence at particular place, accompani-
ed with positive presumptlve proof of continu-
ing there for an unlimited time."-(1 Biuueys re-
ports, S49. ''If it sufficiently appear that the in-
tention of removing was to make a permanent set
Element for an indefinite time, the right of domicil
is acquired by residence of a lew days."-l'rhe
Venus, Cranch, 279.) "Vattel has defined dom
icil 10 be fixed residence in any place, with an
intention of always staying there. But this is not
an accurate statement. 1t would be more correct
to say that that place is properly the domicil of
person in which his habltatton is fixed, without
any present intention of removing therefron.''-
[Storys Con. of Laws, s 43.) ga person who re-
moves TO aloreign country, settles himself there,
and engages III the trade of the country, furnishes
by these acts such evidence of an intention per-
namently to reside there as 10 stamp him with the
national characterof the State where he restless"
I-Cfhe Venus, Cranch, 2I9.)
Apply these principles 10 the case under consid-
Grafton, and the inevitable result is that KoSZla
had a dolncil in the United States lie came to
and resided in this county year and IL months.
He came here with the intention of making it his
future abode. This intention was manifested in
several ways, but most significantly by his solemn
declaration upon oath. There can be no better
evidence of his design OF making the United States
his future home than such declaration; aud to
this kind of evidence of the intention, the indis-
penSable element of true domicil, civilians have
always attached Importance. (Phulmore 8 1859
In the of Koszta we have all that Is required
| the concurrence of actual residence with tn:
Intention to make this country his future home.
The establishment of his domicil here invested
him with the national character of this country,
and with that character he acquired the right to
claim protection from the United States, and they
had the right to extend it to hun as long as that
character continued.
The next question is, was Koszta clothed with
that character when he waS kidnapped mi streets
| of Smyrna and imprisoned on board OF the Aus
| HuSZaT2
acquired by residence remains as long as the DOM
icil continues, and that continues no. onyas long
| as the domicied person continues III the country
of his residence, but until he acquires new dom
icil. The law as TO the continuance and change
of domlctl is clearly state in the following quo
tatiOn from an eminent juriSt:
"However, i'll many cases actual residence is not
indispensable to retain domic after it is once &C.
quired; but it is retained, amino solo, by the mere
intention not to change 1t, or 10 adopt another
IL therefore, person leaves his home Tor tempora-
ny purposes, but with an intention TO return to it.,
THIS change of place is not in law change of dom
icil. Thus, If person should go on voyage TO
sea, or 10 foreign country, for health or Tor plea
sure, or for business of temporary nature, with
an intention TO return, such tranSitory residence
would not constitute new domicii, or amount to
an Abandonment of the old one; for ii is not the
mere act of inhabitancy in ploce which maGes'it
the domicil, but it is the fact coupled with the in
tention of remaining there, amino mGnendi'' -
(Story's Con. of Laws, S44.
At the very last session of the Supreme Court of
the United States case came up for adjudication
presenting question as to the domlci of General
kosciusco at The time of hisdeath. The decision
which was concurred in by all the judges on the
the BENCH fully susainS the correctneSso the fore
going propositions IN regard to domcaI, particu-
larry the two most important in KoSztas case: first
that he acquired domicil in the United States;
and second, that he did not lose 1t by his alb
sence in Turkey.-(I4 Howard's Reports s. @. U.
s., 40O.)
As the national character, according 10 the law
of nations, depends upon the domicil, it remains
as long as the domcil is retained, and is changed
with it. Koszta was, therefore, vested with the
nationality of an American citizen at Smyrns, if
he, IN contemplation of law, had a domiciI in the
United States. The authorities areadyreferred to
show that 10 lose dumicil when once obtained,
the domlcied person must leave the country of his
residence with the intention to abandon that resi-
dence, and must acquire domiciI in another