Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1853-10-07

subject at the time he seized. He had been
lied, and the Emperor of Austria had been party
to his exile, and thus driving him from his domin
ions had driven him from his jurisdiction 1t seems
to have been the very object of the Austrian decree
to dissolve the political connection between the un
lawful emigrant'' and the Emperor. In Costa's
case, it was dissolved And although the declara-
ton supposed to have been made by Costa, that he
Hungarian, and would live and die Hunga
rIan, is relied upon as proof that he looked upon
himself AS an Austrian subject Mr.. Marcy attaches
no Importance to that fact, since the party with
which Costa acted, and the cause which he sustain
ed. was that which totally disconnected the idea
of being Hungarian from that of being an Austr-
sub ject He could not have intended by the Ian
guage ascribed to him. to acknowledge any unbro-
ken tie which then bound him to the Emperor of
Austria. Mr.. Marcy is brought, by fair applica-
ton of sound principles law, and by careful con-
sdcraton of the facts to this important conclusion
that those who acted in behalf of Austria, had no
right whatever to seize and imprson Martin Costa
1t will be conceded that the Turkish authority
throughout theWhoe affair, remained dormant, with
out being called into action. 1t has been
shown that Austria had no authority whatever in
the matter and the arrest of Costa by her was SIM
ply outrage perpetrated by the strong upon the
weak, and which any party might right in accor-
dance with the plain law of nature, and the more
| exalted maxim of Christianity, which teaches men
do unto others whatsoever they would that others
should do unto them. Who in such case has a
right to complain Not the wrong .doers, surely
for they appeal to no law to justify their
! duct. They can derive no support from civil au-
thority, for there none called into action nor
from the law of nature, for that they had violated
But further MIR. Marcy proceeds to show, that at
the time of his seizure Costa had the national char
acter of an American, and the government of the
United States had the right to extend its protection
over him. 1t is not contended that the initiatory
steps which Costa had taken in the process of natur-
alzation invested him with all the civil rights of an
American citizen but it is sufficient for all the purpo-
ses of this case, to show that he clothed with
an American nationality and in virtue thereof the
government of the United States was authorized to
extend to him its protection at home and abroad
It is great to suppose that nation can prop
erly extend it's protection only to nativeborn nat
ural zed citizens. According to national law, the
national character of country attaches to all resi-
dents who are there with, or even without an nten
ton to become citizens provided they have domi
that domicil confers national character Inter
national 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 enoins
upon other nations to respect him. in regard to pro-
lection, as American citizen. Itconcedes to eve
ry country the right to protect any and all who may
be clothed with it's nationality
These positions are sustained by reference to au
> thorities
"The position is clear one that, if person goes
into foreign country and engages in trade there
he is by the law of nations, to be considered
chant of that country, and subject for all civil pur
poses, whether that country be hostile neutral"
Kent Com, Is.
Again The same authority says that
In the law of nations, to Europe, the rule il
that take their national character from the gen
eral character of the country in which they reside
s Ibid. IS.
1t was evident, from the fact of Costa's residence
in the United States and his declaration of inten
1 ton to become citizen, that he had acquired
domici in this country-that it the place Of hi
actual residence with the intention to make it hi
; future home And it would be absurd to suppos
that by the fact ola temporary absence on blu
siness otherwise, without any intention of perma
r nent removal but with the full intention of return
ing any person would lose domicl once acquired
e Evidently, at the time when Costa was seized a
Smyrna, he still retained that domcil which he &C
= qured in the United States, and awaiting al
: opportunity to return to. Whenever, by the opera
II ton of the law Of nations individual become
. clothed with national character, be he native
born or naturaZed citizen, exile driven from hi
t early home by political oppression, emf gran
enticed from it by the hopes of better fortune 70
i himself and his posterty, he claim the protec
H. ton of this Government. and it may respond to tina
o claim without being obliged to explain its conduc
to any foreign Power for it is its duty to make it
nationality respected by other nations and respecte
i in every qnarter of the globe The right of a ma
ton to protect and require others to respect HON
e and abroad all who clothed with its nationality
l. is doctrine for the first time brought in
It to operation by the United States 1t is common
all nations, and has had the sanction of their prac
tce for ages; but it is that at this late period
when the United States assert claim to it as
inheritance, it should at once be discovere
h. that it doctrine fraught with danger and lkel
h to compromit the peace of the world. The Unite
lr States see no cause for alarm no reason for re
nouncing for themselves what others have so Ion
Re and so harmlessly enjoyed
n No fears need be entertained that the effect of th
doctrine will be- to offer facility for acquiring
r national character, which will lead to alarming
l. Buses since the first distinct act done by them tc
It wards the accomplishment of these designs, woul
l. disclose their fraudulent purpose in coming to-
j. seeking domicie in this country. This would de
:. prYe them of any American nationality or claim