The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-09-15
American izenship.

II we have not misunderstood The tendency and de-
sxn OF The article in the National lss,gswer Of Tues
day. on the Kosta case, the questions growing out OF il
hereafter 10 furnish Asaes between The whig and
democratic paries Indeed, the Isisuigs~oev TO
CONSIDER the discussions Of The subject already marked
BY ). a. much canuariey Of knowledge and judgment
usually chasc,exes our editorial discussions in which
party bias is often more discesnible than We
ess that this feature 10 the discussions Of the Kos,a
had escaped our observation, and now inclined
10 suspect ha, the wish OF the intng~rsr is father to
the ,hough or that It's habit in past dscassons Of look
ing with conscious eye upon the policy Of iu gov
snment in regard foreign questions has become in
vstcrate that il has unconsciousy fallen into the
vein We presume that the I~sli,s~sr en,ertains no
doub, bu, ha, the sdminsa,ion will approve the
due, OF Captain lnsraham, and il TO that our
nechbor mig have avoided the suspicion OF being under
party bias himself II he had declined PREJUDICE the
case in advance OF the action Of government. 81
The avowed purpose Of alIuding to the subjec, ia 10
Introduce an article from the pen OF an ennen, jurs,
and statesman which esteemed important by the Intel
Es~esr The janst referred to his opinion rs FOL
lows: aastasa
aThc foreigner fskos oath support the constitution
Of tho United States when he makes his defamation ror
rsso~rrss s~s foru akaisaes but only declares his in
tention do tSee act OF 1907 chapter 2s) While
he remain, within cui'ory, under fsg, he
OF course entitled 10 protection but when not within
our territory under 0sg, and before adm ,sson
upon full com plisnce with naturally alton
laws what possible claim can he have protection
He the United States nefhes The of the
DENT aad there - nothing from which the duty OF pro-
lection resulLi'
II we we've disposed to d,soas. the legal question sta
ted in this extract should be constrained TO dissent
HON the conclusion TO which The eminen, lurs, arrives
There Is however, general expectation that the point
involved the protection due foreigner abroad
temporarily after fling his declaration for nauralza
ton viii receive an eay official exposition and for ,ha,
reason we deem It unnecessary 10 engage in Inc dis
eusson, especially have already insisted that Cap
tain lngraham's conduct uas susceptible OF complete
justification, without rgard TO the legal question argued
abeveps si.t q So ~ ass7sssa s'es sn L
It's not the legal opinion oil The eminent arst that
desire 10 cuucis< bu, The disposition manifested by
III. irieigy~tu TO PREJUDICE the Kosm case For this
purpose. we in the concluding comments Of that
paper reflection upon Kos,a which imprssses
with the conviction that the writer under the has Of
prejudice well ~ party. Why ohsncterire Koa,s a.
bird Of p,ssss, and by that hind OF aur seek nAu
ence the public mnde Why a,,emp, 10 draw contrast
betwir, the brave foreigners who wen, 10 III. Mexican
war and brave Hungarian who ioushi ios liberty nj
home agains, Austrian tyranny The former the Iai.ui
senoy comnepes as '.uue men," tsnd 20 they wese,)
whilst the latter regarded brds Of passage
VIVA, matter is ii whether Kosta is German or an
frshman- whether he fought under Koesuth or under
Scott. OF whether he fought at all il he wss entitled TO
the protection Of flag man, he 10 not TO b. d.
ps we'd 81 his rsh becanss ihe J~1uis..su regards him
Is merely bird Of passaSe II is the spit OF ilEber
ssy which maaifesss i,sslf in ssch comweuts excstsg
~ s~psssssa Aat me I~ssiksss~r sym,aihisas With
de Anssris6 Govsransat ID The KostA case. tba, "
condemn. We have objection to The course of tba,
pssr - msser Of nero psysy roleyws are vssAy for
The ,sa.e which il seems dossd 10 make bat ~ ~osd
seslIy prsiar 70 ss~osI whsle counuy ssasdx ID oas
spla vsdsna ssssaysS shs sd~'ssss~ssSis Sqss,id
The honor OF the government in opposition 10 th> 60