The daily union., 1854-02-09
SPEECH or HON. ID. 4. DISNEY,
or OHIO

OF OHIO,
On the doctrine OF domciliaion and the OF thanks
20 Captain Ingrahsm; delivered in the House OF Rep
rosentstives. January III, 1854.
Tbs House having under consideration the oint reso
luton for vote OF thanks and the presentation OF
sword to Captain lngraham-
MIR DISNEY said
Mr.. SPEAKER: When this resolution was before the
House The other day, the gentleman from Georgia mir
HnLYrRl remarked that the world would not only notice
the passage Of the resolution. bul would also examine
the observations which had been made and the opinions
which might be expressed, when the resolution
under consideration. There is truth in The remark And
had not been that during this discussion opinions
have been advanced from which must totally dissent.
should not have participated in Inc debate
So far the resolution itself is concerned, feel that
after the exceedingly able clear and lucid defence which
the gentleman from Louisiana Mr. PrRKSsl has just
made any additional remarks oil nine in that regard may
perhaps be said TO be entirely aDcaled for That gentle
man has placed the resolution and Its phraseoogy and
the Eeas0as which operated on the committee 10 adopt
that phraseology, upon grounds unmistakabe, and. IN
my Judgment. not 10 be questioned
l believe that ii is conceded. on all hands that
the thanks Of Congress are justly due 10 Captain
Ingrsham for his gallant action and the only difference
OF opnion far rs understand II, is in regard 10 the
reasons upon which that act should be based | believe
that every gentleman Is prepared 10 go TO the extent 10
which The resolution goes and allow me here TO say
that substantial difference between the resolution,
il reads, and the substitute suggested by the gem
ilsman from Alabama. Lhr PHILIPS
What i the resolution as i stands before the House
1t proposes Of thanks Captain lngraham tor his
udicious and gallant conduct in extending the proec
lion OF the American flag Martin Kosxta. under the
facs. and under all the facts OF the without any
limiiaion Il is true that the facts themselves are
not specially set forth in the resolution; would
usage or good taste permit thing OF the Sort But BY
necessary and unavoidable implication. the resolution
proposes give vote Of thanks TO Captain lngraham
tor extending the protection OF the American flag under
the facts Nay moe sir the resolution goes further for
it declares that the of Martin Koszta illegal
What more can gentlemen ask than resolution which
declares that Captain Ingrsham is entitled the thanks
OF the American Congress for his judcious and aan
FHdMNf mt ha Ama
TO Marhn kosza, who has been seized in violation OF
his rights, and view of his relations the American
government! Does not this cover the whole case |
ask the question: there any substantial difference in
idea principle between the resolution stands and
the amendment suggested by The gentleman IRON Ala
bamal
The right to ask protection, and the duty to grant il,
correIative and coexsen That resolution asserts
that Captain lngraham did right in extending the proec
tion of the American flag 10 Martin koszta and, by
ceasary implication the right OF Martin kosza 10 that
protection 10 asserted repeat that the resolution 49,
take IL. an expression OF the very principles whose
avowal is asked tor by the gentleman from Alabama
But sir, as have already said, the very able eucda
ton and defence OF the resolution, by the gentleman
from Louisiana has rendered il entirely unnecessary for
10 interpose any additional observations upon these
points Bat remarks have been elected during the dis
cussion, and opinions have been enunciaed from which
compelled 10 dissent is II all times unpleasant
differ from ones friends and the unpleasant
the occasion rises In dignity and Importance. Nobody
has higher admiration Tor the ability OF the present dis
tinguished Secretary OF State than have am proud
10 call him my friend. admire his ability--an ability
exhibited occasion with signal than
upon the occasion OF Martin Koszas seizure; but there
points in his fetter with which cannot agree When
this country shall undertake TO ntepoate the law of
tons with new principles and new creed. ii will be
time Tor us 10 consider the policy OF so doing.
II has been remarked, well in the kosZta letter
upon this hooT, that the Secretary OF State set form
that doctrine he only referred TO
principles known TO the law OF nations. To this |
mnst give my dissent do not read 1t. For the
purposes OF commerce, the laws OF nations have Tecog
nissd the fac, that an individual may acquire domci
in q country alien 10 the oil his origin They have
recognized that, for commercial purposes, he may be
cio&hcd with the nationality of country alien TO the
Uwhich be owes his allegiance and the error OF the
Secretary consists in this be has conounded political
with esm<reisi law. That while he finds the language
wAish be running through The books upon the SUP.
ct YET be has omitted TO notice and recognise the dis
tnctou Of which have spok that the nationality which
gwen BY domlc is conferred Tor Gonmsrcal purposes
This distinction 10 palpab.y and unmstskaby laid down
N The very authorities which the Secretary himself
cites; and IN this Nationality the individual must be lin
lied 10 such acts as are not incompatible with his ale
gi~o
Clothed with the nationality for commercial purposes
The Distinction, sir is important one. La state oi
belween two countries, IN order to define the nights
oi respesve parties courts have tried, with exceeding
Bass,y, the relations exislng with parties, and IL has
been held that when insividaal acquires a domic
in country alien TO the country 10 which be his
allegiance, he does for local and commercial pur.
rsses
A. the property OF country constitutes part Of its
strsnsh, 20 the legitimate night OF country IN time OF
tire OF its property; and iAe OF England add
Francs, we'll those OF country, have held
that in the execution oil this right II is be permit.
ted 10 individual, under OF different nation.
atty, though resident OF the county, protect the
property which s the product OF the hostile soil So
in The OF subject OF Great Brtan, domciiaed in
the city oil New YORK, and still retaining his aeg anee
never having ablured II TO the OF Great Britain bat
a,ill protesting and acknowledging H. When, under
these condItIoBs hrs property is destroyed ia state oil
war between the two countries, that property-even
though is owned by British subject, II domicillaed
within the limits OF the United States OF America-is to
Be considered American property and just sub
yet OF legal prize and capture by British cruisers Be-
cause though bs aleg is due TO the British
and he is in every respect British subject, vet his dom
relation clothes him with the American nationality toI
commercial purposes and his property Is therefore
American property. Wherever may be the country to
which The party his allegiance, If he be resident
sf the hostile county, be, IN this connexon, s held io
~ clothed with It's nationality and his properly held 10
b. part OF the property OF The county OF his residence
More, sir; the courts have gone further; they have
held that where there parties copariner-
ahip, Who hold joint adventure one OF Them having
domciliaed the country OF bellgereni, and The
other being resident of the country OF the other beger
ent. but without having abjured his allegiance the cour
will proceed inquire ino the domc,aiion oi the pat
tiss and make Partition. though both be subjects o
the bellgeren which has made the capture because ,hs
Aoncia,ion of the has clothed bm with the nation
atty OF the other county Tor commercial purposes. So
strictly has been held that domtciiiaon clothes with
nationality for commercial purposes This principle is
acted all cases; and, as have said already il laid
down authority BY the very wnefs cited by the Sec
retaTy OF State
am not desiroas 10 weary the House by going into
The multitude Of TO be- found 10 the books Eng
r. -.