Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-02-15

there during his natural life, become thereby
necessarily invested with such nationality as
to impose upon him q fealty to the British
crown-a fealty incompatible with his allegi-
ance to our republic? Ours are an adventu-
rous people In their pursuits theyare spread
ing themselves throughout the globe. They
are crossing every sea; they are settling in
every cline; but ardent as is their pursuit of
wealth. it is yet inferior to their love of their
native land and are we prepared to assert doc
trnes whose results would be to impose upon
them a local fealty wherever they may reside?
As yet, our government has acted upon doc
trine exactly opposed to this.
In the riots which occurred at New Orleans
year or two ago, the property OF various
Spaniards domicitidted in that city was de-
strpyed; but the government of Spain claimed
them as Spanish subjects, and made recla-
nation for indemnifcation, which our govern.
ment both allowed and paid. What became of
the doctrine of domiciliation there? What was
the national character with which these domi-
ciliated Spanards were clothed2 Can any one
doubt than an unnaturalized Englishman domi-
| ciliated in New York is British subject? Can
| mere domicliation release him from his obliga-
| tons as subject to the British crown, or i'm
| pose upon him duties in relation to our govern
| ment incompatible with his duties as a. British
| subject?
An American sailor in the British service is
domicilated within the jurisdiction of the
crown, but is that sailor, as an individual.
clothed with the. British political nationality
To use the language Of the secretary, may
| @his services be required, (for the defence OF
that country may his life be perilled and sac
\ ,;ubt1 and viudica
| ing its honor,n if at war with the country of
his birth-with this land of which we boast
and in behalf Of which the gallant sailor would
gladly sacrifice the last pulsation of his hearth
| Ask the great public of our country if it is
| prepared to sanction a doctrine which would
authorize England to compel American sailors
| to fight against us in time Of war? think
not No, sir, it will never be tolerated. The
American sailor in the British service is clothed
with British nationality, so far as his relations
| to property are concerned. He is entitled to
the protection Of the British government while
within its jurisdiction, and while there owes it
| an allegiance, but only such an allegiance as
| is not Incompatible with his allegiance to the
United States.
The whole difficulty in this case has arisen
| from confounding political with commercial
| aw-from confounding commercial relations
| with the right and duty Of an individual, as q
| subject-and / use the word subject" not in
contradistinction to the term which we use in
this country, that of "citizen,' but to desig-
nate the relations between the governed and
the government. / am inquiring into the
political relations of the individual under the
government. The right and duty of an in
| dividual under a government, viewed in his
political relations to that government, and
the rights Of that individual towards that gov
ernment, in his commercial transactions, in
regard to the property of the country in which
he lisa resident are differentiated separate things.
| There are two sorts of allegiance. The books
Of this country and Europe recognise them
/ with entire distinctness. The temporary ale
glance growing out of a domicil, and connected
with the commercial transactions of the coun-
| try, the personal duty while within the juris-
diction and the permanent allegiance grow
ing out OF the duties of the citizen in the alb
stract, without regard to his commercial rela-
tons and connexion with the property of the
country, and which reaches beyond the juris-
dction Of the country. Permanent allegiance
imposes upon an individual the obligation to
support, defend, and obey the government,
wiirtl.cl at ho.ne ahrcad. Temporary allie
glance imposes upon the individual the neces-
sity of obeying the laws of the country, while
within which he is residing, within which he IS
domiciliated, provided they are not incompati-
Bile with the obligations he owes to the country
to which his permanent allegiance is due.
This is o distinction which the Secretary Of
State has overlooked. 1t is an important one,
vast and mighty in its consequence.
Take the case of Koszta to illustrate this.
While he remained within the limits of the re-
public, with an intention to remain permanently
here, he owed temporary allegiance to the gov
eminent, and was entitled to protection within
its jurisdiction. But if he had left these shores
without the intention of returning, no sooner
had he quilted the dock at New York, than he
would have been Invested of all his obligations
of temporary allegiance to this government,
and this government would have been relieved
from all obligations in respect to his protection.
! They were under obligations to protect him in
his property and in his relations to his proper
tv, whether within or without the jurisdiction of
the United States, but not to protect the indi-
vidual, in his political relations, outside Of the
jurisdiction of the country, on account of any
| claim which he may have acquired in his politi-
cal relations to the institutions of the country
during his residence here.
| But sir, before we can decide whether Mar
| tin Koszta was entitled to any privileges even
/
intention Of the party in leaving our shores
whether it was for temporary purposes merely.
cleft. as we understand, with the intention of
| returning to this country. What, then, was
the position he occupied? To that question,
my reply is, that he occupied precisely the posi-
ton of a British subject residing (domiciliated)
as merchant in New York, who leaves the
country and takes voyage to France to ac-
complish purposes connected with his bust
ness. Now, sir, while he is there, in the heart
of France, he is an American merchant, but
British subject, with a temporary allegiance
to the United States, but a permanent allegi-
ance to Great Britain. Martin Koszta in com
mercial matters, would have been as an Ameri-
can merchant, who was temporarily in Smyrna;
but, though occupying such relations, he miqht
have been an Austrian subject beside. Such is
the doctrine Of the law. 1t was the right and duty
of the United States to protect his property
as an American merchant; but in his political
relations, as soon as he left our shores, he was
absolved from all allegiance to this government,
and the government at the same time was alb.
/ solved from obligations to protect him while he