Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1854-11-14

the TACT TO the world, that these States are in
dependent That independence was defended
by arms, and finally recognised by treaties.
But secondly, it is maintained that it is
mans natural right to expatriate himself at his
pleasure, and adopt another country than that
Of his birth. Whatever may be oar opinion Of
what ought to be the rights of mankind, it will
be found that this opinion, so far as regards
the laws of most civilized nations, is erroneous.
And even were the right of throwing off ones
allegiance to his native country unquestioned,
there never was, and there never can, be a
doubt of the right of any nation to forbid the
entrance of foreigners into its country. That
allegiance to ones native country is perpetual,
and cannot be thrown off at pleasure, may
however, be considered settled law. On this
point very able American jurist holds the fol
lowing language
"The origin Of allegiance in England has
been already described It's former extension
through almost every part of this country is
unquestionable and in many States it contin-
ues unimpaircd in its qualities and nature. It
is indirectly recognised in the Constitution Of
the United States, and by the acts of Congress
which have been since passed. The indefeasi-
BILE quality conceived to be incident toit, has
not been decided on by the Supreme Court of
the United States but in the circuit courts
Ellsworth, chief justice, declared that mem
Der of the community cannot dissolve the So
cial compact so as to free himself from our
laws, without the consent or the default of the
community And in another case, Washing
ton, judge, declared that no citizen can throw
off his allegiance to his country without Some
law authorizing him to do so.'-(See Rawlee
on the Constitution, page 97)
The principle has subsequently been settled
as abovc-(Sec Cd vol. Kent p. 49,
In some of the United States "expatriation is
permitted by legislative enactment; and in
some of them the right is secured by their
constitutions
. We do not mean.to discuss the justice of the
principle recognised by nearly all civilized ma
tions on this subject and settled by decisions
in our own courts. We refer to it only to cs-
tablish the position that the natural rights con-
tended for by some of our adversaries does not
exist conventional law restrains it. Govern
ments may indeed release their claim, as they
often do, to the perpetual allegiance of their
subjects who wish to emgrate; but, then, the
government of the country which they desire
to adopt may, if it chooses, refuse to receive
them. That every Independent nation may
rightfully exercise its discretion in the admis-
sion or exclusion of foreigners, is position
which no lawyer or judge will deny. This
power is Indispensable to national independ-
ence. It\is> distinctly recognised by all the
writers upon the laws of nations, and has been
universally regarded us an unquestioned right
ever since the dawn of civilization. The ablest
American jurist in this country, Chancellor
Kent, in the first vol. of his Commentaries
page 34 holds the following explicit language :
Every nation is bound, in time Of peace, to
grant passage for lawful purposes, over their
lands rivers, and seas, TO the people of other
States, whenever it can be permitted without
inconvenience; and burdensome conditions
ought not to be annexed to the transit of per-
sons and property. II, however, any govern
ment deems the introduction of foreigners, or
their merchandise, injurious to the interests Of
their own people, which they are bound to
protect and promote, they are at liberty to
withhold the indulgence"
| This doctrine covers the whole ground, and
is in strict conformity with the uniform prac-
tice of all independent nations. See also Ser.
jeants Cons. Law, page 31S, to the same effect.
How then can it be maintained, that any man
has natural right, not only to leave his own
country, but to thrust himself upon another 2
The position is untenable. 1t has neither law
nor justice TO sustain it. Indeed it is only
urged to bewilder the minds Of the people, who
are known to be sensitive when rights are sup
posed to be threatened, and whose sympathies
are quickly aroused in behalf ofthe prosecuted.
Those who maintain this supposed natural
right, laugh in their sleeves at the credulity Of
such as swallow the preposterous doctrine
We come now to the third objection that
If Congress should repeal the present law Of
naturalization, each State might for ITSELF allow
foreigners the rights and privileges of citizens,
within its limits. This question is one Of the
| highest importance. Prior to the adoption o.
the Federal constitution, this power was pos.
sessed and exercised by the several States
The consequence Of it was, that there were va.
| rious and discordant rules adopted Mr.. Mad
ison, in page 202 Of the Federalist, advocating
the adoption Of the Federal constitution, says
In one State, residence for short time
confers all the rights Of citizenship; in another
| qualifications of greater importance are re.
quircd. An alien, therefore, legally incapaci
tated for certain rights in the latter, may, by
previous residence only in the former, elude
| his incapacity; and thus the law Of one State
be preposterously rendered paramount 10 the
law Of another, within the jurisdiction Of the
other"
This was the condition Of things whilst the
different States exercised the power Of natural
HHtlOH. ut cNilS vi ~ dIt
writer, Rawlc on the Constitution, page SO, J
after describing the evils Of these conflicting
provisions, adds:
"The evil could not be better rcmedicd than
by vesting the exclusive power in Congress"
The provisions Of the constitution ON this
subject are in the following words In article
/, section 0, it reads,
Congress shall have power to establish q
uniform rule Of naturalization"
In article |, section Q, it reads
1.-The migration or importation of such per-
sons as any Of the States now existing shall
think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited
by the Congress prior to the year 1908"
In article ~, section 2, it reads
"Thc citizens Of each State shall be entitled
to the privileges and immunities Of citizens in
the several States"
These are all the provisions of the constitu-
tion affecting this question. BY the first clause
cited above, the general power is granted to
establish uniform rule BY the second clause
cited the poyypr of nroh ibitinU irnmio1atiop Il