New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-02-15
POINT or CoNsTITUTIoNALL Law

of Maes.cbusetts and his learned Attorney General
let II legislation Of that State should in any r.
spect Transcend the limits imposed upon il BY the
Constitution Of the United States. In this point
nj yjew-and 20 far as Gov. Gardner is concerned.
with the possibility Of Vice Presidential nomiua-
ton in prospect-tbeir minds are greatly eIer-
ei,ed by the Massachusetts, Personal Liberty Law.
the enactment Of which they tried to prevent and
Of which they are now seeking the repeal.
According 10 the old proverb-an ounce OF pre-
yenton is worth pound Of cure. Ii il not 80 easy
getting laws repealed after they are once enacted
especially if those laws happen to find support in
every generous impulse Of the human heart. But
if the Governor Of Massachusetts, and his able A.
torney General really have that generation for the
Constitution of the United States and the laws en-
acted under ii Of which they make such loud pro-
fessions. there is anOthtr infringement-much more
uponestionably az it seems 20 us, All infringement
Of the Constitution Of the United States and of the
laws enacted under it-threatened at this moment
by the Legislature Of Massachusetts,, the cOnsum-
nation of which the patriotic and national
Governor and the learned Attorney General may,
by seasonable and earnest interpOston, be able 70
prevent. The Constitution of the United States
confers upon Congress the exclusive right to enact
naturalization laws. Under the Constitution Of
the United States citizen of any State is entitled
to all the privileges of citizen in all the States,
and so of course are such persons as may under
the naturalization laws have been admitted to the
privileges Of citizenship OF the United States.
6 ~. "a Gta4ac in
else Of their undoubted and exclusive authority,
have seen fit to enact that FIVE years residence IN
ANY one of the United States zone year OF il within
the State where the naturalization takes place.,
with three years previous declaration of intention
TO become cir zen, and compliance with GER
tain other prescribed formalities, shall suffice TO
convert a foreign-born person into an American
citizen, to all intents and purposes as much so as
if be had been born in one of the United States.
Now, it happens that certain persons in Massa
chusetts-we will not call them fanatics nor zealOs,
it is sufficient to describe them as they describe
themselves, or did til very ately-persons no doubt
of good intention but of very slender information
do not like this Naturalization law OF Congress-
but think that no forcgn-bOrn person ought to be
admitted TO the privilege of citizenship till he has
resided in this country for twentyon years
Deeply impressed and quite run away with by this
one idea these persons have set to work to nulliy,
40 far as Massachusetts, is concerned, the Natural
izatiOn laws of Congress, and to prevent any natu-
ralized citizen of the United States from enjoying
and exercising the rights of a citizen of Massachu-
sets. ar least so far as voting is concerned, till he
has resided in the United States for twenty-one
years.
1t is attempted to put this multiplying project into
execution y.addiIg clause to the effect above
stated to the Constitution of the State. The Leg
islature of Massachusetts has now been hammer
ing at this project, in rather bungllng STYLE but
with great pertinacity, for upward OF year. In
all that time, has never doubt occurred to Gov.
Gardner and his learned Attorney-Genera whether
this thing can be cOnstitutOnally done This, it
appears TO u.s. is case in which the opinion of the
Judges of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts
might be very properly asked. The people of
Massachusetts have doubtless the right, under GER
tain limitations however, TO prescribe the length
of tine for which person shall reside within the
district or precinct in which he offers TO vote be-
fore he shall be allowed that privilege; and, with
the same end in view, and within the same limta
tions TO require all voters TO have resided for
limited time within the State. As to this matter
however. the naturalized citizen is certainly en-
titled TO stand upon the same ground with the cit-
zen coming in from another State; SO that If Mas
sacbusetts desires 10 exclude naturalized citizens
born in Ireland from voting, she may perhaps re-
quire of them certain term OF residence in Mas
sacl usetts; but she has got 10 put all citizens not
born in the State, but removing into lt-persons
born in New Hampshire, forinstance-On precisely
the same ground. II is nothing to her, and she
has no right to base any legislation on the fact,
where these citizens lived before coming TO Massa-
ciusetts. 1t is sufficient that they are found in
Massachusetts,, possessing the rights of citizenship
there. and, from that circumstance, entitled TO
vote equally with other citizens.
The iustfable intent and object of demanding
residence at all is merely to exclude yagabOnds
and transient persons, and 10 cOnine the right of
voting TO settled inhabitants. This is q Just and
reasonable exercise of that power; but when the
requsition Of residence is perverted to another OBJ
ect. and is attempted to be employed as an insru-
ment for multiplying the Naturalization laws of the
United States, it appears to us high time that such
great sticklers for the Federal Constitution and
Laws as Gov Gardner and Mr.. Clifford should be
on the alert, lest they eadthe Legislature, allow
the Legislature TO lead them, into an unconstitu-
tional ditch.
An IMPORTANT SANITARY MOVE.
~. ;u..-... Of avarv ;n1;r;1u.1 an5 ararv