Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-10-30
From the southern Literary Messenger.
The Right Of Suffrage to Subsequent
Immigrants,

POcC vi octutsAE LUG HaiCty eho cN'S-sN6N -
the members, by their .oint eorls;" and since the
government extends the arm of protection over eV
cry member. it becomes the reciprocal duty OF the
member, to raise the shield and ward on 10 the
best Of bis ability, the blows which threaten TO
overthrow the State.
Looking at the number Of foreigners who daily
and hourly reach the American shore, and presently
become participants in the political privileges OF the
land, the question arises whether, through them,
danger is not threatened this government Ii there
be the least shadow of danger, il is evidently the
duty OF each citizen to investigate the subject, and
TO do his utmost to remove that danger from the
governments which protects him.
Those who would deny the right of suffrage to
future Immigrants, in order to ward off danger
threatened to this government, have to contend
with popular opinion; for q more odious measure
could not be advocated before the American public,
than that immigration should be prohibited, and
that question is often conounded with the one UNI
der discussion. But their points OF disagreement
are far more numerous than those of correspon-
dence. Refuse the right OF suffrage to subsequent
immigrants, but allow the arm OF protection 70 re-
main extended over the man who is flying from tyn
ranny, and prefer warm welcome to the immi-
grant who is seeking land of civil and religious
liberty. Grant him the right to hold securely aud
to convey real estate. Let the liberty OF the
press" remain unrestricted, and ''the freedom Of
thought" unintIDged.
Another reason why the popular voice is raised
against denying the right of suffrage to future mmi
grants Is that the idea has obtained currency, that
Il such an act were passed by Congress, It would
operate against foreigners who are DaturaliZed The
fact is left entirely out of view, that no Legislative
Uody in the United States has power to enact an
''tr post tdcto law-or law impairing the obligation
OF contracts" 1t is plain, that all foreigners who
are naturaized, have entered into positive con-
A
be within the boundary of this country have com.
menced TO fulfill their part OF an agreement, made
with the government which declares that Il they
remain here tor five years, and comply with GER
tain conditions, they may become citizens These
contracts cannot justly be annued, without the
express consent OF the foreigners who have entered
upon them.
No contract has been formed between the gov
erhment and Foreigners who may hereafter seek an
asylum in this western land; and if refusing polit.
ical privilege to these subsequent immigrants"
will advance the security of the government, no
valid objection can be urged
The question refers entirely to these "subsequent
immigrants" and if it be possible TO establish the
position that refusing to grant to these "ihe right
OF suffrage" would tend to the Perpetuity OF this
goVernment-to remove danger, which, perhaps,
may not be visiOnRry--it is at the same time made
evident that it is the interest of both native and
naturezed citizens favor the passage of such al
act, because it would contribute to the prosperity
OF the government, and benefit the future immis
grant, By preserving this land refuge for the
down-trodden of earth.
There are some who may hold the position, that
fright of suffrage" is UndeniabLe and not poLn
zeal right But few entertain this opinion; yet
moment may be devoted 10 its refutation, or rather
TO displaying It's absurdity.
Before man enters into civil society he possesses
natural liberty. When he becomes a member he
resigns palt Of this liberty that his inaienable
tights may be better secured These rights, or
powers, which an individual resigns to the body
polite, constitute his political rights-his rights as
individual of nation; and since these are given
to the majority of that body, for the avowed pur-
pose of better securing the inalieDable rights they
are, of course, subject to legislation, and may DC
restricted in individual instances, aud in some cases
entirely removed if the majority think it necessary
Tor the better securing Of the object for which they
associated. This principle forms the basis OF all
legislation, and is doubtless correct.
Since the principal right which man resigns, when
he becomes a member OF the social compact is that
OF being governed all that relate directly or Indie
recty to this subject, come under the class of po
HtieaL rights, and subject to legislation 'Ihe
right oil suffrage" is the most prominent of those
which have their rise in the legislative form of gov
ernmeuI, and is, therefore, clearly political right
and may be restricted. Thus it has been viewed
by all the nations Of the earth. Not a single cleo
tive government can be found where this privilege
is not, in some degree, abridged. But small nj
nority OF the foreigners who seek a home beneath
the American flag have ever, in their native conn
try, enjoyed this privilege; or, if they have been
allowed TO their votes have been controlled by
the landed proprletors.
Notwithstanding its boosted freedom, and the
loud voice OF opposition which it raises when a
lie pol,t he ,bo e.,
eIguer, who comes here to enjoy more perfect libs
erty aud security than he can obtain at home
notwithstanding this parade, the government makes
invidiOus distinction in extending the privilege
Of voting to those Foreigners, while, at the same
time, il refuses the right" to its fair ones whose
infancy and whose maturer years have been spent
under the shade OF the eagles Ort ad pinons" and
whose hearts filled with love for free insttu-
tons But where viii the man be found who holds
the opinion that the fair is unhappy, or their
rights unsafe, because it is refused 'Ihe right of
suifrage2"
The conclusion is unavoidabe-that granting the
right OF suffrage the immigrant, is bestowing on
him favor, noe essential TO his happiness and
ten.ing to him privilege he has no natural right
to demand.
Those who support the opposite side Of the ques
ton, advance the argument, thai even though it be
a favor yet it is unjust, uugenerous, and contrary
10 tue spirit OF Tree luctltulOne 10 refuse II.
In attempting to prove that it is unjust, the Rev
olution OF I776 is nstanced. and the imposition of
taxes without the consent of the colonies, declared
to be their principal reason for separation from the
mother country; then comes the conclusion, that
this government should be the last TO carry out
that act Of oppression which caused it tosprng into
existence.
Any person who reads the Declaration of Inde-
pendence," will see that taxation without represenN
tatun, is a single and minor charge of the twenty
seven which were brought sgcinst George III. But,
even though it were the principal one, the analogy
between the example and the subject it s intended
to illustrate is ndistinct to be invisible IN
less TO a microscopic eye; for, long as govern
ment extends protection TO its members, so long
are the members bound to allegiance to that gov
eminent But so soon as il neglects refuses 10
fulfill it's part OF the contract, the member is re-
leased aud Is at liberty TO join, or form such otner
government, as be may th.nk more conducive to
his happiness.
TO BE CONTINUED