Thibodaux minerva. [volume] (Thibodaux, La.) 18??-1858, 1856-01-19
The Naturalization Question.
NEW ORLEANS, Jan. 10th, 1855.

New ORLEANS, Jan. 10th, 1855.
EDS Observation-Disclosures Some time agt
in consequence of published speech of mine o
the religious test, +" A Naturalized Citizen of owe
40 years" addressed to me, through your paper,
letter, to which now beg leave to make a respec
full reply.
do this, the more readily, because this gentle
man is valued friend, and because he is type
large class Of our fellow citizens, who, althoug
foregn-born, are Of enlightened and reliable patr
otism, whose sentiments ought to be treated wit
respect, and who ought in comfy, if not in law
to be regarded as our equals
He says:
"Your arguments against religious mtoleranc
"are very strong, but while reading them, wa
forcibly struck with the applicability of some
them to another sort of intolerance and illiberali
"ty, which you appear to think entirely merito
| "rous 1 mean the denunciation, by your order
"of every citizen who is not matiue born, withou
| exception or reservation; and determination t.
| "deprive them, through the ballot box, of por
g ton Of their right Of citizenship"
He says again in his letter to Col. 7. G. Hunt
| to which he refers me:
"You (the American partly have boune
yourselves not to vote for any candidate TO
"otfice, who may be naturalized citizen
Thereby taking away from him right Of pc
"l;tical equality, guaranteed to him by law
"part of the implied compact 6etaceem him ant
"the people of the United States, when he became
ga citizen."
This same fallacy-for such, l think l shall
prove it to be-is expressed by Mr.. Soule in hi
speech, delivered on Lafayette Square, on Nov. Sd
1855, as follows:
"Naturalized citizens have taken an oath Of
allegiance under a solemn and indssoluble
contract, whose unalterable conditions arc
written in the Constitution of the United States
That sacred instrument makes them, IN all res
"pects, equals Of the native-born."
could fill pages with similar quotations, not
only from the foes, but the friends of our cause
for it seems to be almost universally thought, that
the act Of naturalization makes foreigner the
equal Of the native in every respect.
I shall now attempt to show the reverse of this
to be the correct principle, viz: that maturaziza-
ton only makes citizen or subject and does not
invest foreigner Nth sovereignty, or the right Of
outrage or even entitle him to it in future !; and
that such must have been the intention and under-
standing Of the trainers Of the Constitution of the
United States.
1t will be seen hereafter, that important conse-
quences flow from this position. But to proceed ::
What is naturalization?
Naturalization, was term of purely English Or
igin, and meant, to invest an alien with the
rights and privileges of native subject or citizen"
What were these in England? Clearly not polit-
zeal rights-not the right Of government, Or, in
other words sovereignty, for the citizens or subjects
of England never held them-they being in the
Crown and Parliament, ab origine; but civil
rights, such as the right to the protection of the
government, the right to pursue any lawful
occupation, the right to acquire and hold prop
erty-the right to sue and be sued in the courts,
ETC., etc. These are civil rights, and the endow-
ment Of foreigner with them, is 'naturaliza-
ton"
This definition, as will be seen hereafter, con-
forms exactly to our political philosophy, and to
our dual structure of government.
No additional meaning arises from the use of
the term in the Constitution of the United States,
for it was used by the trainers as a technical one
with an already fixed meaning Moreover, the said
trainers provided, that all elections of federal off
GERS, should be by those who had the right to vote
IN the States; thus themselves recognizing the
power Of the people of the States over the politi-
cal rights of the republic, and acknowledging that
the Federal government has no power to bestow
the elective franchise. See Constitution Art l.
Sec. 2 Art. O. Sec. c. 2.
The people of the States acting through the
State governments, had, before the Federal Con-
stitution was formed the sovereign right to endow
foreigners with citizenship, and sufrage-thus
making them equal to natives. They gave to the
Federal Government when they formed it. the
power to bestow citizenship, i. e. to naturalist,
but reserved to themselves the power of bestowing
the rightto vote, e. sovereigmity See Const Art
l, Sec. 8; and amendments, Art. TO-
When an alien has been naturalized, or endowed
by the Federal Government with these civl riqhts
land not till then, as shall try to show hereafter)
he has the status, or condition, necessary for the
endowment Of political rights, which the State
sovereignties alone can give.
Hence we fnd in all the State Constitutions, ar
ticles bestowing suffrage, or fixing the qualifca-
tons Of voters, i. e. declaring who shall have po-
lical rights, or sovereignty for votes the sov
ereignty Of the republic.
If the above is correct, it follows that my friend
and Mr.. Soule are entirely mistaken, and that nat.
uralization does not make an qlie, the equal of a
native; but that it merely "adopts him into the
nation, and "places him in the condition of ma
tive born subject" (Web. Dic.) 1t follows also,
that to steps must be taken, two acts Of sovereignty
are required to put foreigner on an equality with
3 native: LIST. To make him citizen or subject,
l. e. to give him civil rights, and secure his ALE
glance. End. To give him governing pocsr, or
j. e. the right to vote and hold Office
Then he will be coequal with the native who inherits
all the rights Of the country, civil and political,
and who are in the dual condition Of sovereign and
subject governors and governed-law- makers and
aw-obeyers-who, in other words, govern them
eeI,os