The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-10-01

Compare on this point the conflicting views of Attorney
Virginia cannot lawfully command vessel because not
citizen, November 7, 1921 and Of Attorney General Le
gare who holds that such may presmpt public
lands as a citizen. March Is, l843) ~. a
hesitate admit that the determination of this point
rests with the individual States other grounds
Look for instance at that unexlored clause of the con-
suon which declares that the citizens of each State
shall be entitled TO all the privileges and mmunites of cit
Zens the several Staes Can ii be that New York may
impose on Virginia Virginia New York, any person
whom either of them shall choose call citizen II would
seem 1t would that the determination of what
shall be deemed citizenship in all the tates must be mat
ter of federal jurisdiction, residing only In the general
government.
At any rate certain it is that by the legislation of
Of the States persons citizens there who not citizens
of the United States.
AT the time is hazardous deny all authority
to those Legislative acts of the different States of the Unon
which define the "white man. and thus do in fact
determine to Africans the dividing line between inca
pacy and capacity for citizenship of the given State and
perhaps of the United Sates(See the collected in
Kents Com. vol. H. p. 257 note
Instead therefore of attempting by reference to the egs~
laton of of the States by consideration of the
anaoges of foreign law and the of the thing
lay down general rule say what the general rule
ought TO be- to the stage at which, by admxture of
blood, the political ncapacity OF Indians will cease it
to to be desirable to confne my conclusion
the very presented without going step beyond it
that is to express the opinion that person of mixed blood
retaining tribal relations cannot also enjoy the
time the rights of citizen OF the United States.
Many persons Of this class, it to be doubted are
of most respectable character and mentally and morally
capable to be citizens of the United States But citizen
ship does not depend that alone Such persons are
pable to become czensthe question will reran in each
case, whether they have become in sact Suppose q
habreed, who is this day to all inteuts and purposes n-
dian-the chief for instance of some rbeand therefore,
clearly not citizen of the United States That tho
condition of John Ross in the referred Tennes-
1t be- concede for the arguments sake that it
is competent for him to become citizen or any rate
voter, in Wisconsin, By casing be member Of TIE
tribe. Be il So Let him cease, then, continue by his
own volition and election Indian II, By az, of
recognised legality he has manifested his desire e con-
sdeed citizen then will have be considered whether
such act effective whether for instance il was perform
ed in good faith as in the of alleged change Of dom
Gil whether 1T Is not contradeted by partys having
in the time retained his tribal relations whether in
word, If OF admitted capacity become citizen of the
United States he has in fact become such by throwing off
the status Of Indian.
That Indians cannot preempt public lands and that
they cannot remove the disability by declaring in the form
Of the statute their intention become citizens has been
more than once ruled in the practice of the Public Land
ohc according to in the papes before me reported
by the Commissioner.
Another which he reports of civilized Indian adj
mea py you 10 the ordinary purchase of public lands
proves nothing either way Citizenship requisite for
that II may be done by foreign alien, and fortiori by
mere denzen domestic alien, such the indians
lSee my opinion Of July 2s 1867 But pre-emp.on is
carefully confined by law to citizens and persons who
to statute. (Ibid)
Attorney General Legare undoubtedly erred in saving
dgasdo that denzs of the United States may pre-
empt puolc lands The statute in specifying the second
have declared In form their intention to become citizens
pointedy excludes all other ncitizens 1t says in effect
.haa no aliens no denzen no persons not citizens by birth
or Naturalization shall enjoy the privilege of eempon
except such as have made the declaration, according
law OF intention TO become citizens Mr. Legare could
have overlooked this manifest import statute had he
not been carried away in argument by gene dispos
uon to protect in the given case the claim of free A
! can. Opinion of March 10, lS43)
But If free African is entitled pre.emption IL can
only be 30 considered by first overrulin Mr. Writ and de-
cidlng that he Is citizen OF the United States,
Whether the haboods in the present had ceased
70 pe Indians or not Is primarily aqueon of facus
II John Ross, who is beyond all peradventure civilized
haoTeed should assume 10 preempt public lands cit
lien of the United States. ....
Further investigation of the facts in the present case
would therefore TO be requisite for the asceranmen
OF the whole truth and to establish firm basis complete
legal determination If it shall appear on such nvestga-
on that the persons claiming the present preempons be-
longed down to five months afterwards the Chippewas
OF Lake Superior then they Indians in law still and
OF course not citizens Of the United States and they
not maintain rights Of preepton TO public land as c
zens OF the United States while the time retaining
their special privileges tribal rights and grants
Such has been the decision heretofore in the case of other
tribes containing members of mixed blood. (See Mr.
TaneyS opinions Of September 1884, and May ls 1881
And that decision had the express approval and author
W OF the President Of the United States See Public Land
Laws, vol H. p. 600)
This restricted view Of the subject Is perfectly consistent
with the organic law Of the State Of Wisconsin whatever
force may be conceded 10 that this question The con-
suton OF Wisconsin attributes certain Of the rights of
W PeIsOns OF lndhn descent not MEM
bers OF any tribe Certain IL that the persons thus de-
scrbed electors n the State of Wisconsin are not there
fore citizens Of the United States any than the white
foreigners who have declared their Intention be natural
| iEed, and therefore become electors in Wisconsin.
However that may be- the very condition of the const-
tuition Of Wisconsin Is mot members Of any tribe and tha
presented TO me is of persons of Indian descent belong
ing to the tribe Of Chppewas Of Lake Superior
Nay, the constitution of Wisconsin does lot profess 10
pretend that these persons citizens of the Sate IL only
says they shall be qualified electors in tne elections of the
State The constitution Of the State stops there But
eccorship and citizenship different things they are
and not citizen he may be citizen and not elector In
word, no conclusions whatever affecting the subject
be deduced from the constitution and laws Of the State Of
Wisconsin.
think the language Of the seventh clause Of the third
article Of the treaty with the Chppewas before me- legally
describes persons not citizens Of the United States but
though half-boods yet still Indiana think the persons
so described, in asking and receiving the benefit Of the
clause declare themselves have been at that time not
citizens but Indians.
They might be competent to become citizens This as-
sigument Of eighty Of land each of them In sew
crafty and segregated from the common property of the
tribe may be construed implying that they intended
thereafter to quit the tribe with its community Of rights
and become citizens But conempates and supposes
and their acts pronounce they had yet passed the
lue between the aboriginal and the civilized or citizen
status.
There another article of the treaty the 10TH which
serves TO confirm that conclusion, Its words are
All missionaries and teachers and other persons Of full
Gs residing in the territory hereby cedsd or upon any of
toe reservations hereby made by authority of law sha bo
allowed to enter the land occupied by them at the mini
mum price whenever the surveys shall be completed to tho