The star of the north. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1849-1866, 1857-05-27


istra,ion Of both National and State govern.
ments. In 1921, controversy arose as 10
whether free persons Of color were citizens
OF the United States within the intent and
meaning of the acts Of Congress regulating
foreign and-soasiing trade, SO as 10 be quail.
fed 10 command vessels; and Mr.. Wir, At
iorney General, decided that they were not
and he moreover held the words "citizens of
the Uuited States," were used in the acts OF
Congress in the same sense as in the Con-
sii,ution. This view is also fully sustained
in recent opinion Of the present Attorney
General.
The judicial decisions Of The country are to
The same effect. 10 Kenl's Commentaries,
vol. 2, p. 277, il is stated that in 1882 Chief
Justice Dagseu, OF Connecticut, held tha, free
blacks are rot "citizens" within the meaning
of the term as used in the constitution of the
United States and the Supreme Court of
TeLnessee, in the case OF the State against
Claiborne, held The same doctrine. Such be.
ing the construction of the Constitution in
regard 10 free persons Of color, !, is conceiv-
ed that they cannot be regarded, when be-
yonc the jurisdiction of the government, as
entitled to The iuIl rights Of citizens; hut the
Secretary directs me TO say that though the
department could no, certify that such per.
sons are citizens of the United States, yet, If
satisfied Of the truth Of the facts, il would
give CERT fcate, tina, they were born in the
United States, are free, and that the govern
ment thereof would regard il TO be lis duty 10
proiec, them if wronged BY foreign govern.
ment while within its jurisdiction fof a legal
aud proper purpose.
lam, sir, respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
J. A. THOMAS, asst Sec.
H. H. RlcE, New York city.
The several acts Of Congress in reference 10
the naturalization of foreigners, exhibit the
same settled and delerminaie policy. Under
their provisions no negro, or his descendants,
can be naiuralized, or be made citizens OF
the United States. The words of the first acl
of Congress, passed but few months after
The adoption Of The Federal Constitution, and
sanctioned by Tie approval of George Wash.
ing,on, are as follows: "Any alien, being
free lohiie person, may become Citizen"
Sc. The act of 1875 uses the following Ian
gusge: "Any free aohits person may become
a citizen u SO. The act of i79s, signed by
John Adams, and that of 1902, approved by
Thomas Jefferson, make use of the same spe.
cific language; and The subsequent: enact
ments of Congress, passed in 1918 and 1924,
indicate precisely the same restrictive policy
upon the Eegro race. Chancellor Kent, in
his Commentaries on American Law"
suslains this point in The following words:
"The acl Of Congress confines The descrip-
tion of aliens capable of naturalization, 10
free white persons.' Ipresume this excludes
the inhabitants of Africa and their descend
ants and it may become question, to what
extent persons of mixed blood are excluded,
and what shades and degrees of mixture Of
color disqualify an alien from application
for the benefits OF the act OF naturalization.
Perhaps there might be difficulties also, as
10 the copper-colored natives of America, or
The yellowsH iawney races Of the Asiatcs,
aud il may well be doubted whether any OF
them are white persons within The purview
ofthe law."-(2 Ksnts Com. slh Ed. s6)
The same distinguished writer says:
ain most of The United States there is
distinction in respect 10 The political privile.
ges, between free white persons and free col
ored persons of African blood and in no part
of the country, except in Maine, do the latter.
in poin, Of fact, participate equally with the
whites, in The exercise Of civil and political
righis."-(2 Kent, Notes, 27s.)
He then proceeds to examine, q, length,
the various disabilities under which The ne.
gro race labor iu the different States, a nd
alter citing various authorities which prove
that, as a general Thing, they do not possess
and ENJOY The same privileges and immuni.
ties belonging 10 citizen under The Consti.
tuition OF the United States, he employs the
following significant language; ''The better
opinion should think, was, that negroes, or
other slaves, born within and under the alle-
glance OF the United States, are natural born
subjects, but not citizens" e Kent, Notes,
p. 1929
Blu, we are told that "judicial precedent"
is against Us, and "there is no such logic in
the books" as will sustain the poin, at issue,
or that "can in any way be tortured into the
support of the doctrine, that colored person
cannot be citizen Of any State, or Of the
United States" Let US see how far we are
supported by the authority of the courts.
10 the year 1888, the Supreme Court of Ten.
uessee decided and adjudged, that free blacks
were not citizens within the provisions Of the
second section of the fourth article Of the Con.
s,itution of The United States. (Statsos. Clai-
borne, 1. Meig's Reps. asi.) And in the same
State, Chief Justice Calron, in the case OF
Fisher vs. Dubbs, 6 Yugsr's Reps. iis, "gives
a strong picture of the degradation OF free ne
groes living among whites, without motive
and wilhou, hope.r
In the State of Connecticut, the same deci.
sion is arrived at in a case which is thus sta
tee by Chancellor Kent in The notes 10 his
Commentaries, vol. 2, page 2si: "In Con-
neo,icut, by statute, in 1888, any colored per-
sop. NOT an inbabiant OF the Stale, who shall