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

ments. In 1924, aconlroversy arose as to
whether free persons Of color were citizens
of the United States within the intent and
meaning of the ac's Of Congress regulating
foreign and coasring trade, so as 10 be quail
fled 10 command vessels and Mr.. Writ, At
torney General, decided lha, they were not
and he moreover held the words "chizens Of
the United States," were used in the acts OF
Congress in the same sense as in the Con-
s,ilution. This view is also fully sustained
in recent opinio on Of the present Attorney
General.
The judicial decisions Of the country are TO
the same effect In Kent's Commentaries
vol. 2, p. 277, il lie stated that in 1892 Chief
Justice Dageett, Of Connecticut, held that free
blacks are rot 'ctizens" within the meaning
Of the term as used in the constitution Of the
United States and the Supreme Court Of
Tennessee, in The case Of the State against
Claiborne, held the same doctrine. Such be-
ing the construction of tho Constitution in
regard TO free persons Of color, i, is conceiv-
ed that they cannot be regarded, when be-
yonc the jurisdiction of the government, as
entitled to the inl rights oil citizens; hut the
Secretary directs me TO say that though the
department could not certify that such per.
sons are citizens of the United States, yet, If
satisfied Of the truth Of the facts, it would
give cerli ficaie, that they were born in the
United States, are free, and that the govern
ment thereof would regard it TO be lis duty to
protect them if wronged by foreign govern
mem while within lis jurisdiction for legal
and proper purpose.
am, sir, respectfully,
Your obedient servant
IA. THOMAS, Asst Sec.
II. H. RICE, New York city.
The several acls of Congress in reference 10
the naturalization Of foreigners, exhibit The
same settled and delerminale policy. Under
their provisions no negro, or his descendants,
eau be naiuralized, or be made citizens of
the United States The words of the first act
of Congress, passed but few months ofler
the adoption of the Federal Constitution, and
sanctioned by Tie approval Of George WASH
inglon, are as follows: "Any alien, being a
free uhite person, may become a Citizen"
SC. The act of 1895 uses the following Ian
guage; "Any free ,chite person may become
a cilizen," SC. The ac, of 1898, signed by
John Adams, and that of 1902, approved by
Thomas Jefferson, make use OF the same spe
, cific language and The subsequent: enact.
menls of Congress, passed in 1913 and 1924,
indicate precisely the same restrictive policy
upon the Eegro race. Chancellor Kent, in
his Commentaries on American Law"
susans this point in The following words:
"The act OF Congress confines The descrip-
lion of aliens capable Of naturalization, 10
free white persons Ipresume this exclude
the inhabitants OF Africa and their descend
ants; and ii may become question, to what
extent persons of mixed blood are excluded,
and what shades and degrees OF mixture Of
color disqualify all 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 yellow or Iawney races of the Asiatics,
aud it may well be doubled whether any Of
them are white persons within the putview
Of the law."--(2 Kents Com Sth Ed. 36)
The same distinguished writer says:
"In most of The United States there is a
distinction in respect 10 The political privile.
ges, between free white persons aud free col.
orsd persons of African blood and in no part
Of The country, except in Maine, do The latter
in point Of fact, participate equally with the
whites, in The exercise of civil and political
rights."-(2 Kent, Notes, 27s.)
He then proceeds to examine, al length,
the various disabilities under which The ne.
gro race labor in the differen. States, nd
ailer citing various authorities which prove
that, as general Thing, they do no, possess
and enjoy the same privileges and immuni.
lies belonging 10 a citizen under The Consti-
tuition OF the United States, he employs the
following significant language: "The better
opinio should think, was, that negroes, or
other slaves, born within and under tha alle-
glance of the United States, are natural born
subjects, bu, not cnizens." e Kent, Notes,
p. 222.)
But we are told that Judicial precedent"
is against US, and ''there is no such logic in
the books" as will sustaih the poin, al issue,
or that "can in any way be tortured into the
support Of the doctrine, that colorsd person
cannot be a citizen of any State, OF Of the
United States" Let us see how far we are
supported by the authority Of the courts.
In The year 1888, the Supreme Court of Ten
nessee decided and adjudged, that free blacks
were not citizens within the provisions OF the
second section of the fourth article OF the Con-
stnution of the United States. Estate Us. Cldi-
borne, /. Meig's Reps. 33l.) And in the same
State, Chief Justice Cstrou, in the case OF
Fishsr Us. Dubds, 6 Yrge's Reps. iis, "sivss
a strong picture of the degradation of free ne
gross living among whites, without motive
and without hope
10 the State Of Connecticut, tho same dsci'
sion is arrived at 10 case which is thus eta
teG by Chancellor Kent in the notes 10 his