The Washington union., 1857-05-27
The supreme Court of the United states.
THE DRED SCOTT CASE.
The 0@cidl Report.
fcoSTIsUEp. I

the early hostility ~ displayed 10 the slave TRADE on
the coast of Africa, may expect to ind the laws o
that State as Ienient and favorable to the as
those of any other State in the Union and If we md
that the time the constitution adopted they were
not even there raised to the rank Of citizens but were
still held and treated property, and the laws relating
them passed with reference altogether 70 he interest
and convenience of the white we shall hardly hnd
them elevated TO higher rank anywhere else
brief notice of the laws OF two other States and we
shall pass on to other considerations
By the laws Of New Hampshire collected and finally
passed in 1875 was permitted TO be enrolled IN
the militia of State but free white citizens and the
same proysion is found in subsequent collection Of the
laws made in 1865. Nothing could more strongly mark
the entire Reputation of the African race The alien is
excluded because, being born in foreign country he
cannot be member of the community until he is natu
ralised But why the African race, born In the
State permitted to share in OF the highest duties
of the czenY The is obvious he Is not, by the
institutions and laws of TIE State numbered among its
people He forms part of the sovereignty Of the State
and is not therefore called to uphold and defend It.
Again in 1892 Rhode Island in its revised code,
ed law forbidding persons who were authorized to JON
persons in marriage from joining In marriage any white
person with any negro, INDIAN or mulato, under the
penalty of two hundred dollars and declaring all such
marriages absolutely null and void and the same law
again reenaced in its revised code Of 1874 So that
down TO the aforementioned period strongest mark
of ineriorty and degradation was fastened upon the AT
rican in that State.
1t would be impossible to enumerate and compress in
the space usually allotted to opinion OF court the
various laws marking the condition of this which
were passed from time to time after the revolution and
before and since the adoption of the constitution of the
United States In addition to those already referred to,
it sufficient to say, that Chancellor Kent whose accu
ry and research will question: states in the sixth
edition of his Commentaries published in lS4s, vol,
25S b that in part Of the country except Maine
did the African race in point of fact, participate equally
with the whites in the exercise of civil and political
rights.
The legislation of the States therefore shows in
ner not to be mistaken the inferior and subject condition
AZ fba tima he yyagn
and long afterwards throughout the thirteen States by
which that instrument framed and it is hardly CON
sstent with the respect due to these States to suppose
that they regarded at that tme ellowcitizens and
members of the sovereignty class of beings whom they
had thus stigmatized whom are bound, out OF
respect the State soveeignties to they had
deemed Just and necessary thus to sgmatize and upon
whom they had impressed such deep and enduring marks
of inferority and degradation that when they met
in convention form the constitution they looked upon
them as portion of their constituents designed to in
cude them in the provisions carefully inserted for the
security and protection of the liberties and rights of their
citizens cannot be supposed that they intended to
secure them rights and privileges, and rank in the
political body throughout the Union which every one
of them denied within the limits of its dominion.
More especially it be believed that the large slave
holding States regarded them included in the word cit
izens or would have consented to constitution which
might compel them to receive them in that character
from another State For if they received, and
entitled to the privileges and immuntes of citizens, it
would exempt them from the operation OF the special
laws and from the police regulations which they consid
cred to be necessary for their safety 1t would give
to persons the negro race who recognised cit
zeng in any one State of the Union the right to enter
every other State whenever they pleased sngly in
companies without pass passport and without obsruc
tion to soou there long they pleased to go where
they pleased at every hour of the day night without
rnolesation unless they committed violation of law
for which white man would be punished and it would
give them the full liberty of speech i'll public and in pri
vate upon oil subjects upon which its citizens might
speak hold public meetings upon political affairs, and
to keep and carry wherever they went. And all
of this would be done in the face of the subject of the
same color both and slaves and inevitably producing
discomfort and nsubordination among them, and endan
gering the peace and safety of the State.
1t is impossible it would seem to believe that the great
men of the slayehodng States, who took large share
in framing the constitution of the United States and
ercsed much influence in procuring its adoption could
have been forgetu regardless Of their safety
and the safety of those who trusted and conded in them
Besides this want of foresight and would have been
utterly inconsistent with the caution displayed in provi
ding for the admission of members into this political
family for when they gave to the citizens of each State
the privileges and mmunities of citizens in the several
States they at the time took from the several States
the power of naturalization and confined that power
clusiyely the federal government No State will
ing permit another State to determine who should
should not be admitted of its citizens and entitled
to demand equal rights and privileges with their peo
pie within their territories The right of naturiza
tion was therefore, with accord surrendered by the
States and confded to the federal government. And
this power granted to Congress to establish uniform
rule of naturalization is by the wellunderstood meaning
of the word confined to persons born in foreign
try, under foreign government. 1t is not power
to raise to the rank of citizen any born in the
United States who, from birth parentage, by the
laws of the country belongs to inferior and sub
ordinate class and when we find the States guard
ing themselves from the indscreet improper admis-
sion by other States of emiqants from other coun-
tries by giving the power exclusively to Congress-
cannot fail to see that they could have left
with the States much important power-that
is, the power of Transforming into citizens
class Of persons who in that character would be much
dangerous to the peace and safety of large portion
of the Union than the few foreigners of the States
might improperly naturalize. The constitution upon its
adoption obviously took from the States all power by
any subsequent legislation to introduce citizen into
the political family of the United States any one mat
ter where he born what might be his character
condition and it gave to Congress the power to confer
this character upon those only who born outside
the dominions of the United States and law OF
State therefore, passed since the constitution adopt
ed give any right of citizenship outside Of its
territory.
clause similar to the one in the constitution in rela-
ton to the rights and mmunites of citizens of State
in the other States contained in the Articles Of Con-
federation. But there is a difference Of language which
is worthy of note The provision in the Articles of Con-
States, paupers, vagabonds and fugitives from justice
excepted should be entitled to all the privileges and inn
munities Of free citizens in the several States"
1t will be observed that under this confederation each
State had the right to decide for ITSELF and in its tri
bunas whom it would acknowledge free inhabtant
of another State The term free ahabian in the gener-
aty terms would certainly include one of he