Weekly national intelligencer., 1857-06-27


Language of the Constitution is The citizens of each
State shall be entitled all privileges and immunii Of
citizens In the several States If each State may make
such persons its citizens they become, such, entitled
10 the benefits of this article if there be natveborn
cilzenshlp of the United States distinct from native
born citizenship of the several States.
There is one view of this article entitled to considers
ZION In this connexon 1t is manifestly copied from the
Iourtn OF the Articles of Confederation will only slight
changes OF phraseology which render its meaning
precise and dropping the clause which excluded paupers
sagaoonds and fugyes from justice probably because
nee cases could be dealt with under the police of
the States and Especial provision therefor was not
sary IL has been suggested that in adopting it into the
constitution the words free inhabitants were changed
iof 'ne #ord citizens An examination of the forms
VI commonly used in the State papers of that
day and an attention the substance of this article of
the Confederation will show that the words free nhabi
tants, as then used, were synonymous with citizens.
When the Articles of Confederation were adopted we
were In the midst of the of the Revolution and there
were very few persons then embraced in the words ree
lnhaoltans who born on our soil 1t was not
Time when many, save the children of the SOIL were
willing to embark their fortunes in our cause: and
though there might be naccuracy in the uses of words
to call free inhabitants citizens it was then technical
rather than substantial difference If we look into the
constitutions and State papers of that period find the
inhabitants or people of these Colonies or the nhab
tants of this State Commonwealth employed to de-
slgnate those whom we should now denominaie citizens
The substance and purpose of the article prove it was
In this sense it used these Words it secures 10 the free
OF free citizens in every State 1t is not conceivable
that the States should have agreed to extend the prv
eges OF citizenship TO persons not entitled enjoy the
privileges OF citizens In the States where they dwelt
that under this article there class of persons in
some the States citizens whom were secured ell
the privileges and immunies of citizens when they
went into other States and the just conclusion Is that
though the Constitution cured naccuracy of language
1t left the substance of this article in the National Con-
sttuton the same as it in the Articles of Con-
federation.
Tba $50 4.
tempt to exclude free persons of color from its opera
tion has been already stated 1t is reasonable to con-
cude that this history known those who framed and
adopted the Constitution That under this fourth article
OF the Confederation free persons of color might be
titled to the privileges of general citizenship otherwise
entitled thereto is clear When this article was in sub
stance placed in and made part of the Constitution of
the United States with no change in its language cacu
lated to exclude free coored from the benefit Of
its provisions the presumption is to say the least
strong that the practical effect which was designed to
have and did have under the former Government was
designed to have and should have under the new Gov
ernment.
1t may be further objected that free eoored persons
may be citizens of the United States depends only on
the will OF master whether he will emancpate his slave
and thereby make him citizen. Not so. The master
is subject the will of the State Whether he shall be
allowed to emancipae his slave all if So on what
dltions and what is to be the potal status of the freed
man. depend not the will of the master, but the
will of the State upon which the political of all its
native born inhabitants depends. Under the Constitu
lion of the United States each State has retained this
power of determining the political status its
inhabitants and no exception thereto be found in
the Constitution. And If master in q slavehoding
State should carry his slave into State and there
emancpate him. he would not thereby make him a
tive-born citizen of that State and consequently
privileges could be claimed by such emancpaed slave
as citizen of the United States. For whatever powers
the States may exercise to confer privileges of citizen
ship persons not born their SOIL the Constitution
of the United States does not recognise such citizens.
Ac hoco
of public law that allegiance and citizenship sprngrom
the place of BIRTH 1t leaves to the States the appca
ton of that principle to individual cases. 1t secured
the citizens of each State the privileges and immunes
of citizens in every other State But it does allow
the States the power make aliens citizens permit
State to take persons born the soil Of another
State and contrary the laws and policy of the State
where they born, make them its citizens, and
citizens of the United States No such deviation from
the great rule of public law contemplated by the
Constitution; and when any such attempt shall be
uay made it is to be met by applying it those rules
OF law and those principles of good faith which will be
sufficient to decide it. and not in my Judgment by deny
ing that all the free native inhabitants of State
who its citizens under its constitution and laws
also citizens of the United States.
1t has sometimes been urged that coored persons are
shown not to be citizens of the United States by the fact
that the naturalization laws apply only white persons
But whether person born in the United States be
be not citizen cannot depend laws which refer only
to Aliens and do not affect the of persons born in
the United States. The effect which can be atri-
bued to them is show that Congress has not deemed
expedien generally to apply the rule coored aliens
That they might do if thought fit is clear The Con-
sttuton has not excluded them. And since that has
conferred the power Congress naturaize colored
aliens, it certainly shows color is necessary qua-
fcaton for citizenship under the Constitution of the
United States 1t may be added that the power make
colored citizens of the United States under the
Constitution has been actually exercised in repeated and
important instances. (See the Treaties with the Choc-
taws, of September q, $780, art IA; with the Chero
KEGS, of May %, 1886, art. II Treaty of Guadalupe
Hidago, February 2, 1S4S, art g.
do not deem 1t necessary to review at length the le-
gsation OF Congress having less bearing the
of colored persons does to me
to have any considerable tendency prove that has
been considered by the legislative department of the
Government that such persons citizens of the
United States. Undoubtedly they have been debarred
from the exercise of particular rights or privileges ex
tended to white persons, but believe always in terms
which, by implication admit they may be citizens Thus
he act of May II, 1892, for the organization of the
militia, directs the enrolment of every free, able
bodied, white male citizen. An assumption that
but white persons citizens would be as inconsistent
with the just import of this language that all citizens
are able-bodied or males.
So the of February g. S03 70 Stat at Large 205
prevent the importation of certain persons States
Fhen by the laws thereof their admission is prohibited
its first section forbds all masters of vessels import
bring any negro, nulatto other person of color
lot being native, citizen, registered seaman of the
United States" &c.
The acts of March g. 1Sl3 section l. q Stat at LARGE
'09,} and March |, 1817 section 3, (3 Stat Large
,51 concerning seamen certainly imply there may be
of color natives of the United States who
citizens of the United States. This implication is
in accordance with the fact For only
aves but free persons of color born In Of the
states, not citizens But there is nothing these
inconsistent with the citizenship of persons of color