The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1859-07-27
W00DSFIElD MONROE COUNTY, OHI0 JULY q, 1859.

grievances alleged against the British
King in the Declaration of Independence,
that had "endeavored to prevent the pop
ulation of these States--for that purpose
obstructing the laws of naturalization of
foreigners, refusing to pass others to
encourage their emigration hither, &c.
The Constitution thus clearly recognises
the principle of expatriation in the stron-
gest manner II would have been incon-
sistent in itself and unworthy Of the char
act er of the authors of that instrument,
to hold out inducements to foreigners to
abandon their native land, to, renounce
Allegiance to their native government and
to become citizens of the United States,
if they had not been convinced of the ab-
solute and unconditional right of expa-
tciation. Congress have uniformally ac-
ted upon this principle ever since the
commencement of the Federal Govern.
ment. They established "a uniform rule
of naturalization nearly seventy years ago.
I here has since been no period in our his
tory when laws for this purpose did not
exist, though their provisions have under
gone successive changes. The alien, in
order to become'a citizen, must declare
on oath or affirmation that he will sup
port the Constitution of the United States;
and, at the same time, he is required to
absolutely and entirely rem ounce and alb
jure all allegiance and fidelity to every
foreign prince, potentate, State or sover
hot nd RI hv
name, the prince, potentate, State or SOW
ereignty whereof he was before citizen" {"
The exercise of the right Of na.uraii-
zation, and the consequent recognition
of the principle of expatriation, are not
confined to the government of the United
States. There is not a country in Europe
l believe at the present moment, where
the law does not authorize the naturaliza-
tion of foreigners in one form or other. =
Indeed, in some of these countries this
law is more liberal than our own towards
foreigners. . .: ....- ...,- ,-,s.. ...-
The question; then, arises, what rights
do our laws confer upon foreigner by
granting him naturalization? I answer,
, all the rights, privileges, and immunities
which belong to native born citizen, in
, their full extent, with the single quali6ca-
t tion that, under the Constitution. "no per-
son except natural born citizen is eligi-
, BILE to the Office of President With
: this exception, the naturalized citizen
: from and after the date of his naturaliza
tion, both at home ard abroad, is placed
. upon the very same footing witt
D the native citizen. He is neither in {
j better nor worse condition. If a nativ,
j citizen chooses to take up his residence il
: q foreign country for the purpose of ad
n vancing his fortune or promoting hi
:, happiness, he is whilst there bound to ODE,
3 its municipal laws equally with those VIII
have lived in it all their lives. He goe
: abroad with his eyes open; and if thes
: laws be arbitrary and unjust, he has cho
sen to abide by the consequences.
;. they are administered in an equal spiri
towards himself and towards native sub
n Ijects, this government has no right
!. interfere authoritively in his behalf. T
.e do this would be to violate the right Q
il an independent nation to legislate within
% its own Territories If this governmen
were to undertake such task, we Nigh
N soon be involved in trouble with nearl
70 the whole world. To protect our citizen
is against, the application of this principl
:. of universal law, in it's full extent, we hav
Il treaties with several nations securing ez
,s emption to American citizens when resi-
q. ding abroad from some of the onerou
Ia duties required from their own subjects
Where no such treaty exists and an Amer
,t lean citizen has committed crime or in
le Cured penalty for violating any mum
d cipal law whatever of the country of hi
ID temporary residence, he is just as liable
ID be tried and punished for, his offence, a
re- though he had resided in it from the da
III Of his birth. If this has not been don
III before his departure and he should volur
n tarily return under the same jurisdiction
g. he may be tried and punished for the O
in fence upon principles of universal law
n Under such circumstances, no perso
he would think of contending that an inte
+. mediate residence in his own country fl
he years would deprive the government who's
an laws he had violated of the power to Ell
force their execution. The very san
principle, and no other, is applicable I
= - the case of naturalized citizen, shou
&c . he choose to return to his native countr
o. In shat case, if he had committed an Q
fence against the law before his departu
at he is responsible for it in the same ma
he Iner as the native American, citizen
u whom 1 have referred. In the langual
" of the late Mr.. Marcy, in his letter
in the 10Th January, 1854. to Nj. Jackso
nd then our charge d'affairs to Vienna, witt
ee speaking of Tousig's case, ''every natio
'e- whenever its laws are violated by any Of
mt owing obedience to them, whether he
ht a citizen or stranger, has right to i
n fict the penalties incurred upon the tran
n. gressor, if found within its jurisdiction
|al This principle is too we'll established
ne admit of serious controversy. If one
r. our native or naturalized citizens we
bin,calf fo pupichmont hv n