Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1859-06-27
The Right of Expatriation False
hoods of the Opposition.

national law contend for the right Of ex
patriation-that is, that citizen, or sub
joc!, has the natural right, voluntarily, to
renounce his allegiance to the government
under which he was born and that all
laws, such as are in existence in some OF
the monarches Of Europe, claiming the
perpetual allegiance" of the subjects born
within their jurisdiction, is in violation of
the law of nations.
The government Of the United States
has always taken this view Of the subject,
and one Of the causes OF the last war with
GREAT Britain, was in vindication Of this
right. The right Of a citizen, or subject,
Of one government, TO renounce his alle-
sianco to that government and become
the citizen or subject, of another, under n
proper system Of naturalization, is pecu-
Early American doctrine, and neither its
wisdom, or policy, was ever questioned,
until the era of now-Nothipgism. Un.
til then, the citizens of Europe who for
sock their native shores TO seek home
in this broad land, were received with
hearty welcome. Their coming ,as hail
ed with JOY and gladness. No one fe.t
sggrieved, No selfish spirit denied them
the opportunity to better their condition.
Their coming was valuable acquisition of
wealth, of labor, and of industry to our
country and their welcome was univer>
sal. All that was required to entitlo them
to an equal participation of the adyanta.
ges Of free government, was to bear an
equal share OF the common burthens. The
advantages were thus mutual, for they
very materially aided in making our coune
iry what it now is. They were happy and
eontented, for they were never insulted
with the breath of envy or malice.
Such, We repeat, was the condition Of
our social relations previous to the advent
Of w-Nothingism. But that grand
fraud upon natural rights--that wicked
assault upon the spirit and theory of our
institutions, has had its day, and if it was
not for the contempt still entertained for
the originators and leaders Of the faction,
would be entirely forgotten.
But in perfect consistency with the hyp-
oerisy Of their creed, they now attempt,
by falsehood, to regain the friendship of
this class of citizens whom they so meanly
and bitterly, and so recently assailed
Whom these assaults were made upon our
adopted citizens the Democratic party
stood up manfully in their defence No
man was recognized as Democrat who
was not openly opposed-who would not
boldly denounce-the illiberal and anti
American doctrines ofthe proscriptionists
Now their organs allege that the Demo-
Gratis were insincere that they we're not
the real friends of foreign-born citizens
and that they (the Know-Noihings) were
the real friends of naturalized citizens,
insmuch as they held that they could
not possess equal rights with native born
citi1ens-that they could not expatrate
themselvcs-could not annul their sllegi-
ance To the governments under which
they were born-and that, knowing this,
they did not want to mslead or deceive
ahem by holding out false hopes. And
TO sustain this allegation they cite the fol-
lowing letter of the venerable Secretary OF
State, Gen. CAss-himself a hero of the
war Of 1912, in defence Of the very princi'
pies they now charge him with ignoring
The letter is dated tho 7th Of May last,
and is in reply to note of inquiry ad-
dressed to him by Mr. lie Clerc of Ten
nessee, a native of France:
"Your letter of the 18th inst, has been
received. In reply have to state that il
is understood that the French government
claims military service from all natives OF
France who may be found within its juris
diction. Your naturalization in this coun>
try will not exempt you from that claim
should you voluntarily return thither.
LEWIS CASS."
Is there anything inconsistent with the
doctrines or practices of our government,
or the Democratic party, in the above p
The question asked by NJ. lie Clcrc, is
fully and fairly answered, md he is told
that being native Of France, should he
be "sound within the jurisdiction" of the
French government, that government
could "claim" military service from him
and that his naturalization here would not
exempt him from that "claim." 1t does
not say that that ''clain" would be just
ono. 1t does not say that it would be con.
s;stent with the doctrines held by the
government of the United States-nor
does it say that such "claim" would be
acknowledged by our government. None
of these things does it say, or even admit,
and yet John NJ. Bolts, and other Know>