The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-07-29

! would have the concurrent power of naturaliza
| ton, and the "rule" might not be one bpt many,
| not IAN uniform" but many multform rules OF ma
turalizaton. If Massachusetts might pr0l0ng them
| Virginia might shorten the period OF probation.
| An alien landing in the one, and remaining and
| qualifying there, might take twentyone years to
| become entitled to the privileges and immunites of
| a citizen of the United States, or might never be
entitled to them; or, landing in the other and re-
naming and qualifying there, might take but one
all. Such absurdity would destroy the very end Of
the national power, the unity and uniformity of the
rule. A rule" to be rule must be uniform and
4 universal"
| True, each State may prescribe the qualifications
Of their electors and the electors Of the most
| numerous branches Of the State Legislatures, by
article l. section 2, clause l. Of the Constitution of
the United States are the electors of the federal
| representatives. Thus, State may possibly ex
clude foreign born citizens from being electors in
| her limits; but this even is questionable and
whether the naturalized citizen may be allowed to
uralized citizen Of the United States, and of this
new birthright he cannot be deprived no more than
the duty of the United States to protect him can be
renowned or ignored. If he may not be allowed to
vote in State he will be in another. If Massa-
chusetts may not cOncede to him equality Virginia
| will. He may be citizen of the United States
| without being citizen of any State or Territory
or of the District of Columbia for want of sufficient
| residence in either to make him citizen there;
thus, he may land from abroad in one State, give
notice of his intention in another travel all the time
in many States during his five years probation and
finally be admitted in any one of them, or in that
| where he gave notice, without acquiring citizen
ship in either; and yet he will be citizen Of the
| United States After becoming citizen ofthe United
| States, he may then for example, come to Virginia
with the intent to remain and reside here, and
| actually reside here the time required by our
laws to be citizen of this State, and thus become
citizen of Virginia as we'll as OF the United States
And after he becomes citizen OF Virginia, we'll
ofthe United States, he then has for his protec
ton section 2, clause L. of article Of the constitu
| ton of the United States to witt
"The citizen of each State shall be entitled to all
privileges and immunities of citizens Of the several
States.S
Then, if native citizen of Virginia, the neighbor
of the naturazed citizen, may go to Massachusetts,
and be entitled, by period of residence any
terms and conditions, to become citizen of that
State, he (the naturalzed) may 60 there, and be
entitled to the same privilege and immunity Thus,
the constitution of the United States protects him
| with equality of privileges and mmunties any
where and everywhere; but to be fully entitled to
thot protection he must be both citizen of the
| United States and of some particular State.
All determinations between citizens, raising some
and depressing others in classes, antrepublcan
and odio!H, and utterly opposed to the laws Of Anne
| rican citizenship.
Would any, then, be found to set up the new
| doctrine of nonprotection," of non-interven-
tion,' against the republican equality of the
privileges and immunites of naturalized citi-
zens Would any, in this behalf, ignore
| the powers and duties of government to protect
naiuralized citizens? would any allow naturalized
citizens to be excluded from States and Territories,
by Odious distinctions between classes of citizens?
Should not all citizens in a republic be equal in
their rights of any kind Of persons and of pro-
perty? To answer these questions. is to answer
your second interrogatory. To admit of such dis
ordinations is to countenance orders of rank in
citizenship as bad as patrician and plebeian!
3. You ask my views regarding the legality
trade"
This subject is but too fruitful of isquistion and
6icCucsinu rrlOD xyhi I anfor baro T,,
short, my views are
BY article l. section 9, clause /, of the con.
stitution Of the United States, The migration or
importation" of certain persons" known to be
African slaves, may be prohibited by the Con-
gress' subsequent to the year 1867
cite what conceive to be the plain implication
of the clause, according to the Interpretation of
Congress and the courts.
Congress passed laws to prohibit the African
slave trade by our citizens, and under our flag, in
our vessels. The authorities of the United
States, in every department of the govern
ment, for nearly half century, have sus.
tanned and enforced these laws. For more than
three years, as Envoy of the United States at the
Conrt, of Brazil was zealously engaged in snatch
ing the flag of our country from the pollution of
that trade, carried on chiefly by New Engands ves-
sells and crews and Old England panos da costa
goods fit for the coast of Africa and my volumi-
nous correspondence with the Department of State,
from August, 1874, to August, 1917 will show what
effect gave the laws of the United States for the
suppression of the African slave trade, as valid and
constitutional laws You will there see my reasons
for saying not only that it would be illegal" and
"nexpedient,' but immoral and disgracefu, for the
United States to reopen the slave trade, or to tole
rate the new importation of African slaves into this
country ] can easily defend the slavery Of the
United States, as it now exists and has existed
from first to last, and show that it is now, at least
well founded on principles wholly opposed to the
reopenlng OF the African slave trade; that the one
is'wholy irreconciable with and opposed to the
other; and the reOpening of the slave trade would
be as offensive to the moral sense of the large ma.
lority OF Shareholders and of the people of the
South as to any other people in our own or in any
other country So much for that question.
4. You ask my "views, also, regarding the
legitimate bounds Of Congressional legislation in
regard to the territories, which, while maintaining
non-lntervention on the question of forcing or ex-
Guiding slavery from them, yet should claim the
constitutional power, if necessary to protect the
rights of persons and property within their borders
leaving the people free at the proper time to form
State constitution, and seek admission into the
Union, whether free or slave States, as they may
. eect?'
This question itself, in the shortest space states
my views in substance with precision In full, they
are contained in pamphlet entitled 90 Terito-
rial government, and the Admission Of New
States &C., being letter addressed by me to
William F. Sanford, Esq, of Alabama, dated Rich
you. Its length, it being treatise in fact, enables
those opposed to its doctrines to misrepresent it to
those who do not read it for themselves. They say
it claims "a code" by Congress for slavery in the
Territories There is no such claim set up by me. All
ask of those who doubt is to read the pamphlet
and to find any such claim in it if they can. On the
contrary, at page l44, say:-"That the Inhabitants
or people Of Territory are sovereign to form for
themselves constitution and State government"
and " that n their territorial condition they
are within the entire control and jurisdiction,
or under the entire rule and regulation Of Congress-
subject to the constitution of the United States;
and that the citizens of each and all of the States
are alike equally entitled to protection in all the
privileges and immunities Of persons and Of pro-
perry, common to equal confederates" And this
right and this duty Of protection ia not to be evaded
or avoided either by the false ad cdptdndun, clamor
that ga code' is required to be enacted by Congress
for the protection of slave property. This is but
to cast odum upon slavery, by creating the impress
sion that discrimination is necessary to distin-
guish it above what is due to other personal and
proprietary rights. On the contrary, no such code
ia required to create either the right or the duty of
protection, and no law is necessary to distinguish
slave property from any other propertv All per.