Civilian & telegraph. [volume] (Cumberland, Md.) 1859-1875, 1859-06-02
Thursday Morning, June 2. 1859.
Agents for the Civilian a. Telegraph.
Massachusetts Naturalization
Inv.

simply as we then stated, in consideration of
our neighbours weakness, he being aggrievel
as he Informed us, because, according to his
conception Of prouicty, We had not treated
him with becoming courtesy by attending to
1t before The reason why we failed to notice
his question at an earlier period is that We
looked upon it as work of supcrerogaton,
for as an American, conducting an American
journal, the Alleganian must have known that
we approved the law of Massachusetts,. In
his reply to us, our neighbor fails to answer
several questions We put TO him, and pro-
pounds series to us of a strictly personal
character, to which he might have added others
inquring where we were born and when
- We were naturalizcd? We remark here that
our neighbor does not properly understand
the meaning Of the terms he employs or, his
charge of discourtcsy was merely assumed
Again that he has forfeited all claim upon us
to that courtesy for which he would have us
believe he is such a sticklcr, inasmuch as he
has treated our questions with Indifference
'''N ''eo"'H ~ IL "pfuiNit Otli DtlSHDtlS
object in the question he propcundcd us was
not to elicit what the American party thought
OF the law Of Massachusetts, but what was our
personal views and hence his series of qllcs-
tons. If our neighbor supposcs he can lead
us into personal controversy lie is mistaken,
for we have more important matters on hand.
We have tc expose the dupcity, the frauds,
corruptions, tigotry ard intolerance of the
Sham Democracy, and have therefore deter
mined to try, at least to avoid any thing 50
distasteful and improbable to our readers and
ourselves. The Allcganian charges that our
reply was non-committal' and that we
lodged" his question, and then affirms, that
= we said we approved the action of the peo-
pie of Massachusetts. Ncighlor is not that
contradiction, we were non-committal,
lodged the question and yet we answered il.
The fact is so far from being non-committal
OF dodgng his question, VIC gave it a categor-
ical answer. proving again that our ncighbor
writes moro for sound than sense. Having
given an answer of the most specific charac-
ter to the question proposed to us, VIC pro-
cccdcd to assign some OF the reasons why we
approved the action of the people OF MaSsG-
chusetis. These reasons the Alleganian dcs-
igpates as sophistical. We assorted that the
spirit OF the law in nearly every State in the
Union was in keeping with the law of Mas
sachusets. That is that the law the States
referred to require a probation, more or less
limited, before the stranger can exercise the
elective franchise. This our neighbor, as we
have said designates as sophiStry, and aflirms
is not true. This declaration upon the part
Of the Alleganian we consider reckless, and
shnll not handy words with him. Again our
neighbor asserts that five years probation is
net two lons-(querry, may it not be too
short p to acquire knowledge of tho Consti-
tuition and laws Of the land. Surely our neigh
Dor must DO very scientific man, for ht has
been able 10 take the exact CALLER of every
foreigners intellectual capabilities, and has
determined beyond all cavil, that it requires
just five years for the most intellectual and
well educated among them TO understand our
Constitution aud laws, and the most iterato
and stupid not one day more or one day less.
What genius our neghbor must be. But
he informs us that "the foreigner immigratcs
hither with the knowledge of the fact that he
will have to undergo probation of five years
before he can become citizen" Now who
@sgreen enough to believe such twalllc p
We venture TO assert that there is not one in
five hundred that has any such knowledge
This is perfect assumption ncishbor, or if
you please, "soplistry" But if this lie
good argument for our neighbor, so also is it
for U.s. The law of Massachusetts, is not ex-
post facto,-it don't look back--it is not re-
Prospective, therefore all who immigrate to
that State now, will 30 there according to our
.ncighbors logic, with knowledge Of the fact
that they will have to remain in the State two
years after being naturalizcd before they can
vote, and will therefore have no right to COM
plain. 1t should be borne in mind that the
naturalization Of an alien makes him citi-
zen Of the United Staics.-not of the State Of
Maryland or Massachusetts,. Each State has
right to her own municipal regulations in
reference to this as well MS other matters.
= hence, South Carolina and Massachusetts re-
quire residence of two years, before the ma
t,iralizcd foreigner can exercise the rights of
citizenship within their respective jurisdic
tons. Minnesota and Oregon, both Demo
cratic States, allow the foreigner to vote he
fore lie is naturalizcd-b lc becomes
citizen of the United States Making him in
fact a citizen, within their bounds without lis
having foresworn his allegiance to foreign
power--this is one Of the beauties of Democ-
racy. The facts here stated show that in diff
ferent Democratic States, difference of views
Obtain on this subject, and it remains for our
sapient neighbor TO reconcile this discordance
in his harmonious party. a word more. in
our issue of last week VIC showed that if the
Americans and Republicans Of Massachusetts,
were to be blamed for tho law they have re-
Gently enacted in regard TO the Alien, the
Democracy were much more culpable, for
they had made the country to ring with their
denunciations Of the American party for hay
ing conserved such purpose, yet they set
the example in actually cnacsing The law, as
in, the ease Of South Carolina. This fact our
lnciehbor doesnot pretend to deny, as he could
not, without falsifying history, but endeavors
TO avoid the force of our blow by skulking
behind the declaration that he don't approve
IL. This is chilis play. What? does the
Allcaspian when the Inconsistency aud du-