Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1859-06-29
From the Washington Constitution
THE RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF NATuR-
ALLIED CITIZENS.

Allied CITIZENS
There is an evident disposition on the part OF
portion of the opposition press, whose lfTarianle
habit it is to find fault with and msrepresent every
act of Mr.. Buchanans cabinet to create false I'M
preston to the meaning of General Casss letter
to Mr.. Felix lie Clerc, natulalized citizen born IN
France and to make appear that the Secretary OF
State has departed from the previous practice of the
State Department. and sought to deny to naturaliz%d
citizens certain rights and immuuities to which, 1t Is
commended, they entitled
Nothing can be more entirely at variance with the
fact In the case of Simon Tousg, an Austrian SUBJ
ject who emigrated to this country, declared his IN
tenon to become citizen Of the United States, re-
turned to the land of his BIRTH and being liable be-
fore his emigration to certain penalties under the
municipal law of Austria was held to he still liable
after his return, but claimed the protection of the
United States as relief from the liability, Mr. Mar
cy wrote to Mr.. Jackson United States charge d
afFaires at Vienna, January 10th, inch: "louslg
voluntarily returned to Austria and placed himself
within the reach of her municipal laws. tie went
BY his own free act under their jurisdiction, and
thereby subjected himself to them. If he had in
Cured penalties and assumed duties while under
those laws, he ght have expected that they would
be enforced against him, and should have known
that the new political relation he had acquired, it,
indeed he had acquired any, could not operate as
release from these penalties Having been once sub
iect to the municipal laws of Austria, and while UNI
der her Jurisdiction violated these laws, his with
drawal from that jurisdiction, and acquiring differ
ent national character. would not exempt him from
their operation whenever he again chose to place
himself under them" Wheaton also, while United
States minister at the court of Prussia, settled this
pont in the case of j. p. Knocke, native of PruS-
STA, who, being naturalized citizen of the United
States returned of his own free will to his native
country and having been called on to perform mill
tary duty, applied to the United States legation for
protection. Mr.. Wheaton replied to his application
in the following language:
Had you remained in the United States, or Wis
tied any other foreign country Except PrusSia) on
your lawful business you would have been protect
ed by the American authorities at home and abroad
in the enjoyment of all vour ights and privileges as
naturazed citizen of the United States But hay
ing returned to the country Of your birth, your ma
tive domice and national character revert, $50 long
rs YOU remain in the PrTSSian doTinionS) and yon
are bound in all respects to obey laws exactly as if
| you had never emf ratcd.'
There is certainly nothing in Gen Cass's brief let
Ter to Mr.. lie Cerc which can be Justly said to go
further than Mr. Marcy, to curtall or abrogate
the rights and privileges which naturalZcd citizens
possess and enjoy under the municipal laws of the
United States by which those ri ghtS and privileges
are described and limited The fact is that General
Casss letter did not raise the question of the rights
liabilities of the rIlturaliZcd citizen. 1t merely
stated the fact of the existence of certain law of
France by which citizens of that country are held to
be liable to military service not with view to en-
press any opinion as to the proprety or improperly
of that law, but with the benevolent purpose OF
warning natives of France who may have emigrated
to this country before they have discharged their
liability to serve in the French army. and have he
come naturazcd citizens of the United States that
in case they return to France, and bring themselves
within the jurisdiction of the municipal laws Of
France they expose themselves to be required to
| fulfill the obligations which they had incurred
prior to their emigration. In further proof Of this
assertion we would draw attention to the letter
from the Secretary of State to Mr. llocr, OF Gin
| cinnati, which publish below. and in which he
| clearly enuncateS the views of the Government of
the United States both to the right of cxpatra-
ton and the protection extended to all those citizens
of foreign nations who exercise it by becoming natn
rallied citizens of this rcpubc-pratcction in all
! the privileges of their adopted domicilc, not only
within the limits of the United States, but in every
; country in the world The Secretary explains. with
equal brevty and effect, the position of the United
States with regard to naturalized citizens who may
voluntarily return to the country of their birth.
which is, that they not liable to any duties or
penalties except such existing at the period
of their emigration of which the naturalized cit
zen is always aware, and to which he can only be
jurisdiction Of the municipal law OF the country of
which he is native. 1t cannot be said that there
is anything harsh to the naturazcd citizen in this
Interpretation of the law of nations since the opera
ton of the municipal law of foreign States for pen
altics incurred by naturazed citizens before they
left their native country is not confined to them.
If native citizen Of the United States had COM
mitted crmc or subjected himself to penalties I'M
der the municipal laws of Prussia or France or
= any other foreign country. in the absence of any
treaty stpuatons, his cXtradition cannot of course
be demanded from this Governments but if he vol
unfairly returns within the limits of those countries
wherein the crime committed or the penalty in
CURED, he would be properly subjected to the pun
! i>hment awarded 70 his offence by the municipal
laws of those States. The principle is that where
: crimes have been committed or penalties incurred
by an individual under the municipal laws of the
State of his birth, he cannot avoid those penalties
or that punishment by naturalization in a foreign
country in case of his return to the place of his
tlvlty The municipal laws of one nation whether
OF naturalization, exemption. or otherwise have no
extra territorial effect by any retrospective
energy to repeal the laws of another State which
had been violated by native of that State prior to
his emigration here, in case of his return. He has
the same privileges and protection here and else
where as native, and no more.
1t is obviously unfair to attempt to constitute any
comparison between the supposed case of Mr. Lie
Clerc and that of Martin Koszta. The latter was
different from the former in every particular; and
so Mr.. Marcy considered it, as may be seen by ref
erence to his argument in the Tousig case. Koszta
whether he committed crimes against the municipal
laws of Austria or not, did not return within the
jurisdiction of those laws, and was, therefore, i'm
properly arrested by Austrian officials in Smyrna
since no treaty obligation existed between Austri;
and Turkey which entitled the former to demand
the extradtiop|of offenders of that character Tha
such case has no point of similitude to that sup
posed by Mr.. lie Clerc, must be obvious to every
body. who gives himself the trouble to reflect, o.
who honestly desires to form a just opinion
We confidently believe that the following offica
exposition of the views of Government will set
tic the question, and remove the erroneous and un
generous Impressions which INSCRIPTIONS partisan
have sought to create with regard to the action O
the State Department in the matter of Mr.. LIE Cerc
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Washington, june IA, 1859.