The weekly Panola star. [volume] (Panola, Miss.) 1857-1881, 1866-04-21

iN' +.
ffihiel i1 tHgf n ib6 p0Waf ~.
ifrffihH f nH.iufm uIa " fmlHmfi .
iaiIW n Hm dutdfYl fhni Hia
lsa fuNot w prnafiic % mlr fr iho|
removal ~ disabilities e0u erurm
upon ftcIgn birb II appam ihcu,
'lpi lho oHlf power granted io CON
iftaH ~ legislilp concerning citizen
'hlp l. confined ~ fho removal of
.ta disabilities "A fupirn hiHhH
W. " remembered Tint upon tli.
hc did not dincrlf from d maIori
of The court, nor did he differ
from q majority ~ the urrt upon
point that citizenship Of the
United States consequent upon birth
Ia q State j. 10 depend upon the faci
whether the constitution and laws oil
The State mako the party 10 born 4
VI the State In regard Ia
this, Mr. johnson said the opinion Of
Judge Curtis has never been quea-
toned
We have, then, the unanimous
opinion of the Supreme Court upon
these two points. II follows, inoyi-
tably, that there are but two methods
by which q person may become u
citizen Of the United States. One is
through the operation of natuuliza-
ton laws, and the other through
the operation Of State laws. at
is not says Judge Curtis, "thc ma
tiyity that imparts the character Of
citizen or alien there must be added
0to the fact of nativity the other fact
!, hat at the time of his birth he Is, by
, he constitution or laws of the State,
citizcn of that State"
: My the constitution and laws of
: Massachusetts, a negro is a citizen Of
n State. According to the opin-
idiof Judge Curtis, he is also a citi-
Is zchof the United States. In this he
difkcd from Judge fancy and the
g riarity of the court, but the same
pcflses and process of reasoning
: Wild led him to this conclusion led
8 hin aso to declare a negro born in 0
slGee gtate was not n citizen of that
Site nor of the United States. In
thi he was in accord with judge
:. Taey and a majority of the court
Wis the Republican party, which
mac tho opinion of Judge Curtis
c whe Il was delivered and up to III,
time,f the assumption by Congress
of th right to interfere in the domes
tic afirs of the States, the basis 70.
their assaults upon the Suprem'
Courtfor its decision in the Dire,
Scott Ase, now repudiate Judge Cur
Z It's rs authority, and speak contemp
%tuouslJ of his argument as tn
opinion of a dissenting judge?
n VIII NJ. Trumbull accept the opin
ion of be majority of the court il
!. that cad?
y The 81 of emancipation-assum
ing thatthe position of Judge Cur
/ It's, which Senator johnson says cha
u never ben questioned" is correct
did not confer citizenship upon
single negro. Emancipation did nc
y "add to the fact of nativity the othc
fact that az the time of their birth.
the negroes of the South were b
the constitution and laws of ii
\ Southern : eotates citizens of tho:
Estates" There exists no power J
Congress, by any device Of legisli
/. ton whatsoever, to confer citizenshi
upon them. Judge Curtis says tn
the only power granted to Coz
Q gress to legislate concerning citizel
81 ship is confined to the removal
ms disabilities of foreign BIRTH"
ny Senator johnson, in logic which
-. without flaw, and with the coolnt
and dignity becoming a Senator, We
"" eaectually disposes of the assumph.
to upon which Mr.. Trumbull rested
'e- offence of the civil rights bill, Vi
nd THAT birth on the soil of a count
both creates the duties and conf
the rights Of citizenship" AS
N. from the points we have referred
lis he shows, with admirable clearnC
the that the privilege Of determining "
sc. should be citizens was never SURF,
,ye dered by the States, and that
TO power ito prescribe a uniform r
-ell Of naturalization was only gran.
moo because " il related to a common
ms ject for which the constitution IL
ing was adopted, and in shich fore
The nations pcre concerned"
lies II Is probable that this VIII
question will before long be ag
my brought before the Supreme Coz
isc and, a the civil rights bill has pas
,r.S the discussion of il at this time n
be deemed both late and prcmatl
ere We cannot Judge so, inasmueh as
nan negro legislation OF Congress
lily rests upon the alleged citizenship
ier- the freedmen. There may have b
wn, made in Congress within the past
rty- years many more brilliant speechC
his IL long words, muddy ideas, and SIC
he sentiment constitute brilliancy-
40 there has been none within that |
he which in a more mastery maj
nose reduced from strength to nothing
om- such an ingenious and able argun
vid- as was made by Mr.. Trumbull
and his last speech in defence Of the
an rights bill.-C Chicago Times.
,,