The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-04-06

ment, power TO declare who shall De ciuzen anu
what is the effect of the exercise OF that power
What was the design OF the power, ana what
Ia the operation of the power where II is
exeredY The design Of the power is TO remove ais
abilities arising from the fact Of alenage and nothing
else The operation OF the power Is TO place the party
whose disabilities arising from aenage, removed by
virtue of the laws in the same condition
with ybody elsc but whether he IL To be considered
citizen Of State Of the United States by virtue Of
the removal of the disabilities consequent upon his
taking advantage Of the naturalization laws presents
entirely different inquiry and, perhaps, cannot make
the view-whch shall otherwise present in my own
anguaeemore clear to the country than by reading
opinion In the bred Scott case-not that opinion pro-
nounced by the majority, which has been so often and
think so shamelessly perverted 10 tho disparage
mont, not only of the majority OF the court who
sanctioned that opinion but Of the very admirable law
Of Mr. Justice Curtis in which no differs from that OF the
majorityan opinion marked by learning to great
extent as any opinion eyer pronounced by any Judge OF
that or any other tribunal The question which
In that part Of the opinion he was dis
cussng, was whether bred Scott a citizen
entitled 10 in the courts Of the United States.
majority OF the court decided that in consequence OF
the blood that supposed TO In his veins his de-
i"n aoan ana ms nav ny ovino W 'io
United states slave, he could not become a
citizen Of the United States. Mr. Justice Curtis held
that the constitution OF the United States assumed that
citizenship might be acquired by nativity that was
the common law that II the law of the civilzed
world that he who born in country and not made
a slave at the moment he was born by any municipal
regulations became by virtue of his birth, citizen.
But he by means held that the consequence OF his
being citizen Of the United States by virtue OF his
birth, made him citizen Of any State Of the United
States Let read sentence two from his opinion.
II will be found in the 10Th OF Howard; that part
Of the opinion TO which refers page 597 and others
After having stated and doubt having stated correctly
that OF the adoption Of the constitution Of the
United States there five States in which per OF
color entitled to the right OF suffrage and in which,
therefore, they participated in the deliberations OF the
States by which the convention was authorizet and
afterwards In the conventions of the several States by
which the constitution itself sanctioned h. to
tins conclusion. He says:---
Ny opinion IS that under the constitution of the ured
States free born the soil of State wh1
citizen Of that State by force of its constitution or laws
citizen Of the United States.
Now mark the qua icaton Il Is not the nativity that
mpars the character of citizen alien there must be
added TO the fact of nativity the Other fact that the
the State citizen of that State and the two things
added birth and citizenship by the laws OF the State he
secame' ~ virtue Of the two citizen Of the United
terpret that part Of the opinion, would be speedily
removed by subsequent portions Of the opinion TO
which I win call the attention OF the Senate He
ssys:--"The first section OF the second article
OF the Constitution uses the language, "A natural
born citizen II thus assumes that citizenship may be
acquired by birth. He then goes TO state "1he
sttuton having recognized the rule that persons born
within the several states citizens of the United
States one OF four things must be true" Now what
theyr will read First that the constitution itself has
described what persons shall or shall not be citizens OF
the United States" Fourth that II Is referred 10 each
state to determine what free persons, born within its
limits shall be citizens Of such State and thereby be
citizens Of the United States shall not read every
thing he says relation three Of the alternative
but only portion OF It. He gays there be such thing
citizenship OF tho United States acquired by birth
within tho states which tho constitution expressly re.
cognixes and Denies then these four alternatives
embrace the entire subject and only remains TO select
ihe which is true that the constitution itsef has
defined citizenship Of the United States by declaring
what persons born within the several States shall or
shall not be citizens OF the United States will be
presented IL contains no such declaration. He may
dbni the hrEt alternative without doubt unfounded
that y TO say the constitution mas not stated
c language Of his opinion, the constitution has not
described what native born persons shall shall be
citizens, the prOpOsitlOns uvchB language.
b. dismissed A. proposition wholly unfounded. Well II
zion does not OF ITSELF declare who are 10 be citizens Of
the United s,scs Is there anything In the cJnsttutio
which conies upon Congress- The power TO do The same
thingy Let what Justice Curtis says about that:
HAS empowered Congress what free born per-
born within the several States shall shall not be
citizens Of the United States II such power exists then
the constitution has empowered Congress prv
legged classes within the states who alone shall be
titled TO the franchise and privileges OF citizenship In
II be true that the constitution has enabled Congress
declare what free pc sons born within the several
States shall bo citizens OF the United states It must at
the same time be admitted that II Is an unlimited power.
IL this subject is within the jurisdiction Of Congress- II
must depend wholly It's discretion Then he pro-
ceeds Afterwards in very clear and forcble
language to say the constitution confers such power
upon Congress Now will read part OF what he says
Among The powers expressly granted 70 Congress the
not dosBd that this is power 10 presribe rule for the
removal q disabilities consequent upon foreign brb II
lslate concerning citizenship confined the renoy. OF
itsdlsabilites Of foreign birth.
stitution any express authority conferred upon Con
gress TO egsate at all in relation 10 the statute OF
citizcnshp, he proceeds 10 inquire whether there
exists any Implied power establish IT, He says
whether there DO anything Ia the constitution
from which the power may be implied viii best be seen
when We come TO examine the two other alternatives
which are, whether all free persons born the so In
several States, such Of them may be citizens OF
States respectively thereby citizens Of the United
States He says the last OF these alternatives Is IN my
judgment the true One-that Ia TO say there Ia no
power expressed or Implied which confers upon Con.
nj Ia MI "A
are 10 be considered citizens because or their birth
within the state. except such a. 10 use his own Ian.
guage, that Is true only OF such may be citizens OF
each STATE and because they citizens Of each State
by yrtVe VI their birth under the CONSTITUTION and laws
o the State q Their birth they became citizens o. the
United Sstee and he says that alone contains the
Of public law, rcd uir.i BY he consultation iiseh
creates The % du,se .nS conrss SooD nsh. Of
citizenship That the doctrine relied upon by my
friend from Illinois Mr. TrumeulD II must be remeu
bercd thst thoHgh the constitution the dessne
form ofahe Unted States OF America q governmen,
~ which loyalty and obedience from the ctTens
be given in return Tor protection and privileges yet tho
several sovereign stales whose people their crsnn
were not only 70 continue In existence, bu, with powers
unmpared, except 30 far a. they we're granted 70 tho
national government and among the powers reserved W
the States wa that Of deatninng what persons should
not be ctzens. Having come " the conclu-
sion that that power WA not delegated The
that, that remains u stood before, power
exclusively belonging " the States respectively Now
WI ffe DENT what s the consequence OF that dOfr
" be truof And think may challenge my friond
rom Illinois 10 dlsprove ~ The snthorily before oit
Kensh o. under the Constitution % the United States s
not delegated u Congress except In particular In
stance, and that not which intended 10 make
the party ia whOgo favor The power might DO exercised
citizen OF the Uulted states merely for the purpose of
removing thn disabilities which Law Of Congress can
consequent upon bis foreign birth aud foreign
alleg snce. That question IN which the whole
were Interested " vas matter Of general moment.
II related cbject Tor which The constitution
Itself vas adopted and IN which foreign nations
were concerned Because M ono State had the
power iegHiAie upon any sa9ec, upon watch foreign
o.tEnu might 10 concerned b deemed advisable 70
invest power which ght Otherwise create dlculte'
and injury 10 the whole. In agUvcrnment 10 which the
Interests and rety Of the Whole committed But the
removal ~ disabilities under The naiurazaio ION laws "a
citixeB % any one state. That power, IN
the words Of just Cnrts remained u stood before
the constitution adopted, exclusively belonging u
The siaes themselves N0s ghat does this bin proposs
10 dor II says that every born In the United Sisses
whether born n slave not II 10 not confined 10 IA
operation 70 those born subsequent 10 the abolition o