The evening Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1861-1871, 1866-04-12

that citizenship may be acquired oy nativity.
That 10 the common law, that il the law OF
the ciyilissd world, that he who 10 born in Z
and NOT made . slave the moment
he 10 born BY any municipal regulation, be-
comes, by virtue of his birth, citixsn; but
he BY mo- means hold that his being . citizen
of the United States by virtue Of his birth
made him citizen Of any state OF the Unit
cd States. Lot me read Q sentence or two
from his opinion. That part OF the opinion
to which refer will b found in 19 Howard,
page 577 and onward. After having stated,
and no doubt stated correctly, tAas at the
adoption Of the constitution of the United
State there were five states in winch persons
of color were entitled to the right Of suffrage,
and in which, therefore. they participated In
the deliberations OF the states BY whom the
convention was authorised, and sfterward In
the convention of the several states BY which
the constitution itself Was sanctioned, he
came to this conclusion:
And my opinion is, that under the con-
,titution of the United States, every free per- |
son born on the soil of state. who 10 citi- |
zen of that state BY force OF lite constitution or
laws, is also citizen of the United States"
Mark the qualification. Ii is not nativity
that imparts the character of q citizenship
alone. There must be added to the fact of
nativity, the other fact, that at the time OF
his birth he 10 BY the laws Of the state in
which he is born a citizen and the two
things occurring, birth..snd citizenship by the
| laws of the state, he becomes, by virtue OF
| the two, a citizen of the United States. 1t
there could be any doubt that correctly IN
terpret that part of his opinion, that doubt
seems to be removed by the subsequent por-
tons of it, TO which I will now call the atten-
| ton of the senate. He says:
1.-The first section of the second article OF
the constitution uses the language, a natur-
| al born citizen 1t thus assumes that cit-
zenship may be acquired by BIRTH
And then he goes on to state that this Is
the rule everywhere, and proceeds:
| "Ths constitution having recognized the
rule that persons born within the several
states are citizens Of the United States, ono
of four things must be true"
| beg the attention of my friend from Hi
nois TO this. do not know that he has seen
the opinion with reference to this question -
| The constitution assuming that there may be
| citizenship by virtue of birth where the law
OF the state in which the birth occurred con-
fers upon the party born the character OF cit
izsn. and
THE constitution having recognized the
rule that persons born within the several
states are citizens of the United States, one
of four things must be true"
What are they?
cribed what native born persons shall or shall
not be citizens of the United States or,
go. That it has empowered congress to do
so or,
49, That all free persons, born within the
several states, are citizens of the United
States: or,
a. That it is LETT to each state to deter
mine what free persons. born within it's linn
it's shall be citizens of such state. and thereby"
IL ~,
Iiudge) '.be citizens of the United States"
l will no, read everything that he says in
relation to the alternatives, but only por-
tions:
"If there be such thing as citizenship OF
the United States acquired by birth within
the states, which the constitution expressly
recognizes. and no one denies, then these
four alternatives embrace the entire subject,
and it only remains to select that one which
is true.
THAT the constitution itself 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 not be pretended. 1t contains no
such declaration. We may dismiss the FIRE,
alternative as without doub, nnfounded."
That 10 to say the constitution has not sta.
ted, or, to use the language of his question,
the constitution has not prescribed what ma
tive-born persons shall or shall not be citi-
zens of the United States. The proposition,
to use his own language again, may be DIS
missed as . proposition wholly unfounded.-
1t that is untrue. then is the other proposi-
ton true? If il does not of itself declare
no are to be citizsns..of the states, and there
by citizens of the United States, is there any
thing In the constitution which oonfers upon
congress the power to do the Same thing p
Let us see what he SAYS about that:
Has it empowered congress 10 enact what
} free persons, born within the several states,
shall or shall not be citizens of the United
States?
, Before examining the various provisions
of the constitution which may relate TO this
| question. it is important to consider for q mo-
ment the substantial nature of this inquiry.
Ii il, in effect, whether the constitution has
empowered congress to create privileged
/ classes within the states, who alone can be
entitled to the franchise and powers of citi-
zepship of the United States If il be admit
! ted that the constitution has enabled congress
to declare what free persons. born within the
several states, shall be citizens of the United
States, it must at the same time be admitted
tina. is is unlimited power. If this cub
! isct is within the control of congress, it must
: depend wholly on its discretion"
Then he proceeds immediately after to
, state IN very ciedr anu iofclple language that
, the constitution oonfers no such power upon
f congress. | will read part of what he
says:
Among the powers expressly granted to
,, congress is the power to establish a uniform
, rule of naturalization.' Ii is not doubted
that this is power to prescribe rule for
the removal of the disabilities consequent on
foreign birth.
"1t appears. then, that the only power ex-
, pressly granted to congress to legislate con
corning citizenship 10 confined to the remov.
al of the disabilities of foreign birth"
Leaving the inquiry Xhather thare In in