New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-01-28

After showing how European governments have lndi-
rcrv. 81 not directly fostcred eneTtloh anu pafue-
ptclin rs benefits, the report goes on
But 10 Is not necessary 10 snow 'o aVtlNc paueiIs
fom this bondage OF fcuda allegiance 1t Well'se
lied principle OF public law that soSefeigs ana sugeo1s
are huu by acts which receive their Implied sahcuon
silence I'm flis case IL tho equivalent Of express consent
II g. implied when is manifested by signs acts or iact
or i irocfio or silence, which indicate consent. The
law Of nations is founded uron the general consent Of
ratlols, Whether be express taclt or pre- te
vontons or treaties expressly or taciy made Thc lat
fer have tlcr origin in the actions customs OF States
cElih.r paces 5-is3) a nation pledge lts faith
tartv IN milking treaties well by express dcclara
lion II IL enagh that ITS faith is given The 10
unmportant. 2Yattel, page 23l)
THE AUTHORITY oY A MuNclrL LEGIsLtuoS.
Lord PamcrstOn I'm his dispatch 10 Sr Bancroft cites
with admiration Mr.. Justice story ~ authority Tor the
doctrine which every nation has hitherto assumed that
times and OF ali places " that every nation has an ex
elusive night 10 regulate persons and things within ltS
own territory according 80 its own sovereign viii ana
pleasure " and that Ia speaking Of The right OF state
10 bind its native subjects erywhcre, We speak
Them and rot Of its rights TO compel or require ooedl,
70 such laws on the part Of other nations ana
Lord Palmerson considered this exposition OF pnbc law
as conclusive against the American theory Of allegiance
and the rights claimed for its naturazed citizens
MI Justice story On, We ItJtCo i-o,u IA ~ , go
ducti0n thcreirOm What Americans claim IS ihat Ste
which cannot employ support protect and govern al
her people. and for that reason regulates ana accom-
phes the deportation Of that portion least hoc 10 su
port themselves forfes her right TO govern then any
where exclusively her own subjects ana mat me
doctrine ~ intrinsic and indecasihe allegiance mas come
AMERICAN LAW AyD PREcEDENTs
FOREIGN Governments attach much importance to the
tbt the laws a. The Tinted states as interpreted by
ifs judicial tribunals sustain their claim to perpetual
allegiance This is one Of many emlarrassmcnts mat
attend this difficult and delicate question The Presi-
dent in his Annual Message. refers to this subject
ar,ns eoact ave-. The EiSenSe pcar@eS, q s Gce
nrrt as uuorny held as 1t row holds that naturalization IN
Wth Constitution srd laws q tie United tes a9sees
the recipient oa bis Taiye 3s le soa,i Of Az, Di m
o,ed laws u ration British judges c'toris aud law
S bs b n. Executive saortS q tie state, Tl conflict
,1 me be n o% authority aErod called aise sub
Corrres. the national viii unrtaLay upon this important
Justly considered the American Interpretation Of
public law on this subject. elementary VT sS
nothing 10 authority OF Blackstone The lursdlo, on
Of courts does not extend to tho enactment Of laws II -
limited to their just interpretation They are goVcF9su
less by than by prceedents Ihe docllHe 9l tr
the reason of decision cannot be discovered yet we owe
nose thev aid not act wholly without consideration" 81
VIII sclyilcy follow IN the otSeps ot my predecessors,
ED one of tho most eminent English Judges The ohso
lee claim OF mahenabc allegiance may wen he sustained
y such absurd accepting doctrines Of legal construc
ZION: the absurd theory Of pcrpctual allegiance cond
very We'll he recognized There American authority
which cites this doctrine that does not rest II noh IN
dish law The common law Of England at the American
ovolnti1n is by authorities accepted os law III
tie United states untn changed nv Ieglslauon: Ihrre
has bce no legislation the subject Of cXpatreu0n,
because the Constitution of the Government rests fer rs
authority avowedly upon the voluntary consent Of its
Srbiccts American law authorities receiving tho
49,, a. Of England before the Revolution rs American
,on law as some inrlsts do tho theory OF indeasibe
llerauce miaht be considered having some color OF
law because IL indiSputably, az the TINE u inc
Teyoluion pretenson of the common law OF England
il m his manner IL has been treated In this conn
trv Elementary writer's clte tins law necause u - part
q! our legal history: ard class Of lawyers VINO SuhnTd
date reason 10 precedent and few public men who haVo
ted their views without ind0Isne ihou nave hed mat
the English doctrine was law III this country, upon INC
theory which has 10 lust foundation that everything
flat was law in England before II was law IL America
alter the Revolution. But has not been so auolta
lively declared by the legislative, executive or judicial
officers OF the Government. So
II is the doctrine OF the English law says judge
Kent, chat naturalbom subjects owe an allegiance
which is intrinsic ard ptpgiIn ana T nt cao Se
writers on public law as generally IN favor or an oppo,
Ste doeS Adii9G hs att a net GseT Spn 6 b rs iRH mat
Of common law prevails, he also declares mat some
relaxation Of the OLD sern rue OF me common IN" -
reOuired and admitted under the liberal influence o. com
Jrdee story in the case OF The Santssima Trinidad q
wheaton 2S8 cvadcd iho question OF cXpatration. Civ
w dec sion thereon hut said ait was perfectly clear
tbat il could he done vont bona rye chang, OF
enccs 10 this subject IN American judicial decisions are
tration i. fraudulcny made TO support unjust claims 70
rronerfy or u Justify acts OF war against nations with
TSh we TeS +. &C. ' CefJueo Ellsworth ruled Tat
ms subject the so%%9R law n of sS HE county d re-
where citizen Of the United states, In evasion OF its
lava accepted ITSn pie wrong sy pSa EaE
naturalization in France But ne defense was
Court was 20 show that such defense could be rccoc
MED for sncf purposes. at was difficult" the Chief
J GS MOVE 52g no no n Wr Williams was justly cSnSetcd
ana imprisoned The decision Of TIE Court maintained
be integrity Of the Government IN RS treaty spulation5
with England at q time when che was M war; though we
were at peace and ought not to he cited by Engshmcn
against the principles OF pubic Iw tlat lie al me lou
lions Of American government But IL has important
feature II is distinct RECOGNITION, even a. that eiy
day, that the emigration nom Europe ana ire cNpafa
zion Of It's citizens with me consent OF the European
Governments IN countries SO CROWDED d Win inhabitants
have no inhabitants TO sparc.-iNiless Register.
II will be difficult fiud authority OF American law
writer's on q decision ~ American courts in which the
doctrine perpetual alegance IS recognized except as
tradition OF English law. or case in which II has been
Teored with favor except for tho purpose prevent
Ing private injustice the injury of the public peace II
TnjisI common law existing the time OF the Rcvou
ton There nothing American IN the oath of the land
baons ngand in 1885, nor III the feeble paTaphrase OF
The opinion of American iurlsts and legislators this
snber1 l. we'll expressed by Mr. Webster. Secretary Of
stare I'm letter to Lord AshburtOn August, 1872 upon
TIE right Of expatriatlon
II r ne give shelter and protection to those whom The policy
az her eoTrrraea and Baos by happy
eoany those is become n $50 nom poverty to coo fudag
ast Of an M rights. ali lI nay asd It's done
SIst s '1S y si il hat as Tat Which had Is origin n aa desc
ant ~ g s P ssss between s w AND sS e
England fhou At lereih eIN aem s night to TIE services Of
In this stateinant Mr. Webster regards the doctrine
against which be protests not 40 American, but as In
iITEcT OF THIS DOCTRINE on THE PEOPLE OF THE
UNITED STATES.
The American people perfectly conscious that every
nation has perfect right TO frame its municipal laws 10
meet It's own necessities This municipal right Is recog
nzed because Il cannot be known otherwise what Is re-
CURED for the public safety In has not. however The
same elevation rs other branches Of public law. 1t is IN
the nature OF police regulations But in this 1t
is not entirely independent OF public opinion ana author
y Excessive cruelty injustice in Us provisions would
sfy interference. Every household has the same iIo
Guny, authority must be 70 exercised as not to
impair the peace OF other households and the municipal
legislation OF q nation must be 70 framed not
10 disturb much less to impair destroy in
others rights common TO all nations. legs
atjon that does thismunlcipa Otherwiseis against
the law OF nations and OF God The municipal
of Great Britain has this effect upon the people OF this
country Under such circumstances this Government is