The Irish republic. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1867-18??, 1868-02-22

provso that protection shall given to one who has
nounced his citizenship There be preense for such
an enactment by the remuneration the person to be
citizen OF the United States and all right claim pro-
lection vanshe with it, The final proviso in the first section
denies protection to the citizen
shall establish continuous residence for term not
@ ea ana shall have failed make return of his property
The return for taxation required by the third section is
citizen last resided
owned by the Government of the United States and ores
It's protection against any foreign prince potentate he
remains continuously beyond the limits of the United States
o I'VE years and fails to make return to the OF
his district Can anything analogous to such condition be
found in the laws of any nation the globe? Even in
Russia national protection is lost by disappearance for the
term of ten years from the place of domcile is be
observed that an intention to emgrate change domce
forms no part of the condition Emigration to another
country to seek permanent home Intentional change
OF domlce may equally deprive nauralized native
born citizen of prot lion by the Government from which he
emgated for they of voluntary repatriation and
remuneration of that Governments but this bill the
naraized citizen who goes abroad and remains five years.
with intention to emgate change his domcie but in
the pursuit of health study pleasure business and with
the intention to return and retain his domce in the United
States Such forfeiture of citizenship would in this age shock
the feeling and the understanding of everyone 1t is in
direct conflict with the principle asserted in the
men OF the BILL claiming the naturazed citizen to the soil
with five years eher and the thumb of taxation
ingenious expeden for the of naturaized
citizens and the check of emigration to the United States
could not be devised by the ingenious foreign diplomacy
The naveborn citizen not and cannot be such
condition, and if applied to the naturalzed citizens what
becomes of your boosted equality?
But Mr. Speaker the proposed redress for the wrongs
petraed towards naurazed citizens the most remark
able provision in this very singular BILL Section
provides that any Government shall any natuaized
citizen, and unreasonaby delay refuse release him. the
President empowered to order the and detan in
custody any subject citizen of such foreign Government
who may be found within the Jurisdiction of the United
State and report his action to Congress. If
engaged in matter that does not permit of trng such an
enactment might SMILE AS of redressng
wrong the proposition is farce and mode of punish
men is barbarsm The remedy proposed at variance with
all the principles recognized by modern civilized Govern
mens in their dealings with another does not pro-
pose to relieve the suffering party punish the
but to nlct suffering upon any innocent helpless private
person who may have within territory in the
innocent and peaceful pursuits presents the Government
of the United States in the attitude of Sinking its national
obligations and instead of protecting its citizens in
becoming great Power making reprisas upon helpless
private individual No believe that any European
Government would fail to make such seizure for
immediate war;
The United States would not have the excuse that
King Theodore of Abyssna has He says those Engshmen
conspraos is to be observed that this power
to the President may involve in In the existing
state of things he at moment bring with any
and all the European nations The power of seizure is left
his will and thus he would have under his every
foreigner who touched Shores any of whom might be
selected for his victim The objections already considered
render any detailed examination of the other sections almost
superuous The third section it will be observed deprives
of protection any naturazed citizen who shall return to his
native country with intent to his domicile therein
waving any controversy the business of this provision
had it stood alone It's manifest hardship and Injustice is
exhibited by the fourth section which defines domice to
continuous residence for than five years in his
native country establishing himself in any business.
The fourth section says that the naturazed citizen shall
not be entitled to the protection of the Government if
other things che shall fail to make annual return of his
property for taxation the internal revenue for
the district of the United States in which said citizen
resided" This condition is stringent and obnoxious
than the provision in second section already remarked
For any failure to make the specified for taxation
fore the protection of the United States Such are the
plain terms of the bill Would any legislator apply that
the native born citizen If not why apply it the
uraized citizen? Is this the boosted equality of rights be-
tween citizens?
Again. this section further forfeits protection if any
naturalized citizen shall engage army navy bel
igerent any foreign service Does the author
this bill mean this?
Engagement beligerent may justly forfeit protection
as against the parties with each other but to all