, 1874-05-01
SHALL WE PROTECT QUE CITIZENS +

IN un'Tise bill is now before Congrosa. Il
proposes to define tho rights of citizenship. It
makes al unnecessary, unjust, md unwiso dis
tinction betwoon native-born and nnturalizod
citizons, by providing that naturalized citizcn
who returns to his natiYe land and is convicted
OF some crime committed before roaching this
country shall losc his citizenship; md that q
natura1lzod citizon shall bo in . similar plight il
he simply becomes domicilcd in the land of his
birth. It iB, moreover, provided that all Anori-
cans, native-born or oruaturallzed domiciled In any
foreign country, shall lose their citizenship un-
loss they register at:somo Consulate, oncon every
two years. their wiBh to rotain It. THIS, while it
Is free from tho very serious objection mude to
tile other two provisions, will put In motion
oumbrous eystem Of registry that will do little
good. It would surely bo sufficient IL tho two
years woro changed to ton. Unleas man takos
the trouble to declare hia intsntion OF becoming
subject to another nationality, it in evident that
he wishes to remain an Amoritan. Why shwart
that wish or hamper it's fulnilment by making
him go through this rcgistry-procesa every twcn-
ty-four months? The especial sin of the bill
los, however, in tho distinction drawn between
tho native ind tho foreign-born citizen. 1t has
long boon our boast TINT no such distinction
existed. with tho single exception of
the inability Of tho 1attcr to BECOME
President inability that practically concerns
only two or thrco men In generation,
Tho bill lays down tho doctrine that the
United States cannot protect naturalized oiti-
zon Hho returns to his natiyo country and ia
there convicted Of crime committed prior to
his arrival here. In Germany, tho very act Of
emigration when tle years Of army service lnye
not hoen completed is crime. Shall We suffor
citizen to be punished for this 2-puniahed, In
other words, because ho has become citizen ut
a time when cur civilization could mold his
character instead of waiting until all chance OF
emancipation from European traditlous is gone?
Tho hill provides, again, that naturallzed
citizon shall lose his acquired rights
by simply becoming domioiled in the
land Of his birth. Thus two foreign
born oitizons, an Englishmnn and IN Austrian,
aud native American may GO abroad to 60
into business at Vienna. As soon as they are
domiciled there, the Austrian 1oses lia oitizon-
ship, while the Englshman retains his. But il
d branch house ia started at London, and the
resides there to attend to it. ho,
too, ceaBeH to be an American citizon. In this
caae, zach foreign-born citizen can do
what the other cannot, aud the nativo cau do
what either OF them cannot, without forfeitiug
any rights. It ia absurd to pass such enact
mcnts. They arc utterly unjust to the classes
to which We owo much OF our prosperity. Thoy
cheaper tue honor Of American citizenship. by
making It's possessors report to tho authorities
like schoolboys. from time to time, and by arbi-
Erarily withdrawing it from others just at the
moment when Its protection may bo most
needed.
Tho argument TINT the bill is intonded to him
lor immigration soona to us unfounded. It |
concerns only immigrants who 60 back, and |
'ew Of them como here With any idea Of doing
hat. 1t is not law, but common senso, that will
loon check the tide Of immigration. Our 1nbor
market is oyerstockod. Tho fact shows itaelf
ivory Toar. in tho incroaBe Of suffering among
he poor. It will bo known abroad Gro long,
md will act aa d most effoctual and = greatly-
teeled check