The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1874-04-29

pie would distavor expatriation, but be-
cause such bills seek rather to deter lmml- |
grafton. and to make our citizenship sub
iect to odious and onerous RESTRICTION sub
iect to network OF police
In other words, the general drift OF this
bill-it was not, of course, intended by the |
gentleman from Massachusetts to dis
courage immigration, because it detracts
from the value of our citizenship
I might go into the details of the bill to
show YOU this, but | will not refer to de-
tails, excepting as far as it may be abso-
lutely necessary. One of the many obiec-
tons to this bill is power with which the
Secretary of State is clothed, as if he we're
judicial person to renaturalize under GER
tain circumstances This, sir, is a power
which belongs to the legislative branch of
tt 9 Government. will never give it to
the State Department.
Although it may be true, as nv honora-
bic friend Mr. E, r. Hoarl says, that en-
barrassments have arisen in our Depart
ment of State and to our Government in
being called upon to protect men who have
become citizens here and have afterward
gone to their native land to make Difficult
ties, yet do submit that we might well
have these alleged embarrassments, and
more of them rather than discourage I'M
migration or throw cloud over American
citizenship.
| What is such citizenship To men and
/ women, ay, to women and children, to per.
sons of both sexes, it is their all. Many OF
/ them have this and nothing more when
they go abroad. Should we not guard it
. carefully? Should we raise any presump-
ton, that, because they may have remain
ed abroad for one or two or more years,
they do not therefore intend to return
Should we be overprompt to raise the pre-
sumption that they have not the dnimus
reuertendi? Should we not be careful
about the precise evidence required to in.
dictate that extent2
l / might go on, sir, for some time to show
the House, in general way, that the
whole drift of this bill is at variance with
the fundamental ideas of our republicanisu
as illustrated by those attractive forces
which have brought men Of all nations
here to commingle with us in their and oul
varied independencies and industries. The
old idea under the feudal system was gte6o
ascrtptuS The idea was that a man was
bound to the SOIL 1t was a system thai
resembled the villanage in England. A
man owed personal service to the lord Of
the soil, the same as his master owed it to
the king: and it was born with the chile
and only ended in the grave. 1t WAS from
this relation of lord and vassal, or rather
of master and servant, that the system OF
passports took its origin. That system i,
alien to our federal system of States, in
terdependent with perfect comfy among
each and all.
i might here say to gentlemen who have
travelled abroad that the passport system
is obsolete. Turkey long since abolished
it; Greece has abolished it; France toe
has abolished it, and even Germany doe:
not require it. 1t is dead in all Europe
The passport system has now certain le
gal status. If the passport be properly OBJ
tanned it is sometimes evidence in court, fol
certain purposes. But Of that hereafter
- But 50 far as passports are concerned,
they are almost obsolete. The world has
changed and is changing Locomotion has
changed its ways. Steam and the tele
graph, and what not, have made new re
lations. The teudal system, which my
friend has unconsciously Incorporated in
this bill, cannot exist under our civiliza-
} ton. Therefore this bill is Objectionable
in two points: first, it recognizes the ole
feudal principal of supervision of Ameri
can citizens abroad by diplomatic and con
sular agents and second in that it make.
the continuance of American citizenship
dependent upon this supervision, and i'm
poses the loss Of citizenship as penalty
for disobedience in this respect The
question presented here is not as to the
} right OF expatriation, but as to the RICH
of the Government, of tn,
nationality Of which an individual
has either by birth or naturalization be
come citizen, to restrict the freedom O
r his mo yements, and to deprive him of hi,
citizenship against his will unless he sub
mits to arbitrary restrictions.
To concede that right would indicate
that under certain circumstances citizen
ship is held merely at the pleasure OF thu
Government. Government may enforc
when it chooses its claim to the service o
the citizen. 1t may at will renounce it.
own duty to protect. Such a construction
of the authority of the Government owe
the citizenship of an individual is unten
able. by all the canOns of American in
depreciation it is untenable. Upon it alone
T can the three principal sections of Thu
. substitute be reasonably defended
A variety of thoughts strike me here
which | will reserve until the debate OF
those sections takes place Among others
whether Congress has the constitutions
power to pass any such act as this
Would it not be to some extent in the
nature of a bill of attainder to legislate Z
citizen out of his rights? Because he re-
sided two years abroad and did not regis
ter at the consulate, is he therefore lost t.
us? If Congress has the power to denaI
Continued on third page.)