The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-06-30

''EsrSins Up the Wrong Tree" Again.
IL is difficult for vehement political pGrti-
sans TO learn, what seems so simple TO cooler
minds that cause is weakened by argu-
ments which discredit the eandm Of the
reasoner. A democratic attack on recent
opinion of Attorney General Pierrepont, in
which enathemas are hurled against that
officer for not asserting tho immunity Of
young German born in the United States
from military service in Germany, where he
has resided since he was four years Of age, il
the occasion of this frantic denunciation.
Judge PieTepont has decided question of
law in evident accordance with the analogies
Of law, and until his reasoning can be refuted
by more cogent arguments than have yet APP
peared there is no warrant for ''alarm" and
indignation" at Mr. Pierreponts alleged
''cringing," nor for the spasmodic language
Of his democratic assailants.
The facts out of which this case has arisen
are that German, Steinkauler by name, was
naturalized az citizen Of the United States in
1854 and had son born in the following
year. When the son was four years Of age
Steinkauler returned with his family TO Ger
many, where they have resided ever since
The son, still minor, has been required by
the German authorities to report for military
duty. The father protests on the ground that
the son is native born citizen of the United
States. Representations are made to our Min
lister at Berlin, who refers the question to
Secretary Fish for instructions, and the latter
asks the opinion of the Attorney General as to
whether it is the duty Of our government to
protect young Steinkauler against military
service in Germany. Attorney General Pierre
pont gives it as his opinion that our govern
ment is under no such obligation in view of
all the circumstances of the case.
The ground on which this opinion is
assailed is SO obviously untenable that
it will not bear moments examina-
ton. 1t rests on the assump-
ton that person born in one country
cannot legally be compelled to render military
service in another. Our government could
not assert such o doctrine without stultifying
itself and proclai1ning that it was Wholesale
violation Of international law during the late
civil war. Our CONSUMPTION laws operated
upon hundreds Of thousands Of young men Of
foreign birth, who had never by any act Of
their own sundered their foreign allegiance.
They were born in Ireland or Germany, as
young Steinkauler was born in America
but we never hesltated to conscript them into
our armies, and we should not have tolerated
the interference of foreign governments to
prevent it. The ground on which we con-
scripted those foreign born youth into our mill
tary service was the provision Of our own laws
that the minor children Of naturalized foreign
ers became citizens by the naturalization Of
their father, and we should assert our right
to impress them into our military service
against the whole world if other governments
should be foolish enough to protest and inter
fere.
The principle which underlies the Ameri-
can statute on this subject is that the nation
atty Of minor children follows that Of the
father. After having practically asserted this
principle for more than seventy years in our
legislation il would be fragrant absurdity for
Us to impugn it when exercised by another
government II is to be presumed that the
German authorities are merely enforcing
German laws, and if those laws, like ours,
make the nationality Of minor children follow
that Of the father, the case is too clear for
rational controversy. The father Of young
Steinkauler has unquestionably reverted to
the condition Of German subject since his
naturalization in 1854 by the operation Of the
treaty Of 1868. True, this treaty is assailed
by Mr.. Pierreponts critics but what has
no to do with the question whether
that treaty was unwisely negotiated
by Mr.. Bancroft and unwisely ratified
by the American Senate? by the con-
stitution all treaties 10 which the
United States are party are Sthe
supreme law Of the land" and the Attorney
General, in the discharge Of his official duty
as an expounder Of the laws, has no choice but
to recognize and respect them. When called
upon for an official opinion il is not his duty
to mako the law, but to declare what it IS.
The treaty is binding on our government
until il shall be formally abrogated, and the
question Of its abrogation as well as the
question Of its original propriety is entirely
outside the province Of the Attorney General
As Steinkauler plre is unquestionably again a
German subject, Steinkauler .fls must be 80
too on the principle Of. our Naturalization
law that minor children change their nation
ality with change in the nationality Of their
father.
The Arrangements or tho Park De-