Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1879-04-26

| efEnofS, 1rlSnmen, Germans, SWISS
| Danes, Englishmen, wherever the,
come from, their naturalization
: papers. He says in his testimony
that there were forty thousand 0
} these naturalization papers, these
title deeds in the possession of these
; men to their American citizenship
and he has seized thirty thousand
of them. There are but ten thous.
} and left. He furthermore goes on
and says that of that ten thousand
only twelve hundred men voted al
the last election because they were
afraid they would he arrested as
Mr.. Denning was. Hesays further :
The United States has expended from sixty
to one hundred thousand dollars at each
congressional election in this city since 1870
in the effort TO have fair and honest elections.
Yes, the General Government has
spent from sixty to one hundred
thousand dollars year in the city
of New York for the purpose of seiz-
ing from foreign-born citizens of the
United States their title deeds to
their American citizenship.
He further says:
At the Presidential election in 1876 made
| a special and persistent attack npon those
who had registered thereon, and seized q
| large number of those certificates where
had evidence upon which i could success
| fully defend my action. In addition TO this,
l caused every person who held such
| paper 20 be challenged, upon the express
! ground that he was possessed of a paper be-
lieved to have been fraudulently obtained.
How did he further intimidate
them? He tells you that he put this
kind of a notice up all over the city
of New York. Here it is:
UNITED STATES COURT HOUSE
The Court House of the United
States which we are asked to sup
port and keep up
UNITED STATES COURT HoUsE,)
Room i, FOURTH FLOOR,
NEW YORK, August, 20, 1873.
SIR: AS complaints has been filed with
me charging YOU
And he had the complaint filed
charging you with being possessed of
false, fraudulent, and void certificate OF nat
uTalization, issued in 1858, your attention is
call TO the following notice from the United
States district attorney.
Respectfully yours,
JOHN /. DAVENPORT.
warning all such men to give up
their papers and not to vote, or they
would be arrested. AT the last elec-
tion in the city of New York he
says he had brought the number
down to ten thousand, and he was
asked now many of that ten thous-
and voted, and he answered twelve
hundred and forty, and "they
would not have voted if / could
have prevented" !" There were only
twelve hundred and forty out Of
the ten thousand that were natural
lied in 1868 who had the temerity
tovote in the face of all these threats,
in the face of all these arrests.
The significance of all this lies |
here: 1t was supposed when the law |
creating these United States super
visors and deputy marshals was
passed that they were for the pur- |
pose of bringing on fair elections |
down South. 1t was not desired for |
that it has not been used there and |
will not be used there to as great /
and alarming extent as I'm New |
York City. Why? If Presiden-
tial election in the State of New
York can be carried by one vote il
gives thirty-five electoral votes to
the candidate for President who
receives them. The State / repre-
sent has only five ELECTORAL votes and
is of no very great importance; but
if they can carry the great State of
New York by a popular majority
of one it gives the thirty-five elec-
tOral votes of that State for one can
didate for President. That is the
reason for this great effort in the
city and State of New York.
But, Mr.. President, something
may be asked in regard to the GER
tificates of naturalization issued in
1868. What inducement was there
for Mr.. Davenport to make an at
tack upon the foreign-born citizens
who were naturaliZed in 1858? He
says they were fraudulent certifi-
Gates. This very question as to these
naturalization papers has been de-
cided by nineteen judges in the
State of New York, and Davenport
knew it. / hold in my hand the
opinion rendered in the test case.
This very point had been decided.
said there was not suf-
ficient record of the admission of
these parties to the rights of citi-
not that the men were not
to naturalization, not that
they had not the right to vote, bat
made the proper record it was too
; it was too concise and
that question came up in the case
Of Peter Coleman as. John j. Dav-
export and was decided by Judge
Blatchford of the United States Dis
trict Court. l have his opinion in
my hand. 1t is as follows:
The statute, in requiring the proceedings
10 which 1t refers to be " recorded by the
clerk of the court" required no other record
m respect OF Coleman than that which was | I
made, either as respects the order OF admls-
'iOn or any of the Oaths or affidavids. In
q re Christian, before Judge Freedman, of
he superior court of New York, October 10, :
STS, persons in the exact position of Cole
nan applied to that court to have the |
record Of the proceedings In that court adj (
hitting them to citizenship perfected by an
entry naHc pro tune of the fact of such ad-
mission in the minute book of that court.
hat the validity Of the admission of the
party to citizenship was disputed, on the al .
egation that there was no legal record of ,
he judgment admitting him to citizenship,
or the reason that the clerk of the court did I
not write out an entry in the minute book
If the court reciting the proceedings and
he same point now urged here. Judge :
freedman, in his decision In that case, de-
ails the practice of the superior court from
he close of 1858 to the close Of 1873 In natur-
lliZation proceedings, and shows IL to have
Deen the Same in all cases as in the case OF
coleman. He held that what was 80 done
sufficient record, and that the
rnnt of any further or different record, aud
he absence of an entry in the general
minute book OF the court, did not render the
to citizenship invalid. He there-
ore denied the application on the ground
hat no necessity existed for granting it, be- !
.ause there was no defect in the record
which required perfection by amendment. :
In another place the judge says
That court for q period Of fifteen years OBJ 9
erved the same form of procedure, and Z
Iept the same records, and made the same !
,rders of admission in all cases OF naturiLli-
.ation as in the case of Coleman, and none ,
,ther. During that period nineteen judges
occupied seats ON the bench OF that court. !
They were Joseph =. Bosworth, Murray HOf- /
nan, John Slosson, Lewis III. Woodruff, Ed
wards Pierrepont, James Monerief, Antho- {
~ l.. Robertson, James w. White, Iohn N. {
Claudius l.. Mcneil, Samuel Il, ,
Sarvin, John II. McCunn, Samuel Jones,
freeman J. Fithian, John j. Freedman, {
lanes g. Spencer, William Il. Curtis, John
'edgwicl, and Hooper G. Van Worst. II is
o be presumed that, in each case of natu-
during TINT time, a certificate was Z
,iven like in form to that received by Cole
nan, and averring that the court had or
Tered the admission of the party. That Sc
les of judges must have regarded what was
ound on the files or in the records or books [
If the court in each case as an order of ad- 1
mission or as a record showing that such an ,
,rder had been made by the court.
The nineteen judges here named
lad agreed; all had passed on this
very question all said the issued of