San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1891-07-21
The Alien Land Law is Misunder-
stood.

| stOOus
To the San Antonio Daily LIGHT:
1t is plain, from the opinions ex'
pressed, In relation to :ne alien land
law, that many of these volunteer
instructors, have either failed to read
the law, or are unqualified to compre-
bend Its provisions. These volunteer
teachers had best make the maxim of
Davy Crockett, their rule OF action,
"be sure you are right, and then 60
ahead" There has been world of
twaddle about this law by persons,
whose opinions disclose their pltiable
ignorance of its tenor and scope, and
yet they wrote with refreshing self
confidence and dogmatism.
There is not line in the law in
question, which squints at the retro
active effects; on the contrary, it ex-
pressly negatives any such inference,
or idea. In the Express of the Goth,
Mr.. III. N. Clark, a lawyer Of Uvalde.
is reported to have said in an inter-
view:
"There are q number of English
men in our section of the state who
own land and farm or raise stock.
They will become citizens rather than
close out. Some have already been
naturalized and others have refraiued
in order to avoid jury service"
Mr.. Clark is q lawyer of fair ability
and consequently the reporter must
have misunderstood what he said.
AS the law, on its face, shows 1T is
not retroactive, how could it possibly
affect lands, previously acquired by
aliens? All lands acquired by aliens,
before this law took effect, were law
fully bought, and are not affected by
this new law. This is proved by the
provisions of the law itself, which
really do not appear to have been con-
suited by those lecturing about it
with such prodIgal glibness. l am
sure the reporter failed to catch the
meaning of Mr.. Clarke, who is too
good lawyer to imagine the law was
intended to act retoractively and to
disturb vested rights, in the face of
its own provisions.
The Galveston News "takes the
bakery" for absurdity and none
sense In its comments on the alien
land law, as witness the following
FLAP doodle" criticism upon it down
below:
"If the state has a right to say that
a citizen of Engla shall not acquire
land in trade from a citizen of Texas.
then the state has the right to say
the same of citizen of Alabama or
The state has no power to
control interstate commerce, and even
less right to Interfere with interna-
tional commerce. n-Galveston News.
The News ought to know that no
citizen OF the United States is an alien
inTexas, or any one Of the forty four
states composing the Union. There
is q constitu tional clause which de-
clares that the citizen of one state
shall have all the rights of the citi.
zens living in any state. The News
had better employ live editor, or
compel it's present editor to read the
federal constitution and to post
himself, if it does not care to
become the laughing stock of
every village newspaper i'll the
outlying region in the suburbs of
But it pushes its
absurdity to the jumping off place"
when 1t takes the ground that an
buying land in Texas
falls under the head of international
commerce" By parity of reason, if
foreigner buys a watermelon or a
dozen peaches in Galveston or San
Antonio. and eats them on the spot,
the purchase comes under the head of
international commerce. and for that
reason the city authorities cannot reg
uIate the sale OF fruit within their
limits. Buying land and loaning
money on mortgages on land is part
of international commerce." says
the wiseacre of the Galveston News.
&. B. II.