El Paso daily herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1881-1901, 1897-05-07
MEXICAN TREATY RIGHTS
TContinued from Second Page

TCoutinued from Second Page ]
discussion of that question, nor is i
deemed material to enquire as to wha
race chronological writer's would assign
the present applicant. If the stric
scientific classiic alton of the
anthropologist should be adopted h'
would probably not be classed as white
1t is certain that he is not an African
nor of African descent. According tt
his own statement be is a full bloodeC
Mexican" bearing no relation to the
Aztecs or original races of Mexico
Being then citiz n Of Mexico may
he be 4turalzed, pursuant to the
laws of congress? If debarred by the
strict letter of the law from receiving
| letters of citizenship, is he embraced
within the intent and meaning of the
statute? If he falls within the intent
and meaning of the law, his application
should be granted, notwithstanding the
letter of the statute may be against
him.
In Holy Trinity church VS.. United
| States, 43 y. s., 459, it is said by the
| Supreme Court:
SIT is a familiar RUE that thing
may be within tn : letter of the law
and yet not within the statute, because
not within its spirit, nor within the in
IGNITION of its makers. This has been
often asserted, and the reports are full
of cases illustrating its application.
This is not the substitution of the will
of the judge for that of the legislator,
for frequently words of general mean
ing are used in statute, words broad
enough to include an act in question,
and yet a consideration of the whole
Legislation or of the circumstances sur
rounding its enactment or of the alb
surd results which from giving such
broad meaning to the words makes it
unreasonable to believe that the legis-
lator intended to include the particular
act - AS is said in Plowden, POS, from
which cases, it appears, that the sages
of the law have heretofore construed
statutes quite contrary to the letter in
some appearance, and those statutes
which comprehend all things in the
letter they have expounded to extend |
to but some things, and those tn ngs
which generally prohibit al people |
from doing such an act they have in |
terpreted to permit some people to dc
il. and those which include every per-
son in the letter, they have adjudged |
to reach to some person onlv, which eX-
positions have always been founded |
upon the intent of the legislature,
which they have collected by some
times considering the cause and neces-
sly VI UuS dCJ, SOuctlueS ny
one part of'the act with an
other and sometimes by foreign Cir
eumStanceS.''
RIGHTS OF MEXICANS.
A reference to the constitution of
he repu bile of Texas and the cOnsti-
ution, laws and treaties of the United
States will disclose that both that re-
,ub bile and the United States have free
y. during the past sixty years. confer
ed upon Mexicaus the rights ard priv
leges of American citizenship, not in
Iivldually, it is true, but by various
collective acts of natural ZatioD.
The first of such acts will be found in
he language of section 10 of the gen
raj provisions of the Constitution of
he Republic of Texas, adopted in 1886.
By that section it is provided:
'All persons africans, the descend
mis- Of Africans, and the Indians eX- :
epted) who are residing in Texas on !
he day of the declaration of independ- :
nee March ?, 1885 shall be consider 5
j citizens of the republic, entitled to =
II the privileges of such" :
Under this provision, Mexicans, who :
esided in Texas On March ,, 1885, be- =
anne citizens OF the republic. xii .
atrick VS.. Sisne~os. % Texas, lib; aar- Y
y VS.. De Leon, 5 Texas, PIP; 13 OPP. .
-tty. Gen, 397, 39S.) and by the reso- =
ltions Of March /, 1916, and Dec. 20, :
SIS. parsed by the national congress, =
nd such citizens, without express y,
authorization, became incorporated in d, i,
} the citizenship of the union. Thus =
is said by the Supreme Court, in y
lloyd VS.. Thayer, 143 L. S., 149: :
By the annexation of Texas under a .
)int resolution Of congress of March l, =
545, and its admission into the union =
n an equal footing with the original =
.ates, Dec. 20, 1915, all the citizens of =
ne former republic became without :
ny express declaration, citizens of the
nited States: Stat, 1856: Stat, los;
sr VS.. Territory; l New Mexico, 81" o
See also Lawrence's VIII. Int. Law; d
.ppendix S97: Morse on Citizenship, q
&c. o. .
The next collective act in chronology t
al order, providing for the naturaliz- a
ton of MeXicans, is the treaty con- W
uded between the United States and +
Lexico, Feb 2, 1913, commonly known n
the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo 8
he eighth article of that treaty is as 5
flows: n
"Article s. Mexicaus now establish a
in territories previously belonging G
Mexico and which remain for the L
lture within the limits of the United
tates, as defined by the present L
nuty, shall be free to continue where v
ley now reside, or to remove at any
me to the Mexican Republic, retain e
q the property which they possess in j
lie said territories or dispoSing there |
;, and removing the proceeds wher= II
yer they please, without being SUBJ l.
cted on this account to any contribu-
on. tax or charge whatever.
Those who shall prefer to remain in n
lie said territories may either retain RI
lie title and rights of Mexican citizens, u
acquire those of citizens of the y
mite States, but they shall be under u
litigation to make their election with j
one year from the date of the ex- b
lange of notifications of this treaty, u
Id those who shall remain in the said n
rritories after the expiration of that =
ear without having declared their l:
tention to retain the character of 8;
eXicans, shall be considered to have 1;
ected 10 become citizens Of the United q
tates. I
In the said territories property of b
yery kind now belonging to Mexicans o.
81, i-l,I 81, Ill l., ri