The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-04-26

Ing upon the relations of the Unitec States, and of the several States to eacf other and to the citizens of tho States and of the United States. have been be- fore this Court during the ofhcial life ot any of It's present members. We nave given every opportunity for full hearing at the bar: we have discussed it freely and compared views among ourselves; we have taken. ample time for careful deliberation, and we now propose to an nounce the judgments which we have formed in the constructions If these ar ticles, 60 far as We have found them necessary to the iecisi m of the cases be- fore us, and beyond that nave neither the inclination nor the right to go.'
 Twelve articles of amendment were added to the Federal Constitution soon after the original organization of the Government under 1t in 17sa. Of these all but the last were adopted so soon after wards as to justify the statement that they were practically contemporaneous with the adoption of the original; and the twelfth, adopted in 1908, was so nearly so as to have become, ike all the others, historical and of another age. But with in the last eight years three other ar ticles of amendment of vast importance have been added by the voice of the peo- PAS " thos NShCtou isiS-i LAbNht'
 The most cursory glance at these ar ticles discloses a unity of purpose. when taken in connection with the history of the times. which cannot fail to have an important bearing on any question of doubt sconcerning their true meaning. Nor can such doubts. when any reason ably exist. be safely and rationally solved without reference to that history; for in 1t Is found the occasion and the ne- cessity for recurring again to the great source of power in this country, the peo- pie of the States, for additional guaran- tees of human rights additional powers to the Federal Government; additional restraints upon those of the States"
 Touching directly upon the question of citizenship, the Court said the following
 ''The first section of the Fourteenth Ar ticle, to which our attention more spe- cialiy is invited. opens with definition of citizenshin-not only citizenship of the United States, but citizenship of the States. No such definition was previously found in the Constitution. nor had any attempt been made to define 1t by Con- gross. It had ueen the occasion of much discussion in the courts, by the executive departments; and in the public journals It had been said by eminent judges thai no man was a citizen of the United States, except as he was citizen of one of the States composing the Union. Those therefore who had been born and resided always in the District of Columbia. or ir the territories. though within the United States, were rot citizens. Whether thi. proposition was sound or not, had nevel been judicially decided. But it had beer held by this Court, in the celebrated Dret Scott case only few years before tn, of of African descent, whether slave ol not. was not and could not be a citizer of the United States. This decision, while 1t met the condemnation of some of tn, ablest statesmen md constitutional law yers of the country, had never been over ruled: and if it was to be accepted al a constitutional limitation of the right o citizenship, then all the negro race wh' had recently been made freemen, wer still not only not citizens, bu. were in | capable of becoming so by anything shor of an amendment Q the Constitution.
 ''To remove this difficulty primarily an, l to establish a clslr and comprehenslv | definition of citizenship which should de
 clare what should constitute citizenship
 of the United States. and also citizenshi of a State. the first clause of the Firs | Section was fr1med:
 l All peTSoHS DuIH UT UdluTdfLeu III LII
 United States and subject to the jurisdic
 tion thereof, are citizens of the Unite
 States and of the state In which the
 reside
 The first observati on we have to mak
 of this clause is, that 1t puts a rest bot
 questions which we stated to have bee
 the subject of differences of opinion. l i declares that persons may be citizens o | the United States without regard to citi
 zenship of particular State, and it over
 turns the Dred Scott Decision by mak
 ing all persons born within the Unite States and subject to jurisdiction citizen
 of the United States. That its main pur
 pose was to establish the citizenship 0
 the negro can admit of no doubt. Tn phrase. subject to it's Jurisdiction wa
 intended to exclude from its operatio
 children of Ministers, Consuls and citi
 zens and subjects of foreign States bor | within the United States
 "The next observation is more i'm
 portant in view of the arguments of coun | sel in the present case, It is, that tn | distinction between citizenship of tn United States and citizenship of a Stat | is clearly recognized and established. No | only may a man be a citizen of tn | United States without being d citizen of | State, but an important element is neces cary to convert tho former into the latter | He must reside within the State to mak him a citizen of it. but it is only necessar | that he should be born or naturalized il l the United States to be citizen of tn | Union."
 Tt is quite clear then that there is | citizenship of the United States, and | citizenship of State, which depen | upon different characteristics or circum stances in the individual.
 We think this distinction and it's ex | pliclt recognition in this amendment o great weight in this argument, becaus
 the next paragraph of this same section | which is the one mainly relied on by tn plaintiffs in error, speaks only of privi leges and immunities of citizens of tn
 United States. The argument. however in favor of the plaintiff rests wholly O,
 the assumption that the citizenship is tn
 same. and the privileges and immunitie guaranteed by the clause are the same.
 "The language Is. No State shall mak
 or enforce any law which shall abridg
 the privilege or immunities of citizen
 of the United States. It Is a little re
 markable, If this clause was intended a | a protection 10 the citizen of a Stat
 against the legislative power of his owl
 State, that the word citizen of the Stat should be left out when it is so careful, used. and used in contradistinction |, citizens of the United States, in tn very sentence which precedes 1t. It is to, clear for argument that the change fl phraseology was adopted understandings and with q purpose.
 'Of the privileges and immunities of thu citizens of the United States, and tn, privileges and immunities of the citiz eI of a State. and what they respectivel!