Year: 1860

tors ana TeeprcSehtatiVeS eieosou, " ocees sarily meant citizen of some one of the States; because, before that time, certainly, there had been no ofher citizenship.

 So Congress is invested with the power "to establish an uniform r7tle of naturaliza- ton throughout the United States;" and thns to prevent one State from making or adopting citizens on terms different from those established by another, And 1 hold ;t certain that no State has the right to permit any one, who is not citizen of0he United States, to vote within her limits for members of Congress, or of the legislature that is to elect Senators. In other words, she cannot make him Der citizen, unless he Mere5y becomes citizen of the United States

 For this reason it was that the constitution was made to provide, that Me citizens of each State should be entitled to all privileges and inmunities of citizens in Me seperaI States.

 But the constitution did not mean to say that citizen of Virginia removing to New York, should at once, and without the con sent of New York, be entitled to rote there, even for members of Congress; and there fore it provided that those only should be 4 entitled to doso, who should have the quail fications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature; leaving it to the good pleasure of each State to require any higher or additional qualification, as it might please; but cer- tainly not supposing that State ~oald, nor meaning to say that State might, dis pense with the indispensable qualification of citizenship of the State, which must be- citizenship of the United States, in those who elect the legislature which chooses the Senators of the State in Congress. Those, " the people of the State," are to elect; and it was never dreamed any where in the world that toreigners were part of the peO-' . pie of State.

 It follows, that the citizen of State, when he removes to and settles in a territo- ", no more ceases to be a citizen of his State, than Roman citizen ceased to be such by removing to Province. COelum, non onimam mutant gai trans mare eurratnt. Under other skies his heoyt is still the same, and the bond between him and his State iA not broken. Citizenship, cheap as we un- fortunately hold it, is still not so easily lost or tossed aside.

 The common territory is like the deck of a national vessel 4 is, 6y construction ot' la,c in the United States, as is our minis ter's residence in England. The country is where the flag is. The territories are, in law. in each State.

 Fictions of law are sed to give effect to rights. They are never permitted to ope- rate so as to diminish or infringe them.- That of the separate existence of corpora tion, is used to aagance the interests and carry out the purposes of the stockholders. The property is held to be its property, De- cause Mat enables H 70 be better managed and handlea. But for all Jenefcia! purposes, or when the fiction would act injuriously on the stockholders interests and rights in the property, that property will be regarded as theirs, and as held in trust for them by the corporation, in law, as it indeed always is in fact.

 So the territory or lands of the United States are 70 iaac the property of the na- tonal government or corporation; but in tact and for all beneficial purposes, they are the joint property of the States, the logaltitle being in the general corporation for con venience of management, and 10 gipe eject to aN Me rights, and full 0olue to oH the in- terests. of euery Slate in oN such lands. Ir IS IMPOSSIBLE so TO USE THIS FICTION AS TO LESSEN, IMPAIR OR DENY THOSE RIGHTS. To do so would be traudulem use of it.

 decline to rest any part of my opinion on the right of the indimduof citizens of the southern States, either to go to, or to re- main in the common territory with their slaves. If this were an indimdual right, the doctrine of popular sovereignty would be more plausible, because majorites may sometimes dispose of individuaI rights, for the general benefit

 rest the argument on the rights of the, States-the joint owners of the territOry.- | Only one power is vested by the constitu- tion in all the States assembled in Congress, in regard to it. That power is, to dispose of the land, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting it, as property. It is not agreed that part of the States shall virtually appropriate the territory to the exclusion of the others. And even if hat could be plausibly argued, it seems to me to admit of no question that collection of citizens of the different States, first present

 in particular portion of the territory, are utterly without power to say that slavery shall not continue in what is in law part of each and all the States. And surel ly 1t is a most insolent and impudent act for them to deny the right of fifteen of the joint owners of the territory to demand foT' their citizens an equal opportunity to settle there with what Mey hold to be property, and for Memsel0es an equal opportunity to endeavor by fair competition to found tfere a new State, that, with institutions and therefore interests like their own, shall in- crease their political power, and aid them to defend their rights in the Union.

 I have no thought of saying that thosey who in the South, advocate the doctrine ot popular sovereignty and the power of the people in territory to abolish slavery or who are opposed to the doctrine that 1t IS the duty of Congress to apply the proper remedy whenever a territorial legislature

 Len