Year: 1876

the proud republic ruled. the mistress of
the world; and when, by tho decision in
the Dred Scott case, it was developed that
this was all an illusion that the title cIti-
zen of the United States was bat theshadow
OF q great name, an empty title, the people
rebelled no less at this overthrow of tradi-
tiousl beliefs than at the refusal 10 extend
these rights, few as they were, to the plain
tiff in that case. By the advocates of State
rights that decision was hailed as declara-
ton by the highest judicial tribunal of the
United States Of the correctness Of their
theory and the operation Of State sover-
eighty and supremacy in all the funda.
mental and essential relations Of govern
ment and citizen.


When the war ended iu the triumph of
the armies of the Union mighty impulse
in favor of nationality swelled the hearts of
the people, and their Representatives in
Congress proposed an amendment to the
Constitution which should settle this yexed
and dangerous question Of supremacy be-
tween the States and the Federal Govern
ment by creating citizenship, and declar-
ing who were citizens of the United States
This proposed amendment was adopted
with signal unanimity by the States, and
became part of the Constitution Of the Uni
ted States The amendment is as follows !:


"All persons born or naturalized in the
United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States, and
Of the State wherein they reside. No State
| 1l.IN l.. H. II. u. II
abridge the privileges or immunities of citi-
Zens of the United States, nor shall any State
deprive any person Of life, liberty or property
without due process of law, nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal pro-
lection Of the laws"


BY rules of construction well settled
this amendment must be recognized, and
must be construed (its language being un-
ambiguous) in its literal Specification Il
means what its language plainly imports,
and by rule accepted by the Supreme
Court OF the United States since the de-
cision in McCulloch VS.. Bank of Maryland,
in 1920, it carries with it by implication all
the powers necessary to carrying it to
effect by the G sneral Government.


In dignity the amendment rises to the
highest prerogative of government, and in
its scope embraces all the corelative obliga-
tions and duties of governor and governed.
Citizens of the United States, and of the
States. &c, is the language of the amend
ment, implying in unmistaksble terms that
allegiance is due first to the United States,
and then to the States, reversing the State
Rights dogma, that citizenship Of the Uni
ted States is reached through citizenship In
the States, and affirming the paramount
sovereignty of the Federal Government.


But allegiance and protection are re-
ciprocal. The Government which demands
ofthe citizen allegiance. and enforces its de.
mand at the peril of life, must extend pro-
lection to the citizen not only as the equiv
alent of the allegiance rendered, but as
necessary to enable the citizen to render
that allegiance. These are mutual and de-
pendent relations; morally and logically
they must coexist. theoretically this
correlation exists in all Governments, des-
potic or free. Nor can Government SUBJ
sist without them, for no Government can
endure whose foundations are laid in vio-
lation of common right and plain reason.
This will not be gainssid. But to what
extent must Government protect the citi-
zen? We reply, to the extent to which it
claims his allegiance. The one is the
measure of the other. This is morally
right, and when it comes in conflict with
another sovereignty claiming adverse, al
legiance, necessary--indispeusable. We
pass by the protection which Government
ordinarily gives to the citizen, and narrow
the basis of allegiance to the physical
necessity which demands protection that it
may be possible for the citizen to render it.
Loyalty is in the mind, it is sentiment,
but allegiance must manifest itself in out
ward signs, in action which tends to sup
port and perpetuate the Government. The
acts which show it may be done in peace
or in war. In quiet times unobtrusive and
unobseryed; in tumultuous times emphatic,
signal and demonstrative. The ballot and
bullet are in our country the most effective
agencies through which the citizen de-
monstrates his allegiance TO the Govern
ment. The first is mightier than the last,
but to be effective for the support of the
Government its exercise must be free, and
to be free it must be placed beyond the
control or iAfluence of any other legally
authorized power.


Ii the State government can control ex-
clusively the conditions of suffrage, then
the control of the most powerful support
which the citizen of the United States can
give to his Government is in the hands of
other, and, it may be, hostile governments.
We say may be. We might, in the light
Of reason and experience, drop the qualifi-
cation and say hostile governments, for
when such cause of discord exists between
two governments it is only question of
time when the conflict Of sovereign ties
shall eventuate in forcible collision.


But we recur to the ballot. How can the
citizen by ballot render the allegiance due
to the Federal Government when the con-
troll of the ballot is absolutely in the State
governments, and the Federal Government
has no power over it! Weput an extreme
but not an unusual example to illustrate
the fallacy of supreme allegiance to the
United States without the power in the
Federal Government to protect its citizens.
The Supreme Court, in the cases TO which
We have referred, say that the United
States can only protect the citizen in the
rights which the Federal Government con-
fers. What these rights are was settled, or
at least there was an enumeration of them,
in the majority opinion in the slaughter
house cases. That opinion in this particu-
lar was based upon the Dred Scott case and
an opinion by Mr.. Justice Washington, de-
ivered many years before, and the rights
of q citizen of the United States under the
amended Constitution are declared Except
as relates to colored people, to be the same
as they were before the war in effect, de-
claring that the solemn provision of the
Constitution creating citizenship of the
United States means nothing. If this be
true, the bonds of the Union are no stronger
in a governmental sense than they were in
tQcn Tho raIatiopc nf tho citizap IN tba