. , - -,• • • i ; ' "
' ' .. .• '. •••• 4 1 •,•••• r 1
.—.. . . . .. . .
, •••... 4 •
. . 14' ' ili , .:` a Z . . • .: ....Z . "
• t •• 1.. r • ,
e - . • '• I .-‘, • I - 1Y , . -...
-... .....,
I - ,
i-. s - ,-.1 :- '- tom. - - ',"„ - '7- ' - • .
_ ..
- - .
- . 4.. n‘ , ? -t•
7.
- - A'• ' "; :, , - .
117,...•
- .
. . --
'• 'l , - - ;•-••• .14: - :::::',...
i..I CIti --.,.....,,•••,,,
... f'- . ',"".-
. .
_v.: . • - ' ;
• ...r" -.: :.. • -, , I )
: i k . . .....:
...-
•, _
0-t - ''-'; L i"'-, • . , s • .1... -...;
. 9. • A d 31;1' L 3, '., 4 --...
• . .
.. •,..' :-.4, <- i. t 1".2 ifi -...c
-_.
••:,. • -- . .
• •
... 1 -• kl,. -_
1.;.• , ' , -‘ 1,•,,_ , •"
...s. • -,
• t:-
~
- •.• s.
-s.
. ....
ili '._ ';• g:.' "
._ .
. .
. . . . . . ...
. f•
• • 7 7.4 ,I ' . .
A. S. =t Proprietor.}
rela " / 79 1 'r 3 ri!gleigtilritoclin•
da. :it X 43 2Ft "Jr
4f Ike
, Grolay jtare 41stweFa. -Liberty
iana tiespottiszti
.111Fuidnd seers.
Goldwin " Three,Engiish
Statesmen," says: -
"Cromwell was Puritanism armed and
in power. The form ofgovenmient which
he meant to found was a monarchy, with
,himself as monarch. The relation of Croni
well to the English revolution was not
that of a Napoleon ; but, if it, be not, blas
phemy to mention the names together,
that of a Robespierre."
Puritanism, armed again and in power,
means to found a monarchy, and although
supreme in a Congress, is seeking for a
monarch in soother Ccotnwelh It im
plored the President to act he part, and
accept the poWer which Cromwell wield
ed over England, Ireland and -Scotland,
but he rejected their offers, and thus " be
trayed the Republican party." "It is a
most extraordinary spectacle," said one
of their party, " to see Congt ess passing a•
bill, and putting it it into the hands of the
President, and thereby clothing him with
a power :.greater than any monarch ever
wielded, and the President vetoing it, and
returning - it, saying, ' I cannot give my as
sent to it, —vetoing a bill that makes him
so strong." Said the Secretary of State,
" What, is the difference between the
President and Congress ? Why, fellow
citizens !, The poiver which Congress of
tti the President might tempt a
Maximillian—a Napoleon—it is limn&
cient to. xempt Andrew Johnson." My
friends, When the time sha 3 l come when
there shall he in the White House a Pros.
dent ofthe United States who will accept
the power offered to President Johnson,
then I tell you the time will have arrived
for the rolling of an imperial throne into
the white house, and surrounding it with
imperial guards."
And why was all this power offered to
Pr, , si.fient Johnson ? To carry out pions
aid designs of-Puritanism. The follow
,•rs of Cromwell acknowledge that Puri
tAnism is the source from whence flowed
the woes and sorrows which over
whelmed the people of the South in this
dreadful war. The Life of Dr. Beecher
says " Instinctively the South betrays its
consciousness of the source of its punish
ment by desperate reaction 'aghinst New
England Puritanism."
It is the duty then of every friend of
humanity, every lover of the human race,
every philanthropist and every christian,
to rearch and ascertain for themselies
what is the nature and what are the prin
ciples of such a mighty power of good or
for evil. The Puritans also acknowledge
the first apostle of Abolitionism, Wm.
Lloyd Garrison, to be the child or off
spring of Puritanism. Let us then Rile
lyz3 the doctrines of Abolitionism,the new
ally of Puritanism, trace them to their
source, and see whether they come from
heaven or from bell. Were the princi
ples of Wm. Lloyd Garrison wafted to
earth niion the breezes of heaven, or did
they reach us on the blasts from hell ?
Was this war upon the S..uth a war for
christianity or a war for infidelity ? Was
it to establish the great truths of the
christian religion or the falsehoods of infi
delity ? We ill search for an answer.
Wen. Lingd Garrison made a speech in
Philadelphia, in Sept. 1845, in which he de
dared that he knew nothing of the tieca
lope or the commandments as a rule of
life. He - railed against the observance of
the Sabbath, and raved at ministers oft he
gospel as _wolves in sheep's clothing. He
represented the churches as dens of
thieves, and said it was a shame to be re
coguized:as a christian. " God be thank
ed," said he, " that I am not so regarded.
I bless him that I am regarded as an infi
de•l."
In June, 1853, - "there was an anti-Bible
Convention in Hanford, ' Conn., at which
Wm. Lloyd Garrison, the great leader of
Abolitionism in America, introduced the
\ following resolutions:
" Resolved, That the doctrine of the
Aroerican•chnrch and priesthood that the
Bible is the- word of God—that whatever
it conasin i , was, given by divine instrira
tion, and tliat ; it is the only rule of faith
and practice—is self evidently absurd, ex
ceedingly injurious, both to the inte feet
and soul,_biglily pernicious in its applies
tiont and a stumbling block in the way of
human redemption.,
" RegOble,d, .Tliat this doctrine has.too
long been held as a_ potent, weapon in the
baulk a -01nel:erring
_priests, to beat
down shorisiog apirit , of religious libert y;
and therefutd: the: :time - has come to de
clare its 'iniinthfultitiesc-and-, 3o 1101:0381C1
those -who are=guiltypf its imposture."
In 1857 Wm. LiciyaGarrison, the lead
er af Abolitionism- Ittneritaysaid : 1
ericau. slavery, id upheld , - by two
mighty lrop'—Chliteh and, State; Relig
ion awl .Government-rand wheo.these aro
o vembbovutobat.funi-eystern shall fall to
rise no more."
Now Win. LloydGartisoa the phild pf
11 04anism, pmPhatioa ito a l .be world
that biatpoppipifelphieb• be was -OitikkliW
i ni4egAilitagt:;,ibialadi r ;farinea: Ira
Part of the Cbristiairitligiettl f *MlEVat
*miff to carry there out, cbtutirmo
well as the American ,gcivernittent must be
overthrown. Re rejected the 'Bible, for
the very reason that his doctrines could
not ho found therein. if the Holy
Bible inculcated the doctrines of the Ab
olitionists why did they one and all re
pudiate it.,2 Theodore Porker said, "I do
not take the Bible - for my master." So
said Gerrit Smith and all the founders
of Abolitionism in America.
What. is the great dogma embraced in
the term Abolitionism ? Negro equality.
This is the principle originating with the
infidel Garrison, and received into Puri
tanism—the source of all the desolations
and sufferings brought upon the people of
the South, who have had this doctrine
forced upon them hy.the sword—its au
thor blessing the Lord that he was an in.
fides, and declaring the Untruthfulness of
the Bible of the Christians.
In 1838 the Herold of Freedom, an or
gan of.the Abolitionists, do Bribes the an
ti-abolitionists in the following caned and
delicate style, in an arttele entitled Color
phobia
"Our people have got it ; many of them
have got it, so bad that they can't get
well. They thitik they took it the natural
way. But they were inoculated. It was
injected into their veins, and incided into
their systems by old Doctor S!avery, the
great doctor that the famouS Doctor Way
land studied with. There is a kind of va
rioloiti type, called coloniiltion. They
generally go together, or all who have
one are more apt to catch the other. The
remedy and the preventive, if taken early,
is a kine-pox sort of matter by the name
of anti slavery. None who have it genu
ine ever catch colorphobia. The remedy
was discoVered by doctor Wm. Lloyd
Jenner Garrison."
Now, the question is, " Where did doc
tor Jenner Garrison discover this remedy?
Where did he obtain the virus with which
he has inoculated the whole Republican
party, and which they are now forcing
the Southern people to receive into their
veins at the point of the sword ?, Answer.
Negro equality is the spawn of the
French revolutionists, and was generated
in the brain of Maximilian Joseph Isadore
Robespierre. That "idea," received into
the theology of the Puritans, forms the
union of infidelity and christianity, cor=
rupting the latter with the falsehuods of
atheists and deists; producing a deadly
haired of the whit‘race ;• and inspiring a
universal shout which first burst from the
lips of Robespierre': " Let all the white
race perish rather than the dogma of no.
gro equality." It is not " blasphemy"
therefore to unite the names of Cromwell
and Robespierre.
The character of this Erst evangelist of
the gospel of Rosseau given in the next
number.
ES Ili 3E3 NI C/ MC
Hon. Geo. W.Woodward
OP PENNSYLVANIA,
In the House of Representatives, Jan. 30,
and Feb. 6, 1868
Expatriation and Naturalization.
The House haying under consideration 811 l No. 55 5 4.
concerning the rights of American Citizens abroad in
Foreign Countries, Mr. Woodward wall allowed 15 min
aces and spoke as follows :
Ma. WOODWARD—Mr. Speaker, Srst of
all I wish to thank the chairman of the
Comm tttee on Foreign Affairs [Mr. Banks]
for an opportunity to say a few words up
on this subject; and I also thank the com
mittee not only for the bill which they
l
I have brought forward, but the very satis
factory report with which it is accompa
nied, and from which I have derived very
considerable instruction. I am in favor
of the bill as to its main featurt s, though
I shall have an amendment to propose,
which Ido not mean to press finlesi the
chairman of the Committee on Foreign
Affairs shall approve it.
All just Governments are fonnded in the
consent of the governed. Out of this
principle result allegiance and protection;
and, according to Englislrlaw, that alle
giance is perpetual and indefeasible. The
courts' f England deny the capacity of
the subject of the British Government ev•
er to denude himself' of his allegiance of
1 the CrOwn of Great Britain. It attends
him wherever he; goes and in whatever
circumstances he May be placed, and for
I all time, - down at least to the second gen.
r eration of his deseendints. Our courts in
this country 'have generally followed this
doctrine of perpetual allegiance because
we have bad no • declaratory statute on
the subject of expatriation. The preva
lent-judicial opinion with us is that a citi
zen-cannot renounce his allegiance to the
Tinited Si ates without permission of the
; Government, to be declared by law. In
the absence vfsuch a statute the rule of
1 common lawproails; • .
Now, sir, the only OefeCt which I see in
! • this bill is!' that at fails to supply to the ju
diciary'Ofthe Iftireed!!!States any rule for
their decisions upon this subject. The
bill does not in any of it's Sectionsprotiide
forthe expatriatign of 'the American cid.
zen. I submit to thel ChZirinan of . tiv
Committei3. •on 'Foreig n Affiii4 ' I*.
Sankiirthilt . ighttre, are isliing:toteign
Qoverattltglta,to mikit. ? yrcwisteeein our
tgebalf for Tille,•exegnitpe pf their chi-
A2EO 'ld '1 . 06 nidirpcusable that we
lICIMMOSE, PA.„TrEsaS.ii', APRIL 14, 186.8.
.
should begin iiy ;,providing for th e exp.
triation of our own citizens. To meet
this deficiency , initfte bill I have drawn up
a section by way - of :amendment, which,
however, I will not p ress unless it has the
approbation of the chairman of the com
mittee. Task the Oleik to read it.
The Clerk read follows :
SEC 3. And be et "further enacted, That
whenever any citizen `o p t the United States,
whether native born or; naturalized, shall
remove his domicil to a`fereign country in
good faith, and with the*ltention of be
coming a citizen or subj'ec4 thereof, and
shall become naturalized wider the laws
of said foreign country, he shall , be con
sidered as having abjured his.. allegiance
to the Government attic Un ited !States,
with the consent of the said Urofteinment
and all claims of the said Goveriment up.
on the allegiance of said citizen Wall for
ever cease and determine.
Mr. Woodward. My friend froniliew
York [Mr. Pruyn] has just laid before-m 9
an amendment which, in its purport, cor
responds with mine, but the phraseology
of which I prefer; and if I move either
amendment I shall probably move his,
unless he should offer it himself.
Mr. Banks. Will the geotlainan allow
me to say one word?
Mr. Woodward. Certainly.
Mr. Banks. I will say to the gentle
man from Pennsylvania tMr. Woodward]
what I said yesterday, that should the
committee on foreign Wars adopt the
provision he has suggested, it will debar
uny nature ized citizen of the United S.
up to this date from claiming the protec
tion in Foreign states which it, is the pur
pose of this bill to accord to hint. It is
impossible to legislate upon this subject
and give now the right of expatriation to
American citizens without by that very
act enabling foreign Governments to say
to us that up to this date our citizens had
no right to expatriate themselves. And,
as the gentleman from Pennsylvania has
already said, we cannot claim of other na
tions that Which we deny ourselves. In
every instance when this subject has been
presented, Congress has evaded legislation
upon this particular point, 'because the
right of expatriation is inherent and in
trinsic in the citizen under the govern
ment of the United states.
Mr. Wood ward. I think the difficulty
suggested by the gentlemen is imaginary,
but if it is not, a • proviso saving the
rights of all naturalized citizens from the
effects of this legislation would obviate
the objection. I have been speaking thus
far of the judicial department. I say that
while the judiciary of the United States
have not in terms expressly decided that
there is no such thing as the right of the
American citizen to expatriate himself,
they have by inference and necessary in
tendment adopted that conclusion. And
that conclusion rests upon the fact that
we have no declaratory statute upon the
subject. The judicial method of reason
ing on this subject is very short and very
sad-factory. The common law prevails
until displaced by a statute. At common
iaw allegiance is indefeasible and perpetu
al. The legislative department of our
Government having provided no declara
tory statute, the judicial conclusion is that
indefeasible allegiance attaches to the
American citizen.
Now, sir, it is to meet just that condi
tion of the law of this country that I pro
pre my amendment. I agree that su fir
as the executive and the Legislative De
partments of the Government areconcern
eil, the doctrine of expatriation has been
and is abundantly recognized. Our whole
system of naturadzat ion is founded upon
this doctrine. Our Declaration of Amer
ican Independence was the first grand nat
uralization act adopted by this country.
The war of 1812 was a recognition of the
same doctrine. Every President of the
United States down to our present Chief
executive, who has referred to the sub
ject in his late message, has urged this
doctrine upon the attention of the coun
try. I believe the people of the country
understand and receive this doctrine. But
air, the judiciary of the United States do
not receive it; and when the judiciary of
Great Britain have occasion to deal with
the question, they rest themselves upon
the conclusion of the judicial mind of the
United States, and the judicial mind of
the United states -rests upon the absence
of any such legislative provision as that
which I propose.
. I think, therefore, it would be wise if
the friends of the bill would incorporate in
it a declaration that the American citizen
may expatriate himself. If he chooses to
go to Great, Britain, or to Germany, or to
France, or to any foreign country, let him
go. If it he thought proper that the dec
laration of his intention to expatriate
himself be made in this country, so that
we may see that debts are paid, that
all his obligations to the Government are
discharged, let him be required to file that
declaration of intention with some officer
of the Government. I care nothing about
the detailed manner in which the expa
trialon• may take place. I am simply
maintaining that we can never expect
Foreign-`Goiernmenta to recognize our
doctrine of expatriation as practiced - by
our exetiVe department unless we adopt
a declftratpry statute, iiport this kubjept.
NQW thits.,darArine 110;4, Sur
• , - • . LL
°octave epartment.ana LDS people okficliffl
country bare recognized throughout bur
whole history, is nowhere better : stated
than in some of those extracts from pub-
Heists which the chairmanof the commit
tee on Foreign Affairs has laid before ns
in bis report.
"Where the liberty of removal bath
been promiscuously allowed and the sub
ject settles hinisell and his effects under
the protection of a foreign State, the com
monwealth which he lea. bath, no, longer
any authority over him."—Pufintiorf, B.
8, ch 11.
"It is a right inherent in all free people
to have the liberty of removal if they
think proper. When a person becomes a
member of a state he does not thereby re
nounce the care of himself and his affairs.
Ha may seek the necessaries and conveni
14ences of life elsewbere. The subjects of
a State cannot be denied the liberty of
Fettling elsewhere in order to procure
those a dvantages which they do not enjoy
in their native country."—Barlemoqui.
These are sufficient statements of the
general principle upon which this govern
ment, with the exception of the Judicial
department, has treated the subject of ex
patriation.
In the case of Respublica vs. Chapman,
(1 Dallas, 53,) Chief Justice McKean,
speaking , of an exchange of governments,
said:
" All the Writers agree that none are
subjects of theidopted Government who
have not freely assented to it."
In Alesberry vs. Hawkins, (9 Dana's re
ports, Kentucky Court of Appeals,) in
1839, expatriation was considered a prac
tical and fundamental American doctrine,
and it was declared that in the absence of
a statute a citizen may in good faith ab
jure his country, and that the assent of
the Government was to be presumed and
he deemed denationalized. There sir, is
an instance of a judicial opinion taking the
ground that, in the absence of an enabling
statute, an American citizen may dena
tionalize himself. But such is not the
general current of the judicial opinions of
the country.
Mr. Speaker, not only has our govern
ment recognized the right of expatriation,
but the English government, and, indeed,
all foreign goyernments, have acted upon
the same general principle of law. Du
ring our colonial dependency they dis
conraged emigration, and one of the counts
in Mr. Jefferson's indictment of George
111 was that he has—
" Endeavored to prevent the population
of these states; for that purpose obstruct
ing the laws for the naturalization of for
eigners, refusing to pass others to encour
age immigration hither, and raising the
conditions of new appropriations oflands."
These were among the acts that " de
fined the tyrant."
But, sir, since our independence the
English government has interposed no ob
stacle to emigration. She might have
done so. Thejudicial writ of ne exeat 'v
im and the army and navy were quite
competent to keep her subjects at home.
But they have not. British ships bring
two or three hundred thousand annually
to our shores, principally Irish and Ger
mans, some Welsh, Norwegians, and
Swedes; but the great contributions to
our population have been from Ireland
and Germany, until the descendants of
these emigrants form more than half of all
our population.
Mr. Banks. Between three hundred
and forty and three hundred and fifty
thousand last year.
Mr. Woodward. And this emigration
in :all probability will increase.
These emigrants, as shown by the re
port of the committee, come for the most
part, in British ships; so the British gov
ernment, instead of hindering them com
ing here, encourages them to do so, thus
acting upon the principles of public law to
which I have alluded; tir the government
of (treat Britain knows as welt as the emi
grant does when he comes to this coun
try that. he comes under our naturalization
laws. They know he is to swear he will
renounce all allegiance to all foreign prin
ces, potentates, and powers, whatsoever,
and especially to" her majesty the queen
of Great Britain." They bring them here
by thousands to take that oath. They al.
low them to become citizens of the Uni
ted States, and when that is accomplished
the judiciary of Great Britain fall back
upon this doctrine of inalienable allegiance
and cite judicial decisions of the United
states in support of t heir imprisonment and
execution of American citizens.
That is the manner m which the British
act, against this subject of expatriation.
We desire to induce them—we cannot
compel them—we desire to induce them
to recognize the doctrine of expatriation
as they have practiced it and as the exec
utive Department of our government has
always recognized it. We have no chance
to induce them to do so unless we set
set them the example of expatriating our
own citizens.
Lord Stanley declared on a recent occa
sion that. "Ireland was never So prosper
ons as now, nor was she ever, more dtsaf
feeted." That she was never more disaf.
fected is probably true," but it, is not, true
that she is prosperous. Belfast is the only
city in. Ireland whose ' 'populhtion is as
large•as it was twenty yedro agcy.:
frietid from New Yotylaftirtobinspnl
will correct me il'retit vironk: Irelan
10 rnn down itbriii&liktlidatiOilftifeooo4 l "
OM to 5,7+54,000, by the *ensue of 1681,
. .
Atm
te. *
W
1 7 . VD ADE XXV,. N K VlBlat
•it.. 7471
41• '
anti ie rota ,3iTi - Sty.than
$01; --Taie..tagAisfetneti-14kiner
loa ijkati:inkebtaats
throOo if rherweV4Tottest*O - Mt*ine.
Nothing bet poverty &Muni them at
home.
. Here:tbe biitiker , 612116010641 that OM
gentleman's time —bad eapirkd, and he
took his seat. - Subsequent - 3r - , an-tbe..6th
February, the same bin before - the - house;
Mr. Woodward Concluded tit remarks as
follows:-
Mr. Woodward. Mr. - Speaker,
al remarks were cat Off•by your inevita
ble hammer last Thursday, I was examin
ing Lord Stanley's declaration that "Ire
land was never so. prosperous. now nor
was she ever more - disaffected?' Yon
know, sir, - that: Lard Stan lef -teat,only,
the son of Lord Derby, the prese,fit Pre
mier of England, but is himself the Secre
tary of Foreign affairs, acrd 'speaks as one
having authority. His assertion that Ire
land was never so prosperous is sufficient
ly refuted by the recent declarations of
Mr. Gladstone and Lord John Russell, to
the effect that Parliament, must take ef
ficient measures very soon for the relief of
the well grounded complaints of Ireland.
It is refuted also by the declining popu
lation of the island to.which I alluded on
Thursday. The two great facts to which
the discontents of Ireland are referable are
the church rates, and the land monopolies.
These are the forces that are driving them
to our shores by hundreds of thousands.
The established church, to support which
Irish labor is taxed, is not the choice of
probably more than one twelfth, perhaps
one fifteenth of the Irish people. The
mass of the people are Roman Catholics.
That is the church of their choice and
their affections, and to that their votive
offerings aro cheerfully given. But, in
addition to the contributions which affec
tion and piety dictate, there are the church
rates, the poor rates, and all the public
taxes which the government imposes to
eat up the arninga of the Irish peasant.
When to these-there is added the land
rent, equal to about - sever' dollars and fif
ty cents of our money''-per acre, is it
strange that Ireland is disaffected ?
strange that Irishmen should Seek our
more happy country, where-all . church ,
contributions are voluntary, and where
cheap land can be found ?
The other source of discontent, the land
monopoly, is a sore evil to Ireland. I
learned last summer from a very intelligent
Englishman whom I met in Ireland sever
al interesting facts, a note of which I made
at the time and on the soot ; and as they
bear upon the question * under considera
tion, I beg the attention of the House to
them :
According to my informant there are
twenty million acres of land in Ireland, of
which six millions are under cultivation
and nine millions in grass. There are six
hundred thousand farmers, of whom four
hundred thousand hold farms of thirty
acres or less. About twenty thousand
men own the six hundred thousand farms,
and recieved therefrom annual rental of
from fourteen to fifteen million pounds,
equal to about seventy milion dollars of
our motley. Irish landlords do not expend
more than one-and-a-half per cent, of their
rental per annum in improving their es
tates. The rest of their large incomes go
into the funds orinto improvements-of the
home farms, the parks, the game, the
hounds, the horses, houses, equipage, &c.
I was surprised to learn that leases for
terms of years are almost unknown in Ire
land. The tenantry are tenants at will,
and liable to be turned out at the caprice
of either the landlord or his steward.—
The consequence of that when a farmer,
compelled by his growing family to culti
vate every rood of ground within his lit
tle farm, clears out hedge-rows or reclaims
bogs, and thus adds a few mires of now
land to exhausted fields that have been
cropped a thousand years, some new bid
der is ready tooffer the steward a shilling
an acre more rent, and the tenant who has
done the work must pay the increased
rent or turn out. He has no lease to pro- ,
tect him. Thus he is punished for his ex
tra labor.
Another reason for not given leases is
political. All these small farmers who pay
a rental of ten pounds per annum are vo
ters, and when they go to the polling pla
ces where they vote viva voce, the steward
is there with books to register each vote,
and woe betide the tenant who presumes
to vote contary to the wishes of his land
lord or his landlord's steward. Having no
lease to protect him; he must vote as he is
commanded, or give up his cottage, which
however poor, is the only shelter for his
wife and children.
Is it strange, sir, that a brave and gen
erous people should flee from a tyranny
more refined than ever the feudal system
was ? And, in view of these facts, is it.
not unjust and ungenerous in an English
staternaa to represent Ireland asprosper
ons,and.her people as unreasonably die
affected.?, A shilling a day, twenty-five
cents of our money, is the- utmost the or:
dinary Irish laborer catrearn, and his em
ployment even aft that -rate itribastial - and
'precarious, • Prosperoosil bTb docibt"the
'resident, and the abienteelandtiorde 'are
, prosnernno,sbnt . the people are pecii:borAt
do-criptioutatiulas the rialriirf
ling richerqhdtpoOr aregrovrine A rt
Ireland, sir, as she is Erevan" cannot
suptt - hVr perpulatioo.
of the matter.
-Now, sir, it is a getters! - pringird: it
POblic few, tbsit when a*Govirnfaintis alit
able to find homes and employclentfortili
redundant population, it is botmg to eon- -
cede to' heft'
_the right,of expatriat!otlese
'Men lave' a natural right logo frOM
eta' where they must itirVe fdVOIr
where their labbr camproeure aeonifiartabbs
.subsistanee. - The British. 401NITattleaS
has maintained for centaries,elV4tegtit
Intestacy and . of land taxation, thlit
to, made it impOsSible for laboring !hen. te
tain land titles, and bavevondenied the
lands of the three kingdoms into (husbands
of comparatively a fevi millionaires rand
nobles—a small,, select, but morns*
rich aristocritcyand . it is in. ail/aeries
of this class that - Ireland . ip 'to:01 , 0.14d: TO
soil, naturally good, hat , beeenitich'est
Waisted by long culture; very 'Masai
done to restore it, and failures of pops
from these causes or from . adverse,
er are frequent, and always intiqied
tensive and exquisite suffering upot!
laboring classes. Social disorders site
from these causes, which only the, nisi la
arm of the Government call !mpprearkit
How unjust and cruel for an English states..
man to charge a people so oppressed !wit h
disaffection in the tnidit tifprolipbrio !
Let him rather lift ofe Cherub ratesrsnd
compel landlords to give their' tenautryi
some interest in the lands they eultivatei,
let him give labor a chance to earn .osily
bread, before he ohargeta Whole poop!,
with unreasonable discontent. ' '
But if these things cannot - be-dons; if
no relief can be devised for down trodden
Ireland—if the Government , must*ntinr
ue to be administered only for the benefit
of the privileged classes, in the dame of
all that is just and decent let the emigrarit
enjoy the rights of citizenship he huts
earned in a more hospitable country.
When he goes back to the Green to
revisit the graves of his ancestors ana
friends, let him not be told that he is still
a British subject, that his oath or natural.
izstion was a farce, and that American eit4
izenship means nothing in an. ;English
court. " This is the unkindest cat of all.":
Sir, we owe it to, our adopted Cliiienit; .
.and to our own dignity, to vindicate gm
,citizenship we confer. By uaturtilizatioe .
,the foreigner becomes'an "Arrieticarre..iti 7.
zet4.o.terpt for one or two lietTib4a,
native tin :to the brai
nor born." Andirbert-elik,returzts t4o: hilt
native country, either for
pleasure, he is entitled to the same meat
ure of protection that any Anierlean att.,
zen has a right to claim Iheßritisligois'
ernrnent have no more right to seize hint;
and deal with him as a rebellions Fenian
subject, or a deserter from his native alle
giance, than they would have to treat you
or me as their subject. If their laws are:
violated, let the oitende.t be.pnnishad, bat
let him be punisbed fer tram:ingression*,
of law within their jurittlictiOn, not fiti
words uttered and acts done Within one
jurisdiction. The proceedings - , of. some
British judges lately, in dealing with. ans
pected Fenians, are gross outrages - upon
our rights of citizenship, and, demand the
instant interposition of our Executive:,
Ere long, I trust, the British licitayrill be
made to reppect.the American eagle. W.
tanght'England by the war ofleitthat .
our seamen could not be impressed into'
her service, and, if neceOsary, we can re-'
peat the lesqon in behalf of our naturalized'?
citizens. But, war ought not tebe.neCur.;
sary to vindicate so plain "i right; and
trust this bill will peacefully toCOnfplitdi
the reform that is demanded by circum
stances.
France and the German States are more '
liberal in their policy than Great. Britain
and Russia, but none of the )European
governments have in form recognized dig
right of expatriation as we insist opolf:
maintaining ii. They have no love for a,,
but they have learned to respect our pow. :
er. One of the few goiod results of our
late civil war was to impress foreign na
tions with a sense of oar military power.'
They saw war waged here, not of: Snell
puny proportions as that of the Roses in
England, but which outstripped thegran
dest martial displays of Napoleon, Ca3sar,
or Alexander—a contest that shook the
whole earth ; and, if we could priseist to
them the spectacle of a fraternal Onion ..
between the belligerent sections,, they .
would be careful not to provolcct*.bleow : :
from united forces that were so formidii.„,
ble in division. They would yield to their
fears what they might not to their - sense
of justice, and would respect our natorali
zation of their subjects whom they could
not detain at. home. .
Thus, underlying,this greatc,questiotrias •
all other public 9uestio.na.et,sur i *, is . ,
the policy of union — speedy,..ooolll4-W.. ~
dissoluble union. That is all Fe, want to .• ;
notinmend this bill to the -,nstiene, etibe,,,l
earth. ,L et no heal.c p r. bieppliectioestogit„!.
the disselfered St gest Itrik. 01 9.4 1 PXKUK- . .: ,
about Senthern rebels in 4 Myal negfoeta..::
bind around ',all: the, Stsl4es ..t 4 he.,bkode or: i
the f.)111 time Unippond t then we aballaeci
not• poly nolliCtis,cot, the, wronge4 ; and,.., l
doWn-trOdden peasantry of the PA ; 1
1 World hastening-to-onatheree l bnywe Shale
4 eeef , their. native : governments , t aokniirir
lodging the righvnt eirpatriatiott*d ie.,l ,
4peming.the-onieetiship we gionfeN; :.; ::s‘;‘ , P
',,, Ttue*reign4opelattortain all itiotfilithict
.
eve a right to demand these Inealnak r •
1 [Bee eth page. 3
=CM