Speech #430045791

I understand that an opportunity will be afforded us to amend the bill. and when the House shall be brought to a consideration of its details it eai be modified and amended. It is not my purpose at this time to refer to several of the details of the bill which in my umid may be materially bcinelited . but I do not sce in the bill itself any thing that is not capable of modification and amendment..so as to avoid the objection Whmich my colleague [Mr. Cox] yesterday saw to it. that it is in the line of restriction upon immigration. anml to that. ixeit is objcertinal. Now. sir. in connection with this whole subject and as direcly pertinent. to it. I desire to refer to naturlization. We have two bills before this House proposing to restrict naturalization. proposing to adopt certain general provisions of law by -which obstmctions shall be thrown in the way of ainy immigrant from abroad wbo dosires to become a citizen of the United States. I have something to say on this subject. not only with reference to the bill under consideratio. hnt with reference to the naturalization laws and the propositions now before the Judiciary Committee of the House for their amendnmnt. I shall as preliinary to a disiussi of those hills niksome historical references which may be interesting to the House. and may not be impertinent to this discussion. The policy of this country in reference to nataralization is not derived. as is generally supposed. freni the laws of England. The naturalization laws of this country were originally founded on antagonism to the principles ingrafted in the Eglish constitution and in English practice. Time ystem arose out of the necessities of the Coloi es. We were then a new people. our ports were open to people from every part of the globe. and. unlike England. the whole tendency and policy of our leislation originally. before we adopted the Constittion of the United States. was to throw open the doors to the widest latitude for te admission of all who chose to come here. giving them very soon equal privileges with ourselves. This was the origin and foundation of the naturalization laws of this country. At the period when the Colonies were fondod the policy of Englarid for snore than a century had been hostile to econfering political privileges upon foreigners. and so illiberal was its course in this respect through the whole period of otr colouial history that one of the acts of tyranny charged ipoi George iiI in the Declaration of Independence was that he liad endeavored to prevent the populationm of the States by obstructing time laws for the naturalization of foreigners. and 1ay refusing to pass others to encourage their imnfigration hither. The only mode by which a foreigner in England could obtain naturalization investing him with ill the lights of a subject was by act of Parliament. and letters of donization could only be obtained by the Kings special license. which was granted with certail restrictions. The rights of foreigners settled in the Colonies were. therefore. in a very precauious state. By the law of England they ceild neither hold nor transmit real property. nor exercise any political rights. and by the navigation act. unless they were naturalized or made free denizens by the Kings lotterapatent. they were forbidden to exercise in any of the Colonies the oecupation of a merchant or a factor. To remedy this state of things and to cncourage imnigration. the colonial Legislatures exercised the right of passing naturalization laws. Maryulandawas thefist Colony that took this coarse. This was inl6(i6. The other Colonies imitated this example. and continued to do so in spite of the protests of Eugland. which looked upon the exercise of this iowver iy the Colonies as an encroachment upon the royal prerogatives or the rights of Parliament. The difficulties growing ot of the subjeet continued to increase until the separation of the two couitries. Darig thle Revolution. cbudl until the adoption of the Federal Consiltation. thel power of naturalizing aliensavas exerciisedhy limo Slates. When the Federal Constitution was framed. in 1787. a provision was iusertedaithout debate conferring upon Coigress the power of establising one uniform rule of naturalization throughout the States. and at the second session of the First Congress after the adoption of tile Constitution. on March 2. 1790. an act of the most liberal character was passed. authorizing the naturatization of any free white alien after a residence of two years nudcr tle jurisdiction of the United States and of one year in the Stlate where ie applied for adiniissien. From that to the prcsent timenumrons acts have been passedupoe the subject. Ii 1795 the period of residence was inereased to tiv years. and a previous declration o1 oath by the alieu of his iutention to becomne a citizen was required to be made before a cotrt of one of tie States. at least three years before the applicants aduissi in. Ii 1798 the residence was increased to fourteen yearswith five years previous declaration of intention. In 1802 the residence was rednced sgain to five years. and the declaration of hatention to three years. and in 1824 the deelsr.tion of intention was further reduced to two years. These provisions hav remained iu force ever since This brief. though incomplete. review siifficientily demonstrates that the history of this country is indissolubly conncled with tie history of immigratios. and that the present greatness and power of the United States are the direct result of the liberal policy that was pursed toward immigrants. Every immigrant adds to te aggrogate iprolictive power of the country. and Congress should therefore remain iitent upon encouraging. faqilitating. and protecting imnigration at all tines. Unnecessary safeguards in naturalizalio should therefore be avoided. because they operate as unneeessary obstacles and the period of residence and of the deelaration of intention should be reduced. Stean acd the telegraph have worked great insohmiius withins the 1 st fifty years. mada residence of two years nuder the jurisdiction of the United States and of one year ils sli S(ate where fle application for admission is made. as demanded by the act in 1790. should be amply sufficient.