Wihy is this liberd act of 180 to he ropnttll ? Why is this section of the petding bill. with its prohibitory and restrictiveelauses. to be substituted for it? Who tlcsks for the cilgo Surely no one who knows anything of the beneficial elfect which the law as it stands aid the practite prevailing before its .tassage in i860 have had upon immigration. But as we alotne should stttr by conplying with this request atid by aiding ikeepingetnigratis away fromi the United States. it would be unwise to inahco the change involveil in the passage of this bill. On the 22d of April. 1874. arguing against a bill similar to this. refromthe ommtteeon I ported to the House by Judge Hoar. oreign Affairs. and which sought trecognize in congressional legislation the leading principles of the naturalization treaty between this country and the North German Confederation. I had the honor to remark: A variety of thoughts strike me here. * * * Among others. whether Congress has tle colostittional nower to pass any such act as this. Would it not be tosome extent in the nature of sbill of attandr to legislae a citizen out of his rightsl If Congress has the power to denationalie a citizen for being away from the conntry two years. could it not impose the same penalty for going abroad for any time. or at That obnoxious bill fell with the adjournent of the last Congress. but the principles on which it rested face its today in the treaties concluded in 1868 by Mr.
Keywords matched
immigration naturalization