parish where his father is settled (y); and if he have no settlement, or it be unknown, then in the parish in which his mother was settled at the time of her marriage(z), until the child get a new settlement for himself. It was formerly held that an illegitimate child being nullius filius could only have a birth settlement, being entitled to none by parentage(a); but it is now enacted by 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 76, s. 71, that every illegitimate child born after Aug. 14, 1834, shall have its mother's settlement till it attains the age of sixteen years, or acquires a settlement in its own right. If, therefore, it attains that age without having acquired a settlement, it is remitted to the birth settlement it would have had before the statute(b). [*438] *A new settlement may be acquired in several ways; as, 3. By marriage. For a woman, marrying a man who is settled in another parish, changes her own settlement, and immediately acquires that of her husband(c). During her marriage she is unable to acquire any settlement of her own(d) but follows that of her husband, however often it may be changed. Should he have no settlement, or should it be unknown, she retains her maiden settlement(e), but it is suspended during his life(ƒ), as she cannot be separated from him without his consent(g). In such a case the wife's settlement is, however, only suspended, not lost, and she can be removed to it after her husband's death, or if he has abandoned her, or is absent when she becomes chargeable(h). From the fact that a wife always has her husband's settlement, it. follows that on the marriage of a woman having an illegitimate child, such child is entitled to the stepfather's settlement until it has attained the age of sixteen years(i). 4. The next method of gaining a settlement is by apprenticeship; for this purpose, there must inter alia be a binding by deed, and a residence of at least forty days(k). 5. A settlement may also be gained by renting a tenement of the minimum value of 10%., and residing therein for forty days(7), though since the passing of stat. 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 76, no settlement can be gained in this way, unless the tenant has been assessed to the poor rate, and shall have paid the same in respect of the tenement for one year. Closely connected with this mode of acquiring a settlement, may be mentioned, *6. A settlement by paying taxes. It was originally enacted that any [* 439] person coming to inhabit any town or parish, who should be charged with and pay his share towards the public taxes in such place, should be deemed to have a settlement therein (m). This qualification has been much restricted by subsequent enactments. The scavenger's rate, house tax, and highway rate(n) have been excepted from the taxes conferring a settlement, the property must be of the value of 107. per annum(o), there must be an occupation for a year, and if the (y) Hard's Case, Salk. 427; Coxwell v. Shillingford, Fort. 313. (2) R. v. Inhabitants of St. Botolph, Burr. Set. Ca. 367, 372; R. v. St. Mary, Leicester, 3 A. & E. 644. (a) Hard's Case, Salk. 427; Inhabitants of St. Nicholas v. Hillingdon, Ib. 485. (b) Overseers of Bodenham v. Overseers of St. Andrews, Worcester, 1 E. & B. 465. (c) St. Giles, Reading v. Eversley, Black water, 1 Str. 580; R. v. Hinxworth, Cald. 42. (d) Berkhampstead v. St. Mary's Northchurch, 2 Bott. 25; R. v. Aythrop, Burr. Set. Ca. 412. (e) R. v. Ryton, Cald. 39; R. v. Hensingham, Ib. 206; R. v. Hudson, Ib. 371. (f) R. v. Carleton, Burr. Set. Ca. 813. (h) R. v. Cottingham, 7 B. & C. 615; St. property does not belong to the occupier, it must be a separate building or land bond fide rented for 107. a year at least for the term of a whole year, and the rent for the same to the amount of 107. must have been actually paid(p). 7. The last mode in which a settlement can now be obtained is by estate. As no man can be removed from his own property(q), a man may gain a settlement by residence for forty days on an estate of his own, of any value if it come to him by descent or devise(r), but, if by purchase, the purchase money must amount to 30%. at least(s). This settlement, however, only lasts as long as the owner of the estate resides in the parish in which it was situate, or within ten miles thereof(t). Formerly there were other methods of obtaining a settlement, among which may be mentioned forty days' residence with notice, hiring and service, and serving an office. The first of these settlements was abolished by 33 Geo. 3, c. 101, and the two latter by 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 76, s. 64. Any person not legally settled, may be removed from the parish in which he is residing, should he become chargeable to it, and may be taken to the place of his settlement. *There are, however, certain exceptions to this rule, of which we may mention that no one can be removed from a [ *440] parish or union in which he has resided continually for three(u) years; nor can a widow, residing with her husband at the time of death, be removed within twelve months afterwards(x); nor can a child under the age of sixteen years, living with its father or mother, be removed (y). The duty of relieving or removing our poor formerly devolved on the overseers, viz., the churchwardens, who are overseers ex officio, and the persons appointed overseers annually by the justices(2), but by the 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 76, the poor law commissioners, and by the 12 & 13 Vict. c. 103, the poor law board (a) were empowered to consolidate any number of parishes into one union. for the relief of the poor. This being done, each parish has to elect one or more guardians, who act for the relief of the poor in the union subject to the rules of the poor law board. In this case the overseers have nothing to do with giving relief, except in cases of sudden emergency(b); they have, however, certain duties to perform in relation to the election of guardians. They are bound to make and levy the poor rates, and have other duties imposed upon them, most of which, however, may be discharged by an assistant overseer, a paid officer whom the inhabitants of each parish may appoint if they think fit(c). (p) 6 Geo. 4, c. 57, s. 2. (r) R. v. Marwood, Burr. Set. Ca. 386; R. V. Ingleton, Ib. 560. (8) 9 Geo. 1, c. 7, s. 5. (t) 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 96, s. 68. (e) 24 & 25 Vict. c. 55, s. 1. (x) 9 & 10 Vict. c. 66, s. 2. (y) Ib. s. 3. (a) 54 Geo. 3, c. 91. (a) 12 & 13 Vict. c. 103. The power of the poor law board, at first temporary, was continued from time to time by different statutes (see 29 & 30 Vict. c. 102), and was made permanent by 30 & 31 Vict. c. 106. This act has been amended, and further provisions for the relief of the poor have been made by 31 & 32 Vict. c. 122. (b) 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 76, s. 54. (c) See Archbold's Parish Officer, 4th ed. tit. Overseer. THE PEOPLE, WHETHER NATURAL-BORN SUBJECTS, ALIENS, OR DENIZENS. HAVING in the eight preceding chapters treated of persons clothed with magisterial functions, I now proceed to consider such as fall under the denomination of the people. And herein all the inferior and subordinate magistrates, treated of in the last chapter, are included. The first and most jects and aliens.(115) obvious division of the people is into natural-born subGenerally speaking, natural-born subjects are such as (115) In a previous note, ante, 213, note 90, the subject of aliens and their naturalization has been briefly noticed; and in this place some of the general principles of daily applica tion will be considered. The power to enact laws relating to the naturalization of foreigners is vested in congress. U. S. Const., art. 1, § 8. And congress has exercised this power by enacting a complete system of laws upon the subject. Act of April 14, 1802; 2 Stat. at Large, 153; act of March 3, 1813, 2 id. 811; act of March 22, 1816, 3 id. 259; act of May 26, 1824, 4 id. 69; act of May 24, 1828, 4 id. 310; act of June 26, 1848, 9 id. 240; act of July 6, 1812, 2 id. 781; act of July 17, 1862, 12 id. 597. The subject of citizenship will not be considered here any further than it relates to the United States government. Citizens are either native born or naturalized; and in the United States any one is regarded as a citizen if he has a right to vote for representatives in congress, and other public officers, and is qualified to hold offices which are in the gift of the people. Citizenship carries with it the right to the protection of the government, and imposes a duty which is usually termed allegiance. The right of expatriation and of terminating the allegiance of foreigners to their governments or sovereigns has been a subject of much discussion. Foreign governments have usually denied the right or the power of the subject to sever the relation of sovereign and subject without the permission of the sovereign. In this country the subject has been several times discussed by the courts. But a recent act of congress has finally settled the rule so far as the government of the United States is concerned: "Whereas, the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and whereas, in the recognition of this principle this government has freely received emigrants from all nations, and invested them with the rights of citizenship; and whereas, it is claimed that such American citizens, with their descendants, are subjects of foreign states, owing allegiance to the governments thereof; and whereas, it is necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this claim of foreign allegiance should be promptly and finally disavowed; therefore, be it enacted by the senate and house of representatives of the United States of America in congress assembled, That any declaration, instruction, opinion, order or decision of any officers of this government which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government." Act of July 27, 1868, 15 Stat. at Large, 223, 224. "§ 2. And be it further enacted, That all naturalized citizens of the United States, while in foreign states, shall be entitled to, and shall receive from this government, the same protection of persons and property that is accorded to native born citizens in like situations and circumstances." Ib., § 2. "§ 3. And be it further enacted, That whenever it shall be made known to the president that any citizen of the United States has been unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority of any foreign government, it shall be the duty of the president forthwith to demand of that government the reasons for such imprisonment, and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation of the rights of American citizenship, the president shall forthwith demand the release of such citizen, and if the release so demanded is unreasonably are born within the dominions of the crown of England; that is, within the ligeance, or allegiance of the sovereign and aliens, such as are born out of it. Natural-born subjects. Allegiance is the tie, or ligamen, which binds the subject to the sovereign, in return for that protection which the sovereign delayed or refused, it shall be the duty of the president to use such means, not amounting to acts of war, as he may think necessary and proper to obtain or effectuate such release, and all the facts and proceedings relative thereto shall, as soon as practicable, be communicated by the president to congress." Ib., § 3. The right of expatriation is now recognized by several foreign governments; and by treaties with this government they have expressly agreed to respect that right. Some of the principal features of these treaties in regard to this subject provide that when citizens of those countries shall have become naturalized in the United States, and shall have resided here uninterruptedly for five years, they shall be held to be citizens of the United States, and shall be treated as such; and when citizens of the United States shall have become naturalized citizens of a foreign government, with a like residence of five years, they are to be regarded as citizens of such foreign country. If any such person shall have committed any crime before leaving his country, the right to punish him on his return is reserved. Treaty with Prussia, Feb. 22, 1868, 15 Stat. at Large, 615; treaty with Bavaria, May 26, 1868, 15 id. 661; treaty with Mexico, July 10, 1868, 15 id. 687; treaty with Russia, as to cession of Russian possessions, etc., March 30, 1867, 15 id. 539, 542; treaty with Grand Duchy of Baden, July 19, 1868, 16 id. 731; treaty with kingdom of Würtemberg, July 28. 1868, 16 id. 735; treaty with China, July 28, 1868, 16 id. 739, 740; convention with Grand Duchy of Hesse, Aug. 1, 1868, 16 id. 743; convention with Belgium, Nov. 16, 1868, 16 id. 747; treaty with Great Britain, May 13, 1870, 16 id. 775. From the readiness with which the right of expatriation has been recognized by foreign governments, it is probable that it will be very generally regarded as a natural right. The question who is an alien is generally one of no difficulty, and yet cases have occurred in which doubts arose which were only settled by a resort to the courts. A person born in a foreign country of parents who were foreigners is an alien. Evidence that a person was living in Germany with German parents, when six years of age; that he came to the United States when he was seventeen or eighteen years old; that he then spoke the German language, and did not speak English, and that his father died in Germany when he was six or eight years old, is sufficient to justify a finding that he was an alien born. Walther v. Rabolt, 30 Cal. 185. The general rule, that persons born in a foreign country, of foreign parents, are aliens, has been frequently laid down by our courts. Ainslie v. Martin, 9 Mass. 454; Jackson v. Burns, 3 Binn. 75; Dawson's Lessee v. Godfrey, 4 Cranch, 321; Blight's Lessee v. Rochester, 7 Wheat. 535; Jackson v. Wright, 4 Johns. 75; Barzizas v. Hopkins, 2 Rand. 276 ; Trezevant v. Osborne, 1 Const. Rep. 61; Inglis v. Trustees of Snug Harbor, 3 Pet. 99, 126. Persons born in this country, of parents who are citizens, are citizens. Formerly the black race was generally excluded from citizenship. But, by recent amendments of the constitution of the United States, this distinction is abrogated, and race, color, or previous condition is not recognized as a test of citizenship. See amendments XIII, XIV, XV. By act of congress May 31, 1870, the right to vote irrespective of race, color, or previous condition of servitude is provided for, and a penalty imposed for any restraint of the right. 16 Stat. at Large, 140. In New York a statute has been enacted for securing the equality of the blacks with those of the whites, so far as it relates to innkeepers, common carriers, owners or managers of places of amusement, schools or institutions of learning, and cemetery associations. Laws 1873, ch. 186. By the English common law, children of English subjects, if born in foreign countries, were aliens. See text, 450. Under the laws of the United States children of citizens are also citizens, although born in a foreign country. Act of April 14, 1802; 2 Stat. at Large, 153, § 4; act Feb. 10, 1855; 10 Stat. at Large, 604, § 1; Campbell v. Gordon, 6 Cranch, 176; Sasportas v. De la Motta, 10 Rich. Eq. (S. C.) 38. By the act of congress of Feb. 10, 1855, a person, although born out of the United States, is a citizen thereof, if, at the time of his birth, his father was a citizen of the United States. Oldtown v. Bangor, 58 Me. 353. Free persons of color, born within the allegiance of the United States, are citizens, and have always been entitled to be so regarded. United States v. Rhodes, 1 Abb. (U. S.) 28. affords the subject. The thing itself, or substantial part of it, is founded in reason and the nature of government; the name and the form of it are derived to us from our Gothic ancestors. Under the feudal system, every Their allegiance. owner of lands held them in subjection to some superior or lord, The terms "married" or " who shall be married," in the act of congress of Feb. 10, 1855, mean that whenever a woman, who under previous acts might be naturalized, is in a state of marriage to a citizen, she becomes by that fact a citizen also. His citizenship, whenever it exists, confers, under the act, citizenship on her. Kelly v. Owen, 7 Wall. (U. S.) 496. A white woman, a native of Ireland and not an alien enemy, who marries a citizen of the United States, is a citizen of the United States although she has always resided in Ireland. Kane v. McCarthy, 63 N. C. 299. When a citizen of the United States, while under age, goes to a foreign country, with the intention of remaining there in trade indefinitely, but not naturalized there, his children, if he marries a native of such country, will be entitled to inherit property as citizens of the United States. Ludlam v. Ludlam, 26 N. Y. (12 Smith) 356. The widow of a naturalized citizen of the United States is entitled to dower, although she never resided in the United States. Burton v. Burton, 1 Keyes, 359. Both national and state courts act in the naturalization of aliens. See, ante, 213, note 90. The order of a court of competent jurisdiction, admitting an alien to citizenship, is, in the absence of fraud, conclusive as to the question of the requisite length of residence of the naturalized citizen in the United States. The Acorn, 2 Abb. (U. S.) 434. The judgment of a competent court, admitting a person to citizenship, if duly entered upon record, closes all inquiry as to the testimony on which it was pronounced, and, like every other judgment, is complete evidence of its own validity. Spratt v. Spratt, 4 Pet. 393; Starke v. Chesapeake Ins. Co., 7 Cranch, 420; Ritchie v. Putnam, 13 Wend. 524; Priest v. Cummings, 16 id. 617, 625. See People v. Snyder, 41 N. Y. (2 Hand) 397, 409. It has been the practice of both national and state governments to extend to alien friends, as extensive rights as are consistent with the interests and safety of the country. One of the most exclusive rules that has been enforced, is that relating to the ownership of lands by aliens. And this matter is one which is regulated by each state for itself. Alien friends may purchase real estate, and no one can question their title, except the state; and, until office found, the title of the alien is valid. Goodrich v. Russell, 42 N. Y. (3 Hand) 177; Cross v. De Valle, 1 Wall. (U. S.) 5; Morris v. Hoyt, 18 Cal. 217; Fairfax v. Hunter, 7 Cranch, 603; McCreery v. Allender, 4 Har. & McHen. 409; Groves v. Gordon, 1 Const. Rep. 111; Marshall v. Conrod, 5 Call. 364; University v. Miller, 3 Dev. 191; Buchanan v. Deshon, 1 Har. & Gill. 280; Sheaffe v. O'Neil, 1 Mass. 256; Jinkins v. Noel, 3 Stew. 60; Jackson v. Adams, 7 Wend. 367; Goodrich v. Russell, 42 N. Y. (3 Hand) 177. So an alien may take by devise as well as by grant. Fairfax v. Hunter, 7 Cranch. 603; Fox v. Southack, 12 Mass. 143; Vaux v. Nesbit, 1 McCord's Ch. 352. Where real estate is devised to an alien, and the land is construed to be converted into personal property, he may take and hold it. Craig v. Leslie, 3 Wheat. 563. In the United States courts, alien friends are entitled to claim the same protection of their rights that is accorded to citizens. Taylor v. Carpenter, 3 Story, 458; 2 Woodb. & M. 1. So one alien may sue another in a state court upon a contract made abroad, when the parties are transiently within the state. Roberts v. Knights, 7 Allen (Mass.), 449. But it is otherwise when a subject of one belligerent nation sues the subjects of the other party, for acts growing out of the war. Juando v. Taylor, 2 Paine, 652. Alien enemies cannot maintain actions in our courts against any person. Crawford v. The William Penn, Pet. C. C. 106; Wilcox v. Henry, 1 Dall. 69; Mumford v. Mumford, 1 Gall. 366; Bell v. Chapman, 10 Johns. 183. During the late civil war, a citizen of South Carolina was not permitted to enforce any of his claims against any of our citizens (New York), in the courts of this state. Bonneau v. Dinsmore, 23 How. Pr. 397. So a citizen of Florida, who engaged in the civil war against the United States, although not technically an alien enemy, was still an enemy, and during the war, was not permitted to maintain an action in the courts of New York, against a citizen of that state. Sanderson v. Morgan, 25 How. Pr. 144; S. C., 39 N. Y. (12 Tiff.) 231. See also Leftwich v. Clinton, 4 Lans. 176. So in the United States courts, all the people of any district that was in insurrection against the United States were regarded as enemies. Alexander's Cotton, 2 Wall. (U. S.) 404. |