an oath of allegiance to the same, may thereupon purchase, and by other just means acquire, hold, and transfer land, and after one year's residence, become entitled to most of the privileges of a natural-born subject. In Connecticut, the Superior Court is invested with power at large, upon petition, to grant to resident aliens the right to take, hold, convey, and transmit real estate, in like manner as native citizens. (c) These civil privileges, con

aliens to take and hold real estate. (1.) Any alien who takes and files in the Secretary of State's office, a deposition of being a resident, and of the intention of his permanent residence, and to become a citizen as soon as the naturalization laws permit, may take and hold real estate in fee, and for six years thereafter may sell, devise, and dispose of the same, except that he shall not lease or demise the same until naturalized. (2.) Such alien shall not, however, take or hold real estate descended, devised, or conveyed to him previously to such residence and deposition, but if he dies within the six years, his heirs being inhabitants, may take by descent as if he had been a citizen. (3.) If any alien sells lands so entitled by him to be held and sold, he may take in fee mortgages as a security for the purchase-money, and repurchase on the mortgage sales. (4.) All such aliens, so holding real estates, are subject to assessments, taxes, and burdens as if they were citizens. (5.) All titles to lands by conveyance, descent, or devise, before the alien was qualified to take and hold, are confirmed on his naturalization, or if not naturalized, if he shall within one year from acquiring the title, file his deposition, he may in that case hold and convey for the term of five years real estate. N. Y. Revised Statutes, vol. ii. 3d edit. pp. 3-6. The Revised Statutes, from p. 3 to p. 5, were doubtless intended to give a clear and condensed view of all the various statute provisions in favor of the rights and capacities of aliens in respect to real property, but such a view has not been answered, and the successive enactments are so tacked together as to lead to repetition and perplexity.5

(c) Statutes of Connecticut, 1838, p. 287.

4 Resident aliens are now vested with the same rights as native citizens. Rev. St. 1849, tit. 29, ch. 1, sec. 6.

Similar privileges are given to alien friends in Virginia, upon filing a declaration of an intention to remain. Rev. St. 1849, tit. 33, ch. 116, sec. 1. In Maine, by the Act of Feb. 9, 1856, aliens may take, hold, convey, and devise real estate within the state; and all conveyances and transfers of any interest in such estate, heretofore made by or to an alien, are made as effectual as if made by or to a citizen of the state. (Laws, 1856, ch. 198, and see Laws, 1854, ch. 64.) A similar provision was made in Massachusetts in 1852, and is now in force under Gen'l. Sts. ch. 90, § 38.

5 A later Act in New York (Act of April 30; Laws, 1845, ch. 115, p. 94) has conferred enlarged privileges upon aliens.

1. The deposition, above mentioned, will avail, though filed subsequent to the acquisition of title, and the alien holds the land in the same manner and with the same effect as a citizen of the United States.

2. The wife of an alien resident, dying seised, and an alien woman marrying a citizen, are entitled to dower.

3. The grantees or devisees of resident aliens, deceased, are made capable of taking and holding in the same manner as if such alien were a citizen; but if any of such devisees or grantees are aliens and males of full age, they must file a deposition, as supra, subject to a like condition as to filing a deposition; the heirs at law of an alien resident may take and hold the real estate of their ancestor.

ferred upon aliens by state authority, are dictated by a just and liberal policy; but they must be taken to be strictly local; and until a foreigner is duly naturalized, according to the Act of

Congress, he is not entitled in any other state to any other *71 privileges than those which the laws of that state allow to aliens. No other state is bound to admit, nor would the United States admit, any alien to any privileges to which he is not entitled by treaty, or the laws of nations, or the laws of the United States, or of the state in which he dwells. The article in the constitution of the United States, (a) declaring that citizens of each state were entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, applies only to natural-born or duly naturalized citizens; and if they remove from one state to another, they are entitled to the privileges that persons of the same description are entitled to in the state to which the removal is made, and to none other. The privileges thus conferred are local and necessarily territorial in their nature. The laws and usages of one state cannot be permitted to prescribe qualifications for citizens, to be claimed and exercised in other states, in contravention to their local policy. (b) It was declared in Corfield v. Coryell, (c) that

(a) Art. 4, sec. 2.

(b) It is a curious fact in ancient Grecian history, that the Greek states indulged such a narrow and excessive jealousy of each other, that intermarriage was forbidden, and none were allowed to possess lands within the territory of another state. When the Olynthian republic introduced a more liberal and beneficial policy in this respect, it was considered as a portentous innovation. Mitford's History, vol. v. p. 9. The Athenians occasionally granted the right of intermarriage, and even the freedom of the city, to the inhabitants of foreign states. Schömann's Dissertations on the Assemblies of the Athenians, ed. Cambridge, 1838, p. 319. So, the Byzantines, to evince their deep gratitude to the Athenians for their assistance in the war against Philip of Macedon, broke in upon their ordinary policy, and granted, by law, to the Athenians, the right of intermarriage with their citizens, and the power of purchasing and holding lands in the Byzantine and Perinthian territories. Demost. Orat. de Corona, where the original decree is set forth at large. So, also, the inhabitants and colonists of the Latin cities in Latium, in the 6th century of Rome, were so much regarded as foreigners, that they could not buy or inherit land from Roman citizens, nor had they generally the right of intermarriage with Romans. Arnold's Hist. vol. iii. p. 14.

(c) 4 Wash. C. C. 371.

4. On the same condition, an alien resident may grant or devise to a citizen or alien.

5. Alien women, resident in the state, may take, by devise or under marriage settlements, and may execute a power.

Former grants, &c., are confirmed. See Brown v. Sprague, 5 Denio, 545.

*

the privileges and immunities conceded by the constitution *72 of the. United States to citizens in the several states were to be confined to those which were, in their nature, fundamental, and belonged of right to the citizens of all free governments. Such are the rights of protection of life and liberty, and to acquire and enjoy property, and to pay no higher impositions than other citizens, and to pass through or reside in the state at pleasure, and to enjoy the elective franchise according to the regulations of the law of the state. But this immunity does not apply to every right, for some may belong exclusively to resident citizens under the laws of the state; and it was held that a statute of New Jersey confining the right of taking oysters within the waters of the state, to the actual inhabitants and residents of the state, was not an Act infringing the constitution of the United States. The power to regulate the fisheries in the navigable waters of the states remained in the states respectively, though the United States have a concurrent power, so far as concerns the free navigation of the waters.

The Act of Congress confines the description of aliens capable of naturalization, to "free white persons." I presume this excludes the inhabitants of Africa, and their descendants; and it may become a question, to what extent persons of mixed blood are excluded, and what shades and degrees of mixture of color disqualify an alien from application for the benefits of the act of naturalization. (a) Perhaps there might be difficulties also as to

(a) By a statute of Virginia, in 1785, every person who hath one fourth part or more of negro blood, is deemed a mulatto, and that Act is still in force. 4 Rand. 631. The same rule is declared in Indiana. Revised Statutes of Indiana, 1838. It is adjudged, in South Carolina, that mulattoes are not white citizens within the meaning of the law, and persons tinged with negro blood are said to be mulattoes. State v. Hayes, 1 Bailey (S. C.) 275. The term is not precisely defined, nor the line of distinction between whites and men of color accurately ascertained. It means a person of mixed white or European and negro descent, without defining exactly the proportions of blood. A remote taint will not degrade a person to the class of persons of color;

The provisions of the Act of April 30, 1845, were extended by an Act passed in 1857, (Laws, 1857, ch. 576.)

The constitution of California provides that aliens who were at the time of the adoption of the constitution or should thereafter become bona fide residents of that state, shall be entitled to enjoy the same rights, in respect to the possession, enjoyment, and inheritance of property, as native-born citizens. It has been decided that this clause forbids non-resident aliens to inherit. Siemssen v. Bofer, 6 Cal. 250.

the copper-colored natives of America, or the yellow or tawny races of the Asiatics, and it may well be doubted whether any of them are "white persons" within the purview of the law. It is the declared law of New York, South Carolina, and Tennessee, (b) and probably so understood in other states, that Indians are not citizens, but distinct tribes, living under the protection of the government, and * consequently they never can be made citi- *73 zens under the Act of Congress. (a)

Before the adoption of the present constitution of the United States, the power of naturalization resided in the several states;

but a mere predominance of white blood is not sufficient to rescue a person from that class. It is held to be a question of fact for a jury, upon the evidence of features and complexion, and reputation as to parentage, and that a distinct and visible admixture of negro blood makes one a mulatto. If the admixture of African blood does not exceed the proportion of one eighth, the person is deemed white. This is the rule in Louisiana, and in the code noir of France for her colonies, and it is deemed in Carolina a proper rule. State v. Davis, 2 Bailey (S. C.) 558. With respect to India, it was the policy of the British Parliament, in 1833, to effect a complete identification of the Europeans and natives in the eye of the law, without regard to color, birth, or religion. Ann. Reg. for 1833. Hist. p. 184. In Ohio, it has been held, that all persons nearer white than black are white persons, within the constitution of the state. Jeffries v. Ankeny, 11 Ohio, 372, 375. So, by the case of Lane v. Baker, 12 Ohio, 237, youths of negro, Indian, and white blood, but of more than one half white blood, are entitled, under the school law in favor of white children, to the benefit of the common-school fund.

(b) Goodell v. Jackson, 20 Johns. 693. State v. Managers of Elections for York, 1 Bailey (S. C.) 215. The State v. Ross. 7 Yerger, 74.

(a) By an Act of the legislature of New York of the 10th of April, 1843, c. 87, 2 R. S. 3d edit. 4, any native Indian may purchase, take, hold, and convey lands, in the same manner as a citizen; and whenever he becomes a freeholder to the value of $100, he becomes subject to taxation, and liable on contracts, and subject to the civil jurisdiction of the courts of law and equity as a citizen. This Act gives to the Indians new and important privileges. Part of the Seneca tribe of Indians now (1843) own and occupy reservation lands in the S. W. part of the state of New York. So the Oneida Indians, owning lands in the counties of Oneida and Madison, were enabled, by the Act of April 18th, 1843, ch. 185, to hold lands in severalty, and to sell and convey the same, under the care of a superintendent on the part of the state. It is admitted that an Indian is a competent witness in a suit between white men. Coleman v. Doe, 4 Smedes & Marsh.

40. So, by the Act of Congress of March 3, 1843, ch. 101, provision is made for a just division of the lands belonging to the Stockbridge tribe of Indians, in the territory of Wisconsin, among them individually, and patents to be issued to such individuals, in severalty and in fee; and such Indians are thenceforth to be deemed citizens of the United States, with all the privileges and duties attached thereto, and the powers and usages of those Indians as a tribe thenceforth to cease.

1 By a statute of New York, (Laws of N. Y. 1847, p. 464,) various provisions have been made for the internal government and police of the Seneca Indians. The Act may be said to contain the rudimentary provisions of civil and republican government.

and the constitution of New York, as it was originally passed, (b) required all persons born out of the United States, and naturalized by the legislature, to take an oath abjuring all foreign allegiance and subjection, in all matters, ecclesiastical as well as civil. This was intended, and so it operated, to exclude from the benefits of naturalization Roman Catholics, who acknowledged the spiritual supremacy of the Pope, and it was the result of former fears and prejudices (still alive and active at the commencement of our Revolution) respecting the religion of the Romish church, which European history had taught us to believe was incompatible with perfect national independence, or the freedom and good order of civil society. So extremely strong, and so astonishingly fierce and unrelenting was public prejudice on this subject, in the early part of our colonial history, that we find it declared by law in the beginning of the last century, (c) that every Jesuit and popish priest, who should continue in the colony after a given day, should be condemned to perpetual imprisonment; and if he broke prison and escaped, and was retaken, he should be put to death. That law, said Mr. Smith, the historian of the colony as late as the year 1756, (d) was worthy of perpetual duration !

(b) Art. 42.

(c) Colony Laws, vol. i. p. 38, Livingston & Smith's edit.

(d) Smith's History of New York, p. 111. In the Act declaring the rights and privileges of the people of the colony of New York, in 1691, all persons “professing faith in God, by Jesus Christ, his only son," were allowed the free exercise and enjoyment of their religious profession and worship, with the exception of "persons of the Roman religion," who were not to exercise their manner of worship contrary to the laws of England. Bradford's edition of the Laws of New York, 1719. As late as 1753, the legis lature of Virginia passed an Act extremely severe upon popish recusants, placing them under the most oppressive disabilities.