Declarations of intention to become citizens: In the month of February, 1; in March, 2; in April, 1; in May, 1; in June, 2; in August, 3; in September, 1; in October, 11; in November, 4; in December, 2-total, 28.

Victor Sere, being duly sworn, did depose and say, that he is the Deputy Clerk of the Parish court, in and for the parish of Orleans.

That from the records of said court it appears, that in the past year, 1844, there were 31 certificates of naturalization granted to foreigners, and 107 declarations of intention to become citizens, entered before said court at the following periods, to wit:

Certificates of naturalization granted: In the month of February, 1; in March, 5; in May, 1; in June, 2; in July, 9; in August, 7; in September, 5; in November, 1– total, 31.

Declarations entered: In the month of January, 2; in March, 1; in April, 1; in May, 3; in June, 1; in July, 39; in August, 29; in September, 23; in November, 6; in December, 2-total, 107.

That during the present year of 1845, up to the present time, there have been 5 certificates of naturalization issued, and 21 declarations of intention to become citizens, entered in said court.

Edward Gardere, Esq., being duly sworn, did depose and say, that he is at this present time, and has been for the last year, Clerk of the Commercial court of New Orleans. That in the year 1844 there were 58 foreigners naturalized by said court, at the following periods, to wit:

Number of persons naturalized in the District and Circuit courts of the United States, from February 5, 1823, to January 1, 1845, 171.

GEORGE W. MORTON, Deputy Clerk.

CHAPTER XXII.

QUALIFICATIONS OF ELECTORS IN TERRITORIES.

LEGISLATION in relation to the qualifications of electors in the Territories of the United States, has not been uniform. The celebrated ordinance of 1787, establishing the Northwest Territory, which was passed prior to the formation of the Federal Government, provided that when the Territory should have five thousand male inhabitants over

twenty-one years of age, it should have a legislative government, and that the right of suffrage should belong to all who were citizens of one of the United States, and had certain property qualifications; and that provision was successively extended to the different Territories organized out of the northwestern Territory. It was also in substance extended to the Territories southwest of the Ohio, not in precisely the same form, but by a general provision that the inhabitants of the southwestern Territory should be entitled to all the right, &c., enjoyed by those of the northwestern Territory under the ordinance of 1787.

A similar provision was inserted in the act organizing the Mississippi Territory in 1793; and the policy of 1787 seems to have been invariably pursued until 1808, when an act was passed restricting the elective franchise of that Territory to those who were citizens of the United States and possessed certain property qualifications.

In 1812, on admitting Illinois into the second grade of Territorial Governments, the act provided that every free white male person, having attained the age of twenty-one, paid a territorial or county tax, and resided one year in the Territory, should enjoy the right of suffrage. The act organizing Missouri, passed the same year, contained a similar provision. In 1817, the Territory of Alabama was organized, and in that instance the precedent of 1812 was disregarded and that of 1787 followed. Arkansas was organized in 1819, and the precedent of 1812 was again adopted. In 1836, the elective franchise in Wisconsin was made the same as that of Missouri in 1812, except that the freehold qualification was not required. The same course was pursued with Iowa in 1838. The act organizing Minnesota, passed 1849, departed again from the precedent of 1812, which had with a single modification been followed in 1819, '36 and '38, by adding the following words to the proviso: "and those who shall have declared, on oath, their intention to become such, and shall have taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, and the provisions of this act." The acts organizing Oregon and Washington Territories contain similar provisions to that of Minnesota. Those establishing Utah and New Mexico contain the Missouri provision, and confine the elective franchise to citizens of the United States.

During the pendency of the bill to establish the Territorial Governments of Kansas and Nebraska, John M. Clayton introduced, in the Senate, an amendment, confining the elective franchise in those Territories to citizens of the United States, which gave rise to an animated debate, as will be seen by reference to the Appendix Congressional Globe of 1853 -54, p. 297. The amendment was to strike out the following :

"And those who shall have declared, on oath, their intention to become such, and shall have taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and the provisions of this act."

So that the proviso will read:

"Provided, That the rights of suffrage and of holding office shall be exercised only by citizens of the United States."

John Pettit, of Indiana, opposed this amendment, and among other remarks, made the following:

Mr. President, in my views of propriety and policy, I shall be constrained to vote against the amendment, for the few brief reasons which I shall assign. In my State we recently held a constitutional convention, and put into it a clause the same in substance, if not in words, as that which it is now proposed to strike out of this bill. We did it after the fullest consideration and the fullest discussion. Allow me to say that I believe no injury has arisen, and none will arise from it; but, on the contrary, very great harmonizing, salutary results are produced by it. It does not follow at all that a man who has come from abroad, from Ireland, England, France, or Germany, understands any better our institutions or his local wants because he has taken two oaths, as is required in the bill as it stands, than though he had taken but one oath. But, sir, in a broader and more comprehensive view of the subject, I am in favor of the provision as it stands in the bill.

I live in the midst of a dense foreign population-Irish and German-and I now say that I believe no such thing can be found on record as a foreign party anywhere got up where they have declared, " we are foreigners; we will vote thus because we are foreigners." On the contrary, when they come here, they range themselves directly under the Whig or Democratic parties-mostly, I grant you, under the Democratic party, for they come here with their sympathies and their feelings with that party of liberty contradistinguished from the treatment they have had at home. They have been led to believe before they come here, and immediately on coming here they see the broad distinction between the parties-the one going for the utmost liberty that man can rightfully enjoy, the other voting to restrict, control and limit their liberty. They find immediately which party it is that has gone for the earliest naturalization, and they know almost instinctively who it was promulgated and advocated the alien and sedition laws. They know the party of liberty, of progress, and of freedom, and they know the party that opposes and grudges every right they receive and have ever enjoyed.

I am against the amendment of the Senator of Delaware. It proposes to exclude from suffrage and from office a large proportion of voters in several of the western States, who are, at least, so far fellow-citizens with us that we conceive ourselves bound to interfere for their protection against aggression in foreign lands. They are clothed, as the Secretary of State has said, with American nationality, and certainly so far citizens as justify and require their full admission to equal privileges and rights in every respect, with our own native born citizens in the Territories. I hope the amendment will be rejected.

David R. Atchison, of Missouri, said—

Now, sir, in the State of Missouri-and that is one of the northwestern States, although it is generally, from its institutions, classed as one of the southwestern States-no person can exercise the right of suffrage or hold office unless he be a citizen of the United States; and, with due deference, I think it a good rule to apply to all the Territories of this Union.

It is not that I fear the votes of the foreign population upon the question of slavery in the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas; but it is upon this great principle, that none but American citizens-whether they be native born, or whether the right of citizenship be conferred upon them by residence in this country of their adoption-should exercise the right of suffrage and the right of holding office, either in the States or Territories.

The question being taken, the amendment was agreed to-yeas, 23; nays, 21; as follows:

Yeas-Messrs. Adams, Atchison, Badger, Bell, Benjamin, Brodhead, Brown, Butler, Clay, Clayton, Dawson, Dixon, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Houston, Hunter, Johnson, Jones of Tennessee, Mason, Morton, Pratt, Sebastian, and Slidell-23.

Nays-Messrs. Chase, Dodge of Wisconsin, Dodge of Iowa, Douglas, Fessenden, Fish, Foot, Gwin, Hamlin, Jones of Iowa, Norris, Pettit, Seward, Shields, Smith, Stuart, Sumner, Toucey, Wade, Walker, and Williams-21.

The House of Representatives passed the bill, but rejected Mr. Clayton's amendment. When it again came up for consideration in the Senate, James A. Pearce, of Maryland, offered to amend the proviso in the fifth section, which was as follows:

"Provided, That the rights of suffrage and of holding office shall be exercised only by citizens of the United States, and those who have declared on oath their intention to become such, and shall have taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, and the provisions of this act,”—

By striking out these words:

"And those who shall have declared on oath their intention to become such, and shall have taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, and the provisions of this act."

Mr. Pearce made an able speech in support of his proposition, from which the following extracts are taken :

For my own part, I cannot conceive any reason why this privilege, which peculiarly belongs to citizenship, should be extended to those who are not citizens. It is a part of political sovereignty. It seems to me to be the essential duty of a citizen, but of no one else, to exercise that power. It is at war with the principles of all government, it seems to me, to confer upon those who are not citizens, the power to control the government, through the right of suffrage. That right belongs only to those who are members of the body-politic, and no foreigner can be so until he has, by naturalization, entered into the compact which constitutes him one of the political community.

Richard Brodhead, of Pennsylvania, followed, in a speech of some length, in support of the amendment. The following are extracts from his speech:

The honorable senator from Maryland has what is called the Clayton amendment, which restricts the right to vote to those who are citizens, either native born or those who have become such under our naturalization laws, and as I voted for it when the

bill was before the Senate upon another occasion, and have scen no reason for changing my vote, I will do so again.

me.

Up to the present time foreigners came here to be Americanized, not to Americanize us. But, I confess, I have witnessed some recent demonstrations that do not please The movements of Kossuth in this country did him no credit, and since he returned, he has issued an address to the German people of this country to take action against the Senate of the United States for rejecting a gentleman nominated by the President for Consul at London. German meetings have been held in different parts of the United States to denounce those who support this bill, and I believe they went so far in some places as to burn the honorable senator from Illinois in effigy.

Those who set themselves up for leaders among them, who claim to be the special guardians of their rights, who pretend to have the same religion that they have, that they may sell them out in election times, either for money or office, are their worst enemies. I have seen a good many claim office on the allegation that they influenced this or that portion of the alien vote, and threaten those in power with the displeasure of the voters of foreign birth if they were not gratified.

David R. Atchison, of Missouri, said—

Mr. President, I have voted for the amendment to the Senate bill proposed by the senator from Delaware; but I must say now that I concur with the senator from Georgia. I have not, however, changed my opinions as to the policy of the amendment. I still entertain the opinions I did then, that none but American citizens, native born or naturalized, should be entitled to the right of suffrage, or to hold office either in the States or Territories of this country."

As I said before, I believe that, as a matter of policy, none but American citizens, native born or naturalized, should be entitled to vote or to hold office in this country; but still I am willing to yield this; and as a southern man, as representing a State more deeply interested in the passage of this bill, perhaps, than any other State in the Union, I say that, practically, it will have no effect upon the institutions of these Territories, The foreign population are not the pioneers; they are not the first to enter the territories of the United States. They are not the first to encounter the perils, and toils, and the dangers of settling a new territory. They follow in the footsteps of the pioneers, and inhabit the cities and villages. They are generally not the agricultural portion of the community. The great mass of them are traders, mechanics, paupers, and peddlers.

Geo. E. Badger, of North Carolina, said:

I voted for this amendment when it was proposed by my friend from Delaware, to the bill which passed the Senate. I thought the amendment right then; I think it right now; and I have listened to discover what reason there is why I should now vote against an amendment which I before voted for, because I thought it right, and which I still think to be right.

Now, sir, what is the amendment? Is it unjust or unfair to anybody? It is to allow the citizens of the United States in these Territories to elect the legislative body, and then to determine upon the domestic institutions of the Territories.