May 7, 1863, The Charleston Mercury
Our readers read yesterday a synopsis of the debate in the Senate on the bill which passed the House of Representatives, repealing the Naturalization Laws, in view of the influx of Yankees after the war. This bill is similar to that introduced by Mr. THOMAS COBB, of Georgia, into the Provisional Congress, passed by that body, and vetoed by President DAVIS. The effort to perpetuate the Yankee Naturalization Laws over the Confederate States may, in effect, be nothing but a form of reconstruction of our Union with them – for every one must know, that after the war is over, ten Yankees will enter the Confederated States for one European. It is a matter of congratulation that this debate was in open session, and that we have the vote upon the measure, although not the names of the Senators. By degrees the people may be let into a knowledge of the course of their Representatives.
The Richmond Enquirer commends President DAVIS. In one column it heaps upon him praises, and in the next denounces his notorious policy. It likens him to BRONDAS, of Sparta, who was a great General in the field; and in the next column it strongly assails two measures of his policy. The Enquirer discourseth as follows upon these two measures:
One is, the conscription of persons pretending to be foreigners, but whom their own Governments do not think it worth their while to claim as subjects; the other is the repeal of all naturalization laws. The first has been defeated; the second postponed by a vote of 9 to 8. We shall hear more of them both.
The opponents of both these measures have acted under the vague and confused idea that certain foreign Governments, which do not know us, and which we do not know, might possibly be irritated against us. They say, if we pretend to put ourselves on an equality with foreign nations, and venture to say that we will admit their Consuls when they admit ours; that we will respect the rights of their nationality so soon as they respect ours; that we will acknowledge their citizens to be their citizens just when they acknowledge us to be citizens of the Confederate States, and not till then; perhaps they may grow angry – who knows?
And they say further: ‘If we undertake to define who shall hereafter have the privilege of becoming our fellow citizens by naturalization; if we presume to shut up from the overcrowded monarchies of Europe those convenient receptacles for their overplus paupers and the criminals who have become too intolerable at home; if we act as if we felt that we also have a social system to conserve; a civilization to guard, to cherish, to honor; and that for those ends we desire to have the working out of our grand problem ourselves, without being swamped by deluges of superfluous humanity, sloughed off from the diseased societies of the old world, and emptied out and swept away from all the penitentiaries of mankind; why, we may offend and aggrieve somebody. Lord Russell might, perhaps, feel indignant against us, an might affront Mr. Mason worse than ever – who knows? He might not only delay, but might even lay an embargo on the ships of the Emperor of China.
Possibly there may be another more secret reason for the opposition to Mr. Clay’s bill. Possibly there may be some who cannot bear the thought of shutting out the Yankees from this Confederacy; but this is a thought which we shall not at present pursue.
One thing, however, we say boldly; this Confederacy will never be recognized as an independent nation – never – until we first have the spirit to recognize ourselves.
The Hon. Senator from South Carolina, Mr. Orr, in opposing this bill of Mr. Clay, to repeal the naturalization laws, was good enough to enter upon a defence of foreigners. They are very much obliged to him, but nobody was assailing them. Mr. Clay’s bill is not directed against foreigners, nor against any of those who have heretofore come from other countries to settle in ours. It only affirms the right of this nation – if it is a nation – to define, as other nations do, the terms of its own citizenship for the future. Mr. Clay does not charge anybody with anything; it is quite unnecessary to claim on behalf of foreigners that they have fought gallantly in our ranks the first Manassas, etc.’– that they are useful artizens in our towns, etc. If they have fought anywhere in our ranks, if they have settled in any of our cities, and declared their intention to become citizens under the existing law, Mr. Clay’s bill does not touch them – they can become citizens, and be the equals of all other citizens. Mr. Orr’s chivalrous defence of foreigners was, therefore, needless; but they thank him all the same. This bill of Mr. Clay’s hurts the rights of no human being in the world.