The first of these Acts is the Naturalization Law, which was passed at the second session
of the first Congress, March 26, 1790, and confines the right of becoming citizens "to aliens
being free white persons."

Now, the Constitution does not limit the power of Congress in this respect to white
persons. And they may, if they think proper, authorize the naturalization of anyone, of any color,
who was bom under allegiance to another government. But the language of the law above
quoted shows that citizenship at that time was perfectly understood to be confined to the white
race; and that they alone constituted the sovereignty in the government.

Congress might, as we before said, have authorized the naturalization of Indians, because
they were aliens and foreigners. But, in their then untutored and savage state, no one would have
though of admitting them as citizens in a civilized community. No one supposed then that any
Indian would ask for, or was capable of enjoying, the privileges of an American citizen, and the
word "white" was not used with any particular reference to them.

Neither was it used with any reference to the African race imported into or bom in this
country; because Congress had no power to naturalize them, and therefore there was no necessity
for using particular words to exclude them.

It would seem to have been used merely because it followed out the line of division
which the Constitution has drawn between the citizen race, who formed and held the
government, and the African race, which they held in subjection and slavery, and governed at
their own pleasure.

Another of the early laws of which we have spoken, is the first Militia Law, which was
passed in 1792, at the first session of the second Congress. The language of this law is equally
plain and significant with the one just mentioned. It directs that every "free able-bodied white
male citizen" shall be enrolled in the militia. The word "white" is evidently used to exclude
unnaturalized foreigners, the latter forming no part of the sovereignty; owing it no allegiance, and
therefore under no obligation to defend it. The African race, however, bom in the country, did
owe allegiance to the government, whether they were slave or free; but it is repudiated, and
rejected from the duties and obligations of citizenship in marked language.

The third Act to which we have alluded is even still more decisive; it was passed as late
as 1813 (2 Stat. 809), and it provides: "That from and after the termination of the war in which
the United States are now engaged with Great Britain, it shall not be lawful to employ, on board
of any public or private vessels of the United States, any person or persons except citizens of the
United States, or persons of color, natives of the United States.

Here the line of distinction is drawn in express words. Persons of color, in the judgment
of Congress, were not included in the word "citizens," and they are described as another and
different class of persons, and authorized to be employed, if bom in the United States.

73