Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 12.djvu/320

300 300 HARVARD LAW REVIEW. mer sovereign are dissolved, and new relations are created between them and the government which has acquired their territory. The same act which transfers their territory transfers the allegiance of those who remain in it." ^ And the right to allegiance is quite as substantial where territory is annexed by conquest unconfirmed by treaty.^ There is no occasion for relaxing the rule when the identity of the ceding or conquered state is extinguished by the transfer of its entire territory. But when the land transferred is a part only of a national domain, a regard for the ties of nationality and a re- luctance to claim an unwilling allegiance may lead the new sover- eign to allow the inhabitants who wish to retain their old allegiance a suitable time within which they may settle their affairs and depart. This privilege of removal was accorded by the United States in the treaties by which they acquired Louisiana, Florida, California, and Alaska. Are the inhabitants of the annexed territory whose allegiance is transferred to the United States citizens thereof? The Sixth Article of the Treaty with Spain of 1819 reads: " The inhabitants of the territories which His Catholic Majesty cedes to the United States, by this treaty, shall be incorpo- rated in the Union of the United States, as soon as may be consistent with the* principles of the Federal Constitution, and admitted to the enjoyment of all the privileges, rights, and immu- nities of the citizens of the United States." This Article as construed by Chief Justice Marshall " admits the inhabitants of Florida to the enjoyment of the privileges, rights, and immunities of the citizens of the United States." ^ And he added : " It is unnecessary to inquire whether this is not their condition independent of stipulation." This inquiry is now pertinent. Does not the citizen or subject of a foreign State whose allegiance has been transferred to the United States, by the transfer of the territory of his residence, become a citizen of the United States, whether the transfer be consummated by cession or by conquest? In other words, is not every person from whom the United States claims full allegiance a citizen? The Supreme Court has not been required to decide this question, but it seems that one owing full allegiance to the United States, and being 1 American Ins. Co. v. Canter, i Peters, 511, 542. 2 See Hall, International Law, § 206 ; Dana's Wheaton, page 435, note.
 * American Ins. Co. v. Canter, i Peters, 511, 542.