From: jahyrahb3@gmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 7:55:12 PM UTC-5, noahidebo...@gmail.com wrote:   
   > Nationality law in the American Colonies    
   > From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia    
   > Jump to navigationJump to search    
   > Nationality law in the American colonies preceding the Articles of   
   Confederation was a decentralized early attempt to develop the concept of   
   citizenship among colonial settlers with respect to the major colonial powers   
   of the period. Precedent was    
   largely based on English common law, with jurisdictional discretion afforded   
   to each of the colonies in accordance with the principles of self-governance.    
   >    
   >    
   > Contents    
   > 1 Jurisdictional tension between England and the colonies    
   > 2 Parliamentary naturalization laws    
   > 3 Colonial naturalization laws    
   > 4 Post-colonial, pre-constitutional period    
   > 5 References    
   > Jurisdictional tension between England and the colonies    
   >    
   > The Royal Charter of Connecticut, 1662.    
   > English common law, under principles of jus sanguinis, viewed English   
   persons and their children in the colonies as full subjects of the king.[1]   
   English common law was less clear on the status of alien residents in the   
   colonies, who generally faced a    
   difficult naturalization process to obtain the same legal rights inhered to   
   natural-born English and their descendants.[2] Issues in early naturalization   
   policy stemmed from the legal relationships between England and its   
   colonies.[3] The strongest legal    
   bonds between England and the American colonies lay in the colonial charters,   
   many of which professed alien residents in the colonies would eventually   
   become “Our Loving subjects and live under Our Allegiance.”[4] Ambiguity   
   in the colonial charters    
   created uncertainty as to whether the authority to naturalize alien residents   
   resided within the colonies themselves or emanated directly from Parliament in   
   London.[5] Legislative bodies from both locations ultimately issued separate   
   and sometimes    
   conflicting naturalization laws, the interaction of which influenced early   
   patterns of non-English immigration to the American colonies.    
   >    
   > Parliamentary naturalization laws    
   > Private naturalization before Parliament afforded the highest legal status   
   an alien resident could obtain in the colonies. However, it was an expensive   
   process, costing applicants upwards of 50 pounds during the 1670s. Further, it   
   was exclusive, in    
   that embedded sacramental tests were designed to bar Catholics from   
   subjectship, yet restricted other non-Christians from the benefits of   
   parliamentary naturalization as well.[6] Alternatively, aliens could seek   
   royal denization, which was a more    
   accessible path to permanent residency yet conferred a lesser form of   
   citizenship than private naturalization.[7]    
   >    
   > Religious prejudice, xenophobia and fears of foreign political views, as   
   well as maintenance of an Englishman's superior commercial privileges, all   
   contributed to a conservative approach to early naturalization law. Moreover,   
   Parliament granted these    
   privileges based on individual merit rather than on broader statutory decrees   
   to maintain full control over admissions to the colonies.[8] However, with the   
   passage of the Linen Cloth Act 1663 (15 Cha. 2, c. 15), the difficulties of   
   naturalization    
   started to be modified toward favoring categories of aliens who might prove of   
   particular benefit to the state.[9]    
   >    
   > The first general naturalization law, providing a simple administrative   
   process for obtaining naturalization appeared when Parliament passed Foreign   
   Protestants Naturalization Act 1708[10] The act required declarations of   
   allegiance and supremacy from    
   aliens and, similar to the private naturalization process, imposed sacramental   
   tests to restrict non-Protestant applicants. One key innovation of the statute   
   was to drastically reduce the application fee to just one schilling.[11] Tory   
   opposition to    
   liberal immigration policies led to the act’s eventual repeal in 1712,   
   though the repeal did not invalidate naturalizations that had already been   
   granted.[12]    
   >    
   > In light of the Tory position, Parliament faced growing pressure from the   
   colonies to open immigration to fulfill its major need, agrarian   
   labor.[13][14] During the colonial period, many were interested in promoting   
   immigration, including the Crown,    
   proprietors, colonial governments, landowners, and agents, all saw in it a   
   profitable enterprise, since immigration would promote settlement, increase   
   the value of landed holdings, and create a protective barrier for the colonies   
   against Spanish, French,    
   and Indians. Each interested party promoted immigration in their own way.   
   Colonial assemblies soon became active in this work, and remained so   
   throughout the colonial period.[15] In 1740 Parliament responded with a more   
   liberal and enlightened policy[16]    
   that greatly eased and broadened the ability of aliens in the American   
   colonies to become naturalized subjects of Britain.    
   >    
   >    
   > William Penn, who as early as 1700 argued in favor of a general   
   naturalization act for the American colonies    
   > The Plantation Act 1740 supplanted the private naturalization process in   
   which aliens in the colonies had to travel to London to appeal for subjectship   
   on a costly, case-by-case basis.[17] After 1740, aliens could locally apply   
   for naturalization    
   within the colonies so long as they had resided there for seven years or more,   
   without being absent more than two consecutive months.[18] Further, the Act   
   encompassed all of British America, as opposed to the previous policy of only   
   conferring    
   subjectship within the colony from which it was requested.[19] The Act also   
   capped the application cost at two shillings, yet required applicants to take   
   an oath of allegiance to the Crown and profess their Protestant belief in open   
   court.[18]    
   >    
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)