444 HASTINGS—POLICE POWER OF THE STATE. [June 19, 
language and the spirit of these articles are to have their fair and just 
weight. . . . . But what we do say, and what we wish to be understood, 
is that in any fair and just construction of any section or phrase of these 
amendments it is necessary to look to the purpose which we have said 
was the pervading spirit of them all, the evil which they were designed 
to remedy, and the process of continued addition to the constitution until 
that purpose was supposed to be accomplished as far as constitutional 
law can accomplish it.” 
Discussing the holding in the Dred Scott case that no negro 
might become a citizen and the first clause of the fourteenth 
amendment, making all persons born in and subject to the jurisdic- 
tion of the United States citizens both of it and of the state of 
their residence, he says this not only settles the question raised in 
that case, but recognizes and establishes a distinction between federal 
and state citizenship. He must reside in a state to be its citizen. 
He need only be born in its jurisdiction, or naturalized, to be a 
citizen of the Union. So he thinks the clause 
‘No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privi- 
leges or immunities of citizens of the United States ”’ 
has no reference to astate dealing with its own citizens as such. 
The rights of citizens of the states have no additional protection in 
that character.’ 
‘‘Its sole purpose was to declare to the several states that whatever 
those rights as you grant or establish them for your own citizens, or as 
you limit or qualify or impose restrictions on their exercise, the same . 
neither more nor less shall be the measure of the rights of citizens of 
other states within your jurisdiction.” 
Of course, this causes the provision under consideration to have the 
effect of simply extending the protection formerly given to citizens 
of the several states by clause 1, section 2, article 4 of the consti- 
tution, under the new provision also to citizens of the United States. 
2 «« Where it is declared that Congress shall have the power to enforce 
that article, was it intended to bring within the power of Congress the entire 
domain of civil rights heretofore belonging exclusively to the states?” 
If so, ‘‘ not only are these rights subject to the control of Congress when- 
ever in its discretion any of them are supposed to be abridged, but that 
body may in advance pass laws limiting and restricting the exercise of 
the legislative power by the states in their most ordinary and usual func- 
176 Wall, pp. 71-77. 272i; 978: 
