There was for many years an uncertainty whether, as a constitutional proposition, State citizenship was primary and the basis upon which Federal citizenship rested, or vice-versa. The result of the Civil War fixed in fact, and the adoption of the 14th Amendment estab lished in law, the priority and supremacy of Federal citizenship. However, the distinction between the rights and obligations attaching to these two citizenships has been in no wise destroyed. This was made plain by the Supreme Court in the famous Slaughter House cases, in which it was held that the provision of the 14th Amendment that "no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privi leges and immunities of citizens of the United States," has reference only to those privileges and immunities which are peculiar to national citizenship, as, for example, the right to use the mails, to resort to the Federal courts, to go to the seat of Federal government, to receive protection while abroad, etc.
Another constitutional classification of citi zens of the United States which has become especially important since the Spanish-Ameri can War is that between the citizens of the States of the Union and of the territories which are regarded as having been "incorporated in the United States," and those persons who are natives of those annexed territorial posses sions, such as the Philippine Islands,* who, while citizens of the United States in the international and broader sense of the term, are nevertheless not deemed to be citizens of the United States in a narrower constitutional sense, and therefore are not entitled to certain special rights which are regarded as flowing from the more special and privileged status.
Another constitutional class of citizens which deserves mention embraces the Indians. Al though under its sovereignty and jurisdiction, the United States for many years saw fit to regard the Indians, or at least those who main tained tribal relations, as constituting bodies politic independent of the States of the Union, and separate from, though dependent upon, the United States; yet with these tribes the United States entered into treaties with respect to the rights which their members should enjoy and the control to which they should submit. For some time now, however, this quasi-interna tional attitude has been abandoned, and the principle put into full operation that the Indians in all their private and public rights are abso lutely subject to such statutory control as Con gress may see fit to provide. The Indians have never been treated, however, in any full consti tutional sense as citizens although they owe full allegiance to the United States. As nationals they are, when abroad, entitled to the protec tion of the United States, and when desiring to leave the limits of the United States they can obtain from the Department of State a paper which of the nature of, even if formally it is not designated as, a passport.
In all cases, whether living within those re stricted areas known as reservations or not, whether maintaining tribal relations or not, Indians remain subject to the direct control of the Federal government. And it has been held that the Indian does not and cannot become a citizen of the United States simply by leaving his tribe, abandoning his reservation and tak ing up his residence and leading a civilized life within a State. On the other hand, it is within the power of Congress at will to impose citizen ship upon such Indians as it pleases. This refusal to permit an Indian by his own will to obtain citizenship, and the imposition upon him of such a character without his consent, are illustrations of the principle that citizenship is not a right which inheres in the individual, but a status created by the sovereign will of the State.
The rights which aliens may enjoy within the United States are dependent upon the gen eral principles of international law and comity and upon the provision of such treaties as the United States may have entered into with the native states of the aliens concerned. It is thus possible that aliens within a State of the Union may be entitled to rights and privileges which that State itself may be unwilling to recognize, and this too with reference to matters which, so far as American citizens are concerned, lie wholly within the legislative discretion of the States. Just how far a Federal treaty may con stitutionally go in fixing the rights of aliens within the States has been a matter of con siderable controversy; and thus, both as a mat ter of law and as a matter of policy, there have arisen such problems as those connected with the right of Japanese, resident in California, to take title to and hold real estate, and to at tend the public schools of the State.
With reference generally to citizens and non citizens, that is, citizens and resident aliens, it is to be observed that throughout the civilized world there is an increasing tendency to make the distinction of little significance within the field of private rights, and within several of the States of the American Union even the right of suffrage has been extended to those aliens who have become domiciled and have declared their intention of becoming citizens, that is, as it is called, have taken out their tfirst papers.' See ALIENS; ALLEGIANCE; NATIONALITY; NAT URALIZATION; NATURALIZATION LAWS; SUFFRAGE.