PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES. The words privileges and immunities are used in the 14th amendment of the United States constitution, and in other parts of that doc ument, and were also used in the Articles of Confederation. They are such privileges as are fundamental, which belong to the citi zens of all free governments and which have at all times been enjoyed by citizens of the United States; Slaughter House Cases, 16 Wall. (U. S.) 76, 21 L. Ed. 394; Spies v. Illinois, 123 U. S. 150, 8 Sup. Ct. 21, 31 L. Ed. 80; O'Neil v. Vermont, 144 U. S. 361, 12 Sup. Ct. 693, 36 L. Ed. 450.
These have been enumerated as some of the principal privileges : Protection by the government, the enjoyment of life and liber ty, with the right to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety; subject never theless to such restraints as the government may justly prescribe for the general good of the whole. The right of a citizen of one state to pass through or reside in any other state, for purposes of trade, agriculture, pro fessional pursuits, or otherwise ; to claim the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus, to in stitute and maintain actions of every kind in the courts of the state, to take, hold, and dispose of property, and an exemption from higher taxes or impositions than are paid by other citizens of the state ; Corfield v. Cor yell, 4 Wash. C. C. 371, Fed. Cas. No. 3230. This enumeration by Mr. Justice Washing ton in the leading case of Garfield v. Coryell has acquired a somewhat historic value. It has been much quoted and in the Slaughter House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 75, 21 L. Ed. 394, it is largely quoted by Mr. Justice Miller as a definition which had been adopted in the main by that court.
Another definition more general in its character was one of counsel, arguendo, in Spies v. Illinois, 123 U.. S. 131, 150, 8 Sup. Ct. 21, 22, 31 L. Ed. 80. "I hold the privilege and immunity of a citizen of the United States to be such as have their recognition in or guaranty from the Constitution of the United States." And of this Mr. Justice Field, in his dissenting opinion in O'Neil v. Vermont, 144 U. S. 323, 361, 12 Sup. Ct. 693, 36 L. Ed. 450, said that, while it might be dif ficult to define the terms so as to cover all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, "after much reflection, I think the definition given at one time before this court by a distinguished advocate-Mr. John
Randolph Tucker of Virginia-is correct," quoting his words as above. It is, however, to be noted that a citizen of a state passing through or residing in any other state is en titled to no greater privileges and immuni ties than are possessed by the citizens of the latter state; Detroit v. Osborne, 135 U. S. 492, 10 Sup. Ct. 1012, 34 L. Ed. 260.
The privileges and immunities of a citi zen of the United States and those of a state are distinct from each other, and it is only the former which are placed' by the 14th amendment under the protection of the fed eral constitution; the latter, whatever they may be, are not intended to have any addi tional protection by this paragraph of the amendment ; In re Keminler, 136 U. S. 436, 110 Sup. Ct. 930, 34 L. Ed. 519; Slaughter ' House Cases, 16 Wall. (U. S.) 36, 74, 21 L. Ed. 394; Com. v. Milton, 12 B. Monr. (Ky.) 212, 54 Am. Dec. 522 ; U. S. v. Anthony, Fed. Cas. No. 14,459, 11 Blatchf. 200.
The privileges and immunities protected by the amendment are those of national citi zenship; Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90, 23 L. Ed. 678; such as arise out of the es sential character of the national govern ment; Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. (U. S.) 36, 74, 21 L. Ed. 394; Ex parte Kinney, Fed. Cas. No. 7,825, 3 Hughes 9 ; In re Kemmler, 136 TJ. S. 436, 10 Sup. Ct. 930, 34 L. Ed. 519; State v. McCann, 21 Ohio St. 198; and belting to the citizens of all free governments ; O'Neil v. Vermont, 144 U. S. 361, 12 Sup. Ct. 693, 36 L. Ed. 450; Spies v. Illinois, 123 U. S. 150, 8 Sup. Ct. 21, 31 L. Ed. 80; Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. (U. S.) 36,.21 L. Ed. 394; those common to the citizens of the states; Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall. (U. S.) 168, 19 L. Ed. 357; they are that limited class depending immediately up on the constitution of the United States; Charge to Grand Jury, Fed. Cas. No. 18,260. They are such only as pertain to citizenship of the United States as distinguished from state citizenship; Rosenthal v. New York, 226 U. S. 260, 33 Sup. Ct. 27, 57 L. Ed. 212, Ann. Cas. 19I4B, 71.