Chief Justice is the title of the presiding Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. (See Judiciary.) His salary is $10,500 per annum.

The following is a list of the persons appointed as Chief-Justices from the establishment of the court, some of whom, however, being rejected by the Senate, or, declining the position, never served in the office: John Jay, of New York, appointed by Washington, September 26, 1789;

resigned, 1791. John Rutledge, of South Carolina, appointed by Washington, July 1,

1795; rejected by the Senate, December 15, 1795. William Cushing, of Massachusetts, appointed by Washington, January

26, 1796 ; declined promotion from his associate justiceship. Oliver Ellsworth, of Connecticut, appointed by Washington, March 4,

1796 ; resigned, 1800. John Jay, of New York, appointed by John Adams, December 19, 1800;

declined. John Marshall, of Virginia, appointed by John Adams, January 31,

1801; died, July 6, 1835. Roger Brooke Taney, of Maryland, appointed by Jackson, March 15,

1836; died, October 12, 1864. Salmon Portland Chase, of Ohio, appointed by Lincoln, December 6,

1864 ; died, May 7, 1873. George H. Williams, of Oregon, appointed by Grant, 1873; rejected. Caleb Cushing, of Massachusetts, appointed by Grant, 1873; rejected. Morrison R. Waite, of Ohio, appointed by Grant, January 21, 1874; died

March 23, 1888. Melville W. Fuller, of Illinois, appointed by Cleveland, July 20, 1888.

Chilian and Peruvian Difficulties. (See Peruvian Guano Troubles.)

Chinese Must Go.—A cry raised by the inhabitants of the Pacific Slope, especially the laboring men, during the discussion of the Chinese question (which see).

Chinese Question.—The development of our Pacific Coast after the discovery of gold in California created a demand for labor which exceeded the supply. Soon Chinamen began to cross the ocean and settle on our western coast. The means necessary to enable them to live in a state comfortable to themselves being small, they soon underbid white laborers and supplanted them in many kinds of work. An outcry was raised by the white population against permitting this competition, which they claimed was unfair. Local legislation attempted to impede the coming of the Chinese, but the United States Courts decided such laws invalid. Then Congress was applied to. It was argued that the Chinese laborers-coolies, as they were called--would drive out white laborers because they could underbid white labor; that they could do this because they could live and be happy on a pittance that would not enable white workmen to live in decency. It was said that the Chinese were an inferior race in morals and physique; that so far from being desirous of assimilating themselves to our institutions, they were inseparably attached to their own civilization and regarded us as barbarians; that they did not inter-marry, and did not come here with the intention of becoming citizens and residing permanently in this country. Those who insisted that * the Chinese must go,” asserted that the Chinese came here under the guidance of what were known as the Six Companies; that these organizations controlled them absolutely in trade, in labor, and politically; that they thus formed a government within our government, and not in unison with it. As a consequence of these arguments, it was urged that the governmen' should restrict Chinese immigration in justice to white laborers, for its own safety and for the welfare of the people at large. On the other hand, it was argued that the Chinese were an honest, quiet, industrious, thrifty and ingenious people; that their peculiar habits and customs would gradually disappear in this country; that the wealth of the nation would be increased by the employment of cheaper labor as it would by using labor-saving machinery, and that it was not in accordance with our national policy of welcoming the oppressed of all nations to refuse to receive the Chinese alone, who would come into harmony with our institutions as speedily as many immigrants from Europe who were freely admitted. The West brought such strong pressure to bear on Congress, that in February, 1879, a bill was passed limiting the number of Chinese passengers that could be brought to this country in a single vessel. Hayes vetoed the bill in March as violating treaty stipulations, and the attempt to pass it over the veto was a failure. Soon afterward a commission was appointed which negotiated a treaty with China (ratified by the Senate in May, 1881), giving the United States power to limit or suspend, but not to prohibit the immigration or residence of Chinese laborers, but reserving to other Chinamen and to laborers then in the United States all the privileges of subjects of the most favored nations. In 1882 a bill was passed prohibiting Chinese immigration. This was vetoed by Arthur in April as violating the treaty. The bill was at once modified and again passed, and this time it received the President's approval and became a law on May 6, 1882. This bill (as amended July 5, 1884) suspends the immigration of Chinese laborers for ten years, requires that other Chinamen visiting this country shall be provided with proper certificates, and prescribes various penalties for violations of its provisions. Chinese officers on diplomatic business, and their servants, are excepted from the provisions of the law. In 1870 there were 63,254 Chinese in the United States. The census of 1880 showed 105,700; of these California had 75,122, and most of the remainder were in Oregon, Nevada, Idaho, Washington Territory, Montana and Arizona.

Cimarron.—The northwestern corner of Indian Territory is reserved for public lands of the United States. It is sometimes called “No Man's Land,” because almost unsettled and belonging to no private individuals. Recently, settlers from Kansas and Colorado have removed thither and taken up their abode there. They have asked that the region be made into a Territory, and at no great distance in the future the public land strip with a portion of Indian Territory may be so organized. The name proposed for this district is Cimarron.

Cincinnatus of the West. It is narrated by an ancient historian, though the story is discredited by modern ones, that on an occasion when Rome was in great danger and Lucius Quintius Cincinnatus had been made dictator to deliver her from danger, the message of his appointment found him at the plow. It is in allusion to this that William Henry Harrison was spoken of as the “Cincinnatus of the West” when he was called to the presidency from his estate on the Ohio River. Washington is sometimes called the “Second Cincinnatus,” because

he came from his retirement at Mount Vernon to assume the presidency.

Cipher Dispatches. The presidential election of 1876 was long doubtful; the change of a single electoral vote would have turned the result. After the election a number of cipher dispatches were discovered which, on translation, proved to have been sent by persons closely identified with Samuel J. Tilden, relating to corrupt agreements for the purchase of electoral votes in Florida and Oregon for the Democratic party. The allegations were investigated by a congressional committee, which concluded that while at least one of the Florida Canvassing Board was purchasable, still, that Tilden was not implicated in any attempts to purchase him, even if these were made. The minority report, being that of the Republican members of the investigating committee, concluded that the charges of corruptibility on the part of members of canvassing boards were “but the slanders of foiled suborners of corruption.” They regarded the proofs of attempted corruption as conclusive, and did not hesitate to indicate their belief that Tilden had knowledge of the matter. In a card dated October 16, 1878, Tilden denied in most emphatic terms all connection with the matter. (For the settlement of the election see Electoral Commission.)

Circle, The. (See American Knights.)
Circle of Honor. (See American Knights.)
Circuit Court. (See Judiciary.)
Citess.-Feminine form of citizen (which see).

Cities, Familiar Names of.–Baltimore, Maryland-Monumental City. Boston, Massachusetts-Hub of the Universe; Athens of America; Modern Athens; Cradle of Liberty; City of Notions; Puritan City. Brooklyn, New York-City of Churches. Buffalo, New YorkQueen City of the Lakes. Chicago, Illinois—Garden City. Cincinnati, Ohio—Queen City. Cleveland, Ohio— Forest City. Detroit, Michigan-City of the Indianapolis, Indiana–Railroad City: Kansas City, Missouri-City of Bluffs. Keokuk, Iowa-Gate City. Louisville, Kentucky-Falls City. Lowell, Massachu. setts--City of Spindles. Milwaukee, Wisconsin-Cream City. Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota Twin Cities. Nashville, Tennessee - City of Rocks. Now Haven, Connecticut-City of Elms; Elm City. New Orleans, Louisiana-Crescent City. New York City, New York-Empire City; Gotham; Metropolis of America. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - City of Brotherly Love; Quaker City. Pittsburg, Pennsylvania-Smoky City; Iron City. Portland, Maine-Forest City. Rochester, New York-Flour City. Springfield, IllinoisFlower City. St. Louis, Missouri -Mound City. St. Paul and Minneapolis, Minnesota–Twin Cities. Washington, District of Columbia-City of Magnificent Distances.

Citizen.-A term used instead of Mr., Sir, Dr. and any other titles, during the end of the last century, when a wave of ultra-Republicanism swept over the country. It was in imitation of the custom in France.

Citizenship.-A citizen is a member of a commonwealth who is entitled to full protection in the enjoyment of what are called private rights. The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State in which they reside.” The term in its broad sense includes both women and children, and the right to vote is not an inherent privilege of citizenship. (See Suffrage; Qualifications of Voters); Children of citizens born abroad are citizens without naturalization. Minor children of naturalized citizens become citizens by the naturalization of their parents. All citizens whether so by birth or naturalization, are entitled when in foreign countries to the full protection of this government as to their persons and property. The States cannot deprive of citizenship any person declared by the Constitution to be entitled to it, but they may extend citizenship in the State to others as well; this is often done to persons who have declared their intention of becoming citizens, but who have not yet been naturalized The act of July 14, 1870, practically

« ForrigeFortsett »