National security and U.S. immigration policy, 1776-1790

Journal of Interdisciplinary History

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 37-64

  Totten, Robbie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 51149099467     PISSN: 00221953     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/jinh.2008.39.1.37     Document Type: Review

References (248)

1. A recent historiographical article on immigration policy is bereft of a single reference to security: Roger Daniels, "Immigration: Federal Policy Towards," in Peter J. Parish (ed.), Readers Guide to American History (London, 1997), 337-338.
2. General historiographical works about the immigration field do not mention geopolitical factors. See Philip Gleason, "Crevecoeur's Question: Historical Writing on Immigration, Ethnicity, and National Identity," in Anthony Molho and Gordon S. Wood (eds.), Imagined Histories: American Historians Interpret the Past (Princeton, 1998), 120-144;
3. Erika Lee, "Immigrants and Immigration Law: A State of the Field Assessment, " Journal of Ethnic History, XVIII. (1999), 85-115;
4. Nancy Foder, Ruben G. Rumbaut, and Steven J. Gold, "Immigration and Immigration Research in the United States," in idem (eds.), Immigration Research for a New Century (New York, 2000), 1-23.
5. For ideological, arguments, see John Higham, Send These to Me, Immigrants in Urban America (Baltimore, 1984), 31;
6. Reed Ueda, "An Immigration Country of Assimilative Pluralism, Immigrant Reception and Absorption in American History," in Klaus J. Bade and Myron Weiner (eds.), Migration Past, Migration Future, Germany and the United States (Providence, 1997), 1, 40-41;
7. Matthew Spalding, "From Pluribus to Unum, Immigration and the Founding Fathers," Policy Review, LXVII (1994), 35-141;
8. for economic and demographic arguments, Lawrence Guy Brown, Immigration, Cultural Conflicts and Social Adjustments (New York, 1933), 61;
9. Marion T. Bennett, American Immigration Policies (Washington D.C., 1963), 2;
10. Daniels, Guarding the Golden Door: American Immigration Policy and Immigrants since 1982 (New York, 2004), 6;
11. Bill Ong Hing, Defining America Through Immigration Policy (Philadelphia, 2004), 20-21.
12. A few political scientists have discussed the security dimension of immigration policy, though not early U.S. immigration policy: James F. Hollifield, Immigrants, Markets, and States: The Political Economy of Postwar Europe (New York, 1992);
13. idem, "Migration, Trade, and the Nation-State: The Myth, of Globalization, " UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, III (1998), 595-636;
14. Eytan. Meyers, International Immigration Policy: A Theoretical and Comparative Analysis (New York, 2004);
15. Christopher Rudolph, "Globalization and Security: Migration and the Evolving Conceptions of Security in Statecraft and Scholarship, Security Studies, XIII (2003), 1-32;
16. idem., National Security and Immigration: Policy Development in the United States and Western Europe since 1945 (Stanford, 2006);
17. idem, "Security and the Political Economy of International Migration," American Political Science Review, XCVII (2003), 602-620;
18. Michael C. Lemay, Guarding the Gates: Immigration and National Security (Westport, 2006);
19. Michael S. Teitelbaum and Weiner (eds.), Threatened Peoples, Threatened Borders (New York, ?995);
20. Weiner, The Global Migration Crisis: Challenge to States and to Human Rights (New York, 1995).
21. For two studies of early U.S. immigration policy that use analytical frameworks with several variables, see Daniel J. Tichenor, Dividing Lines: The Politics of Immigration Control in America (Princeton, 2002);
22. Aristide Zolberg, A Nation by Design: Immigration Policy in the Fashioning of America (New York, 2006).
23. For examples of works in international relations that analyze U.S. domestic politics from a security perspective see Gabriel Almond, "Review Article: The International-National Connection," British Journal of Political Science, XIX (1989), 237-259;
24. Daniel H. Deudney, Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village (Princeton, 2007);
25. Peter Gourevitch, "The Second Image Reversed: The International. Sources of Domestic Politics," International Organization, XXXII (1978), 881-911;
26. Deborah Welch Larson, Anatomy of Mistrust: U. S.-Soviet Relations During the Cold War (Ithaca, 1997);
27. idem, Origins of Containment: A Psychological Explanation (Princeton, 1985);
28. John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York, 2001)
29. (for Mearsheimer's interpretation of U.S. immigration policy, see ibid., 244, 246);
30. Art A. Stein, The Nation at War (Baltimore, 1980);
31. on historians and international theory, Marc Trachtenberg, The Craft of International History: A Guide to Method (Princeton, 2006);
32. on historical work within political science, Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, The Search for American Political Development (Cambridge, 2004).
33. On the "Open Door Era," see Michael C. LeMay, From Open Door to Dutch Door: An Analysis of U.S. Immigration Policy since 1820 (New York, 1987), 7-10;
34. on the Passengr Act of 1819, Zolberg, Nation by Design, 99-100, 110-113;
35. on federal immigration restrictions in the nineteenth century, Daniels, Guarding the Golden Door; idem, Nation by Design, 185-193;
36. for summaries of state regulatory policies during this period, Edward Prince Hutchinson, Legislative History of American Immigration Policy, 1798-1965 (Philadelphia, 1981), 388-404;
37. James H. Kettner, The Development of American Citizenship, 1608-1870 (Chapel Hill, 1978), 108-110;
38. Benjamin J. Klebaner, " State and Local Immigration Regulation, in the United States before 1882," International Review of Social History, III (1958), 269-295;
39. Gerald L. Neuman, "The Lost Century of American Immigration Law (1776-1875)," Columbia Law Review, XCIII (1993), 1833-1901;
40. Zolberg, A Nation by Design, 72-76.
41. On the benefits from immigration, see Rudolph, "Globalization and Security," 14-15; Timothy J. Hatton and Jeffrey G. Williamson, The Age of Mass Migration: Causes and Economic Impact (New York, 1998);
42. on wealth as the building block of national, power, Mearsheimer, Great Power Politics, 55-82, 143-145;
43. on the foundation of early immigration policy, Tichenor, Dividing Lines, 54-55. For the secondary literature supporting a security interpretation of U.S. immigration policy, see n. 44.
44. The mercantilist comment is by Jean Bodin, quoted in Zolberg, Nation by Design, 28.
45. Sir John Holland, the House of Commons, May 4, 1664, in Caroline Robbins, "A Note on General Naturalization under the Later Stuarts and a Speech in the House of Commons on the Subject in 1664," Journal of Modern History, XXXIV (1962), 177.
46. For the quotation on population and strength, see John Duncan Brite, "The Attitude of European States toward Emigration to the American Colonies and the United States 1607-1820," unpub. Ph.D. diss. (University of Chicago, 1937), 178-179; on the British general naturalization law of 1740 and the quotation, Kettner, Development, of American Citizenship, 74.
47. For further analysis of British immigration and population policy, see Bernard Bailyn, Voyagers to the West: A Passage in the Peopling of America on the Eve of the Revolution (New York, 1986), 29-57;
48. Brite, "Attitude of European States," 160-224; Milfred Campbell, "'Of People either too Few or too Many': The Conflict of Opinion on Population and Its Relation to Emigration," in William Appleton Aiken and Basil Duke Henning (eds.), Conflict in Stuart England: Essays in Honour of Wallace Notestein (New York, 1970), 169-203;
49. Emberson Edward Proper, Colonial Immigration Laws: A Study of the Regulation of Immigration by the English Colonies in America (New York, 1900), 73-76;
50. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 26-51;
51. on British naturalization law, ibid., 39.
52. On British migration policy regarding the Palatines, see Philip Otterness, Becoming German: The 1709 Palatine Migration to New York (Ithaca, 2004), 72-73;
53. on British action against the French-speaking Acadians and the related quotation, Geoffrey Plank, An Unsettled Conquest: The British Campaign Against the Peoples of Acadia (Philadelphia, 2001), 1;
54. on shipping undesirables, see A. Roger Ekirch, Bound for America: The Transportation of British Convicts to the Colonies, 1718-1775 (New York, 1987);
55. Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 260-262, 292-295;
56. Brite, "Attitude of European States," 265-287; Zolberg, Nation by Design, 26, 35-36.
57. For the Georgia and South Carolina statutes, see Erna Risch, "Encouragement of Immigration as Revealed in Colonial Legislation," Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XLV (1937), 2, 4 n.;
58. on colonial efforts to entice foreigners, Edward A. Hoyt, "Naturalizaton Under the American Colonies: Signs of a New Community," Political Science Quarterly, LXVII, (1952), 262-263;
59. on colonial laws, Proper, Colonial Immigration Laws; idem, "Encouragement of Immigration," 1-10;
60. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 39;
61. on South Carolina's laws, idem, Colonial Immigration Laws, 69 n.;
62. on promotion agents, Brite, "Attitude of European States," 127-160; on recruitment practices, Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 296-323.
63. Benjamin Franklin, "Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, etc.," in J. A. Leo Lemay (ed.), Benjamin Franklin: Writings (New York, 1987), 373-374.
64. Franklin sought to restrict entrance to the colonies for Germans and slaves primarily because the former would "establish their Language and Manners to the Exclusion of ours" and the latter would "darken its people." On Franklin's loss of a seat in the 1764 election, see William S. Hanna, Benjamin Franklin and Pennsylvania Politics (Stanford, 1964), 154-169;
65. on Massachusetts leaders attempting to emigrate Jesuits, Proper, Colonial Immigration Laws, 27;
66. on Pennsylvania, leaders' attempt to restrict Palatine immigration, ibid., 46-49;
67. on South Carolinian immigration policy, Robert K. Ackerman, South Carolina Colonial Land Policies (Columbia, 1977), 4, 48-49, 89-90;
68. Rachel N. Klein, "Ordering the Backcountry: The South Carolina Regulation," William and Mary Quarterly, XXXVIII (1981), 663;
69. Jane Revill, A Compilation of the Original Lists of Protestant Immigrants to South Carolina, 1763-1773 (Columbia, 1939).
70. South Carolinian officials also sought white immigrants for help "defending the southern frontier against the Indians, the Spanish, and the French" (Ackerman, South Carolina, 48).
71. On the fear of slave revolt, see Walter C. Rucker, The River Flows On: Black Resistance, Culture, and Identity Formation in Early America (Baton Rouge, 2006), 91-119.
72. Franklin, "On Transported Felons," Pennsylvania Gazette, 11 April 1751, in Lemay (ed.), Franklin, 358;
73. Franklin, "Rattle-Snakes for Felons," in ibid., 9 May 1751,
74. in Lemay (ed.), ibid., 359-361.
75. On the potential effect of emigration to the colonies, see Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 38;
76. on the British restricting emigration to the colonies, ibid., 49-66;
77. Proper, Colonial Immigration Law, 75-76 (Mark Petracca found that Proper may have mistakenly identified the proposal on page 76 as an act;
78. see Zolberg, Nation by Design, 490, n.);
79. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 37-38;
80. on European leaders' attempts to restrict emigration, Brite, "Attitudes of European States," 195-224.
81. Although the founders never direcdy discussed or "set" an immigration policy, the Constitution reveals that they had a liberal policy in mind. For example, it provided, "The Congress shall have the power ... to establish a uniform rule of naturalization" (Article I, Section 8), and in 1790, at its first opportunity, Congress set generous naturalization terms: Any free white person who resided for two years "within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States" could acquire American citizenship (Act of March 26, 1790). Furthermore, the constitutional architects, despite objections from several deliberators, protected the slave trade for twenty years, a major source of immigration and labor for the early Republic (Article I, Section. 9). The most significant action taken by the framers to promote immigration was to make natives and immigrants eligible for every political office except the vice-presidency and the presidency (Article I, Section 2; Article I, Section 3; Article II, Section 1). See William S. Bernard (ed.), American Immigration Policy - A Reappraisal (New York, 1950), 4-5.
82. On "nondecisions," see Tichenor, Dividing Lines, 53.
83. On three occasions before 1800, Congress changed the number of years a foreigner had to reside in the U.S. before becoming eligible for citizenship, but not the open-border policy. See Frank George Franklin, The Legislative History of Naturalization in the United States: From the Revolutionarr) War to 1861 (Chicago, 1906), 33-97;
84. Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 235-246.
85. The shortcoming of this article's methodological approach is the difficulty of determining direct causation. If the forefathers had discussed and voted on immigration legislation during the early republic, the extent to which security played into their decisions would be subject to direct analysis. Fortunately, the founders discussed immigration in relation to other policies, such as the naturalization act of 1790. For historical accounts of immigration policy during the early Republic, see Tichenor, Dividing Lines, 49-55;
86. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 58-98.
87. Many scholars of the early republic are quick to cite the forefathers' anti-immigrant and "nativist" remarks. See Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925 (New Brunswick, 1955), 4-8;
88. Roy L. Garis, Immigration Restriction (New York, 1927), 22-27;
89. Dale T. Knobel, "Americans for the Americans": The Nativist Movement in the United States (New York, 1996).
90. The comment by the British Parliament is from Proper, Colonial Immigration Laws, 75-76.
91. On British emigration restrictions to the states, see Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 91; on the Declaration of Independence, http://www. constitution.org/usdeclar.pdf.
92. Totten, "Security and the Making of the U.S. Constitution," unpub. paper. Francisco Rendón to Jose de Gálvez, January 30, 1784, in Mary A. Giunta (ed.), The Emerging Nation: A Documentary History of the Foreign Relations of the United States under the Articles of Confederation, 1780-1789 (Washington, D.C., 1996)
93. [hereinafter FRUS], II, 293.
94. On the international climate in the late eighteenth, century, see Daniel George Lang, Foreign Policy in the Early Republic: The Law of Nations and the Balance of Power (Baton Rouge, 1985);
95. on British and Spanish attempts to undermine U.S. security, Alfred Leroy Burt, The United States, Great Britain, and British North America from the Revolution to the Establishment of Peace after the War of 1812 (New York, 1961);
96. Frederick W. Marks III, Independence on Trial: Foreign Affairs and the Making of the Constitution (Wilmington, 1984), 5-12, 21-36, 19-21, 52-95;
97. Arthur P. Whitaker, The Spanish-American Frontier, 1783-1795 (New York, 1927);
98. on the American Indian threat, see Marks, Independence on Trial, 3-52.
99. See the discussion in Totten, "Security and the Making of the U.S. Constitution." On the thirteen states acting as sovereigns, see Madison, "Vices of the Political System of the United States," April 1787, in William T. Hutchinson, and William M. E. Rachal, (eds.), The Papers of James Madison (Chicago, 1975), IX, 345-358;
100. on the Confederation's susceptibility to foreign attack, David C. Hendrickson, Peace Pact: The Lost World of the American Founding (Lawrence, 2003);
101. Marks, Independence on Trial; on founders' comments about foreign attack, Grayson to Madison, March 22, 1786, in Edmund C. Burnett (ed.), Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1962), XXIII, 205-206;
102. Jefferson to Monroe, November 11, 1784, in Giunta (ed.), FRUS, II, 498;
103. Hamilton to Gouverneur Morris, May 19, 1788, http://oll.libertyfund.org/ Home3/HTML-voice.php?recordID?0249.09 (accessed April 1, 2007); Madison to Jefferson, September 7, 1784, in Giunta (ed.), FRUS, II, 436;
104. Randolph to Madison, December 27, 1787, in John P. Kaminski and Gaspare J. Saladino (eds.), The Documentary History of the Constitution (Madison, 1981), IX, 981-983; VIII, 275-276;
105. Washington to Henry Knox, March 3, 1788, in Marks, Independence on Trial, 50;
106. on Jay's private letters, Gottfried Dietze, "The Federalist": A Classic on Federalism and Free Government (Baltimore, 1960), 74-75;
107. for the Adams and Jay quotations, Marks, Independence on Trial, 29, 46;
108. Federalist No. 4, in Jacob E. Cooke (ed.), The Federalist (Middletown, 1961), 100.
109. Robert Morris, April 10, 1783, in E. James Ferguson (ed.), The Papers of Robert Morris, 1781-1784 (Pittsburgh, 1988), VII, 691-696;
110. Clarence L. Ver Steeg, Robert Morris, Revolutionary Financier: With an Analysis of His Earlier Career (Philadelphia, 1954).
111. On the composition of the U.S. military, see Vernon M. Briggs, Jr., Mass Immigration and the National Interest (Armonk, 1992), 45.
112. "Primitive Whig" feared that the nation would adopt a new paper currency, which would attract domestic schemers and speculators and thus dissuade hard-working foreigners from coming to America. "Primitive Whig, No. 5," New-Jersey Gazette, 6 Feb. 1786;
113. "Extract of a letter from Fort McIntosh," Connecticut Courant, 7 Nov. 1785.
114. On the rivalry between individual states, see Totten, "Security and the Making of the U.S. Constitution"; Hendrickson, Peace Pact;
115. Peter S. Onuf, The Origins of the Federal Republic: Jurisdictional Controversies in the United States 1775-1787 (Philadelphia, 1983);
116. idem, "Anarchy and the Crisis of the Union," in Herman Belz, Ronald Hoffman, and Peter J. Albert (eds.), To Form a More Perfect Union: The Critical Ideas of the Constitution (Charlottesville, 1992).
117. Hamilton to James Duane, September 3, 1780, in The Works of Alexander Hamilton (New York, 1904), I, 217.
118. Madison to Jefferson, August 20, 1784, in Robert A. Rutland and Rachal (eds.), The Papers of James Madison: The Congressional Series (Chicago, 1973), VIII, 108;
119. Grayson to Washington, April 15, 1785, in W. W. Abbot and Dorothy Twohig (eds.), The Papers of George Washington: The Confederation Series (Charlottesville, 1992), II, 498-501;
120. Bloodworm to Richard Caswell, August 28, 1786, in Burnett (ed.), Letters of Members of the Continental Congress, VIII, 455;
121. Putnam to Washington, April 5, 1784, in Abbot and Twolig (eds.), Papers of George Washington, I, 263-265;
122. Rufus King to Elbridge Gerry, June 4, 1786, in Charles R. King (ed.), The Life and Correspondence of Rufus King (New York, 1894-1900), I, 175-179;
123. Onuf, Statehood and Union: A History of the Northwest Ordinance (Bloommgton, 1987), 4.
124. th, 1787," American Museum, X (1791), 114.
125. The Jefferson quotation is in Zolberg, Nation by Design, 58.
126. In a debate about the number of years a foreigner must reside in America before becoming eligible for political office, delegates made it clear why they wanted immigrants-to attract their wealth, which can be consistent with a national security perspective. Hamilton, for instance, noted that "the advantage of encouraging foreigners was obvious & admitted. Persons in Europe of moderate fortunes will be fond of coming." Madison wanted more "respectable Europeans . . . ready to transfer their fortunes hither. " James Wilson cited his own state of Pennsylvania as "among the foremost [state] in population & prosperity" because it aggressively recruited immigrants. The forefathers' discussion in private letters and at the ratifying conventions indicates their connection of wealth with security. Mearsheimer, Tragedy of Great Power Politics, 143-144;
127. Madison, August 9, 1787, Hamilton, August 13, 1787, and Wilson, August 13, 1787, in Max Farrand (ed.), The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 (New Haven, 1966), II, 236, 268, 269. For references to immigration in the Constitution, see n. 10. The founders, in addition to taking steps to protect the slave trade, also took steps to end it.
128. Randolph, the Virginia convention, June 6, 1788, in Kaminski and Saladino (eds.), Documentary History of the Constitution, IX, 981-983.
129. Washington to Jefferson, January 1, 1788, http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/ documents/constitution/1788/jefferson1.html. To represent Washington as a leader who presented America as a great democracy that opened its doors to immigrants, scholars often cite the first president's speech to newly arrived Irish immigrants in 1783. But many of his private correspondences (see n. 22), which have a different tone, are probably more indicative of his true thoughts and intentions. Washington, "Letter to the members of the Volunteer Association and other Inhabitants of the Kingdom of Ireland who have lately arrived in the City of New York," Dec. 2, 1783, http://founding.com./library/lbody.cfm.? id?.191&parent?60.
130. Washington to Lafayette, January 10, 1788, http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/ etcbin/ot2wwwwashington.?specfile=/texts/english/washington/fitzpatrick/search/ gw.o2w&act=surround&offset=36768298&tag=Writings+of+Washiugton,+Vol. +29:+To+MARQUIS+DE+LAFAYETTE&query=&id?. On wealth as the building block of national power, see n. 4. Washington to Duane, September 7, 1783, in Lawrence B. Evans (ed.), Writings of George Washington (New York, 1908), 480.
131. In a letter to Congress a few months earlier, he had recommended that several of his former army officers be given land on the Western frontier to help "combat the [Native Americans], and check their incursions - A Settlement formed of such Men would give security to our frontiers" (Washington to the President of Congress, June 17, 1783, ibid., 475).
132. Washington also often wanted to see the West settled. He wrote to Lafayette, for example, that he hoped to see immigrants "increase and multiply" on the "fertile plains of the Ohio." Many scholars argue that Washington, sought to settle the West because he had an economic interest in the region. But to provide security for the young nation should also be considered as an explanation. Washington to Lafayette, July 25, 1785, ibid., 501;
133. Washington to Richard Henderson, June 19, 1788, ibid., 510.
134. On the naturalization law, see Washington, "First Annual Message to Congress," January 8, 1790, ibid., 331.
135. Madison to George Nicholas, May 17, 1788, in Kaminski and Saladino (eds.), Documentary History, XVIII, 24-32;
136. McDowell et al. to the Court of Fayette County, Kentucky, February 28, 1787, ibid., XVI, 261-263.
137. Jay, "A Citizen of New-York: An Address to the People of the State of New York," April 15, 1788, ibid., XVII, 101-120;
138. Howard to George Thatcher, February 27, 1787, ibid., XVI, 229-231;
139. Robert R. Livingston to Marquis de la Luzerne, May 7, 1788, ibid., XVII, 393.
140. James Wilson, the Pennsylvania convention, December 4, 1787, ibid., II, 477-478, 583-584.
141. At the Massachusetts convention, General Samuel Thompson declared that because of immigration and natural growth, "we are encreasing in numbers." As a result, "we are able to stand our own ground against a foreign power-they cannot starve us out-they cannot bring their ships on the land." Thompson and other delegates who presented similar arguments presumably thought that a robust population, through the manpower and resources it provided for an army, was vital for deterrence. David Ramsay, a South Carolinian leader, also believed that America's growing population, stimulated in part by immigration, would strengthen the nation, declaring that because of "our growing numbers the citizens of the United States will probably be five times as numerous as the inhabitants of Great Britain." Consequently, with a robust population and a strong central government, Ramsay concluded, "we shall be protected from foreign invasion." Thompson, ibid., VI, 1316.
142. For similar speeches at the Massachusetts convention, see James Bowdoin, January 23, 1788, ibid., VI, 1317-1323;
143. Thomas Dawes, January 12, 1788, ibid., VI, 1287-1289;
144. Bowdoin to George Ewing, August 12, 1788, ibid., XVIII, 324;
145. "David Ramsay Oration," Charleston Columbian Herald, 5 June, 1788, ibid., XVIII, 164.
146. Barton, Observations on the Progress of Population 1-2, n.1.
147. On Barton, see Milton Rubican, "A Memoir of the Life of William Barton, A.M. (1754-1817)," Pennsylvania History, XII (1945), 179-193.
148. Marcus," New York Daily Advertiser, 15 Oct. 1787,
149. in Kaminski and Saladino (eds.), Documentary History, VIII, 383;
150. "A Freeholder," Virginia Independent Chronicle, 9 April 1788,
151. ibid., IX, 728-729;
152. Pennsylvania Packet, 3 June 1788,
153. ibid., VI, 149-151;
154. "A Delegate Who Has Catched Cold," Virginia Independent Chronicle, 18 June 1788,
155. ibid., X, 1640-1643;
156. "One of the People," Massachusetts Centinel, 17 Oct. 1787,
157. ibid., XIII, 394-395;
158. "A True American," Massachusetts Centinel, 29 Sept. 1787,
159. ibid., XIII, 267;
160. Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, 22 Aug. 1787,
161. ibid., XIII, 189;
162. "AJerseyman: To the Citizens of New Jersey," Trenton Mercury, 6 Nov. 1787,
163. ibid., II, 146-151;
164. Philadelphia Independent. Gazetteer, 5 May 1788,
165. ibid., XVII, 386.
166. nd session, 1150;
167. John Lawrence, Annals of Congress, 1 Congress, 2 session, 1154.
168. Hamilton, "Report on Manufacturers," December 5, 1791;
169. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 70.
170. On "nativist" sentiment, see Higham, Strangers in the Land;
171. Garis, Immigration Restriction, 22-27.
172. Roger Kaplan, "The Hidden. War: British. Intelligence Operations during the American Revolution," William and Mary Quarterly, XLVII (1990), 115-138 (quotation, 124).
173. Charles Thomson to Franklin, August 13, 1784, in Giunta (ed.), FRUS, II, 426-427.
174. Elbridge Gerry, August 13, 1787, in Farrand (ed.), Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, II, 268;
175. Mason, August 8, 1787, ibid., II, 216;
176. Charles Pinkney, August 9, 1787, ibid., II, 235;
177. Pierce Butler, August 9, 1787, ibid., II, 236;
178. Morris, August 9, 1787, ibid., II, 235, 237-238.
179. On Washington's spy network during the Revolutionary War, see Morton Pennypacker, George Washington's Spies: In Long Island and New York (Brooklyn, 1939).
180. Jay to Washington, July 25, 1787, in Farrand (ed.), Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, III, 61;
181. "The Republican Federalist VI," Massachusetts Centinel, 2 Feb. 1788, in Kaminski and Saladino (eds.), Documentary History, V, 844.
182. nd session, 1147-1148, 1151-1152;
183. st Congress, 2 session, 1160;
184. nd session, 1161;
185. nd session, 1150-1151.
186. The naturalization law of 1790 provided that "all free white persons" who have immigrated to the United States and resided in the country "for two whole years shall be entitled to all the rights of citizenship." As several immigration scholars have observed, this was, by any comparison, a "liberal" and "generous" naturalization law. Kettner, Development of American Citizenship, 236;
187. Tichenor, Dividing Lines, 53.
188. The debate about the naturalization bill of 1790 was similar to that in the Federal Convention: The representatives wanted to encourage immigration to spur growth but also protect the nation from foreign harm and conspiracies. Franklin, Legislative History, 38.
189. On Vermont, see Onuf, Origins of the Federal Republic;
190. on Franklin, Samuel Cole Williams, History of the Lost State of Franklin (Johnson City, 1924).
191. Washington to Knox, December 5, 1784, in Abbot and Twohig (eds.), Papers of George Washington, II, 171;
192. Washington to Governor Benjamin Harris on October 10, 1784. ibid., II, 89-99;
193. Monroe to Patrick Henry, August 12, 1786, in William Wirt Henry (ed.), Patrick Henry: Life, Correspondence, and Speeches, (New York, 1969), II, 296-297;
194. Monroe to Madison, August 14, 1786, in Rutland and Rachal (eds.), Papers of James Madison, IX, 104;
195. King to Gerry, June 4, 1786, in King (ed.), Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, I, 175-179.
196. For comments by foreign leaders, see Charles Gravier, comte de Vergennes to François Barbé-Marbois, May 10, 1785, in Giunta (ed.), FRUS, II, 624-626;
197. Marbois to Vergennes, February 23, 1785, ibid., II, 560-562;
198. Don Diego Maria de Gardoqui to José Moňino y Redondo, conde de Floridablanca, August 23, 1785, ibid., II, 764-767.
199. See Matthewson, A Proslavery Foreign Policy: Haitian-American Relations During the Early Republic (Westport, 2003) (Pinckney's quotation, 22-23);
200. Rucker, River Flows On, 17-119.
201. On attempts by European leaders to restrict emigration to America, see Brite, "Attitude of European States," 195-224; Maldwyn A. Jones, "The Background to Emigration from Great Britain in the Nineteenth Century," Perspectives in American History, VII (1973), 12;
202. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 60, 103-107.
203. Phineas Bond to Lord Carmarthen, November 16, 1788, in Giunta (ed.), FRUS, III, 868-870;
204. Bond to Evan Nepean, November 16, 1788, ibid., III, 870-874.
205. Bond to Nepean, November 16, 1788, ibid., III, 870-874;
206. George Miller to Carmarthen, November 30, 1788, ibid., 889-892;
207. Bond to Lord Grenville, September 10, 1791, in Edith Abbott (ed.), Historical Aspects of the Immigration Problem (Chicago, 1926), 222;
208. Bond to Grenville, November 23, 1794, ibid., 222-223.
209. Francisco Rendón to Don José de Gálvez, February 12, 1785, in Giunta (ed.), FRUS, II, 551-552;
210. François Barbé-Marbois to Vergennes, February 23, 1785, in ibid., II, 560-562;
211. Vergennes to Marbois, May 10, 1785, ibid., 624-626.
212. Mearsheimer, Tragedy of Great Power Politics, 155, 157.
213. For the Washington quotation, see n. 21. On U.S. public opinion of immigration, see Nancy Foner, "Immigrant Commitment to America, Then and Now: Myths and Realties," Citizenship Studies, V (2001), 27-39;
214. Kenneth K. Lee, Huddled Masses, Muddled Laws: Why Contemporary Immigration Policy Fails to Reflect Public Opinion (Westport, 1998).
215. Rudolph, "Globalization and Security," 5, and Hollifield, "The Politics of International Migration: How Can We 'Bring the State Back In?" in Caroline B. Brettell and idem (eds.), Migration Theory: Talking Across Disciplines (New York, 2000), 152, argue that the security dynamic of immigration has been neglected because scholars consider international migration to be "low" (social and economic) rather than "high" (military) politics.
216. Abraham Lincoln, "State of the Union Address, 1864" (December, 1864), http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid?29505 (accessed June 10, 2005). For the quotation regarding the Refugee Relief Act, see Rudolph, National Security, 48;
217. for the quotation regarding September 11, Zolberg, "Guarding the Gates," in Craig Calhoun, Paul Price, and Ashley Timmer (eds.), Understanding September 11 (New York, 2002), 285;
218. for secondary literature explicitly connecting security to U.S. immigration policy, see Meyers, International Immigration Policy;
219. idem, National Security;
220. Zolberg, "Guarding the Gates"; for secondary literature implicitly supporting a security interpretation, Tichenor, Dividing Lines;
221. Zolberg, Nation By Design.
222. For an excellent overview of international migration and immigration policy, see Hollifield, "Politics of International Migration," 137-186. For examples of cultural and ideological theories, see David Jacobson, Rights Across Borders: Immigration and the Decline of Citizenship (Baltimore, 1996), 8-13;
223. Debra DeLaet, U.S. Immigration Policy in an Age of Rights (Westport, 2000);
224. for examples of economic and International Political Economy theories, Hollifield, "Migration, Trade, and the Nation-State"; Alan Kessler, "Guarded Gates: Factor Mobility, Domestic Coalitions, and the Political Economy of American Immigration Control," unpub. Ph.D. diss. (University of California, Los Angeles, 1999), 12-17, 20-52; for examples of social and interest-group theories, Freeman, "Modes of Immigration Politics in Liberal Democratic States," International Migration Review, CXXIX (1995), 881-902;
225. LeMay, From Open Door to Dutch Door, xiv-xv;
226. for a political geography theory, Jeanette Money, Fences and Neighbors: The Political Geography of Immigration Control (Ithaca, 1999);
227. for discussions of international migration within international systems, Hollifield, Immigrants, Markets, and States, 19-41;
228. idem, "Migration, Trade, and the Nation-State"; Lemay, Guarding the Gates;
229. Rudolph, "Globalization and Security"; idem. National Security and Immigration; idem, "Security and the Political Economy of International Migration"; Teitelbaum and Weiner (eds.), Threatened
230. Tichenor, Dividing Lines, 9-10, 43-45;
231. Weiner, Global Migration Crisis;
232. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 11-14.
233. Rudolph's theory purports to show that neoclassical economic and nationalist ideas cause a state to enact "open" policies during times of high geopolitical threat because robust economic production, sparked in part by immigrant labor, is thought necessary for strength and security, and because citizens feel a sense of commonality in the face of external threat, making them less disposed to exclusionary thoughts. Neoclassical economic and xenophobic ideas cause a state to enact "closed" policies during times of low geopolitical threat because the state is less concerned with the economic components of security, and because xenophobic tendencies are likely to manifest absent a motive for citizens to unite. Rudolph's theory applies primarily to postwar U.S. immigration policy, not necessarily across the board. Nonetheless, Rudolph's model provides an excellent foundation for thinking about U.S. immigration policy, identifying three main security components in the postwar period-terrorism, immigrant labor, and assimilating diverse ethnicities (Rudolph, National Security, 11-40).
234. On the migration crisis, see Arthur Schlesinger, The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society (New York, 1992), 10;
235. Samuel P. Huntington, "The West: Unique, Not Universal," Foreign Affairs, LXXV (1996), 28-46;
236. Hollifield, "Politics of International Migration," 139-141; Weiner, Global Migration Crisis;
237. on the challenge of diverting terrorists, Graham Allison, Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe (New York, 2004);
238. Otis L. Graham, Jr., Unguarded Gates: A History of America's Immigration Crisis (Lanham, 2004);
239. Rudolph, "Globalization and Security," 28-29;
240. Zolberg, Nation by Design, 442;
241. on modern terrorism., Max Abrahms, "Why Terrorism. Does Not Work," International Security, XXXI (2006), 42-78;
242. on the geopolitical importance of attracting labor, Marc Rosenblum, "High-Skilled Immigration and the U.S. National Interest," in Wayne A. Cornelius, Thomas J. Espenshade, and Idean Salehyan (eds.), The International Migration of the Highly Skilled (San Diego, 2001), 373-400;
243. Michael Peter Smith and Adrian Favell (eds.), The Human Face of Global Mobility: International Highly Skilled Migration in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific (New Brunswick, 2006);
244. Rudolph, "Globalization and Security," 12; on assimilating immigrants, Geroge F. Kennan, Around the Cragged Hill: A Personal and Political Philosophy (New York, 1993), 152;
245. Hollifield, "Politics of International Migration," 151-162; Huntington, Who Are We? The Challenge to America's National Identity (New York, 2004), 158-181;
246. Cheryl Shanks, Immigration and the Politics of American Sovereignty, 1890-1990 (Ann Arbor, 2000);
247. Rudolph, "Globalization and Security," 20, 22; Roger Waldinger, "Transforming Foreigners into Americans," in. Mary C. Waters and Ueda. (eds.), The New Americans: A Guide to Immigration since 1965 (New York, 2007), 137-148;
248. idem, "The Bounded Community: Turning Foreigners into Americans in Twenty-First Century L.A.," Ethnic and Racial Studies, XXX (2007), 341-374.