free inhabitants_
are used in one part of the article, _free citizens_ in another, and
_people_ in another; or what was meant by superadding to 'all
privileges and immunities of free citizens,' 'all the privileges of
trade and commerce,' cannot easily be determined. It seems to be a
construction scarcely avoidable, however, that those who come under
the denomination of _free inhabitants_ of a state, although not
citizens of such state, are entitled, in every other state, to all
the privileges of _free citizens_ of the latter; that is, to greater
privileges than they may be entitled to in their own state; so that
it may be in the power of a particular state, or rather every state
is laid under the necessity, not only to confer the rights of
citizenship in other states upon any whom it may admit to such rights
within itself, but upon any whom it may allow to become inhabitants
within its jurisdiction. But were an exposition of the term
'inhabitant' to be admitted, which would confine the stipulated
privileges to citizens alone, the difficulty is diminished only, not
removed. The very improper power would still be retained by each
state, of naturalizing aliens in every other state. In one state,
residence for a short time confers all the rights of citizenship; in
another, qualifications of greater importance are required. An alien,
therefore, legally incapacitated for certain rights in the latter,
may, by previous residence only in the former, elude his incapacity,
and thus the law of one state be preposterously rendered paramount to
the laws of another, within the jurisdiction of the other.

"We owe it to mere casualty, that very serious embarrassments on this
subject have been hitherto escaped. By the laws of several states,
certain description of aliens, who had rendered themselves obnoxious,
were laid under interdicts inconsistent, not only with the rights of
citizenship, but with the privileges of residence. What would have
been the consequence, if such persons, by residence, or otherwise,
had acquired the character of citizens under the laws of another
state, and then asserted their rights as such, both to residence and
citizenship, within the state proscribing them? Whatever the legal
consequences might have been, other consequences would probably have
resulted of too serious a nature, not to be provided against.