to the converse. Cannot a person in a substantial sense be a citizen of a State and at the same time not be a citizen of the United States, the Fourteenth Amendment to the contrary notwithstanding? Is it not within the power of a State to grant to an alien, residing within its limits, all the rights and privileges enjoyed by its native-born or naturalized citizens, so far as such rights and privileges are under control of the State?--that is, to naturalize an alien to the extent of its own exclusive jurisdiction, even to the extent of voting for United States officials, thus practically making him a member of the political community in the United States. Said the Supreme Court, through Chief-Justice Taney, in the Dred Scott case: “We must not confound the rights of citizenship which a State may confer within its own limits and the rights of citizenship as a member of the Union;” and Mr. Pomeroy, in his “Constitutional Law,” writes: “While it is settled that the Congress of the United States has exclusive authority to make rules for naturalization, it must not be understood that the States are deprived of all jurisdiction to legislate respecting the rights and duties of aliens. They may permit or forbid persons of alien birth to hold, acquire, or transmit property; to vote at State or national elections, etc. These capacities do not belong to the United States citizenship as such.” It is true that the constitution of the United States makes no one a member of the _political_ body, a capacity which comes only with citizenship of the State; and therefore it confers the right to vote upon no one. That right comes even to the “citizens of the United States,” when they possess it at all, under State laws, and as a grant of State sovereignty. The amendment, Article XV., confers upon citizens of the United States a new exemption; namely, an exemption from discrimination in elections on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude; and to the extent that, should it be needful to protect this exemption, Congress may provide by appropriate legislation. The Fifteenth Amendment endows the individual with the potentiality of enfranchisement, not its actuality, and did not absolutely make him an elector. It did not deprive the people of the States of the discretion, in their primary capacity, to decide who of their number should enjoy the political franchise. It simply forbade them to adopt a particular rule of discrimination.