The order contains two oaths, one applicable both to the native born and to such foreigners as have not claimed and received protection from their Government, &c.; the second applicable,it would seem, to such foreigners as may have claimed and received the above protection; thus, unnaturalized foreigners are divided into two categories, a distinction which the undersigned cannot admit.

The order says that the required "oath will not be, as it has never been, forced upon any;" that "it is too sacred an obligation, too exalted in its tenure, and brings with it too many benefits and privileges to be profaned by unwilling lip service:" and that "all persons shall be deemed to have been citizens of the United States who shall have been resident therein for the space of five years and upward, and if foreign born shall not have claimed and received a protection of their Government, duly signed and registered by the proper officer, more than sixty days previous to the publication of this order."

Whence it follows that foreigners are placed on the same footing with the native-born and naturalized citizens, and in the alternative, either of being deprived of their means of existence or forced implicitly to take the required oath, if they with to ask and do receive "any favor, protection, privilege, passport, or to have money paid them, property or other valuable thing whatever delivered to them, or any benefit of the power of the United States extended to them, except protection from personal violence."

Now, of course, when a foreigner does not wish to submit to the laws, of the country of which he is a resident, he is invariably and everywhere at liberty to leave that country; but here he does not even enjoy that privilege,for to leave he must procure a passport, to obtain which he must take an oath he is unwilling to take,and yet that oath "is so sacred and so exalted in its tenure that it must not be profaned by unwilling lip service."

It is true that the order excepts those foreigners who claimed and received the protection of their Government more than sixty days previous to its publication; but this exception is merely nominal, because the very great majority of foreigners never had any cause hitherto in this country to ask, and therefore to receive, "a protection of their Government." Besides, this exception implies an interference with the interior administration of foreign Governments - an act contrary to the laws of nations. Whether the foreign residents have or have not complied with the laws and edicts of their own Governments is a matter between them and their consuls, and the undersigned deny the right of nay foreign power to meddle with, and still less to enforce, the laws of their respective countries, as far as their fellow-citizens are concerned. When a consul extends the high protection of his Government to such of his countrymen as are neither naturalized nor charged with any breach of the laws of the country in which they reside, he is to be supported by a friendly Government; for it is a law in all civilized countries that if foreigners must submit to the laws of the country in which they reside, they, and, a fortiori,their consuls must, in exchange of that respect for those laws, receive due protection - that protection, in fact, which the foreigners have invariably enjoyed in this country up to the present time. Now foreigners are deprived of that protection unless they become citizens of the United States, and this is done without a warning and in opposition to the laws of the United States concerning the mode in which foreigners may become citizens of this country. The undersigned must remark that a just law can have no retroactive action and can be enforced