Editing Allegiance (section)

===United Kingdom===
The English doctrine, which was at one time adopted in the United States, asserted that allegiance was indelible: "Nemo potest exuere patriam". As the law stood prior to 1870, every person who by birth or [[naturalisation]] satisfied the conditions set forth, even if removed in infancy to another country where their family resided, owed an allegiance to the British crown which they could never resign or lose, except by act of parliament or by the recognition of the independence or the cession of the portion of British territory in which they resided.<ref name="Chisholm1911"/>

This refusal to accept any [[Renunciation of citizenship|renunciation]] of allegiance to the Crown led to conflict with the United States over [[impressment]], which led to further conflicts during the [[War of 1812]], when thirteen Irish American [[prisoner of war|prisoners of war]] were executed as [[traitor]]s after the [[Battle of Queenston Heights]]; [[Winfield Scott]] urged American [[reprisal]], but none was carried out.<ref>[[John Eisenhower]] (1997), ''Agent of Destiny:  The Life and Times of Winfield Scott'', New York:  Free Press.</ref>

Allegiance was the tie which bound the subject to the [[Monarch|sovereign]], in return for that protection which the sovereign afforded the subject. It was the mutual bond and obligation between monarch and subjects, whereby subjects were called their liege subjects, because they are bound to obey and serve them; and the monarch was called their liege lord, because they should maintain and defend them (''Ex parte Anderson'' (1861) 3 El & El 487; 121 ER 525; ''China Navigation Co v Attorney-General'' (1932) 48 TLR 375; ''Attorney-General v Nissan'' [1969] 1 All ER 629; ''[[Oppenheimer v Cattermole]]'' [1972] 3 All ER 1106). The duty of the crown towards its subjects was to govern and protect them. The reciprocal duty of the subject towards the crown was that of allegiance.

At common law, allegiance was a true and faithful obedience of the subject due to their sovereign. As the subject owed to their sovereign their true and faithful allegiance and obedience, so the sovereign

* {{lang|la|duplex et reciprocum ligamen; quia sicut subditus regi tenetur ad obedientiam, ita rex subdito tenetur ad protectionem; merito igitur ligeantia dicitur a ligando, quia continet in se duplex ligamen}} (''Calvin's Case'' (1608) 7 Co Rep 1a; Jenk 306; 2 State Tr 559; 77 ER 377).

Natural allegiance and obedience is an incident inseparable to every subject, for parte Anderson (1861) 3 El & El 487; 121 ER 525). Natural-born subjects owe allegiance wherever they may be. Where territory is occupied in the course of hostilities by an enemy's force, even if the annexation of the occupied country is proclaimed by the enemy, there can be no change of allegiance during the progress of hostilities on the part of a citizen of the occupied country (''R v Vermaak'' (1900) 21 NLR 204 (South Africa)).

Allegiance is owed both to the sovereign as a natural person  and to the sovereign in the political capacity (''Re Stepney Election Petition, Isaacson v Durant'' (1886) 17 QBD 54 (per [[John Coleridge, 1st Baron Coleridge|Lord Coleridge]] CJ)). Attachment to the person of the reigning sovereign is not sufficient. Loyalty requires affection also to the office of the sovereign, attachment to royalty, attachment to the law and to the constitution of the realm, and he who would, by force or by fraud, endeavour to prostrate that law and constitution, though he may retain his affection for its head, can boast but an imperfect and spurious species of loyalty (''R v O'Connell'' (1844) 7 ILR 261).

There were four kinds of allegiances (''Rittson v Stordy'' (1855) 3 Sm & G 230; ''De Geer v Stone'' (1882) 22 Ch D 243; ''Isaacson v Durant'' (1886) 54 LT 684; ''Gibson, Gavin v Gibson'' [1913] 3 KB 379; ''Joyce v DPP'' [1946] AC 347; ''Collingwood v Pace'' (1661) O Bridg 410; ''Lane v Bennett'' (1836) 1 M & W 70; ''Lyons Corp v East India Co'' (1836) 1 Moo PCC 175; ''Birtwhistle v Vardill'' (1840) 7 Cl & Fin 895; ''R v Lopez, R v Sattler'' (1858) Dears & B 525; Ex p Brown (1864) 5 B & S 280):

* (a) ''Ligeantia naturalis, absoluta, pura et indefinita'', and this originally is due by nature and birthright, and is called ''alta ligeantia'', and those that owe this are called ''subditus natus'';
* (b) ''Ligeantia acquisita'', not by nature but by acquisition or denization, being called a denizen, or rather denizon, because they are ''subditus datus'';
* (c) ''Ligeantia localis'', by operation of law, when a friendly alien enters the country, because so long as they are in the country they are within the sovereign's protection, therefore they owe the sovereign a local obedience or allegiance (''R v Cowle'' (1759) 2 Burr 834; ''Low v Routledge'' (1865) 1 Ch App 42; ''Re Johnson, Roberts v Attorney-General'' [1903] 1 Ch 821; ''Tingley v Muller'' [1917] 2 Ch 144; ''Rodriguez v Speyer'' [1919] AC 59; ''Johnstone v Pedlar'' [1921] 2 AC 262; ''R v Tucker'' (1694) Show Parl Cas 186; ''R v Keyn'' (1876) 2 Ex  D 63; ''Re Stepney Election Petn, Isaacson v Durant'' (1886) 17 QBD 54);
* (d) A legal obedience, where a particular law requires the taking of an oath of allegiance by subject or alien alike.

Natural allegiance was acquired by birth within the sovereign's dominions (except for the issue of diplomats or of invading forces or of an alien in an enemy occupied territory). The natural allegiance and obedience are an incident inseparable from every subject, for as soon as they are born they owe by birthright allegiance and obedience to the Sovereign (''Ex p. Anderson'' (1861) 3 E & E 487). A natural-born subject owes allegiance wherever they may be, so that where territory is occupied in the course of hostilities by an enemy's force, even if the annexation of the occupied country is proclaimed by the enemy, there can be no change of allegiance during the progress of hostilities on the part of a citizen of the occupied country (''R v Vermaak'' (1900) 21 NLR 204 (South Africa)).

Acquired allegiance was acquired by naturalisation or denization. Denization, or ''ligeantia acquisita'', appears to be threefold (''Thomas v Sorrel'' (1673) 3 Keb 143):

* (a) absolute, as the common denization, without any limitation or restraint;
* (b) limited, as when the sovereign grants letters of denization to an alien, and the alien's male heirs, or to an alien for the term of their life;
* (c) It may be granted upon condition, ''cujus est dare, ejus est disponere'', and this denization of an alien may come about three ways: by parliament; by letters patent, which was the usual manner; and by conquest.

Local allegiance was due by an alien while in the protection of the crown. All friendly resident aliens incurred all the obligations of subjects (''The Angelique'' (1801) 3 Ch Rob App 7). An alien, coming into a colony, also became, temporarily, a subject of the crown, and acquired rights both within and beyond the colony, and these latter rights could not be affected by the laws of that colony (''Routledge v Low'' (1868) LR 3 HL 100; 37 LJ Ch 454; 18 LT 874; 16 WR 1081, HL; ''Reid v Maxwell'' (1886) 2 TLR 790; ''Falcon v Famous Players Film Co'' [1926] 2 KB 474).

A [[resident alien]] owed allegiance even when the protection of the crown was withdrawn owing to the occupation of an enemy, because the absence of the crown's protection was temporary and involuntary (''de Jager v Attorney-General of Natal'' [1907] AC 326).

Legal allegiance was due when an alien took an oath of allegiance required for a particular office under the crown.

By the [[Naturalization Act 1870]] ([[33 & 34 Vict.]] c. 14), it was made possible for British subjects to renounce their nationality and allegiance, and the ways in which that nationality is lost were defined. So British subjects voluntarily naturalized in a foreign state are deemed aliens from the time of such naturalization, unless, in the case of persons naturalized before the passing of the act, they had declared their desire to remain British subjects within two years from the passing of the act. Persons who, from having been born within British territory, are British subjects, but who, at birth, came under the law of any foreign state or of subjects of such state, and, also, persons who, though born abroad, are British subjects by reason of parentage, may, by declarations of alienage, get rid of British nationality. Emigration to an uncivilized country left British nationality unaffected: indeed the right claimed by all states to follow with their authority their subjects so emigrating was one of the usual and recognized means of [[Colonialism|colonial]] expansion.<ref name="Chisholm1911"/>