Taft, At. Gen. 1876, 15 Op. 114. Quaere, however, as to the applicability of the doctrine of double allegiance in such cases, so long as minority continues. "Under section 2172 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, if, as you state, your father was naturalized while you were a minor, you are by virtue of that fact, if dwelling in the United States, an American citizen, and entitled to protection as such, in case you should be molested upon visiting Germany, your father's native country." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Goldenberg, Dec. 15, 1884, 153 See, also, Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Kasson, min. to Ger- Robert Emden was born in Switzerland in 1862. His father, a native of Switzerland, was naturalized in the United States in 1854, but soon afterwards returned to Switzerland, where he ever afterwards continued to reside. In 1885 the son, who had never been in the United States, applied to the American legation at Berne for a passport. The Department of State held: "The passport application of Mr. Robert Emden, although he is the son of a naturalized American, cannot be granted, because he is not and never has been 'dwelling in the United States,' according to section 2172 of the Revised Statutes." Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Cramer, min. to Switz., June 27, 1885, To the same effect is the case of Charles Drevet, decided in 1885. (Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. McLane, min. to France, July 2, 1885, See, also, Mr. Rives, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Haus, Dec. 5, 1888, 170 "Mrs. Heisinger was born in Altona, Prussia. Her husband was also an alien by birth and came to the United States Case of Carl Heis- in May, 1866. He was naturalized August 18, 1871, inger. and died probably not later than 1879. The son Carl was born in Philadelphia, in the State of Pennsylvania, January 21, 1871, more than six months before the naturalization of his father. In 1879 Mrs. Heisinger returned to Germany, taking her son with her, and has ever since resided in that country. 66 'It is a reasonable interpretation that the words 'if dwelling in the United States' were intended, among other things, to meet the case of conflicting claims of allegiance. In this relation it is pertinent to disclose the origin of those words. On March 26, 1790, an act was approved, entitled 'An act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization' (Stats. at Large, 103). This was the first law enacted by Congress on that subject. The first clauses prescribed the conditions and methods of naturalization. Then followed these words: "And the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of 21 years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. "In 1795 the law of 1790 was repealed by an act of the 29th of January of the former year entitled, 'An act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject' (1 Stats. at Large, 414). By the third section of the act of January 29, 1795, it was provided that— "The children of persons duly naturalized, dwelling within the United States and being under the age of 21 years at the time of such naturalization, and the children of citizens of the United States born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States. "The law on this subject so remained until 1802, on the 14th of April, of which year, an act was approved entitled, 'An act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and to repeal the acts heretofore passed on that subject.' (2 Stats. at Large, 153.) "The fourth section of this act provides that "The children of persons duly naturalized under any of the laws of the United States, . . . being under the age of 21 years at the time of their parents being so naturalized .. .shall, if dwelling in the United States, be considered as citizens of the United States, and the children of persons who are now or have been citizens of the United States, shall, though born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, be considered citizens of the United States. "It will be observed that in this provision, which is incorporated in section 2172 of the Revised Statutes, the words if dwelling in the United States' are transposed. The effect of this transposition was considered by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Campbell . Gordon (6 Cranch, 176) in 1810. The case involved a title to land, which depended upon the citizenship of one Yanetta Gordon, née Currie, who was by birth a British subject. Her father, also a natural-born British subject, emigrated to the United States and in 1795 was naturalized. His daughter Yanetta was then residing in Scotland, where she remained until 1797, in which year she came to the United States. It was contended by counsel that she was not a citizen of the United States, inasmuch as she was not dwelling in the United States at the time of her father's naturalization. The Supreme Court took a different view of the matter. Mr. Justice Washington, delivering the opinion of the court, said: 666 "The next question to be decided is whether the naturalization of William Currie conferred upon his daughter the rights of a citizen after her coming to and residing within the United States, she having been a resident in a foreign country at the time when her father was naturalized. Whatever difficulty might exist as to the construction of the third section of the act of January 29, 1795, in relation to this point, it is conceived that the rights of citizenship were clearly conferred upon the female appellee by the fourth section of the act of April 14, 1802. This act declares that the children of persons duly naturalized under any of the laws of the United States, being under the age of 21 years at the time of their parents being so naturalized, shall, if dwelling in the United States, be considered as citizens of the United States. This is precisely the case of Mrs. Gordon.' "The effect of the law, as thus expounded, is to make actual residence in the United States, and not residence at the time of naturalization, the test of the claim to citizenship; and here, as explanatory of this rule, it is important to observe the associated provision, found in all the acts above quoted, and incorporated in the same relation in section 2172 of the Revised Statutes, that children born of citizens of the United States shall, though born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, be considered as citizens thereof. Under this provision, such children are treated as citizens of the United States, whether dwelling in this country or not, being regarded as citizens of the United States by birth. The preceding provision relates to children born of parents who were not at the time citizens of the United States, and upon whom the country of the parents, under the same rule of law as that announced by this Government, might have claims of allegiance. In respect to such persons, the words if dwelling in the United States' recognize a possible conflict of allegiance. They also recognize another principle, and that is that it is not within the power of a parent to eradicate the original nationality of his child, though he may, during the minority of such child, invest him with rights or subject him to duties which may or may not be claimed or performed. For this reason, also, it is provided that children not born citizens of the United States are, by virtue of the naturalization of their parents, to be considered as citizens of the United States if dwelling therein. "The Department does not desire to be understood to assert that natural-born subjects of a foreign power whose parents have been naturalized in the United States must at every moment be dwelling in the United States in order to claim its citizenship. That question does not arise in the present case. The words 'if dwelling in the United States,' whether meaning residence at a particular moment or contemplating a settled abode, apply to Carl Heisinger, who, being now 19 years of age, has for about 11 years been dwelling in Germany. It is not known that the Government of that country has made any claims upon him. But, if the German Government should, under a provision of law similar to that in force in the United States in relation to the foreign-born children of citizens, seek to exact from him the performance of obligations as a natural-born subject, the Department would be bound to consider the provisions of section 2172 of the Revised Statutes." Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Phelps, minister to Germany, February 1, 1890, For. Rel. 1890, 301. J. W. claimed American citizenship through the naturalization of his father. The latter was born in the Crimea in 1836, came to the United States in 1875, and was naturalized in 1881. Three months later he returned to Russia, where he continued to reside, following the occupation of a farmer. J. W. was born in Russia and returned to that country with his father in 1881, being then nineteen years of age, and afterwards resided there, also following the occupation of farming. In 1891, being then twenty-eight years old, he applied to the American legation at St. Petersburg for a passport. He expressed no intention as to returning to the United States. The Department of State declared that it would not have availed him if he had. Under section 2172, Revised Statutes, said the Department, the children of persons who have been duly naturalized, being under the age of twenty-one years at the time of their parent's naturalization, are, "if dwelling in the United States," to be considered as citizens thereof. J. W., said the Department, "never has dwelt here since attaining his majority, and is not dwelling here now. He is therefore precluded by the statute from claiming the benefits of citizenship of the United States." Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Smith, min. to Russia, No. 79, Feb. 28, 1891, MS. Inst. Russia, XVI. 696. "With regard to your inquiry as to whether a person residing abroad could be considered as dwelling in the United States,' so as to come within the meaning of section 2172, Revised Statutes, I would say that this passage has reference merely to the residence of a minor, who, to be naturalized under the statute, must be 'dwelling in the United States' either at the time of the parent's naturalization or afterwards during his minority. The phrase clearly could not be construed to mean that the person must always be dwelling in the United States' in order to be entitled to citizenship. By such interpretation a person claiming citizenship through the parent's naturalization would be precluded from asserting citizenship when not actually within the jurisdiction of the United States. A person properly claiming naturalization under this statute (2172, R. S.) is as completely naturalized as if he had complied with the conditions of the general naturalization laws of the United States, and would not, if he left the jurisdiction of the United States, have to comply with the requirements of Revised Statutes 2167, by taking out naturalization papers for himself." Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Storer, min. to Belgium, March 6, 1899, "The fact that a person claiming citizenship through the naturalization "Anton Macek, according to your statement, was born in Vienna, of Austrian parents, August 13, 1875. In May, 1884, Macek's case. his father, Alois Macek, emigrated to the United States with his entire family and has resided in Chicago ever since. Before his naturalization and while the son, Anton, was yet a minor— August 16, 1894-the father sent him to Austria to be educated. The father, Alois Macek, was naturalized in the superior court of Cook County, Ill., October 22, 1894-that is, subsequently to the return of the son, Anton Macek, to Austro-Hungarian jurisdiction, where he has since remained. "You have felt it to be your duty to withhold a passport in the view that section 2172 merely confers citizenship upon minors actually residing in the United States at the time of their father's naturalization, in support of which opinion you refer to the Department's instruction to you, No. 2, of April 1, 1899, the pertinent provisions of which you quote. "At the same time you submit to the Department the view, which you state is advocated by the consul at Prague, that the words 'dwelling in the United States' refer to the legal residence of a minor which, unless manumitted, is with the parent wherever the minor |