« PreviousContinue »
change his allegiance without the assent of his sovereign, subject only to the penalties of imprisonment and loss of civil rights prescribed by the penal code.“
The Department of State advised Mr. Hardy that he had done al! that was practicable in the absence of a naturalization treaty, and instructed him to propose to Greece the negotiation of such a treaty. on the lines of the convention between the United States and AustriaHungary.
The Greek Government replied, however, that it could conclude a convention only on the basis of a communication from the war office, in which it was declared that, while permission to change allegiance would be freely granted, it could not be obtained unless the applicant had “ satisfied his military obligations and discharged the duties which he might eventually incur toward the state;" that the acquisition of foreign nationality in no wise relieved Greek subjects from military duty, since, if it were otherwise, “ anyone who wished to evade military service in Greece would only have to become naturalized abroad;" that whosoever became naturalized abroad without permission was subject to the penalties of the penal code, and, as to any evasion of military service, to punishment under military law as a deserter; and that, in order to avoid misunderstandings, it would be necessary to arrange by an exchange of notes that every Greek subject desiring to acquire American nationality should deposit with the American authorities a certified copy of the royal decree authorizing him to abandon his Greek allegiance.
The United States declined to conclude a convention, unless it should “recognize the right of the individual to change his allegi
The Greek Government adhered to its position in the case of Economopoulos, although, in another and similar case, the minister of foreign affairs forestalled the arrest of the individual by a personal letter to the local authorities. Mr. Hardy therefore, as stated by him in a dispatch of Oct. 2, 1900, advised Economopoulos, in view of the decisions of 1886, to try an appeal to the Legal Council, but on account of the expense or for some other reason he did not do so, and remained in the military service. The Department of State, in reply, instructed Mr. Hardy that he had, under the circumstances stated in his dispatch, done all that he could properly do in Mr. Economopoulos' behalf.a
a For. Rel. 1900, 637, 640–641. The minister of foreign affairs afterwards maintained that these decisions were applicable only to the cases in which they were made, and established no general principle, and that they were besides unconstitutional and rendered liable to impeachment the ministry which enforced them. (For. Rel. 1900, 646-647.)
Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hardy, min. to Greece, April 6 and April 13, 1900, For. Rel. 1900, 641, 612.
c For. Rel. 1900, 643–644.
d Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hardy, min. to Greece, june 6, 1900, For. Rel. 1900, 644.
March 27, 1901, Mr. Charles S. Francis, United States minister at Athens, wrote a personal letter to the Greek minister of war, reciting the circumstances of the case and saying that, while there was no naturalization treaty between the two countries, it was believed that the minister's “sense of justice” and considerations of “comity” would lead to the discharge of the person in question, in order that he might return to the country of his adoption.
March 29, 1901, the minister of war replied that the laws of the country did not permit him to strike Economopoulos from the roll of conscripts and order his dismissal from the army, but that he would order his discharge from the ranks if he could find any reason of health or of family that would justify him in so doing. He was actually discharged from the service June 25, 1901.
“ The information given below is believed to be correct, yet is not to be considered as official, as it relates to the laws and regulations of a foreign country.
The Greek Government does not, as a general statement, recognize a change of nationality on the part of a former Greek without the consent of the King, and a former Greek who has not completed his military service and who is not exempt therefrom under the military code may be arrested upon his return to Greece. The practice of the Greek Government is not, however, uniform, but American citizens of Greek origin are advised to find out before returning what status they may expect to enjoy. Information should be sought directly from the Greek Government, and this Department always refuses to act as intermediary in seeking the information.
“ There is no treaty on the subject of naturalized citizens between the United States and Greece."
Circular Notice, Department of State, Jan. 31, 1901, For. Rel. 1901, 247.
In the case of Mr. Leon Aparicio, the Guatemalan Government seems to have taken the ground that a person born in France, of Guatemalan parents, by the laws of Guatemala was not entitled to be registered as a foreigner in Guatemala, although he had been naturalized in the United States.
a Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hardy, min. to Greece, Oct. 24, 1900, For. Rel. 1900, 617.
• For, Rel. 1901, 247,249,
For. Rel. 1897, 338-340.
In March, 1903, Alberto Posadas, a native Guatemalan, who had been naturalized in the United States, and who bore an American passport, was arrested and detained in Guatemala for refusing to pay a forced loan. When the minister of the United States interceded, the Guatemalan minister of foreign affairs declared that many Guatemalans obtained naturalization in the United States in order to avoid the duties and obligations of citizens in Guatemala, where their property interests lay; and he also took the ground that, by the constitution of Guatemala, natives of the country were declared to be citizens whenever they were within the jurisdiction. Subsequently, Posadas was released, and the question of principle referred to Washington for discussion and settlement. With reference to the contention of the Guatemalan Government, the Department of State observed that, if the Guatemalan constitution contained, which did not appear to be the case, a provision denying the right of expatriation, the same question of dual allegiance which we have with Russia and Turkey would arise, and a satisfactory solution of the question could be a fforded by the conclusion of a treaty of naturalization with Guatemala, if that Government will agree."
Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Combs, min. to Guatemala, No. 30, April
18, 1903, For, Rel. 1903, 581.
In an instruction to Mr. Marsh, American minister at Florence, July 15, 1868, Mr. Seward referred to the “ manifest need for a removal of the doubts and uncertainty which attend the condition of the Italian naturalized in the United States, when he transiently revisits his native country.” To leave the question open would, he declared, " be to lay a foundation for jealousies and discontents, not merely profitless but injurious between the two countries, such, indeed, as those that have sometimes disturbed the cordiality of the relations between the United States, France, Germany, Great Britain, and other European nations."
In a confidential instruction to Mr. Marsh on the following day, Mr. Seward said: “ What is important to the United States in this respect, so far as Italy is concerned, is an agreement on the principle upon which the institutions of the United States, and of all other American states mainly rest; namely, the right of a man in any country who is neither convicted nor accused of crime to change his domicil and allegiance with a view to the free exercise of his own faculties
and the pursuit of happiness in his own lawful way. I am not aware that any considerable military inconvenience resulted to either country from the exercise of the right mentioned by the citizens of the United States and Italy during the war in which both were recently engaged."
Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Marsh, min. to Italy, July 15, 1868, MS.
Inst. Italy, I, 269, acknowledging the receipt of Mr. Marsh's No. 212, of June 22, 1868; same to same, July 16, 1868, id. 271, acknowledging the receipt of Mr. Marsh's confidential dispatch, No. 215, June 26,
1868. As early as May, 1861, Mr. Seward expressed the intention to send full
powers to Mr. Marsh to negotiate and sign a naturalization treaty. (Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Marsh, No. 3, May 9, 1861, MS.
Inst. Italy, I. 118.) .
“ It is hoped ... that the Italian Government will not, by actually drafting Biagiotte into their military service, give occasion for us to demand his discharge. The feeling in the United States, as you are aware, is very strong against compulsory military or naval service of naturalized citizens in countries where they were born. This sentiment the government would be bound to respect. Cases of the kind frequently occurred with the German states prior to the naturalization treaties with them. Since then, however, it is believed that no difficulty upon the subject has happened. It is a matter of regret, in the interest of friendly relations with Italy, that she should have declined our overtures for a similar convention.”
Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Marsh, min. to Italy, Nov. 15, 1872, MS.
Inst. Italy, I. 407, acknowledging the receipt of Mr. Marsh's Nos. 421 and 422, Oct. 9 and 11, 1872.
“ It is a rule of ordinary prudence which is observed by this Department to hesitate in expressing an opinion upon a hypothetical case. It is possible that a naturalized citizen may have incurred obligations or liabilities in his native country from which, on returning to the country of his nativity, it would be difficult to shield him. There is no naturalization treaty between the United States and Italy. In the absence of one, the municipal law of that country will probably be held to be applicable to all native Italians who, though naturalized abroad, may return within the jurisdiction of the Italian Government."
Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Davidson, Feb. 23, 1875, 106 MS. Dom.
Let. 576. “Although by the aid of our diplomatic and consular representatives ne
[a naturalized American citizen of Italian origin, desirous of revisit-
April 18, 1871, 89 MS. Dom. Let. 157.)
“I have to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch No. 729 of the 19th of January last, relative to the case of Lieutenant Lornia, in which you observe that the promulgation of an amnesty by the new King of Italy, embracing a large class of offenses against military law and discipline, will give you an opportunity of asking the release of the American citizens now held to military service in Italy, as perhaps coming within the principle of the amnesty, and that you shall avail yourself of the occasion in your next interview with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Trusting that your efforts in the direction stated will be successful, I am," etc.
Mr. Evarts, Sec. of State, to Mr. Marsh, min. to Italy, Feb. 11, 1878, MS.
Inst, Italy, II. 54. " It is understood the law of Italy makes no exception in favor of its sub
jects naturalized abroad, in requiring from them service in the army, if found within Italian jurisdiction. As the United States has no naturalization treaty with Italy, the local laws must prevail.” (Mr. F. W. Seward, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Wilson, March 20, 1878,
122 MS. Dom. Let. 230.) To the same effect, Mr. F. W. Seward, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Cassasa,
Nov, 29, 1878, 125 MS. Dom. Let. 408.
In the case of Mr. Largomarsino, a naturalized American citizen of Italian origin, who was enrolled in the Italian army upon his return to his native country, the Italian minister of foreign affairs informed Mr. Marsh, the American minister at Rome, that it was not possible to make exceptions to the law, adding that “ Article 12 of the Civil Code of the Kingdom explicitly enacts that the loss of citizenship does not carry with it exemption from the obligation of military service. Matters of private interest, which, in fact, are common to all Italian citizens on whom military service is incumbent, are not taken into consideration by the laws of conscription. The Royal Government cannot, therefore, hold them of any weight.”
For. Rel. 1878, 458; 1879, 600.
Italy, Feb. 26, 1879, as to the foregoing case, instructed him “to take such action as in your judgment will tend to the best result."
(MS. Inst. Italy, II. 87.) The statement of the Italian minister of foreign affairs is cited in Mr.
Porter, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. ('ollins, Sept. 21, 1885, where it is said: “As a matter of practice this rule has been strictly enforced."
(156 MS. Dom. Let. 178.) See, to the same effect, Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Blanchard, July
22, 1885, 156 MS. Dom. Let. 330. Art. 11, Tit. I., of the Italian Civil Code of 1866, declares : “ Citizenship is
lost . by naturalization in a foreign country." Art. 12, bowever, provides : “Loss of citizenship in the cases stated in the
preceding article does not exempt from the obligations of military service, nor from penalty inflicted on anyone who bears arms against his native country." The contention of the Italian Govern