« PreviousContinue »
"(c) If lost, diligent but ineffectual search for it must be shown.
“(dl) Parol proof of a lost or destroyed certificate should not be received if the original record of naturalization, of which a certified copy could be procured, is attainable. A party who can not produce his naturalization certificate can not supply it by parol proof unless he also prove that the original record of naturalization is unattainable and can not be reproduced by a certified copy."
Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to M. Vignaud, chargé at Paris, No. 343, June
13, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, I. 512. This instruction was realfirmed by Mr. Rives, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr.
McLane, June 30, 1888, For. Rel, 1888, I. 547.
“ You suggest that a discrimination is made, under the instructions recently given to you, between natives and naturalized citizens of the United States, or at least that applicants for passports may allege the existence of such a discrimination. The answer to this suggestion seems to me plain. The rule of proof applied to each class of citizens is the same; and it is the well-known legal rule, universally adopted, that in all cases the proof to be submitted of the existence of a fact must be the best proof of which the case is in its nature susceptible. In the case of native citizens of the United States, as there is no system in existence of individual registration, such as exists in some other countries, the best proof is by affidavit and personal identification to the satisfaction of the legation. But in the case of naturalized citizens additional and other facts essentially different must be established.
" By the laws of the United States naturalization of a foreign-born person to be an American citizen is intrusted to the courts of record, both of the several States and of the United States. By the rules of evidence, as universally administered here, the record of such court can be proved either by an inspection of the records themselves or by a certified copy under the seal of the court; and such evidence is the conclusive and sole proof of the action of the court.
“Whenever the question of citizenship is brought in issue within the United States the certified abstract from the record of the court is required to establish the fact of naturalization. In cases of loss or destruction of the original records an exception is made, but then the ground for the introduction of secondary evidence must be laid by proofs in the usual mode.
“ It is not perceived how a less stringent rule could properly be laid down for the guidance of the agents of the Government residing in foreign countries. The expediency of increased strictness is rather apparent, when the serious nature and consequences of the guarantees of national protection which are to accompany the issue of a passport are taken into consideration. At the present time, questions of
allegiance and citizenship are undergoing unusually serious examination in Europe, especially in the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine, lately part of the territory of France, but in which German power is now maintained in consequence of cession under the duress of war. The obligations of the Government to its citizens are of the most farreaching nature, and the United States expect to perform their full duty in protecting their citizens abroad, but the fact of such citizenship must be established before our intervention can be appealed to. It is not competent for this Department to alter the law which makes naturalization the act of a judicial court of record, and for that reason to be proven like other records.
“ The hardships of the enforcement of the rule here insisted upon, and which is not, as you seem to suppose, of recent origin, are more apparent than real. The procurement of a certificate of naturalization under the seal of the court is easy and inexpensive, and duplicates can always be obtained before going abroad, or within a fortnight, by telegraphing, by anyone now in Europe.
The instructions heretofore given (No. 343) have thus been reviewed in the light of your recent representations, and it is not perceived how this Department, consistently with public interests or duty, can dispense with the customary and reasonable proof of American naturalized citizenship.
“ The present time appears opportune to inform that portion of the public who propose in their residence in foreign countries to enjoy all the privileges of American citizenship, that at least they must establish their right to do so by the usual and easily acquired proofs.”
Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. McLane, min. to France, July 20, 1888,
For. Rel. 1888, I. 552.
“ I have to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 645, of the 23d ultimo, in which you inform the Department of your issuance of a passport to Mr. Max Hellman, a naturalized citizen of the United States, without the exhibition by him of his certificate of naturalization, as required by the rules of this Department. You state that he is well known to you personally, that he has been a naturalized citizen of the United States for thirty years, and that while he failed to produce a certificate of naturalization, he exhibited passports heretofore issued to him by this Department, and also by the American legation at Paris.
Upon these facts, and especially in view of your personal knowledge of the applicant, your action is approved. The personal knowlege of a minister of the United States necessarily obviates the necessity of more formal proof."
Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. McLane, min. to France, Aug. 10, 1888,
For. Rel. 1888, I. 555.
“In cases recently presented at Paris and elsewhere, in which persons of good repute and widely known have alleged that they had left their certificates of naturalization at home, and were, consequently, unable to produce them to the legation, the Department has held that the certificate of the minister as to his personal knowledge of the status of the applicant would suffice to permit the issuance of a passport."
Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Grant, June 6, 1889, MS, Inst. to Austria
- Only under exceptional circumstances should a passport be issued to a naturalized citizen without a previous inspection of his naturalization certificate. Occasionally, when the good faith of the applicant is palpable and the refusal to issue the passport might work hardship, the fact that he has lost or left behind him his certificate may not operate to cause the minister to refuse him his passport, but the circumstances of the case should be always set forth and the applicant's sworn statement of them should be required."
Jr. Adee, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Storer, min. to Belgium, July 23, 1897,
For. Rel. 1897, 25.
" You state that your predecessor issued a passport on January 11, 1875, to Mr. Hennessy, wife, and son, and that he now applies to you for a new passport, but that he is unable to present his certificate of naturalization, being of alien birth, alleging that it has been destroyed by fire. You ask for instructions as to your duty in this case and in similar applications which may come before you. In reply you are informed that the requirement that a person of alien birth shoul:1 produce his certificate of naturalization when making application for a passport is of long standing and should be carefully enforced; but sometimes, through the loss or destruction of the document, it is necessary to make an exception to the rule when the issuing official is satisfied of the good faith of the application and when its rejection might result in serions inconvenience or hardship. The nature of the secondary evidence which may be required is governed by the circumstances surrounding each case, but the general rule laid down in Mr. Bayard's instruction to Mr. Vignaud, June 13, 1888 (Foreign Relations, 1888, p. 542), appears to be applicable to the case under consideration :
“(a) The prior existence of the certificate must be shown.
“(6) If burned or otherwise destroyed, such destruction of the certificate must be proved.
"A party who can not produce his naturalization certificate can not supply it by parole proof unless he also proves that the original record of the naturalization is unattainable and can not be reproduced by a certified copy.'
“ In issuing Mr. Hennessy a passport under the conditions set forth above it would be well to advise him that for his future protection and convenience he should make an effort to have the record of his naturalization restored. As it was, according to his statement, recorded in a Chicago court, it is thought he may be able to accomplish its restoration under the burnt record act' passed by the Illinois legislature some years since for the relief of persons in Mr. Hennessy's situation."
Mr. Sherman, Sec. of State, to Mr. Storer, min. to Belgium, Sept. 1, 1897,
For. Rel. 1897, 26.
A passport was issued by the United States embassy in London to a person who stated in his application that he was born in England and emigrated to the United States, and that he was naturalized before “ a court at Boston on or about the year 1874.” He produced no certificate of naturalization, nor apparently any other proof of citizenship, but the embassy seemed to have issued the passport on the strength of the fact that he bore a circular letter of introduction from the Department of State. The Department ruled that such a letter was not evidence of citizenship.
Mr. Day, Acting Sec. of State, to Mr. White, chargé d'affaires ad interim,
Feb. 17, 1898, For. Rel. 1898, 363.
Application was made to the United States legation in Paris for a passport in the name of Stephen Emil Heidenheimer, who claimed to be a naturalized citizen of the United States. It subsequently transpired that he was naturalized in 1871, six months before he had completed the requisite term of five years' residence. It was therefore held that he was not a citizen, and that under sec. 4076, R. S., he was not entitled to a passport.
Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. McLane, min. to France, Dec. 8, 1888,
For. Rel. 1888, I. 565.
“ Does a certificate of naturalization, if properly attested, justify, ipso facto, the issue of a passport, provided identity of applicant be established?"
“A properly authenticated certificate of naturalization, issued by a court having jurisdiction, is conclusive evidence that the person named therein has been admitted to citizenship, and can only be set aside by direct proceedings to that end. Still, if it is made to appear that the naturalization of the applicant was fraudulently obtained, the Secretary of State, in the exercise of his discretion with respect to the granting of passports even to citizens, which is given him by section 4075, R. S., will refuse the applicant a passport, without reference to his rights otherwise as a citizen, until his naturalization be regularly annulled by the courts. Every applicant, however, whether native born or naturalized, in addition to his citizenship, is to be required to comply with the other regulations governing the issuance of passports."
Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Ryan, min. to Mexico, April 9, 1892, MS.
Inst. Mexico, XXIII. 203. See supra, $$ 122–425.
Where an applicant for a passport stated that he was 22 years old when he arrived in the United States, and that he was 25 when naturalized, it was held that his witnesses “must in some way have misled the court" as to his age and the duration of his residence, and that unless the matter could be cleared up he could not receive a passport.
Mr. Foster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Newberry, No. 355, July 18, 1892, MS.
Inst. Turkey, V. 367.
4. CITIZENSHIP THROUGH PARENT'S NATURALIZATION.
The applicant, when claiming citizenship through a parent's naturalization, “must state that he or she is the son or daughter, as the case may be, of the person described in the certificate of naturalization, which must be submitted for inspection, and must set forth the facts of emigration, naturalization, and residence, as required in the rule governing the application of a naturalized citizen."
Rules Governing the Granting and Issuance of Passports in the United
States, Sept. 12, 1903.
Where a person born abroad of an alien father claims citizenship through the subsequent naturalization of his father, it may be necessary for him to produce “ evidence that he himself resided in the United States at some time during minority,” since “ naturalization of the parent here does not confer citizenship on his minor children born abroad before that event and continuing to reside and attain their majority abroad."
Mr. Foster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Lincoln, min. at London, Aug. 10, 1892,
For. Rel. 1892, 233.
26, July 6, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, II. 1122.
“ It not infrequently happens that the son of a naturalized citizen of the United States secures naturalization in his own right because of the difficulty of proving his father's naturalization.”
Mr. Sherman, Sec. of State, to Mr. Storer, min. to Belgium, Sept. 18, 1897.
For. Rel. 1897, 27.
Persons claiming citizenship through the naturalization of their parents are required, when applying to the Department of State