jU:Ahu^. IH!? ^'BR/IRV- - %a^ r^-C4j!c-r-i^ ^ ^^/f^^ Prom the Stand-Point of a United States Consul m Europe. By CHARLES A. PAGE, M. A. WASHINGTON CITY: PHILP & SOLOMONS, 1869. y ^ — -"^ iA " Ne quis invitus civitate muteter ; neve in civitale maneat invitus. Hcee sunt enim fundamenta firmissima nostrce liber tatis,sui quemque Juris et reiinendi et dimittendi esse dorninum." — Cicero, Orat. pro Balbo, cap. 13. ON T H. E NATURALIZATION QUESTION. By CHARLES A. PAGE, M. A. WASHINGTOI^, D. C, DECEBIBER 5, 1SC9. WASHINGTON, D. C: PHILP & SOLOMOi^S. 1869. /'/ [The following letter was not written for publication, but was printed in the New York Times January 18, 1869. Had it been intended for print, the writer would have been more careful as to its style ; he thinks he would have made it briefer, less diifuse, and have stated his points with less repetition and in more logical order. He does not revise it now, because he has not time. He gives a part of one day — Sunday, December 5th — to the work of throwing it into pamphlet form, supplemented, perhaps, with a few remarks suggested to him by later ex- perience. Eegretting that he is prevented fi*om a more ade- quate statement and treatment of facts, which he believes should be regarded as an important element in the consideration of the whole subject of naturalizations — a subject that, concededly, demands legislation — he has only to add here, that this reprint appears at the instance of several gentlemen especially interested in the matter. — C, A. P.] JX fFrom the New York Times, Januaiy 18, 1809.] OUR NATURALIZATION LAWS. Hoiu tliey are vieived abroad — Utter wortJdessness of naturali- zation certificates as evidence of citizenship — Consequent em- barrassments in the enforcement of the rights of property — Letter from United States Consul Page to Senator Patterson, of New Hampshire. United States Consulate, Zurich, Monday, November 30, 1868. Hon. James W. Patterson, Hanover, N. H. Dear Sir : That the respectable portion of the press should be so unanimous and so earnest in urging a reform in our system — or rather want of system — of naturalizations, seems to me to be a very hopeful fact. Moreover, I think the papers have hit on a most essen- tial feature of any reform, by pointing out with such unanimity that United States courts only should issue certificates of naturahzation. That inferior State courts should make United States citizens is an anom- aly that I never could account for ; rather, I should say, an anomaly that is so absurd on the face of it, that I wonder it has been tolerated so long. I write you this letter upon the subject of naturali- zations in order to briefly discuss it in its bearings upon our relations abroad, where some of our naturalized citi- zens are concerned. The question has lately assumed prominence at home on account of the gigantic frauds at the polls recently perpetrated under the present lax system. Hence it has been discussed, so far as I have seen, only as it affects home afl'airs. It has been abund- antly shown that the fraudulent naturalizations now practiced destro}^ the purity and sacredness of the ballot-box ; that they enable unpatriotic and unscru- pulous politicians to achieve dishonest successes ; that they lower the popular respect for the law, its ofiicers, and representatives ; that, by affording a premium upon rascality, the}^ deter honest men from taking an active part in politics, or from entering upon political careers ; that they have always inured to the benefit of the party of rebellion and repudiation, and that in the nature of the case they must always inure to the benefit of whatever party may be most disposed to enlist fraud, and cater to ignorance and depravity. Surely here are sufficient grounds for demanding a radical reform. But let me now present the case in another phase, from my stand-point as a Government ofiicer abroad. In Europe to-day our certificates of naturalization carry with them little weight. They are nearly worth- less, so far as afi^ording any recognized status, any cer- tain protection, to their holders. It is true that they are usually — not always — received in the nature of a passport, permitting transit through and temporary domicile in European countries. Custom-house offi- .cers, policemen, and gendarmes, receive them just as tliey do certificates from the authorities of the most insignificant communities, that the bearer Uves at some mentioned place. But they are not received as a badge of citizenship. All over Europe, courts of law doubt them, question them, often sneer at them, and rule them out of court! And herein is wherein a change ought to be insisted upon. It is this fact that makes the naturalized citizen, when in Europe, not the equal of a citizen born such ; the same rights and im- munities are not guarantied, at least not accorded, to him. The immense emigration from the continent to the United States leads to thousands of cases of disputed property, mainly inheritances, between naturalized citi- zens of the United States and parties on this side of the ocean. The latter are often relatives who would take advantage of a prolonged absence on the part of right- ful heirs to cheat them of inheritances, but oftener they are the authorities of the communities where the prop- erty is, and who, as my experience goes, invariably fight to the last to prevent money from being paid to persons resident out of the country. These authorities are by law the custodians and administrators of the estates of deceased persons, and they seem to me to be partial to claimants living in their own communities. Holding to the old doctrine, of "born a citizen always a citizen," which, owing to our imperfect naturalization treaties they are still able to do, they insist upon deciding all such cases on the assumption that the United States naturalized citizen is still a citizen of their community. And this works to his injury in a score of ways which I need not now detail. However, I must remark that it particularly affects 6 all questions of property where minors and trust funds are concerned. I know cases where minors born in the United States have been kept out of their rights for years, because they, as well as their deceased fath- ers, (naturalized United States citizens,) were regarded as Swiss citizens. The bar to the money being turned over at once to the legal representative of the minor is, that the said minor mcuj return to Switzerland and become, as a pauper, a charge upon the community wdiere his father, or perhaps grandfather, was born, notwithstanding he, and perhaps his father, were born in the United States ! And so the propert}- is held against such a contingenc}' — a very remote contingency it is! Without a more bona fide system of naturahzation, we cannot effect treaties with foreign powers that shall 23lace our naturalized citizens on a par with those born such. Until such treaties are effected, we do not guarantee a naturalized citizen what we pretend to do when we give him a certificate of naturalization. Mr. Bancroft's treaties, admirable as they are in many re- spects — mainly so, however, because they stamp the right of expatriation upon international law as an in- tegral part of it, and satisfactory as they are from the fact that they are a gain in the right direction, and from the fact that the}' contain about all that we can now decently ask for — do not place a naturalized citizen on anything like equality with a native-born citizen. Yet I maintain that treaties which shall do this can be negotiated with all nations whenever we will make the conversion of an alien into a citizen the well- considered, well-guarded, well-proven, weight}', and solemn thing which it ought to be, instead of the hasty, trifling, fraudulent, and farcical thing which it now is. The fault, then, does not lie with foreign authorities. We have no good ground of complaint against them. The fault lies in ourselves, that we issue certificates of naturalization loosely and (notoriously) fraudulently. So long as it is a known fact that they are sold in New York for $2 apiece, how can it be otherwise than that they are scouted at over here whenever they are ad- duced as proof of actual United States citizenship? How can we expect them to be respected so long as it is notorious that hundreds and hundreds of adven- turers hold them, who have never once set foot on our shores ? It is not a more sweeping assertion than the facts warrant, for me to say, that one-fourth, perhaps one- half, of the itinerant vagabonds, swindlers, '^confi- dence men" and "tramps," who infest Europe, carry as a part of their stock in trade certificates of United States naturalization. These imposters often escape detention as vagabonds, or, for actual offences, the prison itself, by pleading their American citizenship. Again, they bring the ntime of American citizen into bad repute, so that often worthy men, justly entitled to it, if poor and without friends on the spot, are made to suffer unjustly. I believe it to be the simple truth, that there are five times as many certificates of naturalization extant in Europe as there are naturalized citizens abroad ! Is it not a shame that rascals the world over, who have never learned a word of English, are able to clothe themselves with the toga of United States citizenship ? These rascals infest our consulates and legations. They trump up all sorts of more or less plausible stories ; but in the end they always want a gift or a loan of money, a certificate of character, a certificate in the nature of a vise of their naturalization papers, or that the consul should procure their release from some un- pleasant situation which the police have constrained them to occupy. It is a green consul who heeds their tales, yet I must confess that I have been several times imposed upon by them ; and that I am not alone in being their victim, I have evidence, in the fact that having detected one, I retained no less than seven cer- tificates of character wliich he had somehow procured from as many United States consuls, and wliich he handed me with a view to enlisting my sympathies. I also effectually rendered innocuous his certificate of naturalization, by writing a few words in red ink across a certificate to its genuineness which a United States minister had written on the back of it, to which words I added my consular seal, after which I returned to him the paper. My clerks tliereafter put him by force out of the office, and I thought I was rid of him. But the police, on the strength of my words in red ink, which they found on his person, arrested him, and sent to me to learn about him. I afterward received letters of thanks from seven United States consuls and one United States minister: from tlio former for returning the certificates the}^ had given the man, and from the latter for my having destroyed the force of the cer- tificate he had given the man. There are now pending in this consulate thirteen cases hinging upon certificates of naturalization. If these certificates were conceded the force which ought to attach to them, I need not have been called upon to intervene. Each of these cases involves property. In 9 . the end, if persistently followed up, the majority of them will doubtless be justly settled, but in every case it will be only after a vast deal of trouble, and "the law's delay," which would be avoided were there a settled system of adjudication in such cases, based upon a just naturalization treaty, which could be nego- tiated, if we had decent naturalization laws decently enforced. One feature of several of these cases is most remark- able. It is that the heirs in the United States are considered here as illegitimate children, and therefore not entitled to the property, and are declared illegiti- mate because the father, a naturalized United States citizen, did not notify the authorities of the community where he was born of the fact that he was going to get married, or because he failed to have the birth, names, and baptisms of his children registered in the church records of his native parish. The remedy and cure for all of these scandalous things is to be looked for, and I trust may be speedily found, in what I have already suggested, viz., a national naturalization law, uniform in all the States, and ad- ministered by United States courts only. The authorities, large and small, of all Europe are ready to concede the right of expatriation and natural- ization, but they justly demand that we shall give proper proof of the fact. Since Columbus was the first American "carpet-bagger," the feudal doctrine of the inalienability of citizenship has been growing more and more untenable, until it is now become absurd. So that does not stand in the way. And with a treaty- stipulated right of a man to change his allegiance will come a practical concession, in every possible case, on 10 the part of the foreign authorities, from policemen to prime ministers, of the fact that naturalized citizens "are, and of right ouglit to be," on a par with citizens native born. Here let me suggest some things that ought to be made law by Congress. An alien desiring to become a United States citizen should first make written application to the United States authorities charged with naturalizations, that he wishes to be naturalized. His application should be supported by affidavits as to identity and period of residence in the United States, and there should be a minute description of his person incorporated in his naturalization certificate, so minute that for a score of years nobody else could possibly personate him. These affidavits and the descri[)tion of person should be filed in a United States court, open to public in- spection, and to counter-affidavits, at least a month before the certificate of naturalization should issue. He should not vote at any election within a 3^ear after such certificate is issued. Thejact of any naturaliza- tion^ together with a copy of the new citizen^ s applica- tion, of his oath of allegiance to the United States, (for- swearing allegiance to his native country,) of the de- scription of his person — i]i short, copies of all the papers in the case — should be certified to the Secretary of State, to be filed in the Department of State. The Secretary of State should transmit certified copies of all these to the United States minister accredited to the coun- try whence the new citizen emigrated, with instructions that the minister should notify the Government of such country of the fact of such naturalization, at the same time handing to it cojnes of the papers in the case, as 11 showing %u arrant for the naturalization. This certifica- tion to the other country luoidd be but decent interna- tional courtesy. If we take a citizen of Switzerlancl^ or a subject of Prussia, and transform him in a twink- ling into a full-fledged citizen of the United States of America, surely it is but a polite, proper, a7id fair thing to notify the other nation concerned of the fact ! At present we fling insults into the face of other nations, by the outrageous way in ivhich ive per?nit our certifi- cates of naturalization — signed, in blank and by the ream — to pass into circulation, as things to be purchased in the market, and at so cheap a rate that anyliody can afford the luxury. They are right when they refuse to accept such trash as proof of United States citizenship. Again, if the record of every naturalization were on fie in the Department of State, and at the capital of the other nation concerned, it would be of vast benefit, as a thing of reference and evidence in controversies, luhere the issues involve the cpiestion of citizenship and allegiance. At present there are a multitude of suck controversies constantly arising, always pending, almost never settled. Of course a majority of these are never heard of in the United States, for it is in foreign coun- tries that they arise, before foreign authorities that they are presented, and it is by these that they are decided. Now, under the system that I suggest, such ques- tions would very seldom arise, and any and all that would come up would be speedil}^ and satisfactorily adjudicated, I hardly need to add, that the system would be a God-send to United States consuls. It would not only relieve them of much vexation and embar- rassment, by lessening the number of instances where they are asked to intervene, but also by giving them 12 solid ground on which to stand, either in refusing to intervene, or, where warranted, in pressing their in- tervention. The Republican party has many and strong incen- tives for inaugurating the reform demanded. Among them are — that it would be for the general welfare ; that it would be a great boon to naturalized citizens, since it would tend to a better protection to them outside of United States jurisdiction ; and, again, that it would be a great stroke of party policy and foresight, since it would make more assured its future triumphs at the polls. Its ascendency, as a party, is at stake, because it has not had the wisdom, the cour- age, or the time to face, master, and adjust this question. Had Congress seen to it five years ago, New York would now be a Republican city, and cities like Chicago would not be in such imminent peril of going over to the enemy. One would suppose that these considerations would appeal irresistibly to every Republican member of Congress. Besides, there is a fine chance for something better than spread-eagle buncombe for such members as have a super-sufficiency of w^ordy eloquence. Let such de- scant on the sanctity of the ballot-box and on the practicability, by making naturahzations bona fide, of properly.protecting naturalized citizens the world over. Indeed, if the name of "American citizen '' is the proud thing we are in the habit of flattering ourselves it is — if it be the modern equivalent of the old " Civis Romanus sum,"' — we should guarantee its possessor the security and dignity which belong to such a title. Judicious legislation upon the question will not alienate from the party any portion of the "foreign 13 vote." All intelligent naturalized citizens will hold their acquired citizenship as a thing of more worth than they do now. Nor will a stricter law, with stricter enforcement, be obnoxious to the intelligent among aliens who may desire to become citizens. They will see that it will enhance their dignity at home and their dignity and security abroad. Moreover — and this luould Biveeten the dose to the congressional palate, and insure its easier acceptance by the stomach of the great public — with a better-guarded system, we could well afford to dispense ivith one or tiuo years of the period of previous residence in the country now required, and to dispense alto- gether with the declaration of intention to become a citizen. I had no thought of writing at such length when I began. And yet I have but imperfectly touched upon such branches of the subject as I thought to write about, while I have allowed myself to refer to some that I did not intend to treat of. If I did not hope that some of the suggestions I make would be of use, I would not write at all on the subject. Yours, very truly, CiiAS. A. Page, United States Consul. The following communication appeared in the New York Times the succeeding day. It explains itself, and since it bears directly upon the subject in hand, is incorporated here : The Imvs of Naturalization in this country and in Switzerland — Letter from the Swiss Consul. No. 23 John St., Wednesday, Jan. 19, 1869. To the Editor of the New York Times: In your valuable paper of yesterday I have read an interesting letter of Charles A. Page, Esq., United 14 States consul at Zurich, Allow me to make a few observations. Respecting the laws of naturalization in the United States I cannot take the liberty to make any observa- tions, being myself still an alien. Only one thing has always struck me as curious : it is the wording of the declaration paper, generally called first paper, by which an alien declares his intention to become a citi- zen of the United States, and is at the same time obliged by oath to renounce allegiance to his own country ; and as he can only become a citizen of the United States two years after this declaration, may I ask you to what nation he belongs during those two years? De facto, during those two years he belongs to no nation, and is what we call in Switzerland a "Heimaths lose." It appears to me that the alien, in making his declaration, should only promise that he would renounce allegiance to his own country when he has really been admitted a citizen of the United States. Mr. Page is right when he says that a Swiss citizen remains always a Swiss citizen, even when naturalized in a foreign country ; but he has a right to renounce his own country by a speciai act of renunciation, which must be recorded in Switzerland. I am aware that there are often claims made in Swit- zerland by descendants of Swiss citizens deceased in the United States, and which claims are sometimes dis- puted when the marriage of their parents had not been regularly admitted and recorded in the parish in Swit- zerland to which they belonged, and even the birth of the children ought to have been registered in Switzer- land. This arises from an old institution existing in Switzerland called "Bourgeoisie," say community, an institution unknown in the United States. Every Swiss belongs to a Bourgeoisie, and has the right, in case of misfortune or old age, when poor, to be maintained by said community, and on that account marriages of Swiss citizens in a foreign country are not always recognized ; 15 at all events, tliey must, as a general rule, be allowed by the authorities of the community to which they belong, and to obtain said consent many formalities are often required to be made, which formalities are so troublesome that many Swiss citizens prefer not to make them. The legalization of a certificate of marriage by a Swiss consul proves only that the marriage is legal in the foreign country v/ here the marriage has taken place, but does not bind the authorities in Switzerland to con- sent to it. No doubt many hardships may be the con- sequence of these laws to legal heirs in the United States, but Switzerland has the right to make her own laws, and the great facility given in the United States to contract marriage (often improvident marriages) without consent of papa or mamma, and especially the late decision given in a court in this State in a cele- brated law- suit respecting the validity of a marriage, will not, I believe, induce the government of Switzer- land to change its laws, always fearing that in course of time many paupers would return to Switzerland and become a heavy expense on the Bourgeoisie. Please to accept the assurance of my high considera- tion, your obedient servant, Ls. Ph. De Luze, Consul of Siuitzerland at New York. "Historicus," (Vernon Harcourt, M. P.,) the noted contributor to the London Times, forcibly remarked, when discussing the subject of citizenship, as follows : "Before the American Government can urge any de- ' mands against foreign governments they have a good * deal to do at home. They have first to settle forthem- * selves a law of expatriation for their own subjects, ' which at present they do not possess. When they ' have done this, they will at all events not be open to ' the retort, ' Physician, heal thyself.' But there is a yet 16 ' more material point which they have to settle, and that is * the question of their own citizenship. The ivhole of the ' American law of citizenship is in a state of inextricable ' confusion J ^ The justness of the first part of this quotation may be questioned, but that portion of it which the writer hereof itaUcizes is only too true. The subjoined extract from a circular, dated Oct. 14, 1869, addressed by the Secretary of State to diplo- matic agents and consuls, clearly presents a branch of the subject, and seems to be pertinent in this con- nection, especially as it treats of what might be termed. lap>sed citizenship : ' ' The official action of the representatives of the ' United States may also be asked in foreign lands in ' favor of natives thereof who have been naturalized ' in the United States. Should passports or other pro- ' tection be asked for by such persons, it will be the duty ' of the officer to satisfy himself that they have done ' nothing to forfeit their acquired rights. For a natu- ' ralized citizen may, by returning to his native coun- ' try and residing there with an evident intent to re- ' main, or by accepting offices there inconsistent with ' his adopted citizenship, or by concealing for a length ' of time the fact of his naturalization and passing ' himself as a citizen or subject of his native country, ' until occasion may make it his interest to ask the ' intervention of the country of his adoption, or in ' other ways which may show an intent to abandon his ' acquired rights, so far resume his original allegiance, as * to absolve the government of his adopted country from ' the obligation to protect him as a citizen while he ' remains in his native land. ' Cautious scrutiny is enjoined in such cases, because ' evidence has been accumulating in this department 17 for some years, that many aliens seek naturalization in the United States without any design of subjecting themselves by permanent residence to the duties and burdens of citizenship, and solely for the purpose of returning to their native country and fixing their domicile and pursuing business therein, relying on such naturalization to evade the obligations of citi- zenship to the country of their native allegiance and actual habitation. To allow such pretensions would be to tolerate a fraud upon both the governments, enabling a man to enjoy the advantages of two na- tionalities and to escape the duties and burdens of each.'' The Secretary apparently had more especially in view the avoidance of diplomatic complications be- tween nations, while the writer thought particularly of abuses of naturalizations abroad, which, seldom lead- ing to diplomatic action, affect only individuals — and our national reputation. Nor do the writer's observa- tions show that any proportion of those holding certifi- cates of naturalization, which should not be regarded, obtained them solely with a view to returning to their native country, and by their aid escaping its burdens. Most never expected to return, yet have done so. Again, the Secretary does not specify fraudulently obtained naturalization papers, (other than the fraud of intent to return,) nor the cases where a certificate was rightfully obtained, but is now held by another person than the one to whom it was issued. The fact that there are countless instances of double or interchangeable citizenship, and consequent "fraud upon both governments,'' is palpable to every United States consul in Europe who has eyes, and most consuls required such instructions for daily guidance ; the more 2 18 so as what has been called above "la[)sed citizenship'' is a thing little understood. Indeed, when and where has it ever before been authoritatively promulgated? The doctrine so well stated in the extract, that adopted citizenship may lapse without any declaration of renunciation by the individual, no one can doubt to be sound ; but should not legislation as well as Depart- ment instructions define to what extent and in what instances it should obtain? Would not such legisla- tion render more easy the negotiation of corresponding treaty stipulations ? Ought not there to be some tribunal to decide when any citizenship has lapsed? Would it not be well that United States consuls, when it comes to their knowl- edge that an adopted citizen, by reason of any of the circumstances stated above, has ceased to have any claim upon his adopted government, should so report, and the fact be declared by competent authority? In short, is it not practicable, somehow, to have a record somewhere, a bare reference to which shall de- termine to what country a man owes allegiance, and make it possible to hold him and limit him to only one allegiance at a time? But this cannot be done so long as certificates of naturalization are so cheap. To conclude, in a nut-shell, let there be a natural- ization law enacted that shall reduce to the minimum fraudulent naturalizations, and let it further provide, that each naturalization shall he of record in the Department of State, and he notijied to the other government concerned. If it is objected that the two features specified would be too cumbersome and expensive, the reply is, that it would not be a difficult thing to organize and adminis- ter a system based upon them, which system should 19 involve no new officials other than a few additional clerks in the State Department, and that no amount of expense that it could possibly involve should for an instant stand against its adoption, if thereby any of the good results which it is believed would follow should be attained. ^ ^ THE LIBRARY ^^6S UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA J^ -J Santa Barbara THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW. lU OCTl 51997 12 Series 9482