Speech #440033552

In the opening clause of the third subdivision of this section there is the first glimpse of desirable legislation of a nature that has been wanting and should be supplied. but it is so crude and incorrect in terms that it should be amended. It reads: Thirdly. The following persons shall be regarded as not subject to the jurisdietien of the United States within the intent of the said fourteenth amendment. er as not residing within the United States. within such intent. namely: First. citizens of the United States who become naturalized as citizens or subject of another state. or who in any foreign country enter into the civil. naval. or military service of any foreign prince or state. or of any colony. district. or people foreign to the United Stares. while such service continues. There is a fundamental error and misdirection of meaning in the use of the words "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." as here quoted in the bill from the fourteenth amendment. In the Slaughterhouse cases the Supreme Court say: The phrase was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers. cansols. and citizens or subjeets of foreign states born within the United States. From this authoritative interpretation it follows that the words in the fourteenth amendment. "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." have no reference whatever to those persons who by birth or naturalization are constitutionally and legally citizens of the United States. The reference to this proviso has logically no place in this bill. which deals with the rights of citizens only. and not with the rights of those who are specially excepted by this proviso from becoming such citizens. That persons on becoming naturalized elsewhereor entering the publie service of any foreign power should cease tobe citizensof theUnited States is perfectly right and proper. and a declaratory act to that effect should ave been passed long ago. Bitt this clauseof the pending bill does not say so. and in that it falls short of being satisfactory. It only declares them " not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." which of course would deprive them of all right to protection.while they are abroad. hut leaves their citizenship in aheyance. and to revive mn case of their return to the United States. And here is the wrong in the bill. A citizen of the United States becoming naturalized in another country has left us. he has abjured his allegiance to the Republic. and has assumed the relation of a citizen or subject to another power. He. thereby has hecome an alien to the United States. the same as if he had been an alien throughout life. We have no claims upon him. and he has none upon us. Should he return to this country. desirous to resume his lost citizenship. the way stands open to him. as to every other alien. in the process prescribed by our naturalization laws. Those who take public office in foreign states place themselves in the same category. They must necessarily take an oath of allegiance to the sovereign or state that employs them. and as no man can be assumed to owe allegiance to two nationalities at the same time. they deprive themselves by their own act of their American citizenship. thus accepting voluntarily the status of aliens to the United States. They also may again be naturalized here. by going through the same proceedings in court as other aliens. This is the American doctrine of the effect of naturalization. The rule so lucidly laid down by General Cass. that a znative of Germany. naturalized in the United States. when returning to the country of his birth. returns there as an American citizen and iu no other capacity. is the only true guide in this question. and should be avplied to our own people also. When a native of the United States is naturalized in France. wt hn returning to the country of his birth. he returlns hero asa French citizen and inno othercapacity. Let usexact observance of thiq rule on both sides and we shall be right and will need no such questionable legislation as is proposed in this bill. 7. The "thirdly" of this thlird subdivision of section 2 brings up the deeper and wider question. whether the "naturalization treaties." especially those with the German states. are to be sustained as wise and politic. This clause deprives of the protection of the United States ".iaturalized citizons of the IJuited States who may by the terms of any traty be regarded as having resumed their original nationtality. The adoption of this clause would be tantamount to a legislative approval of the treaties themselves by the House.