I did. What are the facts ? Peterson was near the court. he never had declared his intention to become a naturalized citizen and had never obtained his first papers. and he did not come to this country during his minority. Ho had applied to be naturalized and had been refused. a man whom he has never seen before says to him. "I will furnish the requisite proof to establish that you are entitled to your naturalization papers. I will go before the court and swear that you were a residenthere at so early a period of your minority as to entitle you to naturalization papers." Thecy repair to the court. the peijury is coaciittod . and Peterson secures his papers from the court and upon them votes. There is no dispute about the facts. This man Peterson. upon the stand as a witness. testifies to them with great frankness. It is said that there is no precedent before the House for rejecting such a vote as this. I ask the majority here if they will establish the precedent that fraudulent naturalization papers. procured by false evidence from witnesses conmitting perjury. are to entitle men to vote and the right of citizens? There is no question that this man was not entitled to citizenship. no question that his papers were fraudulent. still you are told because there is no precedent in the traditions of this House for rejecting his vote you will not reject and make a precedent. I supposed.
Keywords matched
naturalized naturalization