Speech #500010051

BARRY. The Monday before the election in 1886 the contestee went to Warsaw. Kosciusko County. and took out naturalization papers renouncing all allegiance to Queen Victoria and other foreign governments. and taking the oath of allegiance to the United States. yet now he comes up and says he proposes to contradict that record and to show that he was naturalized on or about the 25th day of February. 1865. That. is what he attempts to establish by parol. Now. I will read from a case in 2 Abbotts U. S. Reports: The proceeding to obtain naturalization is clearly a judicial one. A hearing is required to be had in open court. and the right can be conferred only by the judgment of the court on satisfactory proof. This case is also relied upon by the contestee. I invite the attention of the House now to read a very wellconsidered case. that of Charles Greens Sons against Salas. reported in the Federal Law Reporter. In that case there was a certificate of naturalization in the district court of the United States Ibr the southern district of Georgia. That certificate was presented. but what did the court say? I read: In other words. was there a judgment admitting Raymond Salasto American citizenship? In the absence of proof of the loss or destruction of a record (and there is no pertinent proof of that here) the method of proving the record is by the record itself or .n extract from it. The certificate of the clerk in itself is neither such evidence nor such extract. it is a recital of what he thinks he has done. And the court held that naturalization could not be proved in that way. I refer the House also to the ease of Miller vs. Reinhart. 18 Georgia. where the identical question here came up. In that case the party presented his certificate of final admission to citizenship. and the court held thatProceedings of naturalization have to be reeorded-"wh ich proceedingsshall be recorded by the clerk of the court." is the language of the act of Congress on the subject. The certificate does not give the words of any part of the record. The certilicate seems to be a statement of what. in the clerks opinion. is the legal import or effect of the different particulars of which the record may consist. In this case there was presented a certificate signed by the clerk of a court of record. but the court held that it was not evidence to prove naturalization. In the case now under discussion no certificate has been exhibited to the committee orsubmitted in testimony. I read here from Hills New York Reports. volume 7. page 138: There must be an application for admission to the right of citizenship. made in due form to one of the courts indicated in tihe acts of Congress on the subject. The application must be supported by legal proof of the facts on which it rests. The proceedings are strictly judicial. * * * The right of citizenship is finally conferred by the judgment of the court. This judgientean only be rendered when the court has become satisfied that all the conditions of naturalization have been complied with. By the first section of the act of April 14. 1802. aliens are to be admitted as citizens on tile conditions specilied. "and not otherwise." The court. therefore. must. in the hiinguage of tbe act. be" satisfied " that all these conditions have been complied with. that tile residence of the applicant anid his behav~r have been such as the law requires. and that his attachment to our form of government is firm and sincere. These are imperative duties resting upon the court. which can not be evaded or overlooked.