Speech #500010125

I fear that I have not time to go into that. It will be sufficiently discussed by other gentlemen. It is enough for me to say that in that respect he did just as any other gentleman here would do. he went out among the people. he went to public meetings. and I everywhere. and wherever he went he said substantially. "I have been naturalized. fully naturalized. you elect me and I will show it." That is all he said about it. that is all there is of tht matter. He did not go into details. for what prudent man would? It was too late for explanations. too late to meet charges which might be made upon them. But I insist that you may take this record from beginning to end and you will find that all the statements proved by anybody at any time to have been made anywhere by Captain White are perfectly consistent with the truth of his statement here. There is not any doubt about it. Now. as a legal proposition (and I can only give a hurried glance at the law of this case) I insist that if Captain White appeared in the court of Allen County and did there produce the required testimony. having prior to that time made the declaration of his intention. did produce the required number of witnesses and the required proof. did have administered to him the required oath. take that oath. and did procure his certificate of naturalization and citizenship. he was a citizen. and when his citizenship was challenged it would be sufficient proof for him to produce in answer that certificate. the ordinary and proper method of proving naturalization. That being true. if the certificate be now lost and no record of it can be discovered. it is competent for him to show. as he has done. its loss and the contents of the certificate. That the contents of a lost or destroyed record may be proved by parol is a proposition which I presume will not be gainsaid. It is supported by a long and unbroken line of authorities emanating from the most respectable courts. and I know of no contrary authority. Why should not this principle and rule apply to adjudications of naturalization ? I see no reason. Therefore. if the certificate. which in the first instance would be the proper proof. be lost. and no other record be discovered. the contestee has the right to prove the loss of the certificate. as he has done. and to prove its contents. On this question I will cite a passage from Morse on Citizenship. which is quoted in the minority report. and which I think directly in point. This author. on page 128. section 92. says: In the case of an individual claiming to be a citizen by naturalization. the certificate orletter of naturalization is the usualand orderly proof which is offered. but it is not exclusive. He does not say it is not conclusive. he saysitisnot exclusive. Then he adds: If the letter or certificate is lost. and the record can not be discovered. secondary evidence to establish citizenship would be adnissible.