I refer to the Swinburne case. decided by the supreme court of West Virginia. the opinion being delivered by the president of that court. Judge Green. who is. in my opinion. one of the brightest ornaments of which the judiciary of this country can boast. It was alleged that Swinburne. who was an alien. had been naturalized in the circuit court of Kanawha County. Virginia. now West Virginia. in 1856 or 1857. There was no record of it. Parol evidence was offered to prove naturalization. Judge Green. delivering the opinion of all the judges. said: I have thus far. as did the county court of Kanawha. considered this case as if all this parol evidence introduced by the defendant as tending to prove that in 1S50 or 1857 Ralph Swinburne was naturalized before the circuit court of Kanawha was admissible. but it seems to me clear that none of this evidence was admissible. It had. when viewed in its legal aspect. no tendency even to prove wha. it was introduced to prove. The naturalization of a foreigner is. by the laws of the United States. a proceeding in a court of record in which the court. upon certain facts being satisfactorily proven and a certain oath taken by the applicant. by its judgment declares that the alien is admitted to be a citizen. (See Rev. Stats. of U. S.. 2d edition. see. 2165.) If the records of this court at the time when it is claimed that an alien was thus admitted to citizenship is produced and shows that he was not only not so admitted but not admitted at all. how can any parol evidence on any conceivable legal principle be admitted to prove a fact which it is conclusively shown can not possibly exist?
Keywords matched
naturalized naturalization