There is certainly nothing in that case that looks like fraud. wrong. or injustice. In another case a motion for new trial was made on the ground of the alleged want of citizenship of the claimant. The evidence produced in support of the motion is a statement of the claimants wife that claimant. who is now dead. was born in Canada. and that she does not know that he was ever naturalized. The facts show that the claimant came to this country when very young (a minor. it is said). and that he resided here continuously for a long perioduntil his death. I believe. Since the motion for new trial was made evidence from the records of the Land Office has been filed in the case showing that the claimant received a patent for land. In order to obtain such patent proof of citizenship is required. and this proof was made prior to the date of the depredation. Nevertheless. it is claimed that evidence of naturalization must be shown in order to have the motion for a new trial dismissed. It is. of course. impossible in most cases to get such proof at this late day. and it seems a great hardship that anything of the kind should be thought necessary. particularly as the laws in force at the time the proof of the depredation was filed in the Interior Department and at the date of the depredation did not require proof of citizenship. but only that the claimant was an inhabitant. There is. however. another reason why some action by Congress is almost absolutely necessary to prevent a complete denial of justice.
Keywords matched
naturalized naturalization