Chairman. I think anyone would have to oppose this bill in its present form in spite of the fact that it has a very good purpose. It has mixed up deportation and naturalization. They stand on entirely different principles. Deportation ought. in courtesy. to be done only by treaty. especially with our allies. but even on deportation this bill has been drawn so that it only deports men who belong to a nation that is at war with Germany and bars from entry only those who are subject to military service. The effect of that is odd. An Englishman would be barred because he is subject to military service. an Irishman wouldnot. be. cause he is not subject to military service. A Canadian. as long as he is not subject to military service. would not be barred. neither would an Australian or a New Zealander. but you send- a Frenchman or an Italian or an Englishman back. Thoseare the only ones who would be barred from entry under the third section. And again. if there are enemy subjects here they are now given full power to stay here and do as they please and they vill not be deported. they can not be. in fact. We have not got the tonnage to deport. and "as soon as practicable" means after the war. and that provision ought to be left out. It is amenable to objection and is objected to by the State Department. The other part of this bill. to bar those who claim exemption from naturalization. nobody can object to. neither the State Department nor any foreign country. This bill would say that an Englishman or Frenchman or Italian who comes from countiies that are really fighting and have military service shall not be naturalized. Now. there is a broad principle. If there are any men in this country. even enemy subjects.
Keywords matched
naturalized deports Deportation naturalization deported deportation