tion and particularly its relation to diplomatic protection abroad, will be discussed in the course of the present Part of this treatise.

Besides the customary method of naturalization involving a declaration of intention, a petition for naturalization, a fixed period (usually five years) of residence, a compliance with certain qualifications as to age, education, and moral character, the renunciation of any order of nobility or hereditary title and the oath of allegiance and renunciation of prior allegiance, the statutes of the United States provide for other methods of acquiring citizenship. Thus, children who are minors at the time of their parent's naturalization become citizens if dwelling in the United States.1 Alien women who marry American citizens thereby acquire American citizenship.2 An honorably discharged soldier, of age, may be admitted to citizenship upon his petition, without any declaration of intention, on proving one year's prior residence in the United States. An honorably discharged sailor in the Navy, of age, may be admitted to citizenship without a declaration of intention, after a consecutive service of five years.4 The widow and minor children of an alien who dies after declaring his intention but before becoming naturalized may, by complying with certain provisions of the Act of June 29, 1906, become naturalized without making a declaration of intention. Finally, Congress may by private Act admit an alien to citizenship.

5

(latest edition dated Dec. 19, 1914); to Van Dyne, F., A treatise on the law of naturalization of the U. S., Washington, 1907; to Webster, P., Law of naturalization in the U. S. and of other countries, Boston, 1895; and to H. Doc. 326, 59th Cong., 2nd sess., 80 et seq. For early history of naturalization, see ibid. 8 et seq.; Moore's Dig. III, 297 et seq.; and to Shear, J. C., Syllabus-digest of decisions under the law of naturalization, Sept. 1906 to Aug., 1913, Collingswood, 1913.

1 R. S., § 2172. As to what is "dwelling in the U. S.," see In re Palagnano, 38 Fed. 580, In re Gayde, 113 Fed. 588, and Van Dyne, Naturalization, 82, 197 et seq. But see In re Di Simone, 108 Fed. 942, reversed by In re Gayde.

2 R. S., § 1994. Section 4 of the Act of March 2, 1907; Van Dyne, Naturalization, 227 et seq. Infra, § 264.

3 R. S., § 2166.

4 Act of July 26, 1894, 28 Stat. L. 124.

* Act of June 29, 1906, § 4, par. 6. Section 2167, R. S., which permitted minor residents under certain circumstances to dispense with the declaration of intention has been repealed by the Act of 1906, owing to the many frauds perpetrated under the so-called "minor's clause."

Act of Feb. 23, 1915, admitting to citizenship George Edward Lerrigo; see Hear

It has been held that imperfect or defective naturalization cannot confer rights to American citizenship or diplomatic protection.1 The limited passport granted by the Secretary of State in his discretion to those who have declared their intention to become citizens and who have resided three years in the United States may be considered a slight modification of this principle.2

§ 199. Naturalized Citizens Abroad.

4

Although prior to 1868 naturalized citizens of the United States had on numerous occasions secured the active diplomatic interposition of the government in their behalf equally with native citizens, it was not until the Act of July 27, 1868 (15 Stat. L. 224) that Congress gave formal legislative expression to the obligation of the United States to extend the same protection abroad to naturalized as to native citizens. The immediate occasion of the law was the arrest of certain naturalized citizens by the authorities of their parent countrieswhich adhered to the doctrine of indefeasible allegiance for nonperformance of military service. The United States has experienced much difficulty and in some cases indeed has met with failure in extending equal protection to native and naturalized citizens, inasmuch as the views and attitude of foreign governments with regard to expatriation and the obligations of their former subjects and citizens to their native country vary greatly, as will be seen hereafter. While the United States has concluded numerous naturalization treaties defining the status of naturalized citizens of a particular national. origin, on their return to their native countries, the unwillingness of many countries to conclude naturalization treaties has made imings before House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, May 7 and 21, 1914.

1 For. Rel., 1887, 190 et seq.; For Rel., 1885, 849 et seq.; H. Doc. 326, 59th Cong., 2nd sess., 209.

2 Infra, p. 501.

3 That provision of the Act, now embodied in § 2000 of the Revised Statutes reads: "All naturalized citizens of the United States, while in foreign countries, are entitled to and shall receive from this Government the same protection of person and property which is accorded to native-born citizens." See also Morse on Citizenship, § 134. 4 See a brief account of the historical and political setting of the Act in S. Doc. 326, 59th Cong., 2nd sess., pp. 10-13.

possible of complete execution the legislation of Congress looking to the equal treatment of naturalized American citizens everywhere. In fact, the frequency of cases in which naturalization in the United States was obtained merely for purposes of securing American protection while residing more or less permanently abroad led Congress in 1906 and in 1907 to differentiate between native and naturalized citizens by providing, among other things, that when any naturalized citizen shall, within five years after the issuance of his naturalization certificate, take permanent residence in his native or any other foreign state, the Department of Justice may institute proceedings to cancel his certificate,' and that "when any naturalized citizen shall have resided for two years in the foreign state from which he came, or for five years in any other foreign state it shall be presumed that he has ceased to be an American citizen."2 While this provision merely raises a rebuttable presumption, having effect only during the foreign residence of the naturalized citizen, it has served on many occasions to relieve the United States from the duty to protect this type of undesirable citizen. Great Britain has avoided many annoying diplomatic controversies with the countries to which her naturalized subjects originally owed allegiance and which still claim it, by providing that a naturalized and a natural-born British subject shall be entitled to the same rights and privileges, "with the qualification, that [a naturalized subject] shall not, when within the limits of the foreign state of which he was a subject previously to obtaining his certificate of naturalization, be deemed to be a British subject unless he has ceased to be a subject of that state in pursuance of the laws thereof or in pursuance of a treaty to that effect," 3 which clause is printed on passports issued to naturalized subjects.

Strictly speaking, the third general category of citizens, namely, those endowed with citizenship by reason of annexation of territory, constitute a special class of naturalized citizens. Citizenship thus conferred may be called collective naturalization, and this method

1 Act of June 29, 1906, § 15, 34 Stat. L. 601.

2 Act of Mar. 2, 1907, § 2. These provisions of the acts of 1906 and 1907 will be more fully examined hereafter.

The Naturalization Act, 1870, § 7. This provision is omitted from the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act, 1914.

1

is exemplified by the admission of new states into the Union, or by acquisition of territory by treaty, purchase or conquest. This last class of American citizens has been greatly increased recently by the acquisition of Porto Rico and the Philippines. While the inhabitants of these insular possessions have been held not to be citizens in the constitutional sense of the word, they are American nationals in the international sense,2 and as such entitled to the protection abroad of the United States.3

§200. Citizenship Usually Essential to Protection.

Citizenship is usually an essential condition of diplomatic protection. In the matter of the presentation and enforcement of international claims, no rule is more strictly observed. Thus, protocols for the arbitration of general claims usually provide for the adjudication of claims on the part of corporations, companies, or private individuals, citizens of the United States, against the other government, party to the arbitration. International commissions and the Department of State have on many occasions laid down such rules as the following: 4 a claim must be national in origin and at the time of presentation, and continuously national in ownership; 5 the direct beneficiaries of an award must be citizens; the claim of a foreigner against a foreign.

1 See the discussion of judicial determinations of these questions in H. Doc. 326, 59th Cong., 2nd sess., 153–159 and 72. On collective naturalization, see also Moore's Dig. III, §§ 379, 380; Van Dyne, Naturalization, 265–332.

2 Our new peoples; citizens, subjects, nationals or aliens, by F. R. Coudert, Jr., 3 Columbia L. Rev. (1903), 13-32; American citizenship by D. O. McGovney, 11 Columbia L. Rev. (1911), 231-250, 326–347; Decisions cited in H. Doc. 326, 59th Cong., 2nd sess., 72-73. The same relation between the constitutional and international aspects of nationality arises in most countries possessing colonial dependencies. See Sargent, E. B., British citizenship, London, 1912, and same author in No. 31 (July, 1914), Journ. of the Soc. of Comp. Leg. 327-336.

3 Circular of May 2, 1899, For. Rel., 1900, 894; Act of Apr. 12, 1900, 31 Stat. L. 77 (for Porto Rico), Act of July 1, 1902, 32 Stat. L. 692 (for Philippines), and Act of June 14, 1902, 32 Stat. L., I, 386, amending § 4076, R. S., providing for protection and issuance of passports to the inhabitants of our insular possessions. Moore's Dig. III, 315-318, 874-878.

6

These rules will be more carefully examined hereafter.
Infra, §§ 306 et seq.

I. e., under the general form of protocol above mentioned. See Burthe v. Denis, 133 U. S. 514, reversing Succession of de Circé, 41 La. Ann. 506.

government cannot be nationalized by assignment to an American citizen, or by the naturalization of its owner.1 Numerous questions of citizenship which have had to be determined by international commissions and the Department of State in connection with claims to diplomatic protection will be considered in this Part under appropriate sections.

§ 201. Occasional Protection of Foreigners.

Notwithstanding the general rule so strictly enforced by claims commissions, there have been a few cases in which foreigners have received awards from domestic commissions. Perhaps the most famous of these cases occurred under the Acts of Congress of 1874 and 1882 establishing the first and second court of commissioners of Alabama claims, for the distribution of the Geneva award paid by Great Britain to the United States. The Act of June 23, 1874 provided (§ 12) that no claims should be allowed "arising in favor of any person not entitled at the time of his loss to the protection of the United States in the premises." Under this provision, unnaturalized foreigners, except British subjects, who were excluded on special grounds,2 were permitted to come within the benefits of the Act. For example, aliens shipping goods on American vessels during the rebellion, or employed as seamen on vessels owned and registered in the United States (except British subjects) were held to be entitled to "the protection of the United States." 3 The second Alabama Claims court, established by the Act of June 5, 1882, held, however, that the protection of the United States extended to British subjects serving on American vessels and to the American owners of goods shipped on a British vessel.5 But the London Lloyds association of underwriters were held not entitled to the protection of the United States.

* Worth v. U. S., No. 91, Davis' Report, Washington, 1877, p. 35. 'Davis' Report, 105; Rodocanochi Sons & Co. v. U. S., Moore's Arb. 2359; Morse on Citizenship, § 178, p. 218. See the interesting case of Schreiber and Meyer v. U.S., where naturalization of a German in British East India was held only qualified British naturalization and hence did not exclude claimant from the benefits of the Act. Davis' Rep. 105, Moore's Arb. 2350, Morse, § 178. 'Cassidy v. U. S., No. 144, Moore's Arb. 4672.

'The Pacific Mills v. U. S., No. 793, class 2, ibid. 4673. 6 Bischoff et al. v. U. S., No. 5693, class 1, ibid. 4672.