within two years, I am satisfied, as was the consul-general, that there is no such intent as is contemplated by the regulations. If so instructed by the Department a passport can be issued with the warning that it will not be renewed on its expiration if the applicant remains abroad. Miss Pecare is, however, leaving Switzerland, and as a proviso such as the above-mentioned does not appear on the passport, it would probably be easy to secure a renewal elsewhere. I have, etc. No. 27.] ARTHUR S. HARDY. Mr. Hay to Mr. Hardy. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 28, 1902. SIR: Your No. 43 of the 13th instant relative to the application of Helena Pecare for a passport has been received. Under the circumstances detailed in the dispatch your refusal to grant the passport to Miss Pecare has the Department's approval. I am, etc., JOHN HAY. PASSPORT APPLICATION OF BERTHA KNOPF. No. 55.] Mr. Hardy to Mr. Hay. UNITED STATES LEGATION, SIR: I have the honor to report that I have refused an application for a passport made by Mrs. Bertha Knopf under the circumstances set forth below. On August 22, 1895, passport No. 251 was issued to one Dr. Leo Knopf on an application in which he declared he was born in New York on December 2, 1870, his father being a naturalized citizen of the United States, and that he intended to return to the United States within three or four years. He was the bearer of passport No. 1812, issued November 1, 1892, by the legation in Berlin, and desired its renewal for the purpose of finishing his studies. His wife's name and that of his son Richard, born at Altdorf, January 13, 1895, were inserted in passport No. 251. On June 9, 1898, his wife, Bertha Knopf, called at the legation and explained to Mr. Leishman that her husband had left Switzerland, taking with him the passport No. 251 issued as above by Mr. Broadhead, leaving her and her children without money or identification papers. She was accompanied by Dr. Schmid, national councilor of Altdorf, who vouched for the truth of her statements. On these statements and the production of her marriage certificate and the birth cirtificates of her two children, and her declaration to go to the United States (where she had never been) within two years, passport No. 156 was issued her on June 9, 1898. She was then informed that she must not count upon a renewal. On April 12 instant she applied for a renewal through the Zurich consulate, but was unable to declare her intention to go to the United States within any definite time. Copies of Mr. Lieberknecht's letter accompanying her application and of my reply thereto are inclosed herewith. Mr. Lieberknecht wrote again on April 16 instant. A copy of his letter and of my reply declining to renew are also inclosed. Should the reasons set forth in Mr. Lieberknecht's letter, or the statements made in Mrs. Knopf's last letter appealing against my decision, seem in the view of the Department sufficient to warrant the issue of a passport I would ask to be so instructed. Without such instruction I do not see my way clear to do so. I have, etc., [Inclosure 1.] ARTHUR S. HARDY. Mr. Lieberknecht to Mr. Hardy. UNITED STATES CONSULATE, DEAR SIR: Inclosed please find application for passport of Bertha Knopf, together with her old passport. She married an American citizen, and her husband left her without any papers whatsoever. He is a fugitive from justice, and she does not know whether he is alive or dead. Reports have reached her that he committed suicide, but she has no positive proof of this fact. What proof she has furnished that her husband is an American citizen I do not know, but the facts are recorded at your legation. Yours, respectfully, A. LIEBERKNECHT, Consul. [Inclosure 2.] Mr. Hardy to Mr. Lieberknecht. UNITED STATES LEGATION, Berne, April 15, 1902. SIR: Inclosed please find returned the passport application of Mrs. Bertha Knopf, and her expired passport, "canceled." It appears that Mrs. Knopf married a native citizen of the United States, who has since deserted her; that she has never been in the United States, and can make no declaration of intention to go there. Under these circumstances, as at present set forth, her application is refused. In the application made by her husband in 1895 he declared himself to be a native citizen, and to have been born in New York, December 2, 1870. In such a case the wife should make application on the native form, the words "that I am the wife of a native" being inserted in the proper place. Í call your attention to this instruction of the Department for your future guidance. Yours, very respectfully, ARTHUR S. HARDY. [Inclosure 3.] Mr. Lieberknecht to Mr. Hardy. UNITED STATES CONSULATE, DEAR SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your favor of the 15th instant, in regard to passport application of Mrs. Knopf, and note what you say. I should certainly have used a native form had she not given me to understand that her husband was, or had been, a naturalized citizen, but the fact is she knows very little about him. The woman is no doubt an American citizen, and in her unfortunate circumstances it seems she ought to have the protection of her country. As regards her returning to the United States, it is difficult for her to make any pos If itive statements until she is able to learn whether her husband is alive or dead. she would make application on a native form would you see your way clear to issue her a passport? If so, I shall have her sign a new application. Yours, etc., [Inclosure 4.] Mr. Hardy to Mr. Lieberknecht. A. LIEBERKNECHT, Consul. UNITED STATES LEGATION, Berne, April 18, 1902. SIR: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of April 16 instant, in regard to the passport application of Mrs. Knopf. There seems to be no doubt of the fact that she has acquired American citizenship by marriage to a citizen of the United States. The question is whether she intends, now that her husband has deserted her, to retain the citizenship she has acquired or not. The reply to this question is found in her application wherein she declares no intention to go to the United States, and in the fact that her circumstances are such that there is no reasonable probability that she will do so. If, as you say, she knows very little about her husband, whether he is alive or dead, her going to the United States, where she has never been, being dependent upon what she may learn of his whereabouts and disposition, is altogether too vague and improbable to warrant the issue of her passport. I regret that I can not see my way clear so to do. Yours, very respectfully, ARTHUR S. HARDY. [Inclosure 5.-Translation.] Mrs. Knopf to Mr. Hardy. SISIKON, CT. URI, April 24, 1902. HONORED MR. MINISTER: I am informed by Mr. Lieberknecht that a renewal of my passport is refused for the reason that I can not declare when I will go to the United States. To some extent this is right. Some years ago a suit was brought against the parents of my husband for the payment of a yearly allowance in support of my children, and as it is uncertain when this suit will end, it is impossible to state when I will be able to go to America. As soon as the court shall have decided it, it will be necessary for me to go there to investigate matters myself and to secure a death certificate of my husband. I have acquired American citizenship through my marriage only, and am by birth a German. If, contrary to my expectation, the protection of my home country should be denied to me at this time of need, I would be obliged to resume my former nationality. I beg you, honored minister, to inform me as soon as possible whether it would not be possible under the circumstances to have my passport renewed. If it should be impossible, please let me know the steps necessary for me to take to secure the necessary papers allowing me to stay in Switzerland. Please accept, etc., Mrs. Dr. BERTHA KNOPF-FISCHER. Mr. Hay to Mr. Hardy. No. 35.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: The Department has received your No. 55 of May 2, 1902, submit ting for instruction the case of Mrs. Bertha Knopf, who applied for a passport. It appears she was formerly issued a passport, No. 156, June 9, 1898, because her husband, who deserted her, was a citizen of the United States. She has applied for another passport, but you have refused to issue it because she has not been to the United States and gives no proof of an intention to reside in this country. A careful examination of the files of the passport division has been made, from which it appears that on November 1, 1892, her husband, Leo Knopf, secured a passport, No. 1812, from the (then) legation at Berlin, upon an application setting forth that he was born in Berlin on December 2, 1870, his father being a citizen of the United States at the time of his birth. He presented his father's naturalization certificate and declared that he had himself lived in the United States for two years, from 1890 to 1892. He was then nearly 22 years of age, and swore that he intended to return to the United States within a year. The record shows that when the passport was issued to him, he was warned that a new passport would not be issued to him if he continued to reside abroad after the expiration of the validity of the present one." Perhaps this warning was in his mind when he applied for his next passport, for on August 22, 1895, the legation at Berne issued him a passport, No. 251, on his affidavit that he was born in New York on December 2, 1870, and intended to return to the United States in three or four years. This passport included his wife. Presumably he was not married when he received his first passport. 66 When his wife applied for a passport from your legation, receiving passport No. 156, June 9, 1898, she stated that her husband was a native citizen and that she intended to return (come) to the United States in two years. She presented a supplementary statement setting forth that her husband abandoned her and their two children on July 22, 1896, and had been condemned to a year's imprisonment for crime, but had fled, and was a fugitive from justice. She herself was born in Germany. As there were two children in 1896, it is fair to presume that she and her husband were married in 1894 or before, and while he was still under the protection of the passport granted him by the legation at Berlin. The record is clear in showing that the man who thus abandoned his wife and children and was condemned on a criminal charge besides, is, prima facie, a perjurer also, but we can not avoid the conclusion that he was a citizen of the United States when he married. The second passport, obtained on the strength of the first, was probably issued upon a false application, for the legation at Berlin saw his father's naturalization certificate, and it would be more to his advantage to fabricate a story of native than of foreign birth. It is possible, of course, that both stories are false and that he never was entitled to a passport, but giving him the benefit of the doubt we may assume that the second passport only was obtained by fraud and that he was not entitled to it. Except for two years, he lived all his life abroad where he was born. Although he was in this country when he became of age, he went back to Europe soon thereafter and never returned. Had the truth about his birth and actual residence been known when he applied for his second passport, his application would have been rejected and the protection of this Government would have been withdrawn from him. In this deprivation his wife would have shared. The question then becomes a simple one: Can the wife claim a continuance of the protection which her husband secured through fraud and which would not now be extended to him? Her citizenship and consequent protection follow his, and what he forfeited she also lost. Moreover, she herself states that she only wants to come to this country to secure a certificate of her husband's death. Upon the facts before it, therefore, the Department sustains your refusal to issue a passport in this case. I am, etc., JOHN HAY. PASSPORT APPLICATION OF WILLIAM STRAHLHEIM. No. 56.] Mr. Hardy to Mr. Hay. UNITED STATES LEGATION, SIR: I have the honor to report that a passport has been refused to William Strahlheim under the circumstances given below. I have received an appealing letter from his wife, but I am still unable to see how, under the instructions of the Department, a passport can be issued him. In consideration of the condition of the applicant and the hardship apparently consequent upon the denial of his application, I beg to submit the grounds on which a passport was refused. William Strahlheim is a native citizen of the United States, having been born in New York on October 1, 1859. He first applied to this legation for a passport on November 17, 1893, returning passport No. 4832, issued to him while a minor by the legation at Paris on April 8, 1876. He declared that he last left the United States in 1888 and his intention to return within two years. On this application Mr. Broadhead issued him passport No. 59 November 18, 1893. On October 8, 1895, he applied for a renewal, declaring that he last left the United States in 1890, and his intention to return within a few years. On this application Mr. Broadhead issued him passport No. 280 October 9, 1895. On December 1, 1897, he applied for a renewal, stating that he last left the United States in 1889. In transmitting his application Consul Lieberknecht said: He is a young man, not engaged particularly in any business now, but a commercial traveler, married to a Swiss lady who likes to be with her mamma, etc. I told him that I did not know whether you would consider his reasons for remaining here sufficient or not, but would submit his case to you. Mr. Leishman did not feel warranted in issuing another passport, and referred the application to the Department in his No. 35 December 7, 1897. In its No. 51 of December 24, 1897, the Department, after taking note of the contradictions in Mr. Strahlheim's applications, instructed Mr. Leishman to ascertain the real facts in regard to Strahl heim's intention to return to the United States and to judge of the good faith of any declarations he might make as to his future home. Mr. Leishman saw Mr. Lieberknecht personally on the matter, and, as a result of his interview, Strahlheim made a new application on February 16, 1898, for a passport including his wife, in which he declared his intention to return within two years and that he needed a passport for the purpose of "looking after the welfare of my wife's aged parents." On this application he was issued passport No. 105 February 17, 1898. |