there is much ground for suspicion. Salem's stay in the United States was one extended long enough to complete the 5-years' period necessary for the acquisition of the citizenship. Later on he repeatedly antedated the beginning of this period to wipe out this impression with the American authorities. He altered the date 1903 to 1902 and 1901. In fact he did come to the United States in 1901, not for a continuous stay, but only for a short visit. His repeated voyages to the United States from 1911 to 1919 inclusive, seem to be undertaken solely for the purpose of maintaining the protection of the United States or to regain the same after his passport had expired. The voyage of 1919 began and was carried through under very special circumstances and Salem gave sworn declarations to the Egyptian authorities as well as to the American authorities which do not coincide with the truth. The sort of life and of activity he manifested during many years, between 1909 and 1919, seem to show an obvious intention of permanent residence in Egypt. Finally the letter of Goubran Salem addressed to the American Agent on the 23rd January 1914 which was presented by the American Government themselves would make believe that it was the intention of George Salem to serve Goubran's and his own interests by administrating permanently the Egyptian estates of the family.

These grounds of suspicion are however counterbalanced by a number of facts which show the intention of George Salem to settle finally as a citizen in the United States. Such facts are the nature of his activity in the United States until 1909 and the keeping up of friendly relations with several prominent American citizens. It is also clear that his connections with his American acquaintances have never been broken and finally it is affirmed without contradiction that after the failure of his claim against the Egyptian Government he returned to the United States, that he lived there for a succession of

years and that there also his son by his divorced wife Celine Salem gets his education.

It is in no way exceptional or unusual that he who acquire a new nationality should keep up to a certain degree the domestic and business interests which connect him with his previous home. Salem states indeed that it was his intention since 1909 to settle the inheritance of his father and to return to America. Doubtless in view of the deed of 1907 acted between George Salem and his uncle Goubran the settlement of the inheritance of Josef Salem does not seem a plausible motive for such a long and continuous sojourn. But George would expect to get a liberality from his old relation-and later events have shown that he was constantly preoccupied with this idea; on the other hand, the advanced age of his uncle could make him foresee as imminent an heritage, regardless of its smallness. These prospects allow to state that George Salem had a legitimate interest to stay in Egypt and the fact that he did so with the said intention does not prove that in acquiring the American citizenship he committed a fraudulent act.

As an arbitral tribunal should use the greatest caution when giving a decision that the nationality which is claimed and acknowledged as valid by a sovereign power has been acquired by fraud, and as each doubt in this respect should be interpreted in favour of the validity of the act of naturalization the Arbitral Tribunal cannot, in the Salem case, consider that there was a fraudulent acquisition of American citizenship.

III. Although Salem's right of American citizenship has been acknowledged it has yet to be decided if he possesses another nationality at the same time, which can be opposed to the claim of the United States.

1. When acquiring American citizenship Salem called himself an Egyptian subject. He always fell back on this fact when the protection of the American Agency in Egypt was withheld. In particular when he was cited as a foreigner before the Egyptian courts

he referred to his native nationality and contested the competency of the Mixed Courts. Also at the beginning of the criminal proceedings opened against him for forgery, he affirmed through his counsel that he was an Egyptian subject.

This corresponds with the fact that he was born in Egypt and that he lived until 1919 chiefly in Egypt with the exception of the period from 1903 to 1909, that he accepted positions with Egyptian authorities and as far as can be ascertained was never registered as a foreigner with another consulate than the American consulate.

If he was an Egyptian subject when he acquired American nationality, the Egyptian Government could oppose to his naturalization the fact that he had acquired American nationality without the consent of the Egyptian Government, which means that he never lost Egyptian nationality. This follows from the rules of the Turkish law of 1869 which was then in force in Egypt. These rules did not cease to be applied until the time when an Egyptian nationality law was promulgated. That law is based on the same principles as the Turkish law. The status of nationality, as it existed in Egypt before the changes and modifications that took place in its relations to international public law, continued to prevail with regard to other powers even during and after those changes.

As to the notion of local subject, a very complex and contested notion, it is, in this case, out of the question. Concerned with considerations of a purely local character, it has nothing to do with a matter essentially international. The term "local subject seems indeed to be equivocal, but applied to the case of George Salem it has no other significance or purport than to indicate the Ottoman nationality of a person residing in Egypt. Therefore all the rules relating to this nationality are applicable to the notion of" local subject ".

2. The Turkish law which makes the acquisition of foreign nationality dependent on the permission of the Government is internationally not to be objected to. Indeed it is generally admitted that every person of age is entitled to choose his nationality. This rule

however does only mean that the state which he leaves cannot reclaim him from the state the nationality of which he acquires, and that the state of origin shall not be entitled to contest the other state's right to bestow nationality on an immigrant. But the abovementioned principle does not prevent the state of origin making by its national legislation the loss of its nationality dependent on a special permission of its government, which means that it may treat the emigrant again as its national as soon as he returns into its territory.

On the other hand the Arbitral Tribunal cannot admit that where such a return occurs the state of origin be entitled by international law to maintain that its claim is more important in justice than the claim of the new state. The principle of the socalled "effective nationality "the Egyptian Government referred to does not seem to be sufficiently established in international law. It was used in the famous Canevaro case; but the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal appointed at that time has remained isolated. In spite of the Canevaro case, the practice of several governments, for instance the German, is that if two powers are both entitled by international law to treat a person as their national, neither of these powers can raise a claim against the other in the name of such person (Borchard, 1.c., p. 588). Accordingly the Egyptian Government need not refer to the rule of "effective nationality

to oppose the American claim if they can only bring evidence that Salem was an Egyptian subject and that he acquired the American nationality without the express consent of the Egyptian Government.

IV. In the opinion of the Arbitral Court the Egyptian Government is unable to bring such evidence. Indeed from the circumstances it must be assumed that Salem was not an Egyptian subject but a Persian subject when he acquired American nationality.

1. By uncontested documents the American Government has proved that the father of George Salem as well as his uncle Goubran Salem were officially and in express terms treated as Persian subjects by the Persian as well as by the Egyptian authorities.

In particular there exists a statement by the Egyptian Foreign Office of the year 1890, in which the Egyptian Government formally recognized the Persian nationality of Josef Salem. According to Persian law the legitimate son of a Persian subject whether born within the frontiers of Persia or abroad, is always a Persian subject. If Josef Salem was a Persian subject consequently George Salem was also a Persian subject. The fact that he seems not to have been registered at the Persian consulate in Cairo as a Persian subject is not an important consideration in regard to his Persian nationality and the less so as in 1917 the Persian consul general claimed Salem in express terms as a Persian and as subject to his jurisdiction.

In 1917 and 1918 the Egyptian Government also acknowledged the request of the Persian consul general to treat Salem as a Persian subject by assisting him officially when he took official steps against Salem.

Salem as well as his counsel Me. Nassif however contested the validity in law of the treatment of Josef and Goubran Salem as Persian subjects. Salem, in a letter of the 17th September 1917 addressed to the British Judicial Adviser of the Egyptian Government, Sir M. S. Amos (see annex E to the Case of the Egyptian Government, p. 16), informed him that Josef as well as Goubran Salem purchased the protection of the Persian Government by a payment of 40 Egyptian pounds to the Persian consul. Me. Nassif, in the action which was opened against George Salem as a Persian subject before the Mixed Court by the doctor who treated Goubran Salem in 1918, presented a number of documents from which it seems to follow that the father of Josef and Goubran as well as themselves and their sisters Fadwa and Salma were Ottoman subjects of Syrian origin from Damascus; and in consequence the Mixed Court acknowledged Salem as an Egyptian citizen and declared its non-jurisdiction. (See memorandum of 8th November 1928, annex C of the Egyptian Case, pp. 24ff., and Judgment of March 2, 1918, annex F, p. 183.) George Salem has likewise contested his Persian nationality when objecting to the steps taken by the Persian consul general with regard to the alleged forgery of the document of the 26th January 1917 and has declared himself to be a native.