H. R. 4629 is because it seems to me that under the act of 1907, we said that the taking of the oath of allegiance to a foreign power would constitute expatriation.

Now, although the language of the act of 1907 was as explicit as possible and has been held by the Department of State and by the War Department and by the Department of Justice to constitute expatriation, it is prosposed to legislate that those words did not mean what they seemed to mean and that they shall not apply in a certain class of cases. In other words, a certain class of cases shall be carved out of the language of the statute and some other rule applied. If a man from this country, an American citizen, in 1914, enlisted in the Army of Canada, under the law as it then was, he lost. his American citizenship; but we are going to say, according to the language of the bill, H. R. 4629, that he did not lose his American citizenship, because the act of 1907 did not mean what it appeared to mean. This is going to be a retroactive statute on citizenship. I submit to you, gentlemen of the committee, that there could be no more unfortunate situation than to have a retroactive citizenship statute. It would lead to difficulties of all kinds which can not be regarded as desirable from any point of view.

The bill which I originally introduced, H. R. 3647, expressly provides that before these men can come here and ask for this privilege they shall have been given an honorable discharge from the foreign army in which they were engaged. The bill which is proposed by the Department of Labor and my bill H. R. 4629 do not cover that feature. A man can desert as much as he likes and yet come within the purview of the statute. Those are the principal objectionsplus the administrative objection-to H. R. 4629. Under H. R. 4629, the Labor Department's proposal, we would not know who had been taking advantage of this statute to regain their citizenship. To me that is an exceedingly important element in the proper administration of this law.

The CHAIRMAN. There is this difference: The Labor Department's bill is a blanket bill, while yours will only give citizenship in compliance with certain prerequisites which you lay down in the bill? Mr. ROGERS. Yes, sir.

[H. R. 3647.]

A BILL Permitting the repatriation of certain former American citizens who have hitherto served or who shall hereafter serve in the armed forces of any foreign State engaged in war with a country with which the United States is at war.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person, formerly an American citizen, who may be deemed to have expatriated himself under the provisions of the first paragraph of section two of the act approved March second, nineteen hundred and seven, entitled "An act in reference to the expatriation of citizens and their protection abroad," by taking, since August first, nineteen hundred and fourteen, an oath of allegiance to any foreign State engaged in war with a country with which the United States is at war, and who took such oath in order to be enabled to enlist in the armed forces of such foreign State, and who actually enlisted in such armed forces, and who has been duly and honorably discharged from such armed forces, may, upon complying with the provisions of this act, reassume and reacquire the character and privileges of a citizen of the United States. Any such person who desires so to reacquire and reassume the character and privileges of a citizen of the United States shall, if abroad, present himself before a consular officer of the United States. or, if in the United States, before any court authorized by law to confer Amer

ican citizenship upon aliens; shall offer satisfactory evidence that he comes within the terms of this act; and shall take an oath declaring his allegiance to the United States and abjuring and disclaiming allegiance to such foreign State and to every foreign prince, potentate, State, or sovereignty. The consular officer or court officer having jurisdiction shall thereupon issue in triplicate a certificate of American citizenship, giving one copy to the applicant, retaining one copy for his files, and forwarding one copy to the Secretary of Labor. Thereafter such person shall in all respects be deemed to have acquired the character and privileges of a citizen of the United States.

SEC. 2. That the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Labor shall jointly issue regulations for the proper administration of this act.

[H. R. 4629.]

A BILL Defining section two of the act approved March second, nineteen hundred and seven (Thirty-fourth Statutes at Large, page twelve hundred and twenty-eight).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That when any American citizen has, since August first, ninteen hundred and fourteen, taken an oath of allegiance to any foreign State in order to be enabled to serve in the armed forces of such foreign State, and has actually served in the armed forces of such foreign State, it is declared that the provisions of section two of the act approved March second, nineteen hundred and seven (Thirty-fourth Statutes at Large, page twelve hundred and twenty-eight), shall not be construed or held to be applicable if that foreign State was at the time when such service began engaged in war with a country with which the United States is at war.

Mr. WELTY. At some other time-not now-I wish you would let me know what effect the various bills now proposed would have on the neutrality law if enacted into law.

Mr. PARKER. Well, I think I shall have to pass that up to-day, as

you say.

Mr. WELTY. Please look that up and let me know whether or not they will not make the neutrality law a nullity.

Mr. PARKER. Yes, sir; I will.

Mr. RAKER. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that the report and the letter of the Secretary of Labor accompanying the report of this bill be inserted in the hearings.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

(The report and letter referred to by Mr. Raker follow :)

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, May 8, 1917.

Hon. JOHN L. BURNETT, M. C.,

Chairman Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. BURNETT: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 1st instant, transmitting copy of the bill introduced by Representative Rogers (H. R. 3647) entitled "A bill permitting the repatriation of certain former American citizens who have hitherto served or who shall hereafter serve in the armed forces of any foreign State engaged in war with a country with which the United States is at war."

I do not believe that the said bill is calculated to meet the real practical difficulty that arises from the situation to an alleviation of which it is obviously intended to be directed. If the taking of the (usually limited) oath of allegiance that is required in connection with enlistments in foreign armies really, as a matter of law, operates to expatriate an American citizen, such a citizen could not comply with the provisions of H. R. 3647 until he had reentered the United States; and, as many of these returning soldiers are crippled or maimed or broken down in health, or are otherwise inadmissible if aliens under the immigration law, and as the passage by Congress of such a piece of legislation as this bill would be tantamount to a legislative declaration that enlistment in a foreign army does expatriate, I am clearly of opinion that the passage thereof in its present form would do more harm than good.

13884-17-5

This department has not been disposed to hold, as a matter of law, in enforcing the immigration act, that the taking of a limited oath of allegiance in connection with enlistment in a foreign army operates to expatriate an American citizen under section 2 of the expatriation act of March 2, 1907 (34 Stat., 1228.) Its position with respect to that question is set forth in a letter addressed to Hon. Thomas G. Patten on January 6, 1916, of which a copy is inclosed. It is true that in a case which arose in the northern district of New York (Ex parte Griffin, 237 Fed., 445), Judge Ray held that the taking of an enlistment oath of allegiance had operated to expatriate the American citizen involved; but this department has not been disposed to accept that decision as final or absolutely authoritative upon the point, because Griffin was a deserter and, of course, had not been discharged from the English Army, and was therefore still under the allegiance which he had adopted in his enlistment oath. Efforts which have since been made by the department to bring in the courts a test case that would not be complicated with this element have not so far been successful; and the department has continued the policy of treating all soldiers who have been discharged from foreign armies as no longer subject to the limited oath of allegiance, which for the time being, in conjunction with the actual service of the men in the foreign army, had operated to create with respect to the men an allegiance to a foreign government. Such returning discharged soldiers are being landed as American citizens. That course, to a very large extent, solves the practical difficulties of the situation.

The technical legal difficulties, it seems to me, could very much better be met if and when necessary by the enactment of appropriate amendments to the expatriation act of 1907, above mentioned. Those difficulties arise from the fact that the so-called expatriation act deals with two subjects, to wit: (a) The expatriation of citizenship and (b) the protection abroad of citizens. Unfortunately the provisions of that law which, in the judgment of this department, were intended merely to cover the second subject are almost inextricably entangled with the provisions thereof intended to cover the first subject, and this confusion in the legislation has naturally led to a corresponding confusion in the administration thereof by the departments and the construction thereof by the courts.

You will recall that you were informally advised several months ago that this department had appointed a committee, composed of officials of the Bureaus of Immigration and Naturalization and of the office of the solicitor for this department, to which committee has been assigned the duty of submitting to the department suggestions with respect to needed amendments in the naturalization law. As the expatriation act is really, to a considerable extent, a naturalization measure, the confusion in its provisions above mentioned will naturally come under consideration by the departmental committee mentioned and by the department on the basis of that committee's report. It has not yet been possible, because of the great stress of work which has arisen from the war, for the committee to give any consideration to the duty assigned it, but I hope to be able, on the basis of a report from that committee, to submit suggestions to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization at the next session of Congress.

Respectfully,

W. B. WILSON, Secretary. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May 15, 1917.

MY DEAR MR. BURNETT: I have received your letter of May 1, 1917, transmitting a copy of a bill (H. R. 3647) “permitting the repatriation of certain former American citizens who have hitherto served or who shall hereafter serve in the armed forces of any foreign State engaged in war with a country with which the United States is at war.' You ask for the opinion of this department as to the propriety of enacting the proposed law.

In reply allow me to refer you to the department's views as expressed in its letter of May 8, 1917, to Senator Ellison D. Smith, concerning Senate bill No. 1721 on the same subject. A copy of the letter mentioned is inclosed herewith. I am, my dear Mr. Burnett, sincerely, yours, ROBERT LANSING.

Hon. JOHN L. BURNETT,

House of Representatives.

Inclosure: Copy of letter mentioned.

MAY 8, 1917.

Hon. ELLISON D. SMITH,

United States Senate.

SIR: The department has received your letter of April 12, addressed to the Chief of the Bureau of Citizenship, inclosing a copy of Senate bill No. 1721, "to restore certain persons to American citizenship." You ask for suggestions concerning this bill, which provides for the repatriation of American citizens who have lost their citizenship under the provision of section 2 of the expatriation act of March 2, 1907, by taking oaths of allegiance to France, Great Britain, and their allies upon enlisting in the armies thereof.

It appears to the department that the wording of the proposed bill should be changed in some particulars, and I inclose herewith a draft of a bill which would meet with the department's approval. In this proposed draft there are two provisions to which I wish to call special attention. The first is to the effect that a person of the class mentioned who wishes to recover his American citizenship must obtain a discharge from the foreign army in which he is serving. It is understood that the British military law does not provide for the enlistment or service in the British Army (at least as private soldiers) of persons who are known to be of foreign nationality. The French military law is understood to have a similar provision.

The second provision to which I wish to call attention is to the effect that a person of the class mentioned must take an oath of allegiance to the United States in order to recover his American nationality. This provision seems eminently proper, considering the fact that the persons concerned have lost their American nationality by taking oaths of allegiance to foreign countries.

The provision that "if the oath of allegiance is taken before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign country the proper authorities thereof should be duly notified" is added because it is deemed undesirable that persons should be naturalized as citizens of any country or restored to its citizenship while they are residing in a foreign country unless the authorities of such foreign country are duly notified. While it is not anticipated that the Governments of France. Great Britain, and their allies will have any objection to the restoration of the persons in question to American citizenship while such persons are still within their territories, it is deemed advisable that they should be notified in each case.

The department believes that the proposed law as modified would serve to remedy an unfortunate situation and considers that the passage of such a law is desirable. It is believed that most of the young Americans who enlisted in foreign armies, particularly France and England, did so without any intention whatsoever of giving up their American allegiance. Moreover, it is understood that such persons have not acquired the nationality of the foreign countries in whose armies they have been serving, so that they appear to be left at present in an anomalous situation in respect to their nationality. The present time, when the United States is enlisted in the same cause in which France, Great Britain, and their allies are fighting, seems to be an opportune moment to provide means by which the young Americans in question may be restored to their original status as American citizens. It is believed that the governments under which they are serving will be willing to release them from the obligations which they have taken through their voluntary enlistment and will grant them permission to return to this country in order that they may join the American Army.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

FRANK L. POLK.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any American citizen who may be deemed to have expatriated himself under the provision of the first paragraph of section two of the citizenship act of March second, nineteen hundred and seven, by taking an oath of allegiance to Great Britain, France, or any of their allies in the present conflict upon enlisting in the armed forces thereof be, and he is hereby, authorized to recover the character and privileges of an American citizen after obtaining a discharge from the foreign army in which he is serving and upon taking an oath of allegiance to the United States before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, if he is abroad, or before

a clerk of a court in the United States having jurisdiction to naturalize aliens if he is in this country. The oath of allegiance to be taken is as follows; "I, -, hereby renew my allegiance to the United States of America and disclaim and abjure allegiance to any foreign prince, potentate, State, or sovereignty. Further, I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God."

The oath of allegiance should be signed in triplicate, one copy to be filed in the office where it is taken, one to be forwarded to the Department of Labor, and one to be delivered to the affiant.

If the oath of allegiance is taken before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign country, the proper authorities thereof should be duly notified.

(Thereupon the committee adjourned.)

COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

Thursday, June 14, 1917.

The committee met at 10 o'clock a. m., Hon. John L. Burnett (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, we now have a quorum of the committee. I called the committee together this morning because we have not been making much progress on the Rogers bills, and I do not know that we will be able to act definitely on them to-day, because we have not yet got all the information we requested of the State and Labor Departments. At the hearing before, we asked the gentlemen representing the Labor Department to send a suggested amendment to one of the Rogers bills, and that has been sent down. We also asked for information in regard to the status of people who take this soldiers' oath in the other countries-as to whether they become citizens of those countries or not. There has been some question about that. We asked them to secure that information and submit it to us. Mr. Meeker also has been making a careful investigation of that question, and he says he has run down the information in 19 countries. The Labor Department has not made any report as to their investigations. The State Department this morning sent us a communication. I do not understand this to be executive or secret. If it is, we will have it put in the record and then can erase it before printing.

The SECRETATY OF STATE,

Washington.

AMERICAN EMBASSY, London, November 11, 1915.

SIR: I have received and read with interest the department's confidential publication, Series M, No. 56, issued on the 23d ultimo by the Division of Information entitled, Right to Protection of American Citizens Enlisting in Foreign Armies."

66

I have noted the statement in the final paragraph of the department's instruction of June 11 to the ambassador at Paris that "the department has frequently held that service by American citizens in foreign armies does not of itself operate as a renunciation of American citizenship, unless such service involves the taking of oaths of allegiance to foreign Governments, which would come within the purview of the first paragraph of section 2 of the act of March 2, 1907," which has been my understanding of the department's views on the subject.