Mr. ROGERS. By complying with the ordinary naturalization laws in each case.

I want to call the attention of the committee to the fact that the remedy suggested by this bill does not represent a difference in kind; it is a difference in degree. It is simply a curtailment of time. It does not give the man any undue privilege; it simply gives him a short cut in elapsed time to citizenship. The suggestion has been made by a member of the committee that these men violated the law of the United States when they went abroad and enlisted in one of the foreign armies. To me it is clear they did not. I shall not deal with their discretion or wisdom in enlisting, because that is necessarily a matter of opinion as to the judgment or wisdom of those men, citizens of the United States, who went abroad to fight in the armies of Europe. But the legal aspect is more easily ascertained.

I should like to read a paragraph from the Revised Statutes on this subject, entitled "Neutrality," section 5282:

Every person who, within the territory or jurisdiction of the United States, enlists or enters himself, or hires or retains another person to enlist himself, or to go beyond the limits or jurisdiction of the United States with intent to be enlisted or entered in the service of any foreign prince, state, colony, district, or people, as a soldier, or as a marine or seaman, on board of any vessel of war, letter of marque, or privateer, shall be deemed guilty of high misdemeanor, and so forth.

I will not pass upon the question of the wisdom of these men, but I want to call your attention to the fact that as far as the law goes illegality attaches only in the event of enlistment within the United States in a foreign army or navy. John Bassett Moore's Digest, from which I intended to bring a citation this morning, says that the enlistment of citizens of the United States or of any other country in a foreign army or navy raises no international question of any kind. These men therefore are violators of no law of the United States or of international law.

Mr. RAKER. Is it not by force of the fact that he does not expatriate himself because he is not any longer a citizen of the United States that there is no international question involved? That is the very object and purpose of this law, to avoid international questions over which we would have no control. So far as arresting and convicting him, when he has gone abroad and is on foreign soil, he has thereby waived his rights to be a citizen of this country. Does not that appeal to you?

Mr. ROGERS. Of course the man at the time of his enlistment was still an American citizen, even though on foreign soil.

Mr. RAKER. Of course that is true.

Mr. ROGERS. Also, our expatriation act dates back only 10 years, and there is some question as to whether it was more than declaratory of international law as it then stood. I should say there is a good deal of force in what you have said.

The CHAIRMAN. A great many countries do not require any oath, and those enlisting in their armies do not forfeit their American citizenship.

Mr. RAKER. If he joins the army he does, whether he takes the oath or not.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not so understand.

Mr. SIEGEL. That is the decision of Judge Ray.

Mr. ROGERS. I think it is pretty generally agreed that men who enlisted in the French forces did not lose their American citizenship, because they were not required to take the oath of allegiance. The question is whether or not the recruit took an oath of allegiance to the foreign government.

The CHAIRMAN. That is the language of the statute:

That any American citizen shall be deemed to have expatriated himself when he has been naturalized in any foreign State in conformity with its laws, or when he has taken an oath of allegiance to any foreign State.

It is not the service in the army, it is the taking of the oath. Mr. MEEKER. If I might make a suggestion as to something that has been on my mind since having received this communication from Mr. Cecil Spring-Rice, in which he said:

I greatly regret, however, that I am unable to supply the further information desired as to how this oath confers the rights of British citizenship. Much of the information you desire would require considerable legal opinion, and I would therefore suggest that you should submit your inquiries to the United States Embassy in London.

Mr. SIEGEL. Should that be done direct or through the State Department?

Mr. MEEKER. Through the State Department. He then gives the oath that is taken on enlistment in the British military forces. I do not know whether that is applicable at all or not, but the fact is that a very grave situation obtains and exists in regard to those men, especially who have gone into the English Army. I do not think the men in the French Army would be affected in any way. The French ambassador simply says:

I beg to inform you that an alien who desires to enter the military or naval service of France is not asked to take any oath. He has only, under the present circumstances, to sign a paper pledging himself to serve while the present war

lasts.

Mr. ROGERS. I want to call your attention to the words "under the present circumstances." I understand that the practice now prevailing was not in practice at the beginning of the war and for sometime thereafter.

Mr. MEEKER. I see. If the men of the United States who have gone into the armies of the allies were to be taken into the American Army over there, it would settle all this trouble.

Mr. SIEGEL. I understand that the policy of the War Department is to transfer them as a body to the American Army.

Mr. MEEKER. That is one way out of it.

Mr. ROGERS. I think I can throw a little light on your inquiry. Of course, as the committee understands, before a man can become an officer in the American Army he must be a full citizen. Before a man can enlist in the American Army he must have taken out his first papers toward becoming a citizen. These men who are now fighting with the Canadian or British forces, either in England or in France, or somewhere else, of course can not take out their first papers toward becoming citizens while they are on foreign soil. They would have to do that in this country. Therefore they can not become declarants for citizenship and become enlisted in the American forces. They can not become officers, because they can not acquire citizenship over there. You will remember, however, that the

language of my bill, H. R. 3647, permits those men to reacquire and reassume the character and privileges of citizens of the United States by presenting themselves, if abroad, before a consular officer of the United States.

Mr. MEEKER. The provision in your bill to which you have referred might cover the very thing I have in mind, that those men, under the supervision of the American representatives in Europe, during this emergency can get back their citizenship. I do not think any of the men have lost their citizenship except those who have gone into the British Army, as it is very plain now that they have neither become citizens of Great Britain by the oath they have taken, though they have forfeited their citizenship here.

Mr. ROGERS. The same situation applies as to Canada. A much larger number of our boys have gone into the Canadian forces than into the real British forces.

Mr. MEEKER. The soldiers in the Canadian and British forces are like the citizens of the District of Columbia.

Mr. SIEGEL. They are worse off.

Mr. MEEKER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS. They are like Philip Nolan, men without a country. Mr. MEEKER. By bringing them back into full citizenship while over there, if that can be done, by permitting them to register under the supervision of the American consuls and representatives abroad. as an emergency matter, I think that would be the easiest and quickest solution of it. Even then there is this anomalous situation of these men with their families and everything here not having the status of citizens anywhere.

Mr. ROGERS. Yes.

Mr. MEEKER. Not even in the country for which they are fighting. Mr. ROGERS. If a law like this should be passed the working out of the transfers would be purely an administrative matter and would require no further activity by Congress.

Mr. MEEKER. Possibly so. There is one other point that is evident in a number of these letters. Cecil Spring-Rice did not answer the question, and neither did the French ambassador, but some of them did. That is, the status of the men who are injured, wounded, or killed in the Canadian Army, in the British Army, or the French Army, or any of those other countries, as to the provision which those countries are going to make in the way of pensions.

Mr. SLAYDEN. The advertisement of the British Empire, which some one read to the committee, said that they would be pensioned in the event they were injured.

Mr. WELTY. By what Government?

Mr. SLAYDEN. The British Empire.

Mr. SIEGEL. When these men come back they will land in New York City, and that town will have to take care of them.

Mr. RAKER. There should be a showing made to the committee as to the necessity of such legislation.

Mr. SLAYDEN. Is it not a fact that all these letters disclose that they temporarily become citizens of the foreign countries, ipso facto, by going into the foreign armies? The French ambassador's statement is to the effect that they do not in France.

Mr. MEEKER. They take no oath.

The CHAIRMAN. In the legion referred to in the discussion before the committee they do not take any oath.

Mr. MEEKER. The ambassador says:

An alien who desires to enter the military or naval service of France is not asked to take any oath. He has only, under the present circumstances, to sign a paper pledging himself to serve while the present war lasts.

Here is a letter from the Bulgarian ambassador.

Mr. SIEGEL. We are not interested in Bulgaria now.

Mr. MEEKER. I just wanted to show you how the laws are working [reading]:

Should an alien, who has taken the oath of allegiance and served in the military or naval forces and for that service been granted a pension under the Bulgarian Government, become a citizen of another nation, he thereby forfeits his pension, and should he return to Bulgaria he would be liable in case of a general mobilization, to be drafted into service.

That point has got to be guarded against carefully. There is going to be a tremendous burden of pensions which should justly rest on the proper governments.

Mr. SLAYDEN. Just one observation right there. It seems to me that is a proposition simple and easy to care for. If they are injured prior to their admission into the army of the United States in France or Bulgaria or elsewhere, then the pension is the obligation of the country with which they were serving when they received the injury. Mr. ROGERS. That is what your amendment provides.

Mr. SLAYDEN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SIEGEL. When these people return the chances are nine out of ten that they will come through the port of New York and land in New York City. We will then have a great number of sick, disabled, and crippled men landed in New York City, and the chances are nine out of ten that they will become public charges and it will be necessary for the city of New York to take care of them. If this bill goes through, there should be some provision made so that the burden will be borne by the United States. We are now taking care, in the State institutions, of thousands of people who have come in under the immigration laws and it is now causing an expenditure of $15,000,000 a year.

Mr. SLAYDEN. That is largely for the insane and the criminal insane?

Mr. SIEGEL. No. After three years they become sick and disabled and public charges.

Mr. SLAYDEN. That is a fine argument for the immigration law. The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say a while ago that they could not join our Army. As I understand, an alien if he comes over here can join our Army, but can not become an officer.

Mr. ROGERS. That is the distinction I intended to make. They can join, provided they take out their first papers.

The CHAIRMAN. Without taking out any papers, only applying

for his first papers, he can join our Army?

Mr. SIEGEL. Not without taking out the first papers.

The CHAIRMAN. Can he join our Army without taking out the first papers, Mr. Campbell?

Mr. CAMPBELL. I understand that he is required to file his declaration.

Mr. ROGERS. I called up the Judge Advocate General's office and that is the information I received. It had not occurred to me when I was before the committee last month how great the number of these highly trained men would be. There are estimated to be between 45,000 and 50,000 of these men who have left the United States and enlisted in the forces of Canada, Great Britain, and France.

Various officers of the War Department have spoken to me about my bill of their own volition and not at my suggestion at all. They have sugested to me the importance that it would be to the Army to get the benefit of the training which these men have received. This could readily be done by assigning them as instructors to the training camps of the United States Army. I know of several cases, and I have no doubt that members of this committee know of others, where men have come back here and have been given commissions in the United States Army. For example, there is a man named Boal, a young lad of 19, who, when the war broke out, was at the St. Paul School in Concord; he went across the water and enlisted as a trooper in France, and for gallantry he was promoted to the aviation service. By the time he was 21 he was a lieutenant in the French Army and was in charge of all the American boys who were flying in France. He came back to this country at the request of the War Department and was given a captaincy in the Officers' Reserve Corps, and is now in charge of the aviation work, I am told, at Fort Sam Houston, in Texas.

Mr. SLAYDEN. But his case is not complicated by wounds?

Mr. ROGERS. His case is not complicated by wounds and his case is not complicated by the loss of citizenship, because he was in the foreign legion.

The CHAIRMAN. And did not take any oath?

Mr. ROGERS. He did not take any oath. So the War Department was enabled to utilize his services as an officer without the necessity of putting him through a naturalization process which would have taken five years. There is another case that may be familiar to some of you, that of Capt. Sweeney, now training at Fort Mver. He was promoted for gallantry in the French Army to the rank of captain; he was wounded six times and he was gased six times. He came back here and was commissioned an officer in the Reserve Corps and was asked to go through the training period at Fort Myer, although he had three years' military service. He is now working shoulder to shoulder with boys who are seeking commissions and who never had a day's service prior to their arrival at Fort Myer.

Mr. SLAYDEN. He is an American citizen?

Mr. ROGERS. Yes; he also, of course, did not lose his citizenship because he was in the foreign legion. I have cited those two cases to show you how useful men of that sort are from the fact of their experience in modern warfare and how, in the case of men who have been fighting in the French forces, the War Department is able to utilize their services.

There are thousands of men in the Canadian forces and in the British forces, American citizens originally and Americans at heart in every way to-day, who, because of the difference in the regulations for admission into the British Army as compared with the French