"With respect to this Government being able to guarantee you from 'annoyance 'in the event of your return to the country of your original allegiance, I must observe that this Government has neither the occasion nor the power to interpret the local laws of Russia with respect to the military duty of Russians naturalized abroad and returning to Russia, and that it is consequently impossible to predict whether you may or may not be molested on that account. In case of molestation, this Government would extend to you all possible protection in like manner as to a native-born citizen of the United States. But, it must not be forgotten that, in the absence of a specific treaty of naturalization, the personal status of a native-born American citizen, and of a Russian who has been naturalized in the United States, may be very different in Russia. The former has clearly never incurred any obligation under the laws of that country, and incurs none by going thither other than that of peaceful observance of the laws of the land. The latter, on the contrary, while yet a Russian, may, under Russian laws, have contracted personal obligations towards his native land, which under those laws may not be extinguished by the fact of leaving the country and acquiring status elsewhere as a citizen or subject of another country. In such case, if an individual so circumstanced with respect to Russian law were to return to that country and voluntarily put himself within its jurisdiction, it is probable that he would be held to the fulfilment of that personal obligation, in like manner as he would be held to discharge any other personal indebtedness cognizable under Russian law. This is the case in other countries, especially in Italy, where cases of this character have arisen affecting Italians naturalized abroad, who have been held to the completion of their personal obligation of military service without redress being practicable. The Department has no means of knowing what personal obligations you may have contracted under Russian law, prior to your naturalization and while yet a Russian subject, and it must therefore decline to express any opinion on this point." Mr. Evarts, Sec. of State, to Mr. Cronstine, March 17, 1880, 132 MS. A native Russian, naturalized in the United States, being desirous to In the absence of a treaty of naturalization between the United States regarding the obligations of its native citizens," in case he should place himself within Russian jurisdiction, "would be at least problematical." (Mr. Hunter, Second Assistant Sec. of State, to Mr. Siler, Jan. 29, 1879, 126 MS. Dom. Let. 281.) There being no naturalization treaty between the United States and Russia," the respective rights of the citizens of the two countries rest on international law and comity. I do not understand that a Russian, naturalized abroad and returning to Russia, is ipso facto claimed as a Russian. He may, in determinate cases, be held liable to military duty, or to punishment for non-fulfilment of service due when he emigrated. With regard to such cases the Department abstains from any opinion in advance of an actual instance presenting itself for consideration. If a case arises every possible step is taken to defend bona fide American citizenship. "Generally, however, a law-abiding naturalized Russian returning to Russia and there obeying the laws and justifying his American citizenship in good faith, goes unmolested during any reasonable period of sojourn unless actually liable to military duty or penalty. "I can not undertake to say what is the Russian law concerning estates falling to alien heirs. That is a personal matter, in regard to which Mr. Staub should seek competent legal advice." Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Randall, M. C., June 8, 1881, 137 MS. "Even in questions of citizenship affecting the interests of naturalized citizens of Russian origin, the good disposition of the Imperial Government has been on several occasions shown in a most exemplary manner; and I am sure the actual counselors of His Majesty cannot but contemplate with satisfaction the near approach made in 1874 to the arrangement of negotiations for a treaty of naturalization between the two countries. On that occasion, as will be seen by consulting Mr. Jewell's No. 62, of April 22, 1874, the only remaining obstacle lay in the statutes of the Empire touching the conferment and loss of citizenship, of which the examining commission and the consultative council of state recommended the modification in a sense compatible with the modern usage of nations." Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Foster, min. to Russia, No. 87, July 29, 1881, For. Rel. 1881, 1030, 1034. By the laws of Russia, a Russian subject who becomes naturalized abroad, and afterwards revisits his native country," is liable to prosecution for any offence which he may have previously committed against the laws of that Empire, including that of unlicensed naturalization in a foreign country." If he has been naturalized in the United States, and, on voluntarily returning to Russia, is arrested on H. Doc. 551-vol 3- -40 the charge of unauthorized expatriation, the American legation at St. Petersburg will be instructed to do what it properly can for his relief, in the direction of protecting him from loss of liberty or damage in property. Mr. Hitt, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Pierczynski, Oct. 3, 1881, 139 MS. "As a naturalized American citizen, you would, if provided with a passport, be entitled to all the protection due to a native-born American citizen. This does not imply that you would be free from molestation should you return to your native country [Russia], and it is not improbable that you would be subjected to various inconveniences, perhaps to arrest. In this case every effort would be exerted in your behalf by the diplomatic and consular officers of the United States, though it is impossible to say with what result. You yourself must, of course, be the judge of the advisability of the visit you contemplate." Mr. Davis, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Newding, Feb. 14, 1883, 145 MS. "I have to observe upon the subject that the Russian Government does not admit the right of expatriation, but holds that a Russian subject who leaves Russia without the permission of the Emperor breaks the laws of his country, and the code provides punishment therefor. "Russia has no treaty stipulations with the United States which in any way modify the case so far as our citizens are concerned. If, therefore, one of these returns to the jurisdiction of the offense which had been entirely committed before his naturalization here, the American passport which will be given him on proper application will assure the earnest attention of our diplomatic and consular officers in case there may be any proper opportunity of service to him. The Department cannot, however, guarantee freedom from detention, nor protection and release in case charges are there prosecuted, for infractions of Russian law committed by the individual while a Russian subject and before any obligation was acknowledged by him to the United States." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Halpern, Nov. 27, 1883, 149 "From the responses previously made to your inquiries in Mr. Wagner's behalf, it appears that the brunt of the charge against him was that he, a minor, quitted Russian jurisdiction in advance of attaining the age when he might be called upon for military service. He was born at Lodz in 1852, and in 1874 became liable to military service. He came to the United States in 1869, five years before the liability could rest upon him. When the technical offense, styled 'evasion of military duty,' which is the sole charge against him, began to exist as a tangible accusation, Reinhardt Wagner had already, by residence in the United States for more than three years preceding his majority, acquired under our statutes the preliminary rights of citizenship. No nation should assert an absolute claim over one of its subjects under circumstances like these; and it is thought improbable that Russia will persist in such a claim, even if made. There would be no limit to such a pretension; for the taking of a male infant out of Russia might be regarded with equal propriety as an evasion' of eventual military service. It is tantamount to asserting a right to punish any male Russian who, having quitted Russian territory and become a citizen of another state, may afterward return to Russia. "This claim is different from that put forth by some Governments for the completion of military duty fully accruing while the subject is within their jurisdiction, and actually left unfulfilled. It is, for example, claimed that a subject who leaves the country when called upon to serve in the army, and becomes a citizen or subject of another state, may, if he return to the former jurisdiction while yet of age for military duty, be compelled to serve out his term. This rule appears harsh to us, and yet it goes no further, as a matter of fact, than a contention that an obligation of service accruing and unpaid while the subject is a resident of the country, continues, and is to be extinguished in kind by performance of the alleged defaulted service. But, harsh as it is, it is wholly different from the infliction of vindictive punishment, as, for instance, exile for the constructive evasion of an inchoate obligation. To exact the fulfillment of an existing obligation is one thing; to inflict corporal punishment for not recognizing a future contingent obligation is another." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hunt, min. to Russia, Dec. 22, 1883, H. Ex. Doc. 88, 48 Cong. 1 sess. 7-8. This instruction related to the case of Reinhardt Wagner, who was reported to have been exiled to Siberia. It afterwards appeared that he was in the United States. (For. Rel. 1885, 663; infra, p. 630.) Mr. Hunt was informed that the foregoing instruction was not to be read and communicated to the minister ipsissimis verbis," but was to be used in his discretion. (MS. Inst. Russia, XVI. 366.) See, further, as to Wagner's case, II. Ex. Doc. 109, 48 Cong. 1 sess. "In reply to your question as to your liability to the military laws of Russia, should you return thither, I observe that the Czar's Government does not admit the right of expatriation to such extent as to secure immunity from the subject's obligations to the laws of Russia, if such subject comes within their jurisdiction. The code provides punishment where such a subject leaves Russia without Imperial permission. . . . "The passport carried by an American citizen will of course assure the earnest action of our diplomatic and consular officers in his favor, if occasion should arise; but freedom from detention cannot be guaranteed, nor protection or release, in case charges are prosecuted in Russia for infractions of Russian law, committed by the individual while a Russian subject and before any obligation was acknowledged by him to the United States. "You appear to think your case exceptional in the regard that you left Russia at the age of eleven, or prior to the age of eighteen, but, as a matter of practice in that country, which is of especial concern to you, I may cite a case reported in despatch No. 141, of July 23, 1881, by Mr. Foster, the minister at St. Petersburg. The case was that of Isaac Goldner, who was born in Russia in 1858, but left there in 1870, at the age of twelve. Goldner was naturalized here. In 1880 he returned to Odessa, with an American passport, and was immediately arrested and held for military service. "The minister strenuously presented the case for the favorable consideration of the Czar's Government, and on several occasions, but without the desired results." Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Wolf, March 21, 1885, 154 MS. Dom. See, also, Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Harrison, March 14, 1885, 154 MS. Dom. Let. 472; Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Rosen, April 8, 1885, 155 id. 23; Mr. Porter, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Barnard, May 29, 1885, id. 530; same to Mr. Johnson, June 4, 1885, id. 571. "It appears that you were born a subject of Russia, that you left there at the age of sixteen, and have been naturalized as an American citizen. You now propose visiting Europe, and ask ‘Can Austria or Prussia hold me as a Russian subject.' . . . As regards your enquiry touching your liabilities in those countries, I have to say, that, according to the understanding of this Department, there exists between them and Russia an arrangement which might lead to the shortening of your stay in either country, provided it were known that you had violated the Russian law in any regard; but it is not supposed that you would be otherwise interfered with there in |