laws of such country, become naturalized therein, shall be deemed to be a subject of the state of which the father or mother has become a subject and not a British subject. (33 Vict., Vol. V, p. 170.)

The law of continental Europe is thus described by Vattel: "Children naturally follow the condition of their parents." (Qu. Morse on Citizenship, p. 28.) Mr. Campbell does not propose to change the law (sec. 1993, R. S.) by which children who are born abroad of fathers who are citizens of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization at the time of the birth of the children, are citizens, but would specifically shut out from our citizenship all the children born abroad before the parents became American citizens, no matter when they may come here.

"The United States," says Fields's International Code (Qu. Webster on Citizenship, p. 129), " has not the power to declare its members citizens of nowhere, and cast them upon other civilized governments for protection." The difference between Mr. Campbell's proposition and Mr. Purdy's in this particular is that Mr. Campbell's would, in effect, denationalize foreign-born minor children of naturalized citizens no matter what their age might be, and Mr. Purdy's would denationalize them only if they were over 16 years of age, and both propositions are reactionary and not called for by any public necessity.

The law as it now stands has been in force since March 26, 1790, when the following provision was enacted (1 Stat. L., 103):

And the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of 21 years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States.

This reappeared in the act of January 29, 1795 (1 Stat. L., 414), was not repealed by the act of June 18, 1798 (1 Stat. L., 566), and was reenacted in the law of 1802 (2 Stat. L., 153), which is incorporated in the Revised Statutes as follows (sec. 2172):

* *

The children of persons who have been duly naturalized under any law of the United States * being under the age of 21 years at the time of the naturalization of their parents, shall, if dwelling in the United States, be considered as citizens thereof.

The origin of the provision is probably to be found in the Virginia law of 1779 (Hening's Stat. L., 10, 129):

** And all infants wheresoever born, whose father, if living, or otherwise, whose mother was a citizen at the time of their birth, or who migrate hither, their father, if living, or otherwise their mother, becoming a citizen, or who migrate hither without father or mother, shall be deemed citizens of this Commonwealth until they relinquish that character in manner hereinafter expressed.

HD-59-1-Vol 44-37

And then follows in this notable act, which Thomas Jefferson drafted, a pronouncement of the right of expatriation.

The law of England on the subject before us is especially important because of the circumstances surrounding its adoption. It was enacted in 1870 (33 Vic., 170) upon recommendation of a royal commission appointed in 1868 to inquire into the laws of naturalization and allegiance. Lord Clarendon was the chairman of the commission, Robert Phillimore and Vernon Harcourt were among the members, and Lord Chief Justice Cockburn made its findings the basis of his treatise on nationality. One of the moving causes for the appointment of the British commission, Chief Justice Cockburn states in the introduction of his book (p. 3), was the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives on the rights of American citizens in foreign states, and one object sought to be achieved by the British commission was to bring the English law of naturalization and citizenship more nearly into conformity with. American law than it had thus far been. The English statute is as follows:

Where the father or the mother, being a widow, has obtained a certificate of naturalization in the United Kingdom, every child of such father or mother who during infancy has become resident with such father or mother in any part of the United Kingdom, shall be deemed to be a naturalized British subject.

There was no doubt in the minds of the British commission that this section was to the same effect as the law of the United States. Chief Justice Cockburn states our law thus:

The children of a naturalized alien, if minors at the time of such naturalization, become citizens through the naturalization of the father; a fortiori children born after the father's naturalization. (Nationality, p. 40.)

The meaning of our statute was thus stated by Secretary Blaine in 1881:

This Department has always held the provisions of section 2172, Revised Statutes, as applicable to such children as were actually residing in the United States at the time of their father's naturalization or to minor children who came to the United States during their minority and while the parents were residing here in the character of citizens. This view appears to be in consonance with the traditional policy of our Government on the subject of citizenship. (Van Dyne on Citizenship, p. 121.)

These children are citizens of the United States by naturalization, and they do not become such until they come to the United States to dwell, because no country can naturalize people not within the jurisdiction of its laws.

When they come to the United States to dwell they are on the same plane with other citizens. "All persons born or naturalized in

the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside," says the Constitution. (Art. XIV, sec. 1.)

It is difficult to see by what argument it is proper to confer citizenship on a child of one age and not on a child of another age, since neither can obtain citizenship for itself. The child between the ages of 16 and 21 is as helpless in this respect as the child under 16, and is of an age when citizenship is more necessary to him. A minor citizen of the United States has certain rights and duties as well as an adult, and a youth between the ages of 16 and 21 is the very one who frequently exercises them. He may inherit real property or acquire it through a guardian anywhere in the United States; may serve in the Army or Navy or National Guard; may enter the civil service; may perform a number of local services as an American youth which an alien minor can not do.

Many minors go abroad for educational and other laudable purposes. If they are citizens of the United States they receive the protection of this Government, but if they are aliens they can not receive such protection. If one of the class we are considering, of any age under Mr. Campbell's proposition, and over 16 years of age under Mr. Purdy's, were to return to the country of his birth he might receive its protection if his return were permanent, but under the laws of most States he would be an alien if his return were only temporary. Outside of the country of his birth he would be able to look to no Government for protection. He might be unjustly impressed into a foreign army, being, in fact, of the very age for military duty; he might be expelled from the country because he could not establish his nationality; he might be imprisoned under suspicion; he might be deprived of his property or even of his life, and no power would have a right to intervene in his behalf. If he sought to come back to the United States he would have to return as an alien immigrant, and if his health were bad or his money gone, he might actually be deported to the inhospitable shores from which he sought to escape. The countries of continental Europe habitually demand proof of nationality of foreigners, and often expel those who can not produce it. No one can enter, or sojourn in, or leave Russia or Turkey without showing a certificate of his citizenship. No one can matriculate at the schools or universities of the continental States without this proof.

Recommendations to change existing law should have as a basis the correction of evils which have arisen, but there is no evidence that the law under consideration has produced any noticeable evils. The report of Secretary Hay, January 19, 1905, of Attorney-General Knox in 1903, of Commissioner-General Sargent in 1904, the three most important recent reports urging reform in the naturalization

laws, make no recommendation of changes in the provisions of the section under consideration; nor are any such recommendations to be found in previous reports on naturalization to Congress.

Many bills have from time to time been introduced in Congress proposing extraordinary restrictions to admission to citizenship, but a careful search has failed to discover that any bill was ever introduced having as its object the abolition of the long-existing rule that the naturalization of the parents shall naturalize the minor children dwelling in the United States.

The rule has apparently received little consideration, and this is good proof that few evils have resulted from it. My own experience is that there are few impositions upon American citizenship practiced under it-fewer, in fact, than result from the provision, to which no one can reasonably object, which makes American citizens of children born abroad of parents who are already citizens. It has been said, however, that under the law as it stands a minor who is nearly of age may come to the United States and leave in a short time a full-fledged American. Undoubtedly he may, but it must be remembered that he can be protected while he is abroad only as long as he entertains in good faith an intention of returning to the United States to perform the duties of citizenship. As soon as it is evident that he is not dwelling in the United States he is held to have practically expatriated himself.

It may be said also that the child of a naturalized citizen may come to the United States when very young and return immediately to a foreign jurisdiction an American citizen, and that, being under age, he must then be protected for years until he reaches his majority and elects his nationality. This is an extreme supposition, under which no concrete cases are on record as having arisen; but it may well be doubted whether in this case the child would be considered as ever having resided or dwelt in the United States, and if he never dwelt in the United States he would never be considered its citizen.

It is true that in a few cases young men who are not fitted for citizenship, and would be prevented from securing it if they applied in their own right, now secure it through their parents' naturalization; but there are not enough of them, and the evils arising from their admission are not important enough to justify a change which would sweep a whole class into helpless alienage. This class comprises many thousands, nearly all of whom come to the United States at an age when they are most susceptible to the influences which surround. them. Their parents, under whose control they are, are American citizens; they go to American schools; they know no other allegiance than that of the United States; they look upon themselves and are looked upon by others as Americans. It is a common event for the

alien who seeks a home in the United States to wait until he has established himself before sending for his family to share his fortunes. If the naturalization of adults is surrounded by careful safeguards so as to exclude the unfit, the question of the fitness of the children may safely be left where it is. It must be remembered, finally, that the citizenship which is conferred on these children does not militate in the slightest degree against their electing another nationality than ours immediately upon their reaching manhood.

GAILLARD HUNT,

Department of State.