618 



NATURALIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES. 



to eliminate from the field of diplomatic discussion a 

 class of cases which could hardly bo diplomatically 

 handled in detail with .satisfaction to cither party, and 

 to create a tribunal which should fairly and impar- 

 tially judge them without question or appeal in the 

 interest of universal equity, and especially in that of 

 the traditional good understanding which has so long 

 united both governments. The President charges me 

 to express the hope that nothing may be suffered to 

 interrupt the regular progress of tne work of the com- 

 mi-sioii; and that, relying upon the intelligence and 

 the impartiality of the arbitrators, the Governments of 

 s i uiin and of the United States may accept and carry 

 into effect the decisions rendered in all cases as they 

 arise. 



It becomes, in this view of the authority of the tri- 

 bunal to fix not only the general scope of evidence and 

 argument it will entertain in the discussion both of 

 the merits of each claim and of the claimant's Ameri- 

 can citizenship, but to pass as well upon every offer 

 of evidence bearing upon either issue that may be made 

 before it, entirely unnecessary, and therefore entirely 

 unsuitable, for mo to enter upon anv discussion of ei- 

 ther the jurisprudence that should govern the decis- 

 ions of the tribunal or of the reach of the jurisdiction 

 accorded by the convention of 1871. All these topics 

 arc to be judicially treated and judicially decided by 

 the tribunal, and the two governments are to accept 

 the " awards made in the several cases submitted to 

 the said arbitration as final and conclusive, and will 

 give full effect to the same," as expressed hi the sev- 

 enth article of the convention. 



This obligation upon the two governments is not at 

 all dependent upon the methods, the rules, the rea- 

 sons, or the law which have produced the awards, be- 

 ing approved by the governments, or the awards them- 

 sclves being satisfactory to the governments. Any 

 such pretension, if tolerated, would subvert the con- 

 vention and reserve for direct debate between the gov- 

 ernments contentions which have been deliberately 

 remitted to judicial treatment and decision. 



The interruption of the due judicial course provided 

 by the convention in all cases which should be sub- 

 mitted to the arbitrators, and in which there should 

 arise " questions upon which they should be unable 

 to agree," which has been produced by the action of 

 the Spanish arbitrator, is, as it seems to me, justly 

 complained of by the claimants whose litigations have 

 thus been delayed. There would seem to oe no doubt 

 that, upon the" necessary reason of the situation t as 

 well as by the explicit provision of the convention, 

 the only_ condition to the attaching of the umpire's 

 jurisdiction '' to decide " any question is the inability 

 of the arbitrators to agree upon that question. The 

 interposition, therefore, of any obstruction by either 

 arbitrator to the umpire's disposition of any question 

 upon which the two arbitrators disagree seems a frus- 

 tration of the equal, impartial, comprehensive, and 

 efficient provision made tor the umpirage to produce, 

 in every possible case, an award which the disagree- 

 ment of the arbitrators had disabled them from mak- 

 ing. 



This Government has every desire that the labors 

 of the commission should be brought to a conclusion 

 as^ rapidly as is consistent with an adequate consider- 

 ation bj the tribunal of the cases that may be sub- 

 mitted to it. It sees no reason to think that the pur- 

 poses of the two governments have not been circum- 

 spectly stated and their execution adequately secured 

 by the convention of 1871 ; and, with every wish to 

 raeet^any suggestion which may be made to it by the 

 Spanish Government tending to a better or more ac- 

 ceptable observance of the terms or the spirit of that 

 convention, it can not look with any complacency 

 upon any diminution of the independent judicial au- 

 thority of the tribunal constituted by it, or any inter- 

 ruption of its regular administration of the jurisdic- 

 tion assigned to it. 



I sincerely hope that the views I have had the honor 

 to submit to you may satisfy you that the contention 



on the citizenship of the claimants, dependent upon 

 naturalization, is as fully a question of judicial de- 

 termination for the tribunal in respect to the admissi- 

 bility of evidence, its relevancy and its weight, and 

 in respect to the rules of jurisprudence by which it is 

 to be determined, as any other question in controversy 

 in the cases. This contention was so dealt with by 

 the arbitrators and bv the umpire in the case of 

 Dominguez, and doubtless in all other cases hereto- 

 fore decided ; and it will be so dealt with ? I must as- 

 sume ; in all cases before the tribunal which involve 

 that issue. 



The conclusions which I have formed upon this 

 subject result in the expectation that the rights 

 secured by the convention to claimants whose cases 

 have been laid before the tribunal by this Govern- 

 ment will no longer be delayed or interrupted in their 

 presentation by the obstruction interposed by the 

 Spanish arbitrator to their due course of considera- 

 tion and determination as prescribed by the conven- 

 tion. 



A law of the United States makes it a crimi- 

 nal offense, punishable by both fine and im- 

 prisonment, for any person knowingly to use, 

 in any way or for any purpose, a certificate of 

 naturalization by fraud or false evidence. Any 

 offender is liable to indictment, and on the 

 trial it would seem that the court has express 

 authority to go behind the certificate and to 

 make the fullest inquiries into the facts and 

 merits of the matter. This law is found in 

 section 5428 of the Eevised Statutes of the 

 United States, which reads as follows : 



Every person who knowingly uses any certificate 

 of naturalization heretofore granted by any court, or 

 hereafter granted, which has been or may be procured 

 through fraud or by false evidence, or has been or 

 may te issued by the clerk or any other officer of the 

 court, without any appearance and hearing of the ap- 

 plicant in court, and without lawful authority ; and 

 every person who falsely represents himself to be a 

 citizen of the United States, without having been 

 duly admitted to citizenship, for any fraudulent pur- 

 pose whatever, shall be punishable bv a fine of not 

 more than one thousand dollars, or be imprisoned 

 not more than two years, or both. 



It would seem that any person knowingly 

 using a fraudulent naturalization certificate 

 before an international arbitration commission 

 holding its sessions in this country would be 

 liable to the penalties of the above statute. 



In his message of 1875, President Grant, 

 said : " On many occasions it has been brought 

 to the knowledge of the Government that 

 certificates of naturalization are held and pro- 

 tection or interference claimed by parties who 

 admit that not only they were not within 

 the United States at the time of the pretended 

 naturalization, but that they have never resided 

 in the United States. In others the certificate 

 and record of the court show on their face that 

 the person claiming to be naturalized had not 

 resided the required time in the United States. 

 In others it is admitted upon examination that 

 the requirements of law have not been com- 

 plied with. In some cases, even, such certifi- 

 cates have been matter of purchase. These 

 are not isolated cases arising at rare intervals, 

 but of common occurrence, and which are re- 

 ported from all quarters of the globe." 



