In re Alverto

• Decision Date: 24 September 1912
• Docket Number: 7233.
• Parties: In re ALVERTO.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

198 F. 688

In re ALVERTO.

No. 7233.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

September 24, 1912

Jerome C. Shear, Special Naturalization Examiner, for the United states.

THOMPSON District Judge.

The facts adduced at the hearing are as follows:

The petitioner is a native of the Philippine Islands. His paternal grandfather was a Spaniard, who settled in the Philippines while those islands were under the dominion of Spain, and married a native Philippine woman. The petitioner's father, who was born in the Philippines, also married a native Philippine woman and was a Spanish subject prior to the cession of the Philippine Islands to the United States by the treaty of Paris. Act July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. at L. 691, c. 1369) providing for the administration of the Philippine Islands declared that:

'All inhabitants of the Philippine Islands continuing to reside therein, who were Spanish subjects on the 11th day of April, 1899, and then resided in said islands, and their children born subsequent thereto, shall be deemed and held to be citizens of the Philippine Islands, and as such entitled to the protection of the United States, except such as shall have elected to preserve their allegiance to the crown of Spain in accordance with the provisions of the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain, signed at Paris December 10th, 1898.'

The applicant on April 11, 1899, was a Spanish subject residing in the Philippine Islands, and under the terms of the act became a citizen of the Philippine Islands. At the time of the hearing he had served continuously for seven years as an enlisted man in the United States navy, had been honorably discharged under his first enlistment, and was serving under a second.

Section 30 of the Naturalization Act of June 29, 1906 (34 Stat. 606, c. 3592 (U.S. Comp. St. 1911, p. 544)), provides as follows:

'All the applicable provisions of the naturalization laws of the United States shall apply to and be held to authorize the admission to citizenship of all persons not citizens who owe permanent allegiance to the United States, and who may become residents of any state or organized territory of the United States, with the following modifications: The applicant shall not be required to renounce allegiance to any foreign sovereignty; he shall make his declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United States at least two years prior to his admission; and residence within the jurisdiction of the United States, owing such permanent allegiance, shall be regarded as residence within the United States within the meaning of the five years' residence clause of the existing law.'

The applicant claims under the above section and under Act July 26, 1894 (28 Stat. 124, c. 165 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1332)), as a provision of the naturalization laws applicable thereto. The latter act provides that:

'Any alien of the age of twenty-one years and upwards who has enlisted or may enlist in the United States navy or marine corps, and has served or may hereafter serve five consecutive years in the United States navy or one enlistment in the United States marine corps, and has been or may hereafter be honorably discharged, shall be admitted to become a citizen of the United States upon his petition, without any previous declaration of his intention to become such; and the court admitting such alien shall, in addition to proof of good moral character, be satisfied by competent proof of such person's service in and honorable discharge from the United States navy, or marine corps.'

The question is whether the applicant is debarred by section 2169, Revised Statutes, as amended in 1875 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1333), which provides:

'The provisions of this title shall apply to aliens being free white persons, and to aliens of African nativity and to persons of African descent.' Section 2169 was not repealed by the Naturalization Act of June 29, 1906. United States v. Balsara, 180 F. 694, 103 C.C.A. 660.

The applicant's service in the navy does not affect his status under section 2169. It has been repeatedly held that service in and an honorable discharge from the military service of the United States does not extend the right of naturalization to those persons who are beyond its provision under section 2169. In re Buntaro Kumagai (D.C.) 163 F. 922; In re Knight (D.C.) 171 F. 299; Bessho v. United States, 178 F. 245, 101 C.C.A. 605. It is apparent, therefore, that, however commendable the service of the applicant in the navy, the provisions of law in relation to naturalization of persons in the army and navy were intended by Congress to grant to those serving in the army and navy, who were of the white or African races, exemption from the necessity of a previous declaration of intention and from the necessity of proving residence for five years within the United States, but were not intended to extend the benefit of the naturalization...