State ex rel. Lacy v. Brandhorst

• Decision Date: 21 May 1900
• Citation: 156 Mo. 457,56 S.W. 1094
• Parties: STATE ex rel. LACY et al. v. BRANDHORST.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

56 S.W. 1094

156 Mo. 457

STATE ex rel. LACY et al. v. BRANDHORST.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

May 21, 1900.

NATURALIZATION — JUDGMENT — COLLATERAL ATTACK.

Notwithstanding the absence of a law admitting a minor to be naturalized, a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction naturalizing

a minor, though erroneous, is not void, and cannot be attacked collaterally, but can only be annulled or set aside by appeal or writ of error, taken for that purpose.

Appeal from circuit court, Gasconade county; Rudolph Hirzel, Judge.

Quo warranto proceedings by the state of Missouri, by August Meyer, prosecuting attorney, on the relation of Lacy and others, against Henry Brandhorst, as collector of Gasconade county. There was judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

E. C. Crow, Atty. Gen., and Robt. Walker, for appellants. J. C. Kiskaddon, for respondent.

SHERWOOD, J.

On the trial of the issue joined in this quo warranto proceeding against Brandhorst as collector of Gasconade county, the trial court, upon what it considered sufficient evidence, found the issue in favor of Brandhorst, and denied the writ of ouster. Henry Brandhorst was born in Prussia in 1846. His father, of the same name, removed to this country in 1856, bringing his son with him. In 1857 the father, as found by the lower court, took out his first naturalization papers, when his son was 11 years of age. The father died in 1864, without having taken out his final papers. In 1865 the son himself took out citizen papers, when he was 19 years of age, as recited by the record. The only question arising on these facts is whether they confer citizenship on respondent. This case is governed by the provisions of an act of congress "to establish a uniform rule of naturalization," approved April 14, 1802. Henry Brandhorst, Sr., had made the preparatory declaration required by section 1 of that act. Section 2 of the act approved March 26, 1804, provided "that when any alien who shall have complied with the first condition specified in the first section of the original act, and who shall have pursued the directions prescribed in the second section of the said act, may die before he is actually naturalized, the widow and children of such alien shall be considered as citizens of the United States, and shall be entitled to all rights and privileges, as such, upon taking the oaths prescribed by law." But the second section of the act of March 26, 1804, just quoted, was repealed by that of May 24, 1828. This fact is confessed and pointed out by Mr. Kiskaddon with a candor more charming than common. The lower court evidently was of opinion, as appears from quotations, that sections 2165 and 2168 of the act of congress of 1883 were the governing sections in this case. Their provisions are, in...