United States v. Hidemitsu Toyota
| Decision Date | 28 May 1923 |
| Docket Number | 58600. |
| Citation | 290 F. 971 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. HIDEMITSU TOYOTA. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts |
Laurence Curtis, 2d, of Boston, Mass., for the United States.
Laurence M. Lombard, of Winchester, Mass., for Toyota.
This is a petition brought under section 15 of the Act of June 29 1906 (U.S. Comp. St. Sec. 4374), to cancel a certificate of naturalization issued to Hidemitsu Toyota on May 16, 1921. The case was very ably presented by counsel, with a full citation of authorities.
It is contended that Toyota, while in every way qualified on other grounds to be admitted to naturalization, was not eligible as he is a Japanese. He was admitted under the provisions of the Act of July 19, 1919 (U.S. Comp. St. Supp. 1923, Sec 4352aaa). This statute reads as follows:
'Any person of foreign birth who served in the military or naval forces of the United States during the present war, * * * (who) shall have been honorably discharged * * * shall have the benefits of the seventh subdivision of section 4 of the Act of June 29, 1906, * * * as amended; * * * and this provision shall continue for the period of one year after all of the American troops are returned to the United States.'
Toyota comes within the provisions of this statute and was properly admitted, if it applies to a man of the Japanese race.
It has been the settled policy of the United States since the beginning not to allow the naturalization of any person unless he was a free white person. An exception to this was made in 1870, when persons of African nativity or African descent were added to the list of eligibles. There is no question that a Japanese, who has not served in the army or navy of the United States, cannot be admitted to naturalization. In re Saito (C.C.) 62 F. 126; In re Yamashita, 30 Wash. 234, 70 P. 482, 59 L.R.A. 671; Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178, 43 Sup.Ct. 65, 67 L.Ed. . . . .
It is contended, however, that a different rule applies to persons who have been in the United States military or naval service. This has been denied in two well-considered recent opinions. In re Geronimo Para (D.C.) 269 F. 643; Petition of Easurk Emsen Charr (D.C.) 273 F. 207. See, also, In re 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. An unreported decision of Judge Vaughan, of the District Court of Hawaii, a copy of which was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Kusche
......Thind 2/19/23 US SC 261 U.S. 204, Hindu. 43 S.Ct. 338. Toyota 5/28/23 DC MASS 290 F. 971 Japanese. Gokhale 5/21/28 CCA 2nd 26 F.2d 360 Hindu. (b) Amounts ......
-
Hidemitsu Toyota v. United States
...naturalized. The District Court held he was not entitled to be naturalized, and entered a decree canceling his certificate of citizenship. 290 F. 971. An appeal was taken to the Circuit Court of Appeals, and that court under section 239, Judicial Code (Comp. St. § 1216), certified to this c......
-
Sylvester v. Keeler
...290 F. 969 SYLVESTER v. KEELER. No. 2425.United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.June 22, 1923 [290 F. 970] . . ......
-
Toyota v. United States
...on the brief), for the United States. Before BINGHAM, JOHNSON, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. The decree of the District Court (290 F. 971) is affirmed, in conformance with answers to certified questions. 45 S. Ct. 563, 69 L. Ed. ...