AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF

WOMEN

HEARING

BEFORE A

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION

^UNITED STATES IgSttATE

SEVENTY-SECOND CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

S. 992

A BILL RELATING TO THE RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS

FOR NATURALIZATION PURPOSES OF ALIEN WIVES OF

MEMBERS OF THE DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR

SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES AND WIVES OF

OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES

GOVERNMENT STATIONED ABROAD

S. 2760

A BILL RELATIVE TO THE ADMISSION UNDER THE

IMMIGRATION LAWS OF WIVES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS

S. 3968

A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR THE CITIZENSHIP OF A CHILD

BORN OF AN AMERICAN MOTHER AND

AN ALIEN FATHER

AND

S. 4169

A BILL RELATIVE TO THE CITIZENSHIP OF MINOR

CHILDREN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

MARCH 2, 1933

Printed for the use of the Committee on Immigration

UNITED STATES

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

181999 WASHINGTON : 1983

/' . '•
COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION

HENRY D. HATFIELD, West Virginia, Chairman

HIRAM W. JOHNSON, California. WILLIAM H. KINO, Utah.

HENRY W. KEYE8, New Hampshire. ROYAL 8. OOPELAND, New York.

DAVID A. REED, Pennsylvania. HUBERT D. STEPHENS, Mississippi.

OERALD P. NYE, North Dakota. GEORGE McOILL, Kansas.

JAMES E. WATSON, Indiana. MARCUS A. COOLIDOE, Massachusetts.

R08COE 0. PATTERSON, Missouri. RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Jr., Georgia.

JOHN J. WALSH, Acting Cleric

II
AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 1933

UNITED STATES SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION,

Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 o'clock a. m., in the

committee room, Capitol, Senator Henry D. Hatfield presiding.

Present: Senators Hatfield (chairman) and Copeland.

The subcommittee had under consideration the following bills

which are here printed in full as follows:

[S. 992, Seventy-second Congress, first session]

A BILL Relating to the residence requirements for naturalization purposes of alien wives of members of

the Diplomatic and Consular Service of the United States and wives of other employees of the United

States Government stationed abroad

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United Slates of

America in Congress assembled, That paragraph (b) of section 2 of the Act entitled

"An Act relative to the naturalization and citizenship of married women,"

approved September 22, 1922, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following: "Residence by the alien wife of a member of the Diplomatic or Consular

Service of the United States or any employee of any department of the Federal

Government of the United States who is a citizen of the United States, at the

official place of residence of her husband, shall be considered residence within the

United States."

[Si 2760, Seventy-second Congress, first session]

A BILL Relative to the admission under the immigration laws of wives of American citizens .

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of

America in Congress assembled, That subdivision (c) of section 13 of the Immigration Act of 1924, as amended by the Act of June 13, 1930, is amended by striking

out the word "Chinese."

[Si 3968, Seventy-second Congress, first session]

A BILL To provide for the citizenship of a child born of an American mother and an alien father

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of

America in Congress assembled, That a child born without the United States since

September 22, 1922, of an American mother and an alien father shall be a citizen

of the United States upon the return to the United States of the American mother:

Provided, That said American mother shall not have ceased at any time prior to

her return to the United States to be a citizen of the United States.
Z CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN

[S. 4169, Seventy-Second Congress, First Session]

A BILL Relative to the citizenship of minor children, and for other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United Slates of

America in Congress assembled, That (a) section 1993 of the Revised Statutes is

amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 1993. Any child hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the

United States, whose father or mother is at the time of the birth of such child a

citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States; but

the rights of citizenship shall not descend to any such child unless the citizen

father or citizen mother, as the case may be, has resided in the United States

prior to the birth of such child."

(b) Section 5 of the act entitled "an act in reference to the expatriation of

citizens and their protection abroad," approved March 2, 1907, as amended, is

Amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 5. That a child born without the United States of alien parents shall

be deemed a citizen of the United States by virtue of the naturalization of or

resumption of American citizenship by the father or the mother: Provided, That

.such naturalization or resumption takes place during the minority of such child:

.And provided further, That the citizenship of such minor child shall begin at the

time sucli minor child begins to reside permanently in the United States."

(c) The amendments made by this section to section 1993 of the Revised

Statutes and section 5 of the act of March 2, 1907, shall not terminate citizenship

acquired under such sections before such amendments.

[S. 4169, Seventy-second Congress, first session]

A BILL Relative to the citizenship of minor children, and for other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of

America in Congress assembled, That (a) section 1993 of the Revised Statutes is

amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 1993. Any child hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the

United States, whose father or mother is at the time of the birth of such child a

citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States; but

the rights of citizenship shall not descend to any such child unless the citizen

father or citizen mother, as the case may be, has resided in the United States

prior to the birth of such child."

(b) Section 5 of the act entitled "an act in reference to the expatriation of

citizens and their protection abroad," approved March 2, 1907, as amended, is

amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 5. That a child born without the United States of alien parents shall be

deemed a citizen of the United States by virtue of the naturalization of or resumption of American citizenship by the father or the mother: Provided, That such

naturalization or resumption takes place during the minority of such child: And

provided further, That the citizenship of such minor child shall begin at the time

such minor child begins to reside permanently in the United States."

(c) The amendments made by this section to section 1993 of the Revised Statutes and section 5 of the act of March 2, 1907, shall not terminate citizenship

acquired under such sections before such amendments.

Senator COPELAND. Mr. Chairman, you will recall that we were

appointed as a subcommittee of the Immigration Committee to hear

Congressman John L. Cable. No man in the Congress since I have

been here has been more active in the cause of good citizenship,

particularly in preserving the rights of women in American citizenship, than Congressman Cable.

While I am glad the Democrats won the last election, yet I am

regretful that, by reason of the landslide, we are to lose, for the time,

at least, the eminent services of Mr. Cable. Frankly, I am sorry he

is not to be in a position to give us the wise counsel he has in the past.

As I understand it, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Cable has made a careful

compilation of the history of the battle of the women to preserve their

rights, and of the laws relating to women in citizenship.
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 3

I think that is all I have to say, Mr. Chairman, and I suggest that

Congressman Cable be permitted to proceed in his own way.

Mr. CABLE. Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you for the privilege

of appearing this morning, and also in this manner to acknowledge

the cooperation of members of this committee in the enactment of

the original law of September 22, 1922, seeking to grant independent

citizenship to women, as well as the two amendments of that act,

namely, July 3, 1930, and March 3, 1931.

I submit for your consideration American Citizenship Rights of

Women, giving, in chronological form, the laws of the United States,

the decisions of the various courts, and the rulings of the executive

departments on the rights of women in the United States relative to

or based on their citizenship, with the historical background.

Senator Copeland, of New York, has been most effective in the

passage of these laws by the Senate, and the women of America

have expressed their appreciation and thanks for his work in assisting

in placing on the statute books these laws now granting complete

nationality and citizensliip rights to women. In other words, women

in America now have equal nationality and citizenship rights with

men.

Bills pending before the Committee relative to the citizenship of

minor children, I trust, will receive favorable consideration.

(The statement submitted by Mr. Cable is as follows:)

AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

By JOHN L. CABLE

Member of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization in the United

States House of Representatives during the Sixty-seventh, Sixty-eight,

Seventy-first, and Seventy-second Congresses.

Member of the Bar of Ohio and the Supreme Court of the United States.
WITHIN FOUR YEARS OF THE CLOSE OF THE CIVIL WAR.

SUFFRAGE WAS GRANTED TO WOMEN BY THE TERRITORY OF

WYOMING. THEREAFTER IT WAS BUT A QUESTION OF TIME

UNTIL THE WOMEN OF ALL THE STATES SHOULD OBTAIN SUFFRAGE BY AN AMENDMENT THE NINETEENTH TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UlsilTED STATES. THIS WAS IN 1920.

SINCE THAT TIME. THE HONORABLE JOHN L. CABLE, A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM OHIO, HAS

MADE IT HIS MISSION TO ENLARGE THE EQUALITY, WHICH THE

WOMEN HAD OBTAINED THROUGH THE NINETEENTH AMENDMENT, BY STATUTES DEALING WITH EQUALITY IN THE MATTER

OF NATIONALITY. THE FIRST BILL WHICH HE INTRODUCED IN THE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IS THE BASIS OF ALL SUBSEQUENT

LEGISLATION IN THIS PHASE OF EQUALITY. IT IS RIGHTLY

KNOWN AS THE "CABLE ACT." WHICH, SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT

OF THE UNITED STATES, TOOK EFFECT ON THE 22D DAY OF

SEPTEMBER. 1922. GIVING TO THE WOMEN OF THE UNITED

STATES THE RIGHT TO A NATIONALITY IN THEIR OWN BEHALF

AND RECOGNIZING THEM AS CITIZENS INDEPENDENTLY OF THEIR

HUSBANDS. IT WAS THUS MR. CABLE'S GOOD FORTUNE TO IMPLEMENT (TO USE A PHRASE OF THE DAY) THE NINETEENTH

AMENDMENT. AND IT IS. AND DOUBTLESS ALWAYS WILL BE. A

SOURCE OF PRIDE TO MR. CABLE TO KNOW THAT THE ACT WHICH

BEARS HIS NAME IS WORTHY TO BE MENTIONED IN CONNECTION

WITH THE AMENDMENT.

MR. CABLES HISTORY OF WOMEN'S RIGHTS STATES THE

BATTLE FOR INDEPENDENT CITIZENSHIP. CULMINATING IN THE

ACT WHICH BEARS HIS NAME. AND ALSO FURTHER MEASURES

OF EQUALITY. WITH A RESUME OF THE EFFECT OF MARRIAGE ON

THE CITIZENSHIP OF WOMEN. IT IS A DOCUMENT OF SOME

THIRTY PAGES OF TEXT, WITH AN APPENDIX OF STATUTES.

TABLES OF CASES AND INDEX IN ALL BUT SEVENTY-SIX PAGES.

IT WAS AN EXCELLENT IDEA OF SENATOR COPELAND TO

HAVE IT PRINTED IN THIS PUBLIC DOCUMENT BY THE SENATE OF

THE UNITED STATES.

MR. CABLE. NOTWITHSTANDING HIS PRE-EMINENCE IN THE

FIELD IN WHICH HE IS A PIONEER. IS NEVERTHELESS SO MODEST

AND SO GENEROUS THAT ON OCCASION HE RECALLS. APPARENTLY WITH PLEASURE. THE DAYS WHEN HE WAS A STUDENT OF

THE UNDERSIGNED

JAMES BROWN SCOTT,

PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.

PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.

FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE INSTITUT DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Put

Chapter I. History of woman's rights 9

II. Separate citizenship under the common law 12

III. Trend toward the principle of national identity 14

IV. The principle of national identity adopted absolutely 20

V. The battle for citizenship independence 25

VI. Victory•The women's independent citizenship act 29

VII. Perfecting the law . 34

Re\sum6 of the effect of marriage on the citizenship of women 40

APPENDIXES

A. Authority of Congress to establish a uniform rule of naturalization 43

B. Who are citizens of the United States 43

C. Women's citizenship act of February 10, 1855 43

D. Women's citizenship act of March 2, 1907 43

E. Married women's independent citizenship act of September 22, 1922.. 44

F. Committee report on married women's independent citizenship act of

September 22, 1922.. 44

' G. Act of July 3, 1930 (first perfecting amendment of the married women's

independent citizenship act of September 22, 1922) 46

H. House committee report on act of July 3, 1930 47

I. Senate committee report on act of July 3, 1930 50

J. Act of March 3, 1931 (second perfecting amendment of the married

women's independent citizenship act of September 22, 1922) 58

K. House committee report on act of March 3, 1931 59

L. Senate committee report on act of March 3, 1931 61

M. Conference committee report on act of March 3, 1931 62

N. Married women's independent citizenship act, as amended 63

O. Right to terminate citizenship 64

P. Methods of terminating citizenship 65

Q. Naturalization treaties between the United States and other countries. 65

Table of cases 67

Index 69

7

AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

CHAPTER I. WOMEN'S RIGHTS

A full appreciation of American women's recent citizenship victory

is impossible without an understanding of the world-wide movement

during the nineteenth century to liberate married women from the

legal domination of their husbands and to grant them a legal status

all their own.

Women have always had to fight for their rights, whether personal,

civil, or political. At only one time prior to 1800, and that was

during the later years of the Roman Empire, did they enjoy a status

even approximating that of separate legal identity. Under the civil

law of the continent a single woman was the ward of her father, and

a married woman the ward of her husband. The common law of

England was liberal with the unmarried woman, but not with the

wife. In the eyes of the common law man and wife were one, and

the man was that one.

Upon her marriage a woman's legal identity was submerged in

that of her husband. The common law gave him all of his wife's

persona) property, and gave him the right to collect the rents and

profits from her real estate. He could collect the debts due her.

He was entitled to her companionship and services. If she worked

for another her wages were his, and he could collect them from her

employer. If she happened to suffer personal injury her husband

could recover from the responsible person for the loss of her services.

The American Colonies followed the common law of England

and subordinated married women to their husbands. This situation

was unjust. Women's first great fight began in 1800, when they

started their campaign for independent control of their own property

and for a legal identity. After a long and hard struggle, some of the

States in this country began in 1856 to enact laws which gave married

women independent control of their property and permitted them to

become parties to contracts and to sue in their own names. Women's

fight for a legal identity was won. But even then they by no means

enjoyed a status of equality with men.

Just as women were meeting with their first success in this fight, the

campaign for equal suffrage began. For a long time interest in

woman suffrage lagged, and the campaign seemed doomed to failure.

New life was given the movement, however, by the famous trial of

Susan B. Anthony in 1872.'

In 1871, when the laws of New York gave her no right to vote,

Miss Anthony voted at Rochester, New York, for a candidate for

election to Congress. Accompanied by several other women, she

• United States c. Anthony, 11 Blanchford 200; 24 Fed. 829.
10 CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN

went to the Board of Elections just before the election that year and

demanded that she and the other women be registered as voters.

She read to the election officials this portion of fourteenth amendment

of the United States Constitution:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the state wherein they

reside.

Then she told the members of the board that the provision of the

New York constitution restricting the right of suffrage to "male

citizens" was contrary to the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and therefore void. She warned the

election officials that unless she and her friends were registered, she

would have the officials arrested. Thereupon the ladies were registered and later permitted to vote.

After the election Susan B. Anthony was indicted, tried, and convicted in the Federal court sitting at Rochester for having voted

unlawfully. The presiding judge instructed the jury that the

privilege of voting is one conferred by the State governments only,

and that they might restrict that privilege to whomsoever they

pleased. The judge also declared that citizenship and suffrage are

entirely different, and that while Miss Anthony was a citizen by

birth in the United States, citizenship does not necessarily carry with

it the right to vote.

A somewhat similar case arose in St. Louis during the same election

campaign. Mrs. Virginia Minor went to the registrar of voters,

Reese Happersett, and demanded that she be registered and permitted

to vote as a citizen of the United States under the fourteenth

amendment. Happersett refused. Thereupon Mrs. Minor went to

court to compel Happersett to register her. She lost, and the case

finally was carried to the Supreme Court of the United States.2

That court conceded that Mrs. Minor was a citizen of the United

States and pointed out that women, like men, have always been

citizens by birth in this country. Then the court held that citizenship and suffrage are separate and distinct, and that what should be

the requirements for voting is a matter for the States alone to

determine.

Citizenship and suffrage must not be confused. There are two

kinds of citizenship•State and United States citizenship. In this

book only United States citizenship is of primary interest. Under

the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution a citizen of the United

States also is a citizen of the State wherein he resides, but it does not

follow that a citizen of one of the States, because of his State citizenship, also is a citizen of the United States.

Citizenship is the relation one bears to his or her government.

Suffrage, on the other hand, is merely the right to vote.

The requirements for American citizenship and the rules regulating

that relationship are prescribed by the United States, and not by the

States. Citizenship may be acquired in a number of different ways.

Mrs. Minor and Miss Anthony were citizens because they were born

in the United States. It is an old principle of our law that all persons

born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction of our Government are citizens. Ambassadors and other official representa-

' Minor v. Happersett, 88 U. S. (7 Wall.), 162.
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 11

tives of foreign governments are not subject to the jurisdiction of the

United States, and their children, even though born in this country,

therefore are not American citizens.

A child born abroad of an American father also is a citizen of the

United States.

Many persons become Americans by naturalization. There are

instances of group naturalization by treaty. Most naturalization,

however, results from individual petition. The naturalization of an

alien man also naturalizes his minor children. It used to naturalize

his alien wife too, but now she does not have to become a citizen unless

she wishes to do so. Marriage with an American formerly naturalized

a foreign woman, but marriage no longer is a naturalization process.

Most of the States require that a person be a citizen of both the

United States and the State wherein he resides, before he is permitted

to vote. This, however, is not always necessarily true. Whether

or not this requirement is prescribed is entirely up to the individual

States.

The cases of Susan B. Anthony and Virginia Minor brought to

light the true facts•women citizens were denied the right to vote by

State statutes, and the courts afforded them no relief. After these

decisions were handed down, the campaign for equal suffrage began

in earnest. Miss Anthony drafted an amendment to the Constitution.

Of the United States, and it was first introduced in Congress as a

resolution by Senator A. A. Sargent in 1878.

For years thereafter determined women conducted a valiant struggle

in Washington. But Congress was slow to act, and the results were

discouraging. Meantime the women became active in all the State

capitals, and in time 12 of the 48 States•Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Utah,

Washington, and Wyoming•one by one granted women the right

to vote. Finally the campaign gained great momentum, its influence

became national in scope, and at last the nineteenth amendment to

the Constitution of the United States was ratified in 1920. That

amendment declares:

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged

by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

While American citizenship is governed and regulated by the United

States, the requirements for voting are, with the exception of the

limitation laid down by the 15th and 19th amendments, exclusively

prescribed by the individual States.

In the nineteenth amendment women had won another great victory. There still remained in our laws, however, many discriminations against them. Outstanding among these was the husband's

predominance in matters of citizenship or nationality. After the

nineteenth amendment was ratified, the husband still had the right,

either by refusing to change his citizenship or by adopting a new

one, to decide not only whether he, but also whether his wife should

be a citizen of this country or of some other country. A married

woman had absolutely no choice; in this matter she was still bound

by her husband's will.
12 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

CHAPTER II. SEPARATE CITIZENSHIP UNDER THE COMMON

LAW

The rule that the wife should take the citizenship of her husband

is said to be traceable to the Code of Justinian.1 However that may

be, from 1350 down to the middle of the nineteenth century, the

common law of England gave married women a citizenship identity

entirely separate and apart from that of their husbands. If an alien

woman married a British subject, that marriage did not change her

nationality; nor did marriage with a foreigner operate to deprive an

English woman of her native citizenship.2

For nearly 80 years after the Declaration of Independence the

English common law on this subject was followed in entirety by the

courts in the United States. Marriage under the common law of this

country also was not a naturalization process for the alien woman

who married an American citizen. This point was decided in the

case of Mick v. Mick, which arose in New York in 1833.3

There an alien woman, a native of Ireland, had married an American

citizen in 1805. The man bought a farm in 1823. In 1830 he died,

providing in his will that the farm shoidd be the property of his wife.

The law of New York at that time prohibited an alien from receiving

real estate by will. In 1833, a son brought suit as one of his father's

legal heirs to recover a one-ninth interest in the farm. The court

held that the mother did not become an American citizen by virtue

of her marriage to an American, and that the native-born son was

entitled to the interest he claimed.

Further evidence of a married woman's citizenship independence

under the common law lies in the fact that an alien married woman

was permitted to become a naturalized American on her own petition,

whether or not her husband wished her to become naturalized or to

become naturalized himself.4

On the other hand, the courts held that under the common law

marriage with a foreigner was not sufficient to expatriate an Americanborn woman, even though she went to reside with her alien husband

in his native land. That was decided in Beck v. McGillis,8 which also

came up in New York. John Caldwell, an American citizen, died in

1848, willing certain real estate to his American-born daughter, Eliza,

who had married a Canadian in 1836 and had resided in Canada with

her foreign husband since that time. The court was confronted with

the question whether Eliza, as legatee, could receive the land, or

whether her marriage had made her an alien and therefore disqualified

her under the laws of New York from holding real property in that

State. The court decided in 1850 that "neither her marriage nor

residence in a foreign country constitutes her an alien," and permitted

her to receive the land.

The common law rule giving married women separate citizenship

was an outgrowth of the feudal system. That system was built on

the personal relationship between the king and his lords, the lords

and their underlords, the underlords and their tenants. Because the

1 Prof. J. S. Reeves, University of Michigan, 17 American Journal of International Law, 97,98

* Law of England with Reference to Conflict of Laws, A. V. Dicey, 1927 edition, pp. 174-175.

» Mick v. Mick, 1833,10 Wend. (N. Y.) 379.

< Priest P. Cummings, 1837,16 Wend. (N. Y.), 617.

s Beck v. McGillis, 1850, 9 Barb. (N. Y.), 35; accord•10 Op. of Atty Gen. 321 (1862, Atty. Gen. Edward

Bates).
CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN 13

strength of the system depended upon maintaining those relationships, a rule of law grew up denying any subject or citizen the right

to expatriate himself. As Blackstone said:

It is a principle of universal law that the natural born subject of one prince

can not by any act of his own, no, not by swearing allegiance to another, put

off his natural allegiance to the former: * * * (he) may be entangled by

subjecting himself absolutely to another * * * ; (but) it is unreasonable

that by such voluntary act of his own, he should be able at pleasure to unloose

those bands by which he is connected to his natural prince. *

The rule of separate citizenship under the common law was not a

recognition of women's rights or a recognition of the dignity and individuality of a woman's citizenship. It was a rule of convenience only.

And later, when circumstances had changed somewhat, the common

law of convenience gave way to equally utilitarian statutory rules.

Marriage under the common law, then, did not affect a woman's

citizenship. In one situation that rule was carried down in our law

until after the beginning of the twentieth century. Until 1907 the

American woman who married an alien and remained in this country

after her marriage continued to be an American citizen whether her

alien husband ever became naturalized or not. It was so held in 1896

in the case of Comitis v. Parkerson, which had arisen in Louisiana.7

There an American-born woman had married an Italian immigrant

by the name of Loretto Comitis in Louisiana in 1881. Mr. and Mrs.

Comitis continued to live in Louisiana, having no intention at any

time of going abroad to live. In 1891 Mr. Comitis was killed, and

Mrs. Comitis sued Parkerson and the city of New Orleans for damages

for Comitis' wrongful death. The case was taken into Federal court,

and the question of the court's jurisdiction was raised. Had Annie

Comitis become an alien because of her marriage, so that her case

could be taken into the Federal court on the ground of diversity of

citizenship?

The court held that an American woman in Mrs. Comitis' position

could expatriate herself only by removal from the United States.

Since she had never resided outside the United States, she had never

ceased to be an American, and her petition in the Federal court was

dismissed.

The same rule was laid down by Secretary of State Charles Evans

Hughes in the case of Louise Gehring Marshall, January 24, 1925.

Louise Gehring was born in Cleveland, Ohio, April 26, 1862. Some

years before 1900 she married an Englishman by the name of Marshall.

Mr. and Mrs. Marshall continued to reside in the United States from

the time of their marriage until 1925.

At that time Mrs. Marshall applied for an American passport,

and it became necessary for the Department of State to decide

whether Mrs. Marshall had been deprived of her American citizenship by her marriage to a subject of Great Britain. Mr. Hughes

quoted the Supreme Court of the United States to the effect that

"a change of citizenship can not be arbitrarily imposed, that is,

imposed without the concurrence of the citizen," 8and held that in

the absence of a statutory provision the American woman who married

an alien before 1907 and continued to reside in the United States

* Blackstone's Commentaries, Chase's 1927 edition, p. 117.

' Comitis p. Parkerson, 1896, 56 Fed. 556.

» Mackenzie n. Hare, 1914, 239 U. S. 299.
14 CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN

did not because of her marriage cease to be an American citizen.

Being a citizen, therefore, Mrs. Marshall was entitled to receive a

passport, and it was issued to her forthwith.9

While marriage alone did not deprive an American woman of her

birthright, it was possible for her to terminate her native citizenship

under our law prior to the 1907 act. Such an expatriation is well

illustrated in the early case of Shanks v. Dupont, decided in 1830.10

That case involved the settlement of the estate of Thomas Scott, a

citizen of South Carolina, and a citizen of the United States after the

formation of the union. Thomas Scott's daughter, Ann, a native of

South Carolina, married a British officer by the name of James Shanks

during the British occupation of Charleston in 1781. When the

British forces evacuated in 1782, Ann went with Shanks to England,

and lived there with him until his death in 1801.

Mr. and Mrs. Shanks had five children, all of them born in England.

These children claimed Ann's share of her father's estate in South

Carolina. A question as to Ann's citizenship and the effect of her

marriage on her nationality came up during the consideration of the

case. The court decided that neither Ann's marriage to a foreigner

nor her removal to live with him in England had changed her citizenship. However, the fact that she had voluntarily participated in

British affairs and had "adhered to the British side" had operated to

deprive her of her native citizenship.

Despite Mrs. Shanks' expatriation, her children were permitted to

enforce their claim and take possession of the land under the terms of

the treaty of peace with Great Britain in 1794.

Before any statutes were enacted to control the decisions of the

courts, therefore, it was a rule of the common law that marriage to

an American or the naturalization of her alien husband before 1855

did not naturalize an alien woman. She was then permitted to be

naturalized on her own petition. It has generally been held that

where an American woman married an alien between 1789 and 1907

and continued to reside in the United States, she did not cease to be

an American citizen.11 But our courts early permitted an American

woman to expatriate herself if she elected to do so after marriage to

an alien.

The rule of perpetual allegiance, then, had broken down. In fact,

the reason for the rule had long since disappeared. In the middle

of the nineteenth century our first statutes on this subject were

enacted. Thereafter the law was different.

CHAPTER III. TREND TOWARD THE PRINCIPLE OF NATIONAL IDENTITY

_ During the nineteenth century the common law rule of separate

citizenship for man and wife gave way to another rule of convenience.

People were moving about more freely from one country to another,

and that resulted in more frequent marriages between persons of

different nationalities. Before 1800 a person could expatriate himself

only if he or she first obtained the consent of his or her sovereign. It

is an ancient principle of the Anglo-American law that citizenship is

a compact between the individual and the sovereign, a mutual rela-

• Louise Gehring Marshall case; memorandum, office of solicitor, Department of State, Jan. 24,1925.

« Shanks v. Dupont, 1830, 3 Pet. (U. S.) 242; accord•12 Op. Atty. Gen. 7 (1866, Atty. Gen. Henry Stanberry).

. » Contra•Pequinot v. Detroit, 1883, 16 Fed. 211; in re Zogbaum, 1929, 32 Fed. 2d, 911.
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 15

tionship that can not be terminated by one without the consent of the

other.1 While there could be no expatriation, there are many instances where an individual would leave his or her native land, go

abroad and swear allegiance to some foreign soverign. Such acts

invariably resulted in double allegiance or dual nationality. Embarrassing diplomatic controversies arose over dual nationality, and led

to statutory changes in the law.

The first modern statute giving the wife the same citizenship as her

husband, regardless of what her nationality may have been prior to

marriage, or what her wishes in the matter may have been, was the

Code of Napoleon, enacted in 1804. Article 12 of that code provided

that the alien woman who married a Frenchman should thereby

become a French citizen. Article 9 covered the reverse situation and

stated that a French woman who married a foreigner should herself

become a foreigner and assume her husband's nationality.

These provisions of the Napoleonic Code were widely adopted.

During the nineteenth century and the first part of the twentieth,

similar laws were enacted by Austria, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Cuba,

Denmark, Dominican Republic, Germany, Great Britain, Italy,

Mexico, Nicaragua, Portugal, Rumania, Russia, Spain, Sweden, and

the United States.2

The rule of the English common law was first modified by the act

of Parliament of August 6, 1844,3declaring that the alien woman who

married a British subject should acquire British nationality. Shortly

afterwards the United States adopted a similar rule in the act of

February 10, 1855, which provided:

Any woman who is now or may hereafter be married to a citizen of the United

States, and who might herself be lawfully naturalized, shall be deemed a citizen.4

After the passage of that act, the courts held uniformly that all alien

woman became an American citizen upon marriage with an American

whether he was a native-born or naturalized citizen of the United

States. It was also held thereafter that the alien wife of an alien

became a naturalized American through her husband's naturalization.

The operation of that statute came up in 1868 for consideration in

in the case of Kelly v. Owen.6That case settled a dispute with regard

to partition of the estate of Miles Kelly, a native of Ireland, who had

come to the United States in 1848, and who had married Ellen Duffy,

an alien by birth, in 1853. Kelly died in 1862, leaving as his heirs his

wife and two sisters. Kelly's sisters claimed the whole estate, arguing

that Ellen Kelly, his wife, was an unnaturalized alien and therefore not

entitled to share in it.

Kelly had been naturalized in 1856, and the question for the court to

decide was whether or not Kelly's naturalization had made his wife

Ellen a citizen also and entitled her to receive part of the estate.

That Ellen had married Kelly prior to his naturalization and prior to

the passage of the new act, the court said, did not matter. The terms

of the act referred to a state of marriage, rather than to the time when

the marriage ceremony was celebrated. Thus, Ellen, an alien, had

1 Cf. Williams Case, 1788, Wharton's State Trial, 602.

i Nationality Laws, Richard W. Flournoy, jr., and Manley O. Hudson, 1929, Oxford University Press,

New York.

117 Stats. L. 153; 7 and 8 Victoria, c. 66, XVI.

• 10 U. S. Stats. L. 804; R. 8. Sec. 1994; cf. House Document No. 326, 69th Cong., for report on 1855 act;

repealed by act of Sept. 22, 1922, Sees. 2 and 6.

• Kelly v. Owen, 1868, 7 Wall. (U. S.) 496.

161990•33 2
16 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

become a citizen of the United States because of her husband's

naturalization, despite the fact that she had married her alien husband

before the new law went into effect. Consequently, Mrs. Ellen

Kelly, as wife, was entitled to an interest in her deceased husband's

property, and the partition she requested was granted. That act of

1855 had operated to make her a citizen of the United States automatically upon her husband's naturalization.

One clause of this act, "and who might herself be lawfully naturalized," came up very frequently for interpretation. This clause

received very careful consideration in Leonard v. Grant,6 which arose

in Oregon in 1880. There the court was concerned with the citizenship of Mrs. D. G. Leonard, a woman who had been born in Switzerland, and who had married Leonard, a native-born American, in 1875.

What qualifications for her naturalization had to be shown to prove

that Mrs. Leonard became a naturalized American by marriage with

Leonard? Did she have to prove that she was a free white person or

one of African nativity or descent;7that she had resided in the United

States five years before her marriage;8that she was of good moral

character and attached to the principles of the Constitution, and

that she had renounced all titles of nobility,9if any she had?

The court decided that it was not necessary for those things to be

proved in order for her to be deemed a citizen. All that had to be

proved, the court held, was that she was a free white person or one

of African blood, for her to have acquired American citizenship upon

her marriage to Leonard. In other words, the statute referred only

to a race or class eligibility, and not to the residence and character

prerequisites. Mrs. Leonard was a free white person, and for that

reason was naturalized by her marriage.

Chinese women, of course, have not been eligible for naturalization

since 1882.10 Consequently, their marriage to Americans has not

made them citizens.11 The same rule has been applied to Arabians,

Burmese, Hindus, Japanese, and Koreans.12 They are not white

persons.

In other respects, however, the 1855 act operated contrary to the

best interests of the United States and her people.

Thus it was that the common law governing the citizenship of alien

women who married Americans was changed by the statute of 1855.

Thenceforth marriage to an American, or naturalization of the alien

husband, automatically transformed the alien woman into an American citizen. This situation continued to exist until 1922.

From 1789 to 1907 marriage to an alien did not in itself deprive

an American woman of her native citizenship. If she continued to

reside in the United States, she remained an American. However,

during the period from 1855 to 1907, despite the fact that no law

• Leonard v. Grant. 1880, 5 Fed. 11.

• Race eligibility for naturalization by judicial process prescribed by the acts of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat.

L. 103, c. 3) and July 14, 1870 (Stat. L. 16, 256), respectively; still prescribed.

• Residence requirement for naturalization prescribed first by the act of June 18,1795 (1 Stat. L. 414, c. 20),

raised to 14 years by the act ofJune 18,1798 (1 Stat. L. 566), but restored by the act of April 14, 1802 (2 Stats.

L. 153, c. 28); it has remained unchanged ever since, except as indicated in Chaps. V and VI, post.

' Requirements uniformly prescribed since 1790.

» Act of May 6, 1882, 22 Stat. h. 58, 61.

» Chang Chan v. Nagle, 1924, 268 U. S. 346.

12 Other ineligible aliens: Arabians (7 Fed. 2d. 728), Burmese (28 N". V. S. 333), Hindus (261 U. S. 204),

Japanese (260 U. S. 178), and Koreans (273 Fed. 2071.
CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN 17

was passed relating to the citizenship of American women who

married aliens, there was a changed attitude on the part of the courts.

They seem to have been influenced by the principle of the act of

1855 and by the act of July 27, 1868, which declared that it is an

inherent right of all citizens to sever their allegiance to the United

States.13 The common-law rule of perpetual allegiance was abrogated

by the act of 1868, and thereafter the courts searched for evidence

of an American woman's election to expatriate herself after marriage

to an alien.

Between 1855 and 1907 removal from the United States after

marriage to an alien did operate to expatriate an American woman.

It was so held, for instance in the case of Ruckgaber v. Moore in

1900.uIn that case an American-born woman had married a

Frenchman and, after the marriage, lived continuously in France until

her death. She owned certain personal property in New York, and

this she devised to her daughter, who had married a subject of

Germany and had lived in his native country from the date of the

marriage until this case came before the court. There was no evidence that the daughter had ever resided in this country.

Under what he thought was authority granted by the war revenue

act of 1898, Moore, Federal internal revenue collector in New York,

had levied a legacy tax on the property the mother had willed to her

daughter. The daughter paid the tax under protest, and later

brought suit in Federal court to recover the amount of the tax from the

collector.

The court held that unless the United States had jurisdiction over

the mother or the daughter, the tax could not lawfully have been

levied. Since there was nothing to show that the daughter was born

in the United States or even had ever lived here, the court as once

turned to a consideration of the American-born mother's citizenship

status at the time of her death. Unless she was a citizen of the

United States when she died, our Government had no jurisdiction

over her.

First, the court referred to the fact that three leading countries

France, Great Britain, and the United States, then had laws which

automatically naturalized the alien woman who married one of their

citizens. Next, it referred to the act of 1868, which recognized the

inherent right of all American citizens to expatriate themselves.

Then the court held that the laws of a foreign country became operative if the American woman elected to take her alien husband's

nationality. Removal from the United States and residence in her

husband's country, the court said, indicated such an election. Since

the American-born mother had elected to expatriate herself by going

to reside in France after marriage with an alien, she had completely

severed her ties of allegiance to this country and become an alien.

Inasmuch as the mother was a nonresident alien, the court held

that the United States had no jurisdiction over her, and the tax had

been levied and collected unlawfully. Subsequently the daughter

recovered the legacy tax she had paid the revenue collector.

" Act of July 27, 1868, R. S. sees. 1999, 2000, and 2001; cf. Appendix O, p. 64, infra.

» Ruckbager I. Moore, 1900, 104 Fed. 947; affirmed, 114 Fed. 1021. See also Jennes v. Landes, 1897,

84 Fed. 73; Wallenburg v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 159 Fed. 217.
18 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

Thus, between 1776 and 1907 the marriage of an American woman

to an alien alone was not sufficient to deprive her of her native citizenship. But if she took up a permanent residence abroad with her

husband at any time before September 22, 1922, and if she acquired

as a result of the marriage the nationality of the country of which

her husband was a citizen or subject, she lost her American citizenship.

Suppose that during this period and prior to March 2, 1907, an

American woman married an alien and lost her American citizenship

by marriage and residence abroad with her alien husband, and that

after he died she wished to return to the United States and regain

her native citizenship. Could she do so? There was no statute on

the subject, and but one court decision. (Moore v. Tisdale, 1848,

5 B. Mon., Ky., 352.) The practice of the Department of State,

however, was to permit a woman who had lost her American citizenship in this manner, to reacquire it by resuming permanent residence

in the United States subsequent to the termination of the marital

status and prior to March 2, 1907.

An interesting case on repatriation during this period is that of

Nellie Grant Sartoris, the only daughter of Ulysses S. and Mrs. Grant,

who was born in Illinois in August of 1855. She came with her

family to reside in Washington when General Grant assumed command of the Union Army in 1864. Scarcely had the Civil War ended,

when Grant's magnificent record swept him, a man with but little

Eolitical background, into the presidency. For a few years, however,

er schooling fully occupied her time, and then, when she had finished

that, her parents sent her with her brothers to visit relatives and

travel in Europe. Aboard the S. S. Russia, returning home from a

prolonged visit, Nellie met a young Englishman by the name of

Algernon Charles Frederick Sartoris. Before the Russia had docked

in New York, Nellie and Sartoris were engaged to be married.

On May 21, 1874, they were married at the White House. The

certificate of their marriage is unique. It was countersigned by

David K. Cartter, chief justice of the Supreme Court of the District

of Columbia, and certified to by Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State,

and Sir Edward Thornton, British ambassador to the United States.

A few hours after the ceremony Mr. and Mrs. Sartoris left Washington by special train for New York. Two days later they embarked

on the S. S. Baltic for England. Their home was established in

Hampshire, England, where they lived until Sartoris died in 1896.

Doubtless little thought was given at the time to the effect of

Nellie's marriage upon her citizenship. Sartoris was an Englishman,

and the law of Great Biitain provided that if any alien woman should

marry a native-born or naturalized subject of Great Britain, that

woman herself should be deemed to be a naturalized subject of Great

Britain.16 By the operation of the English law, Nellie became an

English subject upon her marriage with Sartoris. But did she cease

to be an American citizen? While there was no statute governing

this question at the time of her marriage, the act of 1868 had recognized an American citizen's right to expatriate himself, and the courts

had taken it upon themselves to hold that an American woman's

removal from this country after marriage with an alien operated to

expatriate her.

II Same as note 3, p. 16, supra.
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 19

The operation of the laws already mentioned was supplemented by

the terms of the treaty of May 13, 1870, between Great Britain and

the United States.16 In that treaty the United States and Great

Britain mutually agreed that if a citizen of either country should

become a naturalized citizen of the other, the country whose citizen

the person had formerly been should recognize that naturalization as

valid. Because Great Britain had not yet recognized the right of its

citizens to expatriate themselves, as we had done in the act of 1868,

this treaty was necessary to eliminate the conflict between the citizenship laws of the two countries. The United States had entered into

similar treaties with a number of other countries,17 so that by the time

of Mrs. Sartoris' marriage the expatriation policy of the United

States in those cases was well settled.

After Sartoris died in 1896, Mrs. Sartoris returned to the United

States to reside. Resumption of permanent residence in the United

States by a former American woman who had married an alien

and acquired as a result of the marriage the nationality of the

country of which her husband was a citizen or subject, under the

practice of the Department of State, operated to restore her American

citizenship. But there was no specific provision in our laws whereby

a former woman citizen who had lost her citizenship by marriage and

residence abroad, could regain it.

Nellie Grant Sartoris petitioned Congress for relief. That body,

anxious to honor her illustrious father, as a tribute to his patriotism,

on May 18, 1898, passed the following special act:

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United Slates v

America in Congress assembled, That Nellie Grant Sartoris, daughter of Genera'

Ulysses S. Grant, be, and she is hereby, on her own application, unconditionally

readmitted to the character and privileges of a citizen of the United States." w

Resumption of permanent residence in the United States had caused

Mrs. Sartoris to reacquire American citizenship under the previously

mentioned rules of the Department of State. The special act of Congress, therefore, was not necessary.

Congress had followed the lead of other nations and had passed the

act of February 10, 1855, providing that upon marriage to an American the alien woman who might herself be lawfully naturalized ipso

facto acquired American citizenship, if she herself were eligible for

naturalization. This law remained in effect until 1922.

There was no statute directly covering the citizenship status of the

American-born woman who married an alien between 1855 and 1907

It was held that an American woman who married an alien prior to

March 2, 1907, lost her American citizenship (1) if she took up a permanent residence abroad with her husband at any time prior to September 22, 1922, and (2) if she acquired, as the result of the marriage,

the nationality of the country of which her husband was a citizen or

subject. She reaquired American citizenship if, subsequent to the

termination of the marital status and prior to March 2, 1907, she

resumed a permanent residence in the United States.

" Treaties, conventions, etc., between the United States and Other Powers, Vol. I, p. 691. This treaty

resulted in part from the War of 1812.

" Cf. Appendix Q, p. 64. infra,

is H. J. Res. 238, Fifty-fifth Congress, second sossion, Mav 18, 1898; 30 Stat. L. 1496.
20 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

CHAPTER IV. THE PRINCIPLE OF NATIONAL IDENTITY ADOPTED

ABSOLUTELY

In 1900 there was no statute regulating the citizenship of American

women who married foreigners. Of course, the citizenship status of

alien women who married Americans was governed by the act of

February 10, 1855•marriage automatically made them citizens of

the United States. The act of July 27, 1868, had recognized the right

of Americans to expatriate themselves. When an American-born

woman married a foreigner and went to reside permanently in her

husband's country, if, as a result of that marriage she acquired the

nationality of her husband's country, the courts held this to be

evidence of her election to cut off her allegiance to her native country,

and that she had ceased to be an American citizen. After her husband

had died, she was repatriated by resuming a permanent residence in

the United States.

There were many countries which had adopted the principle of

single nationality, and this caused some conflict between the law of

the United States and that of other countries.1To conform with the

law of foreign countries, the act of March 2, 1907,2 was duly enacted,

and the United States also adopted the principle of single nationality"

That law declared:

Any woman who marries a foreigner shall take the nationality of her husband.*

Thenceforth American women were expatriated automatically by

marriage. Without their wish or their consent, marriage became an

expatriation process for them, just as it had since 1855 been a naturalization process for alien women who married citizens of the United

States or whose husbands became naturalized Americans.

There was just one progressive provision in that law. While it

expatriated the American woman who married an alien, it did provide

her with a clear statutory means of repatriation after her husband

had died or she had been divorced. So long as the martial status

continued, however, she was compelled to remain an alien. After

the marriage relation had been terminated, repatriation was possible

for her in one of three ways.3The expatriated American woman

residing in this country became an American citizen again merely by

continuing to reside here. Such a woman, if residing outside the

United States, could recover her lost citizenship by returning to this

country to reside or by registering as an American citizen with a

United States Consul abroad within one year after the marital relationship had been terminated by the death or divorce of her alien

husband. The requirement of registering before a consul within

one year after termination of the marriage is considered directory

only, and not mandatory, and failure to register within the year, if

satisfactorily explained, does not necessarily result in the loss of

American citizenship or of the right of protection.

Just how the act of 1907 operated is shown by the case of Ethel

Coope, who was born at Redwood City, Calif., December 3, 1885,

and who has always resided in the United States. On March 14,

1909, she married Gordon Mackenzie, a British subject who had

' Cf. H. Doc. 326, Fifty-ninth Congress, especially at p. 1; report of James Brown Scott, David J. Hill

and Oaillard Hunt on "Citizenship, Expatriation and Protection Abroad."

> 34 Stat. L. 1228.

» Sec. 3, act of Mar. 2, 1907; repealed by the act of Sept. 22,1922. Cf. Appendix E, p. 44, infra.
CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN 21

immigrated to the United States and who had resided continuously

in California since that time, without any intention of returning to

live in his native country.

Mr. and Mrs. Mackenzie established their home in San Francisco.

By her marriage Mrs. Mackenzie had ceased to be an American citizen

under the terms of the act of 1907. Nevertheless, she continued after

her marriage to take a prominent part in civic affairs, just as she had

done prior thereto. She was very active in the campaign which established woman suffrage in California long before the ratification of the

nineteenth amendment to the United States Constitution.

However, the constitution of the State of California permitted only

United States citizens to vote. When Mrs. Mackenzie went to

register as a legal voter, she was not permitted to do so. She was

told that although she had never lived outside the United States,

the act of 1907 had made her an alien upon her marriage to Gordon

Mackenzie, and that she therefore was prohibited the right to vote

by the California constitution.

Mrs. Mackenzie was not satisfied with the decision of the San Francisco board of elections, and took the matter to court to compel the

board of elections to register her as a legal voter of California. Eventually the case reached the Supreme Court of the United States,4

and

the decision of that court in 1914 is the outstanding court opinion

interpreting the act of 1907.

It was argued in Mrs. Mackenzie's behalf that she had become a

citizen of the United States by her birth in this country, as the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution provides:

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.

The court conceded that she was a citizen at birth, and would have

been even before the ratification of the fourteenth amendment.

Then Mrs. Mackenzie argued that citizenship is a twofold relationship

with neither the Government nor the individual can terminate without the concurrence of the other.6

This being so, she argued, Conf;ress was without power and authority to enact such an expatriation

aw as that of 1907. In other words, she contended that the Constitution gave Congress the power to confer citizenship but not the

power to take it away, except as a punishment for crime or upon

the individual's own voluntary expatriation. A mere statute, she

said, could not deprive her of a constitutional right.

Here Mrs. Mackenzie and the Supreme Court parted ways. The

court stated that the dual relationship referred to was not involved

in this particular case, and further stated that since the United

States is invested with all the attributes of sovereignty, and since

it has the character of nationality, it also has a power incidental to

its sovereignty, the authority to deal with questions of nationality.

The court then pointed out that the terms of the 1907 act were clear

and unequivocal, and that Mrs. Mackenzie's marriage with a subject

of Great Britain had been entered into voluntarily, with notice of the

consequences. In the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United

States, therefore, this marriage indicated Mrs. Mackenzie's election

' Mackenzie v. Hare, 1914, 239 U. S. 299.

« Cf. Williams's case, Wharton's State Trials, p. 602.
22 CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN

to expatriate herself, and her petition to compel the board of elections

to register her was dismissed.

After the act of 1907, then, the American woman automatically

lost her citizenship upon marriage to an alien, regardless of where

she may have resided or what her wishes in the matter may have been.

Before 1907 the American woman who married an alien lost her

native citizenship only if she elected by affirmative act to sever her

allegiance to the United States, or if she went with her husband to

reside permanently in his native country and acquired as the result

of the marriage the nationality of her husband's country. Under the

1907 law she lost her citizenship even though she continued always to

live in the United States and never intended to move to another land.

While expatriation of married women was automatic under this

law, there seemed to be some little compensation for the loss in the

fact that upon the termination of the marital relationship a former

American woman could readily resume her American citizenship.

However, there were many women who found themselves unable to

resume their citizenship under this law. The leading case of this

kind is that of Augusta Louise de Haven-Alten, the names of whose

ancestors and relatives are closely associated in American history with

deeds of patriotism and valor. Augusta Louise was born in New York

City, August 21, 1867. Her father was Capt. Joseph E. de Haven,

one of the prominent naval commanders of the Civil War.

Augusta was only 3 years old when her mother died. For a few

years after that she lived with her grandmother in Chicago, but later

moved to Switzerland with her father. Shortly after her father's

death in 1882, she met a young German officer by the name of Von

Alten, who was studying in Geneva. Augusta and Von Alten were

married in 1886.

At the time of their marriage, our statutes still said nothing about

the effect of an American girl's marriage with a foreigner upon her

citizenship status. Under the law of the North German Union,

however, Augusta became a German subject by reason of her marriage.

Then, too, as in the case of Nellie Grant Sartoris, a treaty, which had

been signed by the United States and the North German Union,

compelled the United States to recognize Augusta Louise as a naturalized subject of the North German Union.6

The German law not only made Augusta a citizen of that country

because of her marriage to Von Alten, it also gave Von Alten full

control of what property his wife had. As the legatee of a will, Mrs.

de Haven-Alten had a $100,000 estate, and she also received a substantial annuity from a trust fund administered in Chicago. Von

Alten, of course, could not appropriate his wife's income from the

trust fund; but he did take custody of the $100,000 estate.

It appears that the marriage was an unhappy one. In 1906 Augusta

and Von Alten entered into an agreement to live separately and apart.

By that time Von Alten had dissipated all of the $100,000 estate

except $25,000. In 1912 Augusta sued Von Alten for divorce; but the

World War came on, and the case was left pending because of Von

Alten's status as a German officer. By 1916 communications with

Austria, where Mrs. de Haven-Alten was living, had become so

• Treaty between North German Union and the United States, Feb. 22, 1868; "Treaties, Conventions

etc.," II, 1928.
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 23

disrupted by the war that payments of her trust income did not reach

her. The next year the United States entered the war, and Augusta,

although an American-born woman, was declared to be an alien enemy

of the United States because of her residence and her expatriation by

marriage to the German subject, Von Alten. The Alien Property

Custodian of the United States thereupon took possession of the

accumulated income from the trust fund, and ordered future payments to be made to him.

In October of 1919, Mrs. de Haven-Alten returned to the United

States on a cretificate showing that she was a native-born American.

She could not obtain an American passport because of her marriage

with a German, and she refused to travel on a German passport.

She was penniless when she arrived in this country, her husband had

the money from her estate and the Alien Property Custodian had the

accumulated income from the trust fund. She had not been able to

bring her petition for divorce to trial. Furthermore, she could not

recover her accumulated trust income from the Alien Property Custodian because she was a German subject in the eyes of our law, and

because no provision had yet been made for the disposition of the

property and money of alien enemies seized by the United States under

the provisions of the trading with the enemy act of October 6, 1917/

If she could become an American citizen again, this money would be

payable to her.

Inasmuch as she was destitute and she could nowhere obtain a

divorce in this country in less than six months, Mrs. de Haven-Alten

sought readmission to American citizenship. True, the expatriation

act of March 2, 1907, in addition/to declaring that marriage with an

alien should automatically give an American woman the status of her

alien husband, had provided a way for a former American woman to

resume her native citizenship upon the terminition of the marital

status. Still, the act of 1907 was of no benefit to Mrs. de Haven-Alten,

since her status as the wife of Von Alten had not been and could not

immediately be terminated. The treaty of peace with Germany had

not yet been signed, and no one could tell what might happen to her

money if she did not recover it before the treaty should be signed and

ratified. Mrs. de Haven-Alten could find relief in one way only, and

that was by special act of Congress.

When the matter was presented to Congress, it was referred to

the Committee on Immigration in the Senate. That committee

considered her case in connection with the precedent which had been

established by the special act readmitting Nellie Grant Sartoris to

the status and privileges of a citizen. In fact, the act for the benefit

of Nellie Grant Sartoris had served as a precedent not only for readmitting to citizenship other women in Mrs. Sartoris's position, but

also for completing defective naturalization of certain men.8

' 40 Stats. L, Vol. II, p. 411.

• Cases of naturalization by special act of Congress for which the Nellie Grant Sartoris act served as a

precedent are as follows:

Women•Marguerite Mathilde Slidell d'Erlanger (S. 8075, 64th Cong., 2d sess., Mar. 4, 1917; 39

Stat. L. 1688). Frances S. Mumm (66th Cong., 1st sess., Oct. 14, 1919, 41 Stat. L. 1449). Augusta

Louise de Haven-Alten (S. J. Res. 134, 66th Cong., 2d sess., Apr. 8,1920; 41 Stat. L. 1463).

Men•Joseph Tousaint (S. 3694, 65th Cong., 3d sess., Feb. 14, 1899; 30 Stats. L. 1621). Fred Weddle

(8. 1794, 56th Cong., 1st sess., June 6, 1900; 31 Stat. L. 1617). John Hornick (H. R. 8108, 57th Cong.,

1st sess., June 30, 1902; 32 Stat. L. 1492). Augustus Trabing (S. 4348. 59th Cong., 2d sess., Jan. 26,

1907; 34 Stat. L. 2411). John B. Brown (H. R. 15594, 59th Cong., 2d sess., Feb. 9, 1907; 34 Stat. L.

2411). Eugene Prince (H. J. Res. 220, 62d Cong., 2d sess., July 19, 1912; 37 Stat. L. 1347). George

Edward Lerrigo (8. 3419, 63d Cong., 1st sess., Feb. 23, 1915; 38 Stats. L. 1376). Joseph Beech (S. J.

Res. 208, 64th Cong., 2d sess., Feb. 26, 1917; 39 Stats. L. 1495).

(Compiled from Cumulative Digest of International Law and Relations. American University

Graduate School, Washington D. C, No. 8, Oct. 8,1930.)
24 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

Following that precedent, the Senate committee passed favorably

upon a bill to readmit Mrs. de Haven-Alten to United States citizenship, and the House committee did likewise shortly thereafter.

A few weeks later, after passing both House of Congress, the following special act became law on April 8, 1920:

Resolved * * *, That Augusta Louise de Haven-Alten, a native-born

citizen of the United States, who forfeited her citizenship by marriage with an

alien, be, and she is hereby, on her own application, unconditionally readmitted

to the character and privileges of a citizen of the United States."

Mrs. de Haven-Alten thereupon immediately regained her American

citizenship and recovered her property from the Alien Property

Custodian.

Congress has at least a dozen times followed the precedent established by the special act passed in behalf of Nellie Grant Sartoris.

Indeed, in colonial history we find that the States also had used this

naturalization device. Shortly after the close of the Revolutionary

War, both Maryland and Virginia passed special acts to make Lafayette and "his heirs male forever" citizens of those States.10 In this

connection, however, we must bear in mind that State citizenship and

United States citizenship are separate and distinct. Thus, by virtue

of the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution every person born

or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction

thereof is a citizen of the United States and the State wherein he or

she resides. State citizenship is established by residence, and it is

not necessary to be a United States citizen in order to be a citizen of

one of the States. Very frequently the two overlap, but they should

not be confused.

Certain limitations on Congress's power to deal with United States

citizenship are laid down in the Constitution. The Constitution declares that Congress shall have power "to establish an uniform rule

of naturalization." " Obviously a rule of naturalization is not uniform

unless it operates equally throughout the whole of territorial United

States, and unless it applies equally to a given class of individuals.

These two elements are essential. Without them, a rule of naturalization is not uniform, and therefore is contrary to the Constitution.

The private act readmitting Nellie Grant Sartoris to United States

citizenship, and the many other special acts for which hers served as

a precedent, including the one passed for Mrs. de Haven-Alten, sre

rules of naturalization. Each of them, however, was a private act

for the benefit of one particular person. For that reason they did not

fulfill either of the two essential requisites of a uniform rule of naturalization, and all of them exceeded the legislative authority granted

Congress by the Constitution. As Chief Justice John Marshall said

in Osborn v. United States Bank:12

The simple power of the National Legislature is to prescribe a uniform rule of

natural'zation, and the exercise of this power exhausts it, so far as respects the

individual.

After the de Haven-Alten act was passed, the question of Congress's

power to pass such acts was raised in the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization. The function of that committee is to

l Cf. note 8 above, "Women." 10 Maryland, act of General Assembly of Maryland, 1784, Ch. XII. Virginia, act of General Assembly

of Virginia, 1785, Ch. V.

» United States Constitution, Art. I, sec. 8, clause 4.

» Osborn v. United States Bank (22 U. S. 737, 827).
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 25

pass on all such matters, and since 1921 it has consistently refused to

approve any bills proposing naturalization of any person by special

act of Congress.13 Many meritorious cases came before the committee, demonstrating clearly the inadequacy and unfairness of the

laws then governing the citizenship of married women.

Following the lead of other nations, the United States in 1907

adopted the principle of single identity absolutely. Alien women

who married Americans or whose alien husbands became naturalized

citizens thereby automatically became citizens also, whether they

wished to do so or whether they were even qualified for citizenship.

American women were subjected to even greater hardships by the

act of 1907. When they married aliens, forthwith they were deprived

of their birthright and became aliens. Of course, when their husbands died or were divorced, these women could be repatriated.

There were many cases like that of Augusta Louise de Haven-Alten,

for whom the means of repatriation provided by the act of 1907

proved wholly inadequate.

In time the need of general remedial legislation became apparent,

and the individual cases which came before the committee finally led

to the enactment of the married women's independent citizenship

act of September 22, 1922.

CHAPTER V. THE BATTLE FOR CITIZENSHIP INDEPENDENCE

For centuries, therefore, male legislators and jurists had jealously

preserved the husband's dominance and had limited the wife to a

negligible sphere of activity and assigned her to an inconspicuous

position in the eyes of the law. This situation was not destined to

continue forever, however. In 1800 married women began openly

to fight for their rights. They met their earliest success in 1856 when

statutes first were enacted to grant married women independent

control of their own property and permit them to contract in their

own right. Immediately following that came a valiant three-quarter

century struggle for woman suffrage, which culminated in the United

States in the nineteenth amendment to the Constitution.

Long before that amendment was ratified the fight for citizenship

equality had already begun. As early as December 6, 1910, a bill

to grant women citizenship, independence, and equality had been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Edward

Thomas Taylor of Colorado.1This bill was aimed at the repugnant

act of 1907, which deprived of their native citizenship those American

women who married foreigners, and compelled them to take the

citizenship of their husbands, regardless of how these women may

have felt about the matter or what they may have wished to do about

their citizenship. Then it was that marriage had become a naturalization process not only for the alien woman who married an American,

but also for the American woman who married an alien. If the

husband changed his citizenship, his act changed that of his wife

also. The wife had nothing at all to say about it; she could enjoy

no citizenship status independent of or different from that of her

husband.

" Authority of Congress to pass a special act admitting individuals to the Status of citizens; cf. " Natu"

ralization of Individuals by Special Acts of Congress," hearings before the Committee on Immigration and

Naturalization, House of Representatives, Siity-seventh Congress, first session, on H. J. Res. 79; serial 6, May 17, June 3 and 27,1921. 1 H. R. 27840, Siity-first Congress, third session; "House bills." Sixty-first Congress, third sess.| vol. 2.
26 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

Such laws were grossly unjust. If the alien husband of an alien

woman refused to petition naturalization, she was compelled to remain

an alien so long as the marital relation continued. On the other

hand, the alien woman who married an American citizen, by that

marriage automatically became a citizen of the United States, without regard to her mental, moral, or physical fitness. If she could not

speak or read English, it did not matter. Indeed, it made no difference whether she could read at all. Her one act, that of marrying an

American man, compensated for all her other shortcomings.

But there was no reward for the American woman who married a

foreigner. Instead, she was subjected to a heavy penalty, absolute

loss of her birthright. Because she had become an alien by her

marriage, in some States she could neither inherit nor buy real estate.

A still greater discrimination was thrust upon her. After 1900

many women began entering actively into commerce and the practice

of the professions. The privileges enjoyed by citizens engaged in

these occupations were closed to the native-born American woman

who married a foreigner and automatically became an alien.

Treaties had been ratified by the United States, by the terms of

which the nationals of the contracting parties were permitted to

enjoy in the country of any one of the contracting parties the privileges enjoyed by the nationals of that country. Obviously, these

reciprocal privileges were not available to the American woman

whose marriage had terminated her United States citizenship and

made her an alien against her will.

The same hardship confronted such a woman if she sought to

practice law. For instance, there was a young woman in New York

who had been born in the United States of American parents. After

completing her college education, she obtained a law degree from the

University of New York law school, passed the bar examination and

became a member of the New York bar in regular standing. During

the next few years she arduously toiled and carefully built up a

remunerative practice of law. Later, however, she married a man of

Dutch nationality and automatically became an alien. Not only did

she lose her American citizenship, she also lost her law business and

the right to practice law in New York, for the laws of that State

required that in order to practice law there a person must be a citizen

of the United States.

Such a woman also was prohibited in many States from practicing

medicine. She could not teach in the public schools. She could,

neither take a State or Federal civil service examination nor hold

any Government office, whether elective or appointive. These

privileges were restricted to American citizens, and her marriage had

taken her American citizenship away from her. In most States she

could not vote, even after equal suffrage was granted. If she went

abroad the United States Government would neither give her a passport nor protect her while outside the country. In fact, by exercising

a power incidental to its sovereignty the United States could even

have expelled her from this country as an alien, although she was

native born and her ancestors had been closely connected with the

early struggles of our great republic.

A case illustrating this predicament was mentioned by Senator

Philander Chase Knox from Pennsylvania, during a debate on an

amendment to the trading with the enemy act. He slid:
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 27

I have in mind the case where a descendant of one of the earliest colonial families in my State did not marry a German title, but married a poor German professor in the University of Pennsylvania, and lost the fortune which her father

and her grandfather and her great-grandfather had accumulated in Chester

County, Pa.; people whose names have been recorded in every phase of Pennsylvania history, in every phase of Pennsylvania activity, in every phase of Pennsylvania philosophy.2

When we entered the World War ni any women who had never been

outside the United States and who never for a moment had thought

of any other than their native allegiance, awakened to find that they

were alien enemies, merely because they happened to have married

a resident foreigner whose country was at war with us. The Government seized their property, and these women were subjected to

humiliating surveillance by Government officials for the duration of

the war.

Certainly this state of the law was completely out of harmony with

the modern increase of woman's freedom of action and self-expression.

More than that, it jeopardized a married woman's rights. It belittled

the dignity of her citizenship. Who can say that a woman has ever

been less loyal, less patriotic, less proud of her native citizenship than

a man?

To change this situation, bills had been introduced in Congress in

1913, 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918,1919,1920,and 1921;but Congress

continued to blink at injustice and refuse to change the law. At last,

however, when the fight for equal suffrage had been won, the battle

for citizenship independence and equality began in earnest. Renewed

energy and force were injected into the battle by the victory convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in

Chicago in 1920. That convention adopted a resolution which urged

"Federal legislation insuring to the women of the United States the

same independent status for citizenship as that which now obtains

for men."

Forthwith representatives of many of the national women's

organizations which had participated in the fight for equal suffrage

appeared before the conventions of the national political parties and

induced them to write into their 1920 platforms the principles of the

victory convention resolution. Typical of the pledges and resolutions

adopted in the political platforms that year in this:

We advocate * * * the independent naturalization of married women.

An American woman, resident in the United States, should not lose her citizenship

by marriage to an alien.3

Armed with these political party pledges and encouraged by their

suffrage victory, the women concentrated their forces in Washington

when the Sixty-seventh Congress convened in March of 1921. These

women, representatives of national women's organizations 500,000

strong, were efficiently organized into the women's joint congressional

committee. The joint congressional committee was formed by representatives of the American Association of University Women, Council

of Jewish Women, Daughters of the American Revolution, General

Federation of Women's Clubs, National Federation of Business and

Professional Women, National League of Women Voters, National

' Congressional Record, vol. 59, pt. 8, Sixty-sixth Congress, second session, p. 8473.

» Republican Party platform, 1920; cf. also the platforms of the Democratic, Prohibition, and FarmerLabor Parties in 1920.
28 CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN

Women's Trade Union League, and the Women's Christian Temperance Union.4

The author had the privilege, as a member of the House Committee

on Immigration and Naturalization, of introducing H. R. 12022, a

bill conforming with the platform pledges of 1920 and containing the

principles of citizenship equality for women.

Under the able leadership of Mrs. Maud Wood Park, chairman of

the joint congressional committee, the most energetic lobby ever

concentrated on Capitol Hill besieged the House committee and

urged favorable action on H. R. 12022. In time a committee hearing

was held. Mrs. Park appeared before the committee, and her statement is expressive of the spirit which prompted the introduction of the

bill. She said:

The underlying reason for this bill is that the right of citizenship should rest in

the individual person and should not depend upon the marital status of that

person. A woman is as much an individual as a man is, and her citizenship

should no more be gained or lost by marriage than should a man's. To forfeit

or acquire citizenship by the mere fact of marriage, without regard for the desires

or the qualifications of the individual affected, belittles both the individual and

the sacred right of citizenship.6

Subsequently the committee reported the bill favorably back to the

House.6

During the debate in the House on H. R. 12022 Congressman

Albert Johnson, Chairman of the House Committee on Immigration

and Naturalization, cited the case of a native-born American woman

who had married an Austrian. She had thereby become an Austrian

under the act of 1907. The husband was killed in a mine accident

in the State of Washington, and, under the workmen's compensation

act of that State, the widow was to be paid compensation. However,

war was declared against Germany and Austria, and this woman,

although she was born and had always resided in the United States,

was held to be an alien enemy. Thereupon the money was seized and

held by the Alien Property Custodian.

After each Member of the House of Representatives had been

interviewed by members of the determined women's organizations

which were supporting the bill, it passed the House by an overwhelming vote on the 20th of June, 1922. Then the bill was sent to

the Senate, and the battle was carried to that side of the Capitol.

The Senate Committee on Immigration favorably reported the bill

back to the Senate, September 1, 1922.

The Senate passed the bill on the 9th of September, 1922. Tirelessly the women had worked for this favorable action in Congress.

Nor did they stop at that; they immediately carried their fight to the

White House.

When the bill arrived at the Executive Mansion, President Harding

found himself confronted by the demand of thousands of American

women for his approval of the bill. On September 22, 1922, he signed

H. R. 12022, and it became law.7

' Congressional Record, vol. 62, pt. 12, Sixty-seventh Congress, second session, p. 13039; vol. 62, pt. 9^

Sixty-seven'h Congress, second session, p. 9043.

s

Statement of Mrs. Maud Wood Pant; bearings before tbe Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Sixty-seventh Congress, second session, p. 570.

• Report on H. R. 12022, Report No. 1110, House or Representatives, Sixty-seventh Congress, second

session; cf. Appendix F, p. 44, infra.

I 42 Stat. L. 1021-1022; for the different steps toward the enactment of H. R. 12022 cf. Congressional

Record, Sixty-seventh Congress, fourth session, vol. 64, pt. 5, p. 6182. Cf. copy of law, Appendix E, p. 44,

infra.
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 29

For the first time in the history of the United States there was

written into our statute books the principle that marriage shall not

affect a woman's citizenship.

CHAPTER VI. VICTORY•THE WOMEN'S INDEPENDENT CITIZENSHIP

ACT

By the women's independent citizenship act of September 22, 1922,

America officially declared that marriage shall not affect a woman's

citizenship. No longer does marriage with an alien deprive an

American woman of her citizenship, any more than it does an American

man. The law of the United States on this subject was completely

reversed. This reversal and abrogation of our antiquated citizenship

doctrines forcibly demonstrates the close adherence of this Nation to

the principle thatinjustice in this country at least will notlong prevail,

a principle so fundamental that it has become inherent in our great

Government.

Ours was a radical departure from the law existing in most of the

countries of the world at that time.1 Regardless of how backward

the laws of other nations were, the United States had the courage of

its convictions and to-day stands foursquare on this principle. Full

credit for the changes in our law is due the valiant and tireless women

who fought so courageously until their rights were recognized.

The women's independent citizenship act abolished many deplorable discriminations against women which had been carried over in

our law as incidents to the Middle-Age doctrine that the husband and

wife are one in the eyes of the law, and the husband that one. The

new law declared that "a woman citizen of the United States shall

not cease to be a citizen of the United States by reason of her marriage after the passage of this act." 2 Thereafter American women

might enter into commerce or practice the professions with the same

privileges as men. They no longer were constantly in danger of losing

these privileges, as well as their American citizenship, in case they

should marry men who happened to be aliens.

After the act of 1922 was passed American women whose husbands

were aliens could hold real estate in those States which previously

had prohibited them that privilege because they had been deprived

of their native citizenship by marriage. Since the enactment of that

law American women have been able to vote, to teach school, and to

hold Government positions, whether their husbands are American

citizens or not. Under that law they are entitled to the passport

f)rivileges and the protection of the United States Government. No

onger are they deprived of their precious birthright.

There was but one exception to the rule that an American woman

who married an alien should not lose her native citizenship. That

exception was the case where such a woman married an alien ineligible

for naturalization.3 At the time the new law was passed all the

members of Congress had not yet been completely won over, and this

proviso was inserted by the committee to make sure of the passage

of the bill. Since 1922, however, this provision has been stricken

from the law.4

i Cf. House Document 326, Fifty-ninth Congress, 1906: Report of James Brown Scott, David J. Hill,

and Gaillard Hunt on Citizenship, Expatriation and Protection Abroad.

• Sec. 3, act of Sept. 22,1922; 42 Stat. L. 1022.

• Ibidem.

< Sec. 4 (a), act of Mar. 3,1931; Public No. 829, Seventy-first Congress.
30 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

It is particularly interesting to note that even if an American

woman's husband expatriates himself, his act does not change his

American wife's citizenship. For example, an American by the name

of Neil Sanderson went with his American wife to Italy. In time he

became prominent in the affairs of an Italian city and later became

mayor of that municipality. By accepting that position, Mr. Sanderson lost his American citizenship and became an Italian. The change

in his status, however, had no effect at all on the citizenship of his

native-born American wife; she remained an American.

The Department of State holds the same to be true in the event the

American husband becomes naturalized in a foreign country or takes

the oath of allegiance to a foreign sovereign. The severance of his

citizenship ties does not deprive his wife of her native citizenship.

Since many other nations still cling to their antiquated citizenship

doctrines and make the wife of one of their citizens or subjects take the

citizenship of her husband, and since our law does not deprive one of

our women of citizenship when she marries an alien, it is true that some

American women possess dual nationality. A woman in that situation

is a citizen of both the United States and her husband's country.

However, even in the absence of laws in other countries, our law

provides her with a means of overcoming this difficulty. If she cares

to do so, she may renounce her American citizenship.5 Or, she may

otherwise sever her allegiance to the United States; she may either

become a naturalized citizen of her husband's country, or she may take

the oath of allegiance of his sovereign.6

A case illustrating the ability of the American woman who marries

an alien to renounce her American citizenship is that of Gwendolyn

Field, daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Marshall Field, jr., of Chicago.

Gwendolyn Field married Archibald Charles Edmonstone, an Englishman, April 5, 1923. Finding that she possessed dual nationality

because of the conflict of the citizenship laws of Great Britain and the

United States, she decided to sever her allegiance to the United States.

In January of 1924, while she was in Edinburgh, she had her lawyers

file a declaration of renunciation in the Federal district court in

Chicago, and the court formally declared that she thereby terminated her American citizenship. Although she had not appeared

personally before the court, the judge held that she had thereby

relieved herself of dual nationality.

The section of the women's independent citizenship act applicable

to this situation reads:

A woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a citizen of the

United States by reason of her marriage after the passage of this act, unless she

makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship before a court having jurisdiction

over naturalization of aliens * * *.

In view of the wording of this provision, it is questionable whether

Mrs. Edmonstone's renunciation actually was valid and effective.

Can an American woman who has married an alien and thereby

acquired his citizenship, and retained her own, renounce her American

citizenship while she is outside the United States? This question

came to the attention of the Department of State in the case of

Ellen Stanton, an American woman who married Walter Hinton,

' Sec. 3, act of Sept. 22,1922, 42 Stat. L. 1022.

• Sec. 2, act of Mar. 2, 1907, 34 Stat. L. 1228; this portion of the 1907 act was not repealed by the act

Sept. 22, 1922; of sec, 3, act of Sept. 22, 1922.
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 31

an Englishman, at Chefoo, China, October 23, 1922. Mrs. Hinton

desired to renounce her American citizenship while she and her

husband were in China. The Department of State pointed out that

the act of 1922 permitted American women in Mrs. Hinton's situation

to renounce their native citizenship only before a court having

jurisdiction over the naturalization of aliens. Inasmuch as there were

no such American courts in China, it was held that while residing

outside the United States she could not renounce her citizenship.

This ruling clearly expresses the intent of those who sponsored the

act of 1922.

At any rate, the native-born woman citizen of the United States

was permitted, after her marriage to a foreigner, to retain her American citizenship. This is exactly what Cornelia Vanderbilt did after

she married Sir John F. Cecil, a subject of Great Britain.

The women's independent citizenship act enabled those unfortunate

women who had been deprived of their American citizenship because

of marriage to aliens under the act of 19077to regain their citizenship

by a shortened naturalization process. Ordinarily, five years' residence in the United States is required for naturalization. But these

women were required by the original 1922 act to have lived in the

United States, Hawaii, Alaska, or Puerto Rico for one year only.8

A most interesting case of repatriation is that of Mrs. Ruth Bryan

Owen, Congresswoman from the fourth district of Florida. Ruth

Bryan, the daughter of William Jennings and Mary Baird Bryan,

was born in Jacksonville, 111., October 2, 1885. She lived continuously in the United States from the date of her birth until May 3,1910,

when she married Reginald Altham Owen, a British subject. At

the time of the marriage the act of 1907 was still in effect and made

Mrs. Owen "involuntarily and automatically a British subject." *

At all times Mrs. Owen was looked upon by her British friends as

an American citizen, despite her actual legal status under the act of

1907. At no time did Mrs. Owen ever take the oath of allegiance

to the British or any other foreign government. At no time did she

ever renounce her allegiance to the United States. During the early

part of the World War she was actively engaged in war organization

work. Thereafter, for the balance of the war her time was spent,

frequently with American women, in active nursing service in the

war zone.

On September 1, 1919, Major and Mrs. Owen returned to the

United States and established their home in Florida, where Mrs.

Owen still lives. Major Owen died on the 12th of December, 1927.

In the meantime Mrs. Owen on January 23, 1925, had petitioned the

United States Federal Court for the Southern District of Florida for

repatriation under the act of September 22, 1922. Ninety days

afterward, a period then required to elapse after the filing of such a

petition, Mrs. Owen was formally naturalized and restored to the

legal status of an American citizen, although her husband remained

a British subject.

November 6,1928, Mrs. Owen was elected by an enormous majority

to represent the fourth district of Florida in the United States House

» Sec. 3, act of Mar. 2,1907; 34 Stat. L. 1228.

« Sec. 4, act of Sept. 22, 1922; 42 Stat. L. 1022.

» Sitting Member's Brief of Facts and Authorities•Election Case, William C. Lawson, Memorialist,

v. Ruth Bryan Owen, Seventy-first Congress, p. 32.

161999•33 3
32 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

of Representatives. Mrs. Owen was duly seated in the House, but

her seat was contested by ber election opponent, William C. Lawson.

Mr. Lawson contended that since Mrs. Owen bad been expatriated

by marriage in 1910 and since she had not been repatriated by naturalization until 1925, she had not been a citizen of the United States for

seven years prior to her election in 1928, and therefore had not met

the requirements of the Constitution of the United States for a Representative in Congress.10

Each house in Congress is the sole judge of the qualifications of its

members.11 Consequently, the case came on for hearing before the

House Committee on Elections No. 1. At the hearings it was pointed

out that the independent citizenship act of 1922 contains this provision:

After her naturalization she shall have the same status as if her marriage had

taken place after the passage of this act.u

Did it, then, entirely wipe out the period during which Mrs. Owen

was a subject of Great Britain?

Five members of the committee held that the seven years' residence

need not to have been immediately preceding the election. The

other four members held that it did have to be immediately before the

election, and concluded that "Mrs. Ruth Bryan Owen, through

naturalization, enjoys the same status as an American woman who

marries an alien subsequent to the passage of the Cable Act, namely,

the status of one who never loses her citizenship." As a whole the

committee thus reported back to the House: "It is, therefore, the

unanimous conclusion of your committee that Ruth Bryan Owen

meets the requirements of one eligible to a seatin the House of Representatives, as set forth in * * * the Constitution."13 Thereupon

a resolution was passed by the House, permitting Mrs. Owen to

retain her seatin the House of Representatives.

Thus it was that the independent citizenship act of 1922 provided

women who had become expatriated by marriage under the act of

1907, to become repatriated by short process, and thereupon restored

them to the status of natural born citizens.

This was not the only benefit in the new law. It also provided

that American women should no longer be deprived of their native

citizenship by marriage to aliens. They might enter unmolested into

commerce or trade, or into the practice of the professions. When they

went abroad they were assured of the passport privileges and protection of the United States Government.

The new law also is beneficial to alien women. It provided them

with privileges they had not enjoyed for 67 years. Alien women, as

well as American women, were granted a citizenship status entirely

separate from and independent of that of their husbands. The

new law was not a compromise between the conflicting principles of

perpetual allegiance and of the husband's dominance over the legal

status of his wife. It was an outright recognition of the fact that a

woman's citizenship is as personal, dignified and sincere as is a man's.

io Unitea Sojtcs Constitution, Art. I, sec. 2, Cl. 2. 11 United States Constitution, Art. I, sec. 5.

» Sec. 4, act of September 22, 1922; 42 Stats, at L. 1022.

""William C. Lawson-Euth Bryan Owen Election Case; "Report No. 968, Committee on Elections

No. 1, House of Representatives, Mar. 24, 1930, pp. 6 and 7; Seventy-first Congress, second session.
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 33

After 1855 and before 1922, an alien married woman could be

naturalized only by her alien husband's naturalization, and could not

be naturalized if her husband did not wish to become an American or

could not qualify for citizenship.14 The women's independent citizenship act repealed thatlaw. It provides "Thatthe right of any woman

to become a naturalized citizen of the United States shall not be

denied or abridged because of her sex or because she is a married

woman."16 This provision of the law is clear and unequivocal.

The alien woman whose alien husband has not been naturalized

may herself become a naturalized citizen of the United States on her

own petition after five years's residence in this country, regardless

of what her husband's wish in that matter may be. Now she is

absolutely free to follow whatever course she wishes to follow.

For the alien woman whose husband, formerly an alien, has become

a naturalized American, there is provided a shortened naturalization

process. She is not required to file a declaration of intention to become a citizen, and it is necessary for her to reside in the United

States only one year prior to the filing of her petition for naturalization.16 The courts have held, however, that an alien woman can not

enjoy this shortened naturalization proceeding unless her husband

has been completely naturalized.17

The shortened naturalization process is also available to the alien

woman who marries an American. She may be naturalized on her

own petition, after residing in the United States for one year. This

privilege is open to her even if she and her American husband have

been divorced.

Since the act of September 22, 1922, alien women have become

American citizens only on their own petitions. They become citizens

only after they study for and pass the examinations. That in itself

is an advantage for alien women. Before 1922 the alien woman

automatically became an American upon the naturalization of her

alien husband or upon her marriage to a citizen of the United States.

The alien husband became Americanized through his contacts at work

and through his preparation for his naturalization examination. The

children learned of American history and ideals at school. But the

alien wife and mother was left at home to do the work. She made

few contacts with Americans and learned little about the new country

of which she automatically became a citizen without any act of her

own.

Alien women now do not enter upon a citizenship status they know

nothing about. Before they become naturalized they have an

opportunity to learn the history, principles, and ideals of our nation.

They petition naturalization because they are eager to become

Americans, and when they acquire citizenship, they cherish it.

Citizenship is the highest honor this country can bestow. Alien

women realize that, and each year they are being naturalized in increasing numbers. For a year prior to the passage of the act of

September 22, 1922, the number of unmarried alien women petitioning naturalization was 200 per month. Within 18 months after the

» Act of Feb. 10, 1855; see. 1994 R. 8.; cf. In re Langtry, 1887, 31 Fed. 879, and In re Rionda, 1908, 164

Fed. 368; also cf. Ch. II, pp. 8 and 9, supra.

» Sec. 1, act of Sept. 22, 1922; 42 Stat. L. 1021. 11 Sec. 2, act of September 22, 1922; 42 Stat. L. 1022.

" Cf. In re Colorossi, 1923, 292 Fed. 862; In re Attyah, 1926, 12 Fed. 2d, 323. Contra•In re Kontos,

1925, 12 Fed. 2d, 134.
34 CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN

act was passed, the number of all alien women, married and unmarried, had grown to over 1,000 per month. During 1923, the first

year after the new act went into effect, 6,011 alien women were naturlzed. By 1930 the number had grown to 48,881. Over the same

period of time the number of ahen men naturalized annually fell

from 148,000 to 127,000, a decrease of 21,000 per year.18

Independent citizenship likewise is beneficial to our country.

Those women who now become American citizens must understand

our Government, its aims and purposes. They are much better

educated than they used to be. They are citizens of a different and

higher type.

In some instances, due to the fact that the law of the alien woman's

country still follows the archaic doctrine of single identity, the

woman may lose her native citizenship by the marriage and not

acquire American citizenship thereby. She may be stateless. In case

such a woman wishes to go abroad for a visit, she can obtain a passport

from neither her native country nor from the United States. However, the State Department has alleviated this situation by permitting

such a woman to travel on a laissez passer or affidavit in lieu of passport.

CHAPTER VII. PERFECTING THE LAW

Great as was the forward stride taken by the United States in the

enactment of the independent citizenship act of 1922, and complete

as appeared to be the removal of discriminations against women, the

original act did not in fact grant women a citizenship status absolutely equal to that of men. It is impossible to foresee all the contingencies which will arise under a new law in operation. In fact,

any new law governing the relations of a great number of people is

bound to cause hardships in at least a few individual cases.

After the independent citizenship act had been in operation for

several years it was apparent that some discriminations against

women, difficulties to which men were not subjected, did persist in

the citizenship law. Organized American women again became active, carried their campaign to the halls of Congress and fought until

they had won.

One of the greatest discriminations against an American woman

arose in the case where she had married an alien and gone abroad to

live with her husband. The 1922 act privided: "If during the continuance of the marital status she resides continuously for two years

in a foreign State of which her husband is a citizen or subject, or for

five years continuously outside the United States, she shall thereafter

be subject to" a presumptive loss of her American citizenship.1

This provision was contrary to the principle of the 1922 act that a

woman should not be deprived of her American citizenship by marriage to an alien. Indeed, it subjected a native-born American

woman who married an alien and went abroad to reside with him to

the same presumption of loss of citizenship to which a naturalized

American man or woman is subjected.2 At no time has a nativeborn American man ever been subjected to presumptive loss of his

citizenship, regardless of whom he may have married or where he

may have lived.

» Annual Reports of Commissioner of Naturalization from June 30,1922, to June 30,1931, inclusive.

' See. 3, act of Sept. 22, 1922; 42 Stats. L. 1022.

» Sec. 2, act of Mar. 2,1907; 34 Stat. L. 1228.
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 35

A case illustrative of this situation is that of Miss Louise Ross, who

was born in Troy, N. Y., April 11, 1902. She received her preliminary

education in the public schools of Troy, but after completing her

college work in this country went abroad to study art. At Rapallo,

Italy, on the 22d of September, 1926, she married Signor G. Mariano,

an Italian. Mr. and Mrs. Mariano established their home in Florence,

Italy, and still reside there.

Because of the act of 1922 Miss Ross was not deprived of her

American citizenship by her marriage to Mariano. She suffered a

hardship in 1928, however, when she applied for a renewal of her

passport, so that she might return to the United States to visit.

Mrs. Mariano owns property in Darien, Conn., and had voted there

even after her marriage. Prior to November, 1928, it had been

financially and otherwise inconvenient for Mrs. Mariano to return to

this country. And when she applied to the American consul for

passport renewal, he advised her that he could neither renew her

American passport nor issue her a new one because she had resided

for more than two years in her husband's native coiintry and therefore was, by presumption, no longer an American citizen.

Mrs. Mariano was forced to return to the United States on an

Italian passport. This phase of the 1922 law failed to preserve for

Mrs. Mariano the citizenship individuality and independence that had

been intended.

Another unjust hardship was that suffered by the former American

woman who had married an alien and lost her native citizenship under

the act of 1907. By the independent citizenship act of 1922 she was

extended the privilege of returning to the United States to be repatriated by a shortened process in a court having jurisdiction over

naturalization.3 However, after the enactment of this act the 1924

immigration quota law was passed. Since the former American

woman had lost her own citizenship and acquired her husband's by

the marriage, she was forced to return to this country as a quota

immigrant. If the quota for her husband's country was exhausted,

she could not get a visa and therefore could not come back to the

United States for the purpose of repatriation.

Such a case is that of Gladys Drake, an American-born woman,

who married an Italian by the name of Spiros Dilasos at Denver,

Colo.;in 1916. In 1922 Dilasos, who owned property in Denver,

inherited additional property in Italy. Thereupon Mr. and Mrs.

Dilasos took their small children and went to Italy to settle Dilasos'

affairs. This required longer than had been expected. In 1924

Dilasos applied for a visa to return to the United States, but was

advised that his return permit had expired because he had stayed out

of the United States longer than six months.

Afterwards Mrs. Dilasos, whom the 1907 act had made an alien

upon her marriage to her Italian husband, tried several times to return

to the United States to be repatriated under the act of 1922, but each

time was told that she would have to come in under the Italian quota

and that it would be years before she could be permitted to come

back to her native country.

As the law stood at that time, Mrs. Dilasos would have had difficulty

in being repatriated even if she had been permitted to return to this

»Sec. 4 act of Sept. 22,1922; 42 Stat. L. 1022.
36 CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OP WOMEN

country as a nonquota immigrant. While a woman in her position

was permitted to be repatriated by a shortened process of naturalization, she was reqmred to reside continually for one year in this

country, Hawaii, Alaska or Puerto Rico before filing her petition.

The courts had interpreted that to mean one year's continuous

residence with the intention of residing here permanently.4This

Mrs. Dilasos might have found difficult to prove.

A somewhat similar case is that of Mrs. Emily Martin. Mrs.

Martin is a native-born American woman who married Ernest A.

Martin, a German subject, before the passage of the 1922 act.

Consequently, the act of 1907 had made her a German citizen because

of her marriage. She and Mr. Martin established their home in

Germany, and in 1924 Mrs. Martin returned to the United States to

recover her American citizenship. After residing here for one year,

she filed her petition for repatriation. When the court questioned

her, she testified that she intended to return to her husband and

children in Germany. For that reason, the court held that she had

no intention of residing permanently in the United States, and refused

to repatriate her, although she had stayed away from her family and

resided in this country for a whole year.6This was a great injustice,

one that had never befallen a man.

To remove these discriminations, the author introduced a bill,

H. R. 10960, in the House of Representatives on March 20, 1930.

Hearings on this bill were held in the House caucus room by the

Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, and presided over by

Congressman Albert Johnson, the chairman. At these hearings

appeared representatives of strong national organizations. Miss

Harlean James appeared in behalf of the American Association of

University Women; Mr. James McGrady, for the American Federation of Labor; Miss Alice Edwards, for the American Home Economics

Association; Mrs. Clarence Fraim, for the General Federation of

Women's Clubs; Miss Dorothy Strauss, for the League of Women

Voters; Miss Cecelia Razovsky, for the National Council of Jewish

Women; Miss Margaret Lambie, for the National Federation of

Business and Professional Women; Miss Maud Younger, for the

National Woman's Party; and Miss Elizabeth Christman, for the

National Women's Trade Union League. Mrs. Ella A. Boole and

Mrs. E. E. Danby wrote letters to the committee expressing the

approval of the Women's Christian Temperance Union and the

Young Women's Christian Association in the passage of H. R. 10960.6

Later the House committee favorably reported H. R. 10960 back to

the House.7 After it had been passed by the House of Representatives without a single objection, it was sent to the Senate, which referred the bill to its Committee on Immigration. That committee

added 15 new sections to the House bill and reported it back to the

Senate with a recommendation that it pass.8The amendments

proposed administrative changes in the law and presented a number

of other changes wholly unrelated to the law governing citizenship of

women.

• Cf. In re Pezzi, 29 Fed. 2d, 999.

» U. S. v. Martin, 1925. 10 Fed. (2) 585.

• Cf. Hearings before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives,

Seventy-first Congress, second session, on H. R. 10208, Mar. 6,1930; subseiuently reintrodueed as H. R.

10960. 7 House Report No. 1036, Seventy-first Congress, second session; cf. Appendix H, p. 47, infra. 8 Senate Report No. 614, Seventy-first Congress, second session; cf. Appendix I, p. 50, infra.
CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN 37

Because of these fifteen riders, most of which were of a contentious

nature, action on the bill was repeatedly objected to by Members of

the Senate. Consequently, H. R. 10960 lay on the Vice President's

desk from May 5 to June 30, 1930. On that day Senator Royal S.

Copeland, a member of the Senate Committee on Immigration and

long a sympathetic and energetic adovcate of citizenship equality for

women, took charge of the debate, had the 15 amendments rejected

en bloc, and persuaded the Senate to pass the bill in the form that it

had been approved by the House.'

After H. R. 10960 had been signed by the Vice President and the

Speaker, it was sent to the White House, where President Hoover

signed the bill on July 3, 1930, and it thereupon became law.10

This first amendment of the independent citizenship act provides

that the American woman who now marries an alien and goes abroad

to reside with him shall no longer be subject to a presumption of loss

of citizenship, any more than a man.11 Of course, if a naturalized

American woman goes abroad to reside, the same presumption of loss

of citizenship that runs against a naturalized American man under the

act of 1907 also runs against her. It also provides that the American

woman who lost her native citizenship by marriage to an alien under

the act of 1907 shall be permitted to return to the United States for

repatriation as a nonquota immigrant.12 The quota of her husband's

country no longer bars or delays her. Then, too, such a woman is now

permitted to be repatriated after her return to this country, without

any proof of residence at all. She may now file her petition for repatriation as soon as she arrives, take the oath of allegiance and be

restored to her American citizenship at once.13

Thus, hardships which had developed under the act of 1922 were

removed by the 1930 amendment of that act. This amendment was

a great benefit as far as it went, but it left much to be done before

women should enjoy a citizenship status equal in all respects to that

of men.

In the first place, no provision was made in the 1930 amendment

for the repatriation of those American women who suffered a presumptive loss of their native citizenship. True, this amendment did repeal

the presumptive loss provision of the act of 1922, but that was not

enough. For instance, women in the situation of Mrs. Louise Mariano, who suffered presumptive loss of citizenship before 1930, were

still without means of repatriation.

Another discrimination which persisted even after the amendment

was this provision of the 1922 act:

* * * any woman citizen who marries an alien ineligible to citizenship shall

cease to be a citizen of the United States.14

Jane Addams, of Hull House, Chicago, criticized this provision of

the independent citizenship act. She stated:

A curious inconsistency of the Cable Act is that it takes away the birthright

of an American-born woman if she marries an ineligible;•i. e., a man from a

country whose people can not be made citizens•-although it is precisely under

such circumstances that a woman most needs her citizenship.16

' Legislative procedure, cf. Congressional Record, vol. 72, Seventy-first Congress, second session, pp.

6782, 6219, 6220, 7304, 7365, 7395, 8334, 8692, 8763, 9857, 9922, 10081, 10174, 10864, 11884, 12052, 12164, 12264,

12265, 12511.

i» Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. L. 854); cf. Appendii G. p. 46, infra.

" Sec. 1, act of July 3, 1930.

i" Sec. 3, act of July 3, 1930.

•» Sec. 2, act of July 3, 1930.

» Se^. 4, act of Sept. 22, 1922 (42 Stats. L. 1022).

u Graphic Survey, November, 1929, p. 136.
38 CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN

Then, too, against this class of American women there was another

discrimination. The amended act of 1922 still specified "That no

woman whose husband is not eligible to citizenship shall be naturalized during the continuance of the marital status." l6 This provision

meant that the American woman who had been deprived of her citizenship bv marrying an ineligible could not be repatriated, and that

the eligible alien wife of an ineligible alien could not be naturalized

so long as the marital status contmued.

These provisions were unsatisfactory. No American man has ever

been deprived of his American citizenship because he has married an

ineligible alien, and no alien man has ever been denied naturalization

because his wife happened to be of a class disqualified from naturalization.

As chairman of the subcommittee of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, the author introduced H. R. 16975 on

February 9, 1931, to remove these last remaining inequalities between

the citizenship status of men and women. Among the many women's

organizations which urged the introduction of this bill and threw behind it their united strength were the General Federation of Women's

Clubs, National Association of Women Lawyers, National Council of

Jewish Women, National Federation of Business and Professional

Women's Clubs, National League of Women Voters, National Woman's Party, and the Woman's Bar Association of the District of

Columbia.17

At the hearings on the bill Dr. Emma Wold, technical adviser to

the United States delegates to The Hague Conference on Codification

of International Law, made this observation:

If the objection to removing the present discrimination against women in our

Cable Act is due to sentiment against racial mixtures, let me call your attention

to the fact that it largely fails of its purpose. It does not affect many white or

Caucasian women. The provision in the law touches the large number of

Chinese and Japanese girls born in the United States with the precious heritage

of United States citizenship. If, unfortunately, but perfectly legitimately, such

a girl falls in love with one of her own race who is an alien and marries him, she is

the one who is penalized.

So far as white women are concerned, the fact is that under the laws of many

of our States, especially the Western States, where Japanese, Chinese, and

Hindus are found in large numbers, the laws make illegal a marriage between a

white person and a Mongolian or Asiatic person. A white woman who enters

upon an attempted marriage of this sort may be punished for the violation of the

laws on marriage, but the penalty of loss of citizenship can not fall upon her for

the reason that there is no marriage.19

The report of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization recommended favorable consideration of H. R. 16975.19 The

interested women's organizations persistently backed the measure,

but the House refused to take action. Earlier in the session, however,

the House had approved H. R. 10672, a bill to eliminate the posting

of notices in naturalization proceedings, and had sent it to the Senate.

The Senate Committee on Immigration added to this bill the one to

amend the act of 1922, H. R. 16975, and sent to the Senate a favorable

'« Sec. 6, act of Sept. 22, 1022, as amended (42 Stat. L. 1022).

" Hearings before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, Seventy-first Congress, third session, on H. R. 14684, H. R. 14685, H. R. 16303; Deo. 17, 1930, and Jan. 23,1931;

subsequently reintroduced as H. R. 16975.

is House Report No. 2693, Seventy-first Congress, third session; cf. Appendix K, p. 59, infra.

i« Ibidem.
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 39

report.20 Thereafter both bills proceeded under the number, H. E.

10672.

When the bill with its amendments came up for consideration in

the Senate, Senator David A. Reed, a member of the Senate Committee on Immigration, took charge of the debate and succeeded in

having the bill and its amendments passed by the Senate on February 26, 1931. The House, however, refused to approve the Senate

amendments, and asked for a conference. The bill as ameded by the

Senate thereupon went to conference.

The conference committee made some changes and reported the

bill, H. R. 10672, with its amendments back to the respective houses

on March 2, 1931. The conference report on the combined bills21

was adopted by both the House and the Senate as H. R. 10672 on

March 3, 1931, and it then was sent to the President.22

Immediately the women went to the White House to urge the

President to sign the bill and not to let it die because of a pocket

veto. Late the night of March 3, 1931, just a few hours before the

Seventy-first Congress adjourned, Mr. Hoover signed the bill and it

became law.

The second amendment of the women's independent citizenship act

did in fact place men and women on exactly the same footing, so far

as citizenship is concerned. The last vestige of discrimination against

women was eliminated. Our law for the first time now completely

recognizes the dignity of an American woman's citizenship and permits her to feel that her allegiance to our government is as fine, intimate and sincere as a man's.

Within a decade this great transformation of our law has taken

Elace. No longer will an American-born woman ever be deprived of

er American citizenship, regardless of whom she may marry or where

or how long she may reside, unless she herself formally renounces her

allegiance to the United States, becomes naturalized in some foreign

country or takes the oath of allegiance to another sovereign. The

woman who lost her citizenship by marriage to an alien before 1922

or because of her residence abroad after marrying an alien subsequent

to 1922, may now return to the United States as a nonquota immigrant

and regain her native citizenship by a simple process of repatriation.

No proof of residence here is required. She is no longer dominated

by the will of her alien husband in this regard.

An alien woman who marries an American now is permitted to be

naturalized by shortening proceedings requiring only one year's residence before filing her petition, instead of the customary five.

Whether an alien man wishes to be naturalized or not, his alien

wife may become a citizen in her own right by the regular naturalization proceedings. That is true, even though her husband himself be

ineligible for citizenship.

To-day women in America enjoy citizenship status truly equal to

and independent of that of men. Woman's citizenship victory is

complete.

» Senate Report No. 1723, Seventy-first Congress, third session; cf. Appendix L, p. 86, infra.

" House Report No. 2937, Seventy-first Congress, Third Session; cf. Appendix M, p. 87, infra.

• Legislative procedure; cf. Congressional Record, vol. 74, pp. 1430, 144.5, 4424, 5121, 5253, 5584, 6124, 6473,

6528, 6660, 6905, 6985, 7153, 7154, 7155, 7250, 7392.
40 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

RESUME OF THE EFFECT OF MARRIAGE ON THE CITIZENSHIP OF

WOMEN

I. AMERICAN WOMEN

A. MARRIAGE PRIOR TO MARCH 2, 1907

1. Marriage to an alien, followed by continuous residence in the

United States, did not affect her nationality; she did not lose her

American citizenship.

2. Marriage to an alien, followed by residence abroad with her

husband, if she took up permanent residence abroad with here husband at any time prior to September 22, 1922, and if she acquired as a

result of the marriage the nationality of the country of which her

husband was a citizen or subject, she. lost her American citizenship.

3. If the American woman who was married to an alien continued

to reside in the United States until after September 22, 1922, she did

not lose her American citizenship by reason of such marriage; nor did

she lose such citizenship if she took up permanent residence abroad

with her husband prior to September 22, 1922, unless she acquired

nationality of the country of which her husband was a subject or

citizen under its laws.

B. RESUMPTION OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP LOST BY MARRIAGE PRIOR TO MARCH

2, 1907

1. When the marital relation terminated prior to March 2, 1907,

American citizenship was resumed if, subsequent to the termination

of the marital status, and prior to March 2, 1907, she resumed a permanent residence in the United States.

2. When the marital relation terminated between March 2, 1907,

and September 22, 1922, American citizenship could be reacquired in

any one of three ways:

(a) If abroad, by registering as an American citizen, or

(b) By returning to reside in the United States, or

(c) If residing in the United States, by continuing to reside therein.

3. After September 22, 1922

(a) It is not material whether the marital relation has terminated.

American citizenship can be reacquired only by petition for naturalization in her own name. However, the woman who married an

alien not eligible to citizenship could not be naturalized during the

continuance of the marital status until after March 3, 1931.

C. MARRIAGE BETWEEN MARCH 2, 1907, AND SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

1. The American woman who married an alien took the nationality of her busband.

D. RESUMPTION OP AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP LOST BY MARRIAGE BETWEEN MARCH 2,

1907, AND SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

1. When the marital relation terminated prior to September 22,

1922, American citizenship could be reacquired in any one of the

three ways set forth in I, B, 2, (a), (b), and (c), supra.

2. After September 22, 1922, it is not material whether the marital

relationship has terminated. American citizenship may be reacquired only by petition for naturalization in her own name. How-
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OP WOMEN 41

ever, the woman who married an alien not eligible to citizenship

could not be naturalized during the continuance of the marital status,

until after March 3, 1931.

E. MARRIAGE ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1922, AND SUBSEQUENTLY

1. Marriage of an American woman to an alien does not affect her

nationality. She remains an American citizen unless•

(a) She has made formal renunciation of her citizenship by personal

appearance before a court having jurisdiction over naturalization of

aliens, or

(6) She has become naturalized under the laws of a foreign country,

or

(c) She has taken the oath of allegiance to a foreign government, or

(d) She married an alien ineligible to citizenship prior to March 3,

1931.

2. In any of the foregoing cases•(a), (6), (c), or (d)•she ceased to

be an American citizen.

3. The provisions of a naturalization treaty entered into before

September 22, 1922, and her husband's naturalization in a foreign

country after September 22, 1922, have no effect upon her citizenship

status unless she gives assent on her part to be included in her husband's naturalization.

F. RESUMPTION OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP LOST BY MARRIAGE OP SEPTEMBER 22,

1922, OR SUBSEQUENTLY

1. The American woman who married an alien ineligible for citizenship could not be repatriated prior to March 3, 1931, unless the

marriage relation was terminated and she was of a race eligible for

naturalization. After March 3,1931, she could be repatriated without

regard to her marital status in event she was a native-born American

citizen, even if she was not of a race eligible for naturalization.

2. The American woman who manied an alien and during the continuance of the marital status, but prior to July 3, 1930, resided continuously for two years in a foreign state of which her husband is a

citizen or subject, or for five years continuously outside the United

States, was presumed to have ceased to be an American citizen, and

was required to present satisfactory evidence to a diplomatic or

consular officer to overcome such presumption.

II. ALIEN WOMEN

A. PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 10, 1858

1. Marriage to an American citizen or the naturalization of her

alien husband did not confer American citizenship upon her. She

could, if otherwise eligible, be naturalized in her own right without

regard to her marital status.

B. BETWEEN FEBRUARY 10, 1885, AND SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

1. Any alien woman who coidd herself be lawfully naturalized and

who married a citizen of the United States, or whose alien husband

became a citizen of the United States through naturalization, automatically acquired American citizenship. She became a citizen as
42 CITIZENSHIP KIGHTS OF WOMEN

fully as if naturalized. The alien wife of an alien husband could not

become, by her own act, a naturalized citizen of the United States.

She had no right of separate naturalization.

C. SINCE SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

1. The alien woman who married a citizen of the United States,

or the alien woman whose alien husband became a citizen through

naturalization, did not become a citizen of the United States by such

marriage or naturalization; she remained an alien, but could, if

eligible for citizenship, be naturalized. An alien married woman

whose husband is not a citizen of the United States has the right (if

eligible) to become an American citizen through naturalization proceedings, without regard to her husband's citizenship status. Her

citizenship no longer depends upon the desire of her husband.
APPENDIXES

APPENDIX A

AUTHORITY OF CONGRESS TO ESTABLISH A UNIFORM RULE OP NATURALIZATION

The Congress shall have Power * * * To establish an uniform Rule of

naturalization. (United States Constitution, Art. I, sec. 8, clause 4.)

APPENDIX B

WHO ARE CITIZENS OP THE UNITED STATES

1. Persons born or naturalized in the United States.•(a) All persons born in

the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not

taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States. (Act of Apr. 9, 1866;

14 Stat. 27; U. S. Code, Title 8, sec. 1.)

NOTE.•All Indians born in the United States are declared to be citizens by the act of June 2,1924.

(6) 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. * * * (Amendment XIV, United States Constitution.)

2. Children born of American fathers living outside the United States.•All

children heretofore born or hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the

United States, whose fathers were or may be at the time of their birth citizens

thereof, are declared to be citizens of the United States; but the rights of citizenship shall not descend to children whose fathers never resided in the United

States. (Act of February 2, 1855; 10 Stat. 604; R. S. 1993; U. S. Code, title 8,

sec. 6.)

3. Minor children whose parents are naturalized.•Achild born withoutthe United

States of alien parents shall be deemed a citizen of the United States by virtue

of the naturalization of or resumption of American citizenship by the parent;

Provided, That such naturalization or resumption takes place during the minority

of such child: And provided further, That the citizenship of such minor child shall

begin at the time such minor child begins to reside permanently in the United

States. (Act of March 2, 1907; 34 Stat. 1229; U. S. Code, title 8, sec. 7.)

APPENDIX C

WOMEN'S CITIZENSHIP ACT OP FEBRUARY 10, 1855

Any woman who is now or may hereafter be married to a citizen of the United

States, and who might herself be lawfully naturalized, shall be deemed a citizen.

(R. S. 2166; repealed by sec. 6, act of September 22, 1922.)

APPENDIX D

WOMEN'S CITIZENSHIP ACT OF MARCH 2, 1907

SEC. 3. That any American woman who marries a foreigner shall take the

nationality of her husband. At the termination of the marital relation she may

resume her American citizenship, if abroad, by registering as an American citizen

within one year with a consul of the United States, or by returning to reside in

the United States, or, if residing in the United States at the termination of the

marital relation, by continuing to reside therein. (This section was repealed by

sec. 7, act of September 22, 1922, 42 Stat. 1022; U. S. C. title 8, sec. 9.)

SEC. 4. That any foreign woman who acquires American citizenship by marriage to an American shall be assumed to retain the same after the termination

43
44 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

of the marital relation if she continue to reside in the United States, unless she

makes formal renunciation thereof before a court having jurisdiction to naturalize

aliens, or if she resides abroad she may retain her citizenship by registering as

such before a United States consid within one year after the termination of such

marital relation. (This section was repealed by sec. 6, act of September 22, 1922,

42 Stat. 1022; U. 8. C. title 8, sec. 10.)

APPENDIX E

MARRIED WOMEN'S INDEPENDENT CITIZENSHIP ACT OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United Slates of

America in Congress assembled, That the right of any woman to become a naturalized citizen of the United States shall not be denied or abridged because of her

sex or because she is a married woman. (42 Stat. 1021-1022; U. S. C, title 8,

sec. 367.)

SEC. 2. That any woman who marries a citizen of the United States after the

passage of this act, or any woman whose husband is naturalized after the passage

of this act, shall not become a citizen of the United States by reason of such marriage or naturalization; but, if eligible to citizenship, she may be naturalized upon

full and complete compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws,

with the following exceptions:

(a) No declaration of intention shall be required;

(b) In lieu of the five-year period of residence within the United States and the

one-year period of residence within the State or Territory where the naturalization

court is held, she shall have resided continuously in the United States, Hawaii,

Alaska, or Porto Rico for at least one vear immediately preceding the filing of the

petition. (42 Stat. 1022; U. S. C, title 8, sec. 368.)

SEC. 3. That a woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a citizen

of the United States by reason of her marriage after the passage of this act, unless

she makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship before a court having jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens: Provided, That any woman citizen who marries an alien ineligible to citizenship shall cease to be a citizen of the United States.

If at the termination of the marital status she is a citizen of the United States she

shall retain her citizenship regardless of her residence. If during the continuance

of the marital status she resides continuously for two years in a foreign State of

which her husband is a citizen or subject, or for five years continuously outside

the United States, she shall thereafter be subject to the same presumption as is a

naturalized citizen of the United States under the second paragraph of section 2

of the act entitled "An act in reference to the expatriation of citizens and their

protection abroad." approved March 2, 1907. Nothing herein shall be construed to repeal or amend the provisions of Revised Statutes 1999 or of section 2

of the expatriation act of 1907 with reference to expatriation. (42 Stat. 1022;

U. S. C, title 8, sec. 9.)

SEC. 4. That a woman who, before the passage of this act, has lost her United

States citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien eligible for citizenship,

may be naturalized as provided by section 2 of this act: Provided, That no certificate of arrival shall be required to be filed with her petition if during the continuance of the marital status she shall have resided within the United States.

After her naturalization she shall have the same citizenship status as if her marriage had taken place after the passage of this act. (42 Stat. 1022; U. S. C,

title 8, sec. 369.)

SEC. 5. That no woman whose husband is not eligible to citizenship shall be

naturalized during the continuance of the marital status. (42 Stat. 1022;

U. S. C, title 8, sec. 370; amended by acts of July 3, 1930, and March 3, 1931;

cf. Appendixes G and I, infra.)

APPENDIX F

COMMITTEE REPORT ON MARRIED WOMEN'S INDEPENDENT CITIZENSHIP ACT OF

SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

[House Report No. 1110, Sixty-seventh Congress, Second Session]

The Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, to whom was referred the

bill (H. R. 12022) relative to the naturalization and citizenship of married women,
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 45

having considered the same, report it to the House with the recommendation that

it do pass with the following amendments:

Page 1, lines 6, 7, and 8, after the word "who" in line 6, strike out the comma

and the words "after the passage of this act," and after the word "States" in line

8 strike out the comma and the word "or" and insert in lieu thereof the words

"after the passage of this act, or any alien woman."

Page 3, line 1, after the word "act" strike out the comma, all the remainder of

line 1, all of line 2, and all of line 3 down to and including the word "marriage."

Page 3, line 15, after the period strike out all the remainder of the section.

This bill, declaring for the independent citizenship of married women, was

introduced by Mr. Cable of Ohio, a member of the committee, and upon it hearings

•were held and extended consideration given by the committee. In the present

Congress Mr. Raker, also a member of the committee, and Mr. Rogers of Massachusetts, and in previous Congresses Miss Rankin of Montana, and Mr. Anthony

of Kansas, introduced bills containing somewhat similar principles, and extended

hearings were also held on those bills.

The principles of this bill have been indorsed by both political parties in their

platforms adopted at Chicago and San Francisco, respectively, in 1920. That

portion of the Republican platform is as follows:

" Naturalization.•-There is urgent need of improvement in our naturalization

laws. No alien should become a citizen until he has become genuinely American,

and adequate tests for determining the alien's fitness should be provided for by

law.

"We advocate in addition the independent naturalization of married women.

An American woman, resident in the United States, should not lose her citizenship by marriage to an alien."

That portion of the Democratic platform reads as follows:

"We advocate * * * Federal legislation which shall insure that American

women resident in the United States, but married to aliens, shall retain their American c'tizenship, and that the same process of naturalization shall be required for

women as for men."

In addition the principles of this bill have been indorsed by the following women's

organizations: American Association of University Women, April, 1922; Business

and Professional Women's Clubs, July, 1921; Council of Jewish Women;

Daughters of the American Revolution, April, 1919; General Federation of

Women's Clubs, January, 1922; National League of Women Voters, April, 1922;

National Women's Trade Union League, June, 1922; Women's Christian Temperance Union, August, 1921.

The purposes of this bill are as follows:

Section 1 provides for the recognition of alien married women who desire and

are qualified to bcome American citizens by permitting such women to become

naturalized. Under existing law the alien wife is denied the privilege of citizenship unless her husband first goes through naturalization proceedings. It is

estimated that there are two and a quarter million alien women in the United

States unnaturalized. It is not known how many of this number are married

women, but there must be a great many who, unless this bill becomes a law, will

continue to be deprived of citizenship in the United States.

Section 2 is for the better protection of the United States by providing assurance

that women as well as men shall be duly qualified before being admitted to the

privilege of citizenship. Under existing law an alien woman who marries a

citizen of the United States automatically becomes a citizen without being

required to speak the English language, to understand our laws, Constitution, or

form of government, without renouncing allegiance to her former ruler, and

without even taking an oath of allegiance to the United States. This also applies

to an alien married woman whose husband becomes naturalized. In the opinion

of the committee the alien woman should live in this country at least a year

before becoming a citizen, and she should go before a Federal naturalization

examiner and show that she is qualified to be a citizen. Your committee, however, deems it inexpedient and undesirable to require the wife of a naturalized

or native-born citizen to wait five years before she herself can become naturalized.

In the first place, she will have every incentive to qualify herself as rapidly as

possible, and, in the second place, if she can qualify, it is desirable to relieve her

of the embarrassment of being without a country as soon as may be consistent

with the welfare of the United States. The benefit of the wife's separate naturalization accrues to her as well as to the country, because she will be put on a par

with her husband in learning the English language, which is the language of our

courts, our press, and our schools, and which she should know in order to teach

her children their rights and duties under the laws of the land.
46 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

Section 3 prevents the automatic loss of an American woman's citizenship by

her marriage to an alien, which is the condition under existing law. Under the

pending bill her American citizenship is not terminated by her marriage with an

alien unless she makes a formal renunciation in court or unless she resides continuously during her marital status for two years in a foreign State of which her

husband is a citizen or subject, or for five years continuously abroad. Under

either of these conditions of residence she shall be subject to the same presumptions

as to loss of citizenship as apply to naturalized aliens. This section is particularly

designed to give to the citizenship of the American woman the dignity and individuality which has heretofore been the exclusive attribute of the male citizen.

The section, however, provides that in case of the marriage of an American

woman to a man who is ineligible to citizenship she shall herself cease to be an

American citizen.

In furtherance of the foregoing purpose, section 4 provides for the naturalization, by the shortened process above referred to, of a woman who has heretofore

lost her citizenship by marriage to an alieu who was eligible for citizenship.

This bill in nowise affects the status of children. Those born here are citizens

of the United States, under the Constitution, regardless of the allegiance of their

parents. Those born abroad will, as heretofore, take the nationality of their

fathers.

Sections 5 and 6 are repealing sections made necessary in order to carry out

the proposed policy. The repealed sections are as follows:

"Section 1994, Revised Statutes: 'Any woman who is now or may hereafter be

married to a citizen of the United States, and who might herself be lawfully

naturalized, shall be deemed a citizen.'

"Section 4 of the expatriation act of 1907: 'That any foreign woman who

acquires American citizenship by marriage to an American shall be assumed to

retain the same after the termination of the marital relation if she continues to

reside in the United States, unless she makes formal renunciation thereof before

a court having jurisdiction to naturalize aliens, or if she resides abroad she may

retain her citizenship by registering as such before United States consul within

one year after the termination of the marital relation.'

"Section 3 of the expatriation act of 1907: 'That any American woman who

marries a foreigner shall take the nationality of her husband. At the termination

of the marital relation she may resume her American citizenship, if abroad, by

registering as an American citizen within one year with a consul of the United

States or by returning to reside in the United States; or, if residing in the United

States at the termination of the marital relation, by continuing to reside therein.'"

It will be noted that the pending bill expressly provides that the repeal of the

last-quoted section shall not restore citizenship lost or terminate citizenship

resumed thereunder.

APPENDIX G

FIRST PERFECTING AMENDMENT OF THE MARRIED WOMEN'S INDEPENDENT CITIZENSHIP ACT OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1922 (ACT OF JULY 3, 1930)

AN ACT To amend the law relative to the citizenship and naturalization of married women, and for

other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of

America in Congress assembled, That the last three sentences of section 3 of the

act entitled "An act relative to the naturalization and citizenship of married

women," approved September 22, 1922 (relating to the presumption of loss of

citizenship by married women by residence abroad), are repealed, but such repeal

shall not restore citizenship lost under such section 3 before such repeal.

SEC. 2. (a) Section 4 of such act of September 22, 1922, is amended to read as

follows:

"SEC. 4. (a) A woman who has lost her United States citizenship by reason of

her marriage to an alien eligible to citizenship or by reason of the loss of United

States citizenship by her husband may, if eligible to citizenship and if she has not

acquired any other nationality by affirmative act, be naturalized upon full and

complete compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws, with the

following exceptions:

" (1) No declaration of intention and no certificate of arrival shall be required,

and no period of residence within the United States or within the county where

the petition is filed shall be required;
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 47

" (2) The petition need not set forth that it is the intention of the petitioner to

reside permanently within the United States;

" (3). The petition may be filed in any court having naturalization jurisdiction,

regardless of the residence of the petitioner;

" (4) If there is attached to the petition, at the time of filing, a certificate from

a naturalization examiner stating that the petitioner has appeared before him for

examination, the petition may be heard at any time after filing.

" (b) After her naturalization such woman shall have the same citizenship status

as if her marriage, or the loss of citizenship by her husband, as the case may be,

had taken place after this section, as amended, takes effect."

(b) The amendment made by this section to section 4 of such act of September

22, 1922, shall not terminate citizenship acquired under such section 4 before such

amendment.

SEC. 3. Subdivision (f) of section 4 of the Immigration Act of 1924, as amended,

is amended to read as follows:

"(f) A woman who was a citizen of the United States and lost her citizenship

by reason of her marriage to an alien, or the loss of United States citizenship by

her husband, or by marriage to an alien and residence in a foreign country."

APPENDIX H

HOUSE COMMITTEE REPORT ON ACT OF JULY 3, 1930

[House Report No. 1036, Seventy-first Congress, second session]

The Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, to whom was referred

the bill (H. R. 10960) to amend the law relative to the citizenship and naturalization of married women, and for other purposes, reports it back to the House

without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

This bill would relieve certain native-born women who have married aliens,

of some unnecessary naturalization requirements growing out of the expatriation

act of March 2, 1907, and the woman's citizenship act of September 22, 1922,

and hardships arising out of the restrictive immigration act of 1924.

Complete independent citizenship for women has not resulted from the act of

September 22, 1922. After more than seven years of operation, the working

of this legislation has developed certain more or less technical difficulties, which

H. R. 10960 proposes to remedy.

PROPOSED LEGISLATION IN THE NATURE OF PERFECTING AMENDMENTS TO THE

ACT OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

The native-born woman who married a foreigner on September 21, 1922, the

day before that act became effective, and lost her American citizenship, was

not, by the 1922 act, automatically restored to citizenship. She was given the

right to repatriate herself by one year's residence in the United States, filing her

petition in a court of competent jurisdiction, renouncing her doubtful allegiance

to a country to which, in fact, she owed no allegiance, and whose nationality

was thrust upon her without her consent, and by taking an oath of allegiance

to the United States.

For example, Mrs. Emily Martin married an alien before the 1922 act and

automatically lost her American citizenship. Later she returned to this country, resided here a year, as required by the law, but was denied naturalization

because she told the court she might reside outside of the United States with

her husband and children, the judge ruling that her year's residence here was

not of the permanent character required by law.

This bill (H. R. 10960) repeals the year's residence requirement, also the

permanent character of the residence now required of a woman who has lost her

citizenship, and also the necessity of her going through the regular naturalization

proceeding as if she were a foreign-born alien. Mrs. Ruth Bryan Owen, a

Member of this Congress, for example, married a British officer before 1922 and

lost her American citizenship through no express desire of her own. To regain

her American citizenship she was required to go through the same naturalization

proceeding as a foreign-born alien, and as if she were not native born. Such a

requirement is not a just treatment of native-born women who have lost their

citizenship without their wish by the provisions of the 1907 act. A simple

affirmative act of a native-born woman should be sufficient to regain citizenship

lost through marriage.

161899•33 4
48 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

If a native-born man marries an alien and resides abroad in her country the

remainder of his life he does not lose his American citizenship. His children,

although they are foreign born and never have been in the United States, likewise

are American citizens, at least until they are 18 years of age. But if a nativeborn woman marries an alien and resides two years in her husband's country, or

five years elsewhere abroad, she is presumed not to be an American citizen. The

committee, realizing that there should not be one rule of law for men and another

for women in the matter of expatriation, proposes in H. R. 10960 to repeal the

provision in the 1922 act raising the presumption that native-born American

women, who have been married to aliens and have resided abroad, have lost their

citizenship, by striking out the last three sentences of section 3 of the act of 1922,

which the Department of State finds extremely difficult to administer.

There are native-born women whose American citizenship was lost by marriage,

prior to the 1922 act, who can not now return to the United States to repatriate

themselves because of our immigration quota law. For example, if an American

woman, prior to the 1922 act, married an Italian, she, under the 1907 act, took the

nationality of her husband. Under the 1924 quota law she must come within the

Italian quota in order to enter the United States to be naturalized. Since the

quota for Italy is already taken up by a long list of applicants, practically, she is

not able to return to the United States for the purpose of repatriation, and we

thus have excluded from the United States by an act of Congress, a native-born

American woman who wants to repatriate herself.

The present law, classifying aliens entitled to "'nonquota" status, now reads, in

part, as follows:

"SEC. 4 (f). A woman who was a citizen of the United States and who prior to

September 22, 1922, lost her citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien,

but at the time of her application for an immigration visa is unmarried."

In other words, her foreign-born husband must either have died or there

must have been a divorce, before she can reenter the United States outside the

quota limitations. H. R. 109G0 amends the above provision of law so that such

native-born women or one who has lost her American citizenship by marriage

and foreign residence since September 22, 1922, may reenter the United States

outside the quota, notwithstanding the fact that the marriage relationship still

exists.

On March 6, 1930, hearings were held by the committee, and the following

appeared on behalf of all the changes contained in H. R. 10960, and of the general

principle that a woman, married or unmarried, should have the same right as a

man to determine her own citizenship. (Hearings held on H. R. 10208.) At

that hearing Mrs. Ruth Bryan Owen, Representative from Florida, sat with

and assisted the committee.

The witnesses were Miss Dorothy Straus, an attorney, New York City, who

represented the National League of Women Voters, who had charge of the

Eresentation of the testimony on behalf of the organizations; Miss Margaret

iambie, representing the National Federation of Business and Professional

Women, New York City; Miss Harlean James, Washington, D. C, representing

the American Association of University Women; Miss Alice Edwards, Washington, D. C, the American Home Economics Association; Miss Cecelia Razovsky,

New York City, chairman of the department of service to the foreign born of

the National Council of Jewish Women; Mrs. E. E. Danly, representing the

national board of the Young Women's Christian Association; Mrs. Clarence

Fraim, representing the General Federation of Women's Clubs; Mrs. Ellis Yost,

representing the Woman's Christian Temperance Union; and Mr. Edward S.

McGrady, Washington, D. C, representing the American Federation of Labor.

Communications in support of the same principle were received from Miss

Elizabeth Christman, secretary of the National Woman's Trade Union League,

and from Mrs. Adena Miller Rich, of the Immigrants' Protective League. H. R.

10960 is also indorsed by the National Woman's Party through their legislative

representative, Mrs. Max Rotter, and Miss Maud Younger.

DIGEST OF PROVISIONS OP H. R. 10960

Section 1 strikes out of section 3 of the act of 1922 the presumption that a

native-born woman loses her United States citizenship by residence abroad after

her marriage to an alien.

Section 2 amends section 4 (a) of the 1922 act and provides a methodwhereby

the native-born woman who lost her citizenship by marriage to an alien prior to

September 22, 1922, may be repatriated by a simple affirmative act in a court

of competent jurisdiction; that is, she may go before a naturalization examiner,
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 49

prove that she has lost her citizenship by marriage to an alien, that she is eligible

to become a citizen under our naturalization laws, then go into court and take

the oath of allegiance. This amendment repeals the one year's residence requirement, the permanent residence requirement, the posting of the name for

90 days, and the requiring of native-born women the same searching examination

and naturalization process as is required of the foreign-born alien.

Section 3 would permit a native-born woman who had lost her citizenship

by marriage to an alien to return to the United States outside of the quota, notwithstanding her marital status has been terminated.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW SHOWN

In compliance with paragraph 2 (a) of Rule 13 of the Rules of the House of

Representatives, changes in existing law, act of September 22, 1922, made by the

bill are shown as follows:

Existing law proposed to be repealed is included in black brackets; new matter

is printed in italics; existing law in wich no change is proposed is shown in roman:

"SEC. 3. That a woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a

citizen of the United States by reason of her marriage after the passage of this

act, unless she makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship before a court

having jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens: Provided, That any woman

citizen who marries an alien ineligible to citizenship shall cease to be a citizen

of the United States. If at the termination of the marital status she is a citizen

of the United States, she shall retain her citizenship regardless of her residence.

[If during the continuance of the marital status she resides continuously for two

years in a foreign State of which her husband is a citizen or subject or for five

years continuously outside the United States, she shall thereafter be subject to

the same presumption as is a naturalized citizen of the United States under the

second paragraph of section 2 of the act entitled "An act in reference to the

expatriation of citizens and their protection abroad", approved March 2, 1907]

but such repeal shall not restore citizenship lost under section 3 before such repeal.

"SEC. 4. (a) [That a] A woman who (before the passage of this act) has lost

her United States citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien eligible to

citizenship or by reason of the loss of the United States citizenship by her husband

may if eligible to citizenship and if she has not acquired by any other nationality by

affirmative act, be naturalized (as provided by section 2 of this act, provided)

upon full and complete compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws,

with the following exceptions: ^Provided, That no certificate of arrival shall be

required to be filed with her petition, if during the continuance of the marital

status she shall have resided within the United States.]

" ' (1) No declaration of intention and no certificate of arrival shall be required,

and no period of residence within the United States or within the county where the

petition is filed shall be required;

•i i ^) The petition need not set forth that it is the intention of the petitioner to

reside permanently within the United States;

" ' (8) The petition may be filed in any court having naturalization jurisdiction,

regardless of the residence of the petitioner;

" '(4) If there is attached to the petition, at the time of filing, a certificate from a

naturalization examiner stating that the petitioner has appeared before him for

examination, the petition may be heard at any time after filing.

" (b) After her naturalization [she] such woman shall have the same citizenship

status as if her marriage or the loss of citizenship by her husband as the case may be

had taken place after [the passage of this actj this section as, amended, takes

effect.'

" (c) The amendment made by this section to section 4 of such act of September

22, 1922, shall not terminate citizenship acquired under such section 4 before such

amendment.

"SEC. 3. Subdivision (f) of section 4 of the immigration act of 1924, as amended,

is amended to read as follows:

" '(f) A woman who was a citizen of the United States and [who prior to

September 22, 1922] lost her citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien,

[but at the time for her application for an immigration visa is unmarried] or

the loss of United States citizenship by her husband, or by marriage to an alien

and residence in a foreign country.' "
50 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

APPENDIX I

KEN ATE COMMITTEE REPORT ON ACT OP JULY 3, 1930

(Senate report No. 614, Seventy-flrst Congress, second session]

The Committee on Immigration, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 10960)

to amend the law relative to the citizenship and naturalization of married women,

and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports it to the Senate and

recommends that the bill do pass with the following amendments:

(1) On page 3, line 2, strike out "effect." " and insert "effect."

(2) On page 3, after line 2, insert the following:

"(c) A child born without the United States of alien parents shall be deemed a

citizen of the United States by virtue of the naturalization of the mother under

the provisions of subdivision (a) of this section if (1) such naturalization takes

place during the minority of such child, and (2) such child is at the time of such

naturalization within the United States in pursuance of a legal admission, whether

or not for permanent residence."

(3) On page 3, after line 6, insert the following:

"(c) Paragraph (b) of section 2 of such act of September 22, 1922, is amended

to read as follows:

" '(b) In lieu of the five-year period of residence within the United States and

the six-months' period of residence within the county where the petitioner resided at the time of filing the petition, she shall have resided continuously in the

United States, Hawaii, Alaska, Porto Rico, or the Virgin Islands for at least one

year immediately preceding the filing of the petition and after legal admission,

whether or not for permanent residence.' "

(4) On page 3, line 13, after the word "country" insert a comma and the following: "and her unmarried minor children if accompanying or following to

join her".

(5) On page 3, after line 13, insert the following new sections:

"SEC. 4. Subdivision (a) of section 1 of the act entitled "An act to supplement

the naturalization laws, and for other purposes," approved March 2, 1929, is

amended to read as follows: "That (a) the registry of aliens at ports of entry

required by section 1 of the act of June 29, 1906 (34 Stat. L., Pt. I, p. 596), as

amended, may be made as to any alien not ineligible to citizenship in whose case

there is no record of admission for permanent residence prior to July 1, 1924, if

such alien shall make a satisfactory showing to the Commissioner General of

Immigration, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Commissioner

General of Immigration, with the approval of the Secretary of Labor, that he•

"'(1) First entered the United States prior to July 1, 1924;

"'(2) Has resided in the United States continuously since such entry;

"' (3) Is a person of good moral character; and

"'(4) Is not subject to deportation.'

"SEC. 5. Section 4 of such act approved March 2, 1929, is amended by striking

out the period at the end thereof and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and the

following: 'except that no such certificate shall be required if the entry was on

or before June 29, 1906.'

"SEC. 6. The fourth subdivision of section 4 of the naturalization act of June

29, 1906, as amemded, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following

new paragraphs:

"' Any alien who has entered the United States as a government official or as a

member of the family of a government official or as an attendant, servant, or

employee of a government official shall not acquire residence for naturalization

purposes until he departs from the United States and thereafter is lawfully

admitted to the United States for permanent residence.

"' Whenever in this act it is required that an affiant or witness must be a citizen

of the United States, such affiant or witness shall not be competent unless during

all of the five-year period immediately preceding the filing of the petition for

citizenship he has been a citizen of the United States.'

"SEC. 7. The last proviso in the first paragraph of the seventh subdivision of

section 4 of such act of June 29, 1906, as amended, is amended by striking out

the period at the end thereof and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and the

following: 'except that this proviso shall not apply in the case of service on

American-owned vessels by an alien who has been lawfully admitted to the

United States for permanent residence.'

"SEC. 8. The twelfth subdivision of section 4 of such act of June 29, 1906, as

amended, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following paragraph:

"'Any individual who claims to have resumed his citizenship under the provisions of this subdivision may, upon the payment of a fee of $1, make application
CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN 51

to the Commissioner of Naturalization, accompanied by two photographs of the

applicant, for a certificate of citizenship. Upon proof to the satisfaction of the

commissioner that the applicant is a citizen and that the citizenship was resumed

as claimed, such individual shall be furnished a certificate of citizenship by the

commissioner, but only if such individual is at the time within the United States.

The certificate of citizenship issued under this subdivision shall have the same

effect as a certificate issued by a court having naturalization jurisdiction, and the

provisions of subdivisions (b) and (c) of section 33 shall apply in respect of

proceedings and certificates of citizenship under this subdivision in the same

manner and to the same extent, including penalties, as they apply in respect of

proceedings and certificates of citizenship issued under such section.'

"SEC. 9. Section 5 of such act of June 29, 1906, as amended, is amended to

read as follows:

'"SEC. 5. The clerk of the court shall, if the petitioner requests it at the time of

filing the petition for citizenship, issue a subpoena for the witnesses named by such

petitioner to appear upon the day set for the final hearing, but in case such witnesses can not be produced upon the final hearing other witnesses may be summoned upon notice to the Bureau of Naturalization in such manner and at such

time as the Commissioner of Naturalization, with the approval of the Secretary

of Labor, may by regulation prescribe.'

"SEC. 10. So much of section 6 of such act of June 29, 1906, as amended, as

reads 'and in no case shall final action be had upon a petition until at least ninety

days have elapsed after filing and posting the notice of such petition' is amended

to read as follows: 'and in no case shall final action be had upon a petition until

at least ninety days have elapsed after filing of such petition.'"

"SEC. 11. (a) Section 8 of such act of June 29, 1906, as amended, is amended to

read as follows:

" 'SEC. 8. No alien shall be admitted to citizenship unless he is able to speak,

read, and write the English language understanding^, and possesses a knowledge

of United States history equivalent to that set forth in the citizenship textbook

published and distributed by the Bureau of Naturalization; except that the above

requirements shall not apply (1) to any alien who is physically unable to comply

therewith, if he is otherwise qualified to become a citizen of the United States,

nor (2) to any alien who, before or after the time this section, as amended, takes

effect, has made a homestead entry unpon the public lands of the United States

and complied in all respects with the laws providing for homestead entries upon

such lands.'

" (b) The above requirements as to ability to read and write the English language and as to knowledge of United States history shall not apply to any alien

if the declaration of intention upon which the petition for citizenship is based was

made prior to the enactment of this act.

" (c) The Commissioner of Naturalization is authorized and directed•

" (1) To promote instruction in the English language and training in citizenship

responsibilities of applicants for naturalization, by the public schools;

" (2) To procure the cooperation of official State and Federal educational and

other agencies and organizations, including those concerned with vocational education, for the better administration of the provisions of this subdivision;

" (3) At the request of the public-school authorities, to send the names of

candidates for citizenship to such authorities; and

"(4) To continued to publish the citizenship textbook and the manual for

teachers, and the monthly naturalization bulletin; and to distribute the textbook

to those applicants for naturalization who are in attendance upon citizenship

classes in the public schools, and the manual to the teachers of such classes. The

cost of printing and binding such publications shall continue to be paid from the

printing and binding appropriations of the Department of Labor and such appropriations shall continue to be reimbursed on the records of the Treausry Department in the amount so paid, upon report thereof by the Public Printer, from the

naturalization fees collected and covered into the Treasury.

"SEC. 12. Section 32 of such act of June 29, 1906, as amended, is amended by

adding at the end thereof the following new subdivision:

" '(c) The provisions of sections 899 and 900 of the Revised Statutes shall not

apply in respect of any part of the record of naturalization proceedings or of any

certificate of citizenship or any declaration of intention.'

"SEC. 13. So much of subdivision (a) of section 33 of such act of June 29, 1906,

as amended, as reads 'Upon obtaining a certificate from the Secretary of Labor

showing the date, place, and manner of arrival in the United States,' is hereby

repealed.

"SEC. 14. (a) Subdivision (a) of section 4 of the immigration act of 1924, as

amended, is amended to read as follows:
52 CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN

" '(a) An immigrant who is the unmarried child under twenty-one years of age,

or the wife, or the husband, of a citizen of the United States;'.

"(b) Clause (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of section 6 of the immigration act of 1924, as amended, is amended to read as follows: '(A) Quota immigrants who are the fathers, or the mothers, of citizens of the United States who

are twenty-one years of age or over;'.

"SEC. i5. The salary of each officer and examiner of the Natrualization Field

Service shall hereafter be increased after each year of satisfactory service to the

next higher salary in his grade as reported annually by the Bureau of the Budget

in the estimates of appropriations. Such increased salaries shall become effective at the beginning of the next quarter following such year of satisfactory service.

Upon reaching the maximum salary within the grade, promotion of any officer or

examiner to the next higher grade shall be at the discretion of the Secretary of

Labor, upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of Naturalization.

"SEC. 16. Section 24 of the immigration act of 1917, as amended, is amended by

adding the following at the end of the section:

"'Clerks in the Immigration Service and the Naturalization Service, respectively, shall be divided into the following groups and grades: Gourp A (clerks

whose duties consist of routine tasks and clerks whose duties consist wholly or

mainlv of typing or operating mechanical office devices)•grade 1, $1,600;

grade'2, $1,700; grade 3, $1,800; grade 4, $1,900; grade 5, $2,000; grade 6, $2,100;

grade 7, $2,300; and Group B (clerks whose duties consist wholly or mainly of

taking and transcribing stenographic notes, and clerks whose duties involve a

knowledge of other specialized subject matter)•grade 1, $1,700; grade 2, $1,800;

grade 3, $1,900; grade 4, $2,000; grade 5, $2,100; grade 6, $2,300; grade 7, $2,500;

and hereafter clerks shall be promoted successively in their respective groups to

grades 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 at the beginning of the next quarter following one year of

satisfactory service in the next lower grade. Clerks having seven or more years'

satisfactory service before or after the enactment of this act may be promoted by

the Secretary of Labor, upon the recommendation of the Commissioner General

of Immigration, or the Commissioner of Naturalization, as the case may be, to

higher salaries than those herein established for grade 7 of Groups A and B.

Nothing in this act shall be construed to reduce the rate of compensation of any

such clerk.'

"SEC. 17. Hereafter the Commissioner General of Immigration and the Commissioner of Naturalization shall each receive a salary of $10,000 a year.

"SEC. 18. The appropriation of such sums as may be necessary to carry out

the provisions of this act is hereby authorized. Expenditures for equipment for

use in the compilation of the statistics to show race, nationalities, and other information authorized to be prepared by the Commissioner of Naturalization shall be

payable from the appropriation for miscellaneous expenses of the Bureau of

Naturalization.''

Following is the report of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization

of the House of Representatives on H. R. 10960:

"[House Report No. 1036, Seventy-first Congress, second session]

"The Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, to whom was referred

the bill (H. R. 10960) to amend the law relative to the citizenship and naturalization of married women, and for other purposes, reports it back to the House

without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

"This bill would relieve certain native-born women who have married aliens,

of some unnecessary naturalization requirements growing out of the expatriation

act of March 2, 1907, and the woman's citizenship act of September 22, 1922,

and hardships arising out of the restrictive immigration act of 1924.

" Complete independent citizenship for women has not resulted from the act of

September 22, 1922. After more than seven years of operation, the working of

this legislation has developed certain more or less technical difficulties, which

H. R. 10960 proposes to remedy.

"PROPOSED LEGISLATION IN THE NATURE OF PERFECTING AMENDMENTS TO THE

ACT OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1922

"The native-born woman who married a foreigner on September 21, 1922, the

day before that act became effective, and lost her American citizenship, was not,

by the 1922 act, automatically restored to citizenship. She was given the right

to repatriate herself by one year's residence in the United States, filing her petition in a court of competent jurisdiction, renouncing her doubtful allegiance to a
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 53

country to which, in fact, she owed no allegiance, and whose nationality was

thrust upon her without her consent, and by taking an oath of allegiance to the

United States.

"For example, Mrs. Emily Martin married an alien before the 1922 act and

automatically lost her American citizenship. Later she returned to this country,

resided here a year, as required by the law, but was denied naturalization because

she told the court she might reside outside of the United States with her husband

and children, the judge ruling that her year's residence here was not of the

permanent character required by law.

"This bill (H. R. 10960) repeals the year's residence requirement, also the permanent character of the residence now required of a woman who has lost her

citizenship, and also the necessity of her going through the regular naturalization

proceeding as if she were a foreign-born alien. Mrs. Ruth Bryan Owen, a

Member of this Congress, for example, married a British officer before 1922 and

lost her American citizenship through no express desire of her own. To regain

her American citizenship she was required to go through the same naturalization

proceeding as a foreign-born alien, and as if she were not native born. Such a

requirement is not a just treatment of native-born women who have lost their

citizenship without their wish by the provisions of the 1907 act. A simple affirmative act of a native-born woman should be sufficient to regain citizenship lost

through marriage.

"If a native-born man marries an alien and resides abroad in her country the

remainder of his life, he does not lose his American citizenship. His children,

although they are foreign born and never have been in the United States, likewise are American citizens, at least until they are 18 years of age. But if a nativeborn woman marries an alien and resides two years in her husband's country, or

five years elsewhere abroad, she is presumed not to be an American citizen. The

committee, realizing that there should not be one rule of law for men and another

for women in the matter of expatriation, proposes in H. R. 10960 to repeal the

provision in the 1922 act raising the presumption that native-born American

women, who have been married to aliens and have resided abroad, citizenship, by striking out the last three sentences of section 3 of the act of 1922,

which the Department of State finds extremely difficult to administer.

"There are native-born women whose American citizenship was lost by marriage, prior to the 1922 act, who can not now return to the United States to repatriate themselves because of our immigration quota law. For example, if an

American woman, prior to the 1922 act, married an Italian, she, under the 1907

act, took the nationality of her husband. Under the 1924 quota law she must

come within the Italian quota in order to enter the United States to be naturalized. Since the quota for Italy is already taken up by a long list of applicants,

practically, she is not able to return to the United States for the purpose of repatriation, and we thus have excluded from the United States by an act of Congress, a native-born American woman who wants to repatriate herself.

"The present law, classifying aliens entitled to 'nonquota' status, now reads,

in part, as follows:

'"SEC. 4 (f). A woman who was a citizen of the United States and who prior to

September 22, 1922, lost her citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien,

but at the time of her application for an immigration visa is unmarried.'

"In other words, her foreign-born husband must either have died or there must

have been a divorce, before she can reenter the United States outside the quota

limitations. H. R. 10960 amends the above provision of law so that such nativeborn women or one who has lost her American citizenship by marriage and

foreign residence since September 22, 1922, may reenter the United States outside the quota, notwithstanding the fact that the marriage relationship still exists.

"On March 6, 1930, hearings were held by the committee, and the following

appeared on behalf of all the changes contained in H. R. 10960 and of the general

principle that a woman, married or unmarried, should have the same right as a

man to determine her own citizenship. (Hearings held on H. R. 10208.) At

that hearing Mrs. Ruth Bryan Owen, Representative from Florida, sat with and

assisted the committee.

"The witnesses were Miss Dorothy Straus, an attorney, New York City, who

represented the National League of Women Voters, who had charge of the

presentation of the testimony on behalf of the organizations; Miss Margaret

Lambie, representing the National Federation of Business and Professional

Women, New York City; Miss Harlean James, Washington, D. C, representing

the American Association of University Women; Miss Alice Edwards, Washington, D. C, the American Home Economics Association; Miss Cecilia Razovsky,
54 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

New York Citv, chairman of the department of service to the foreign born of

the National Council of Jewish Women; Mrs. E. E. Danly, representing the

national board of the Young Women's Christian Association; Mrs. Clarence

Fraim, representing the General Federation of Women's Clubs; Mrs. Ellis Yost,

representing the Woman's Christian Temperance Union; and Mr. Edward S.

McGrady, Washington, D. C, representing the American Federation of Labor.

"Communications in support of the same principle were received from Miss

Elizabeth Christman, secretary of the National Woman's Trade Union League,

and from Mrs. Adcna Miller Rich, of the Immigrants' Protective League. H. R.

10960 is also indorsed by the National Woman's Party through their legislative

representative, Mrs. Max Rotter, and Miss Maud Younger.

'"DIOEST or PROVISIONS OF H. K. 10960

"Section 1 strikes out of Bection 3 of the act of 1922 the presumption that a

native-born woman loses her United States citizenship by residence abroad after

her marriage to an alien.

"Section 2 amends section 4 (a) of the 1922 act and provides a method whereby

the native-born woman who lost her citizenship by marriage to an alien prior to

September 22, 1922, may be repatriated by a simple affirmative act in a court of

competent jurisdiction; that is, she may go before a naturalization examiner,

prove that she has lost her citizenship by marriage to an alien, that she is eligible

to become a citizen under our naturalization laws, then go into court and take

the oath of allegiance. This amendment repeals the one year's residence requirement, the permanent residence requirement, the posting of the name for 90 days,

and the requiring of native-born women the same searching examination and

naturalization process as is required of the foreign-born alien.

"Section 3 would permit a native-born woman who had lost her citizenship by

marriage to an alien to return to the United States outside of the quota, notwithstanding her marital status has been terminated.

" CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW SHOWN

"In compliance with paragraph 2 (a) of Rule 13 of the Rules of the House of

Representatives, changes in existing law, act of September 22, 1922, made by the

bill are shown as follows:

" Existing law proposed to be repealed is included in black brackets; new matter

is printed in italics; existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in

Roman:

"SEC. 3. That a woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a

eitizen of the United States by reason of her marriage after the passage of this

act, unless she makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship before a court

having jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens: Provided, That any woman

citizen who marries an alien ineligible to citizenship shall cease to be a citizen

of the United States. If at the termination of the marital status she is a citizen

of the United States, she shall retain her citizenship regardless of her residence.

[If during the continuance of the marital status she resides continuously for two

years in a foreign State of which her husband is a citizen or subject, or for five

years continuously outside the United States, she shall thereafter be subject to

the same presumption as is a naturalized citizen of the United States under the

second paragraph of section 2 of the act entitled 'An act in reference to the

expatriation of citizens and their protection abroad,' approved March 2, 1907.]

but such repeal shall not restore citizenship lost under section 3 before such repeal.

"SEC. 4. (a) [That] A woman who (before the passage of this act) has lost

her United States citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien eligible to

eitizenship or by reason of the loss of the United Slates citizenship by her husband

may if eligible to citizenship and if she has not acquired any other nationality bj/

affirmative act, be naturalized (as provided by section 2 of this act) ^Provided,

That no certificate of arrival shall be required to be filed with her petition, if

during the continuance of the marital status she shall have resided within the

United States] upon full and complete compliance with all requirements of the

naturalization laws, with the following exceptions:

" '(1) No declaration of intention and no certificate of arrival shall be required,

and no period of residence within the United States or within the country where the

petition is filed shall be required:

" '($) The petition need not set forth that it is the intention of the petitioner to

reside permanently within the United Stales;
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 55

" '(3) The petition may be filed in any court having naturalization jurisdiction,

regardless of the residence of the petitioner;

" '(4) If there is attached to the petition, at the time of filing, a certificate from a

naturalization examiner stating that the petitioner has appeared before him for

examination, the petition may be heard at any time after filing.

" '(b) After her naturalization £she] such woman shall have the same citizenship status as if her marriage or the loss of citizenship by her husband as the case may

be had taken place after [the passage of this act] this section as, amended, lakes

effect.'

" (b) The amendment made by this section to section 4 of such act of September 22, 1922, shall not terminate citizenship acquired under such section 4 before

such amendment.

" SEC. 3. Subdivision (f) of section 4 of the immigration act of 1924, as amended,

is amended to read as follows:

" '(f) A woman who was a citizen of the United States and [who prior to

September 22, 1922] lost her citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien

[but at the time of her application for an immigration visa is unmarried] or the

loss of United States citizenship by her husband, or by marriage to an alien and

residence in a foreign country.' "

EXPLANATION OF COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

The following is submitted in explanation of the amendments reported by your

committee:

(1) This is a clerical change.

(2) The effect of this amendment is to make the minor child, born without the

United States of alien parents, a citizen of the United States by virtue of the

naturalization of the mother under the provisions of section 4 of the Cable Act, as

amended by the bill, if the child is at the time of such naturalization within the

United States in pursuance of a legal admission, whether or not for permanent

residence. Under existing law a minor child does not become a citizen by virtue

of the naturalization of the parent until he begins to reside permanently in the

United States and even in that case authorities differ as to the effect of the naturalization of the mother.

(3) Section 2 of the Cable Act permits the alien wife of an American citizen to

become naturalized after one year's residence with the United States, Hawaii,

Alaska, or Porto Rico in lieu of the 5-year period of residence within the United

States and the 1-year period of residence within the State. This amendment conforms to existing law with respect to the period of residence since the act of March

2, 1929, changes the one year's residence requirement within the State to six

months within the county. The amendment also recognizes the residence of the

alien wife as beginning after legal admission to the United States, whether or not

for permanent residence, and permits residence in the Virgin Islands to be counted

as residence within the United States, in conformity with the act of February 25,

1927, which gave full naturalization jurisdiction to the district court of the Virgin

Islands and made residence by all eligible aliens within the Virgin Islands residence

within the United States for naturalization purposes.

(4) Under the House bill a woman who was a citizen of the United States and

lost her citizenship by reason of marriage to an alien or the loss of citizenship by

her husband or by marriage to an alien and residence in a foreign country is permitted to come in as a nonquota immigrant. The effect of this amendment is to

include the unmarried minor children of such a woman if accompanying or following to join her.

(5) Section 4: This section contains a provision which the Senate passed a year

ago last February, but which was objected to by the House. The section proposed

gives aliens in the United States who entered the country prior to July 1, 1924,

opportunity to have their entries legalized. There are many aliens in this coujtry

who entered the United States innocently and regarding whom no record was

made at the time of their entry. Many came into the country admittedly in conformity with the law. They can not be deported although some of them probably

came into the country without a compliance with the immigration law at the time

of their entry. Aliens who entered the United States irregularly after July 1,

1924, are subject to perpetual deportation. This is a resubmission to the Senate

of its enactment of February, 1929, for reenactment, in the hope that the House

will agree to this humane provision. It does not let aliens into the United States,

but is simply to provide for those who are here and who can get no recognition,

who can not leave the country by obtaining a permit to reenter, and to enable
56 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

them to straighten out theirstatus in this country. They must subject themselves

to rigid examination by the Immigration Service before they may be entitled to

the relief which this measure proposes to give to them. The amendment entitles

one who entered the United States prior to July 1, 1924, where no record was made

of such entry, to have a record made of such entiy, whether or not there is an entry

of such person after June 30, 1924, that is recorded.

Section 5: This provision is to remedy a difficulty which existing law unwittingly imposed upon citizens of the United States and aliens who entered the

United States prior to the time when the immigration records were sufficiently

accurate to be relied upon. It has been impossible to obtain records of entries

of aliens into the United States prior to June 29, 1906, the date of the naturalization law required entries to be made of every alien arriving in the United States.

Section 6: This amendment is to prevent the naturalization of aliens entering

the United States under diplomatic exemptions as members of the suites, or in

the employ in any way, of the foreign representatives accredited to this country.

Instances have occurred where such individuals have left the employ of the

representatives of the foreign government and, through no fault of those representatives, have remained in the United States without complying with the

requirements of the immigration law for permanent admission. Others have

entered the United States under representations of diplomatic exemption which

enabled them to avoid the compliance with the immigration laws at the time of

their entry for permanent admission. They do not have a residence in the

United States in conformity with the immigration laws and should not be given

a naturalization status. Of course, if a woman who has entered under diplomatic

exemption marries a citizen of the United States, under section 2 of the Cable

Act, as amended by your committee, she may be naturalized without departing

from the United States.

The section also requires a naturalized citizen to be a citizen for five years

in order to be competent to serve as a witness for an applicant who desires to

secure citizenship under the naturalization laws.

Section 7: The purpose of this section is to enable aliens who are serving on

vessels owned by American citizens to have the benefit of their service as seamen

on such vessels in applying for naturalization. The records show in these cases

that aliens have entered the United States regularly with their families, have

raised their families in this country, and are in all respects desirable as applicants

for citizenship. The present law prevents aliens from acquiring residence for

naturalization purposes during service upon vessels of foreign registry. Prior

to 1918 aliens came to the United States upon vessels of foreign registry, made

declarations of intention, obtained addresses in American ports, and continued

service upon vessels of foreign registry. After the necessary period of time they

applied for and were admitted to citizenship. Congress in 1918 enacted the

present law which excludes such service as residence under the naturalization

law. However, there is a small number of American-owned vessels of foreign

registry, with seamen legally admitted to the United States and whose families

had been brought with them or were born here and continued to live in the

United States. The provision proposed will afford relief to these bona fide

residents of the United States whose vocation is carried on in American-owned

vessels.

Section 8: This section proposes relief for American citizens who expatriated

themselves by entering the military service of the armies of countries subsequently

allied and associated with the United States during the World War. They entered

these armies before the United States declared war. They were obliged to take

an oath of allegiance to the sovereign, and thereby lost American citizenship but

acquired no other citizenship. By a provision in the act of May 9, 1918, the

twelfth subdivision of section 4 of the act of 1906 was added, by which these

Americans regained their American citizenship status. No certificate of citizenship was provided, however, for them, and their status, while partially relieved,

was not free from embarrassment. This amendment proposes to give to each

such citizen a certificate of his citizenship for his use and protection.

Sections 9 and 10: The enactment of these provisions will accomplish the discontinuance of a great volume of unnecessary clerical work imposed upon clerks

of courts which has been of no value in the administration of the naturalization

law from the time it was required by the act of 1906. This provision is referred

to in sections 5 and 6 of the naturalization act of 1906. The requirement for the
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 57

posting of notices is in section 5 and reference is made to it in section 6. The

change proposed does not let down the restricting provisions of the naturalization

law.

Section 11: This provision raises the standards of the present naturalization

law which only requires an alien to speak the English language and to sign his

name, by mark, or at most in his own handwriting, which often appears in foreign

script. This provision requires all applicants for citizenship to read, speak, and

write in the English language and to possess a knowledge of American history

equivalent to that set forth in the citizenship textbook published by the Bureau

of Naturalization under authority of Congress. This book is available to applicants for citizenship only who attend public schools. It should not be available

for free distribution, as it would immediately become the source of misuse by

self-serving individuals who would fraudulently obtain funds from their unsuspecting countrymen under the guise of instruction. Such instruction would, of

course, be carried on under irresponsible supervision and where so accomplished

would work more harm than advantage to the country and to the individuals.

The requirements to read and write are not applicable to those who hold declarations of intention made prior to the operation of this proposed law. They do not

apply to homestead entrymen or to those physically unable to comply with them.

The effect of subdivision (c) is to repeal and reenact the ninth subdivision of

section 4 of the act of June 29, 1906, and is in conformity with the desire expressed

by the Secretary of the National Advisory Committee on Illiteracy, with the

approval of the committee, as a result of a study made of illiteracy as a national

problem. This committee is one of two committees appointed by the Secretary

of the Interior with the approval of the President to study American educational

problems. This will enable the Commissioner of Naturalization to enlarge the

activities of the Bureau of Naturalization in relation to the promotion of the

organization by the public schools of classes of adult foreigners, to which the

adult illiterate foreign born and the illiterate American born may come to secure

the schooling which they need and instruction in citizenship responsibilities to

enable them to be better citizens in the communities where they live, both as

producers and consumers.

Section 12: The purpose of this section is to prevent the issuance to unsuspecting individuals of useless and worthless certifications regarding parts of natulalization records, as well as to prevent the issuance of certificates of citizenship

or declarations of intention, except in accordance with the requirements of the

naturalization law.

Section 13: This section repeals what was found to be an impracticable requirement upon citizens of the United States entitled to certificates of citizenship.

No record of admission could be found for the reason that they came into the

United States, many of them in the period from 1860 to 1906, during most of which

time no records of any nature whatsoever were kept or authorized by law of

incoming immigrants upon which dependence can be placed.

Section 14: This section permits husbands of American citizens to come in

nonquota, placing them in the same position as wives in this respect. Under

existing law only husbands by marriage occurring prior to June 1, 1928, may enter

the United States as nonquota immigrants. The amendment removes the latter

limitation.

Section 15: This section creates a method of advancement in compensation for

officers and examiners in the Naturalization Service.

Section 16: This section amends section 24 of the immigration act of 1917, to

establish a parity between the clerks in the Immigration and Naturalization

Services where like duties are being performed as well as to permit periodical

promotions.

Section 17: This section fixes the salaries of the Commissioner General of Immigration and the Commissioner of Naturalization at $10,000 a year.

Section 18: This section contains provisions authorizing appropriations.

In conclusion it may be said that many of the provisions added by your committee are contained in bills which have been introduced and favorably reported

to the House. The inclusion of them as amendments in this bill will expedite

legislation that is highly desirable of enactment.
58 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

APPENDIX J

SECOND PERFECTING AMENDMENT OF THE MARRIED WOMEN'S INDEPENDENT

CITIZENSHIP ACT OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1922, ACT OF MARCH 3, 1931

An art to amend the naturalization laws in respect of posting notices of petitions for citizenship, and for

other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of

America in Congress assembled, That section 5 of the Naturalization Act of June

29, 1006, as amended, is amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 5. The clerk of the court shall, if the petitioner requests it at the time of

filing the petition for citizenship, issue a subpoena for the witnesses named by such

petitioner to appear upon the day set for the final hearing, but in case such witnesses can not be produced upon the final hearing other witnesses may be summoned upon notice to the Bureau of Naturalization in such manner and atsuch

time as the Commissioner of Naturalization, with the approval of the Secretary

of Labor, may by regulation prescribe."

SEC. 2. So much of section 6 of such act, as amended, as reads "and in no case

shall final action be had upon a petition until at least ninety days have elapsed

after filing and posting the notice of such petition" is amended to read as follows:

"and in no case shall final action be had upon a petition until at least ninety days

have elapsed after filing of such petition.

SEC. 3. (a) Any person, born in the United States, who had established permanent residence in a foreign country prior to January 1, 1917, and who has

heretofore lost his United States citizenship by becoming naturalized under the

laws of such foreign country, may, if eligible to citizenship and if, prior to the

enactment of this act, he has been admitted to the United States for permanent

residence, be naturalized upon full and complete compliance with all of the requirements of the naturalization laws, with the following exceptions:

(1) The five-year period of residence within the United States shall noi be

required;

(2) The declaration of intention may be made at any time after admission

to the United States, and the petition may be filed at any time after the expiration of six months following the declaration of intention;

(3) If there is attached to the petition, at the time of filing, a certificate from a

naturalization examiner stating that the petitioner has appeared before him

for examination, the petition may be heard at any time after filing.

(b) After naturalization such person shall have the same citizenship status

as immediately preceding the loss of United States citizenship.

SF.C. 4. (a) Section 3 of the act entitled "An act relative to the naturalization and citizenship of married women," approved September 22, 1922, as

amended, is amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 3. (a) A woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a

citizen of the United States by reason of her marriage after this section, as

amended, takes effect, unless she makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship

before a court having jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens.

" (b) Any woman who before this section, as amended, takes effect, has lost

her United States citizenship by residence abroad after marriage to an alien or

by marriage to an alien ineligible to citizenship may, if she has not acquired any

other nationality by affirmative act, be naturalized in the manner prescribed in

section 4 of this act, as amended. Any woman who was a citizen of the United

States at birth shall not be denied naturalization under section 4 on account of

her race.

"(c) No woman shall be entitled to naturalization under section 4 of this act,

as amended, if her United States citizenship originated solely by reason of her

marriage to a citizen of the United States or by reason of the acquisition of United

States citizenship by her husband."

(b) Section 5 of such act of September 22, 1922, is repealed.

Approved, March 3, 1931.
CITIZENSHIP EIGHTS OF WOMEN 59

APPENDIX K

HOUSE COMMITTEE REPORT ON ACT OP MARCH 3, 1931

[House Report No. 2693, Seventy-first Congress, third session]

The Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, to whom was referred the

bill (H. R. 16975) to amend the law relative to the citizenship and naturalization

of married women, and for other purposes, reports it back to the House without

amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

Representatives of the following organizations appeared before the subcommittee on naturalization in the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization

in behalf of the measure: National Association of Women Lawyers, National

Council of Jewish Women, General Federation of Women's Clubs, National

League of Women Voters, National Woman's Party, Woman's Bar Association

of the District of Columbia, Business and Professional Women's Clubs.

Communications in support of the principle of the bill were received by the

committee from the representatives of other organizations interested in its

enactment.

PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO AMEND THE ACT OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1922, AS AMENDED

BY THE, ACT OF JULY 3, 1930

In general, the purpose of the bill is to eliminate the remaining discriminations

against married women in the statutes relating to citizenship and naturalization.

(1) The bill permits a woman who since September 22, 1922, has suffered an

actual or presumptive loss of her United States citizenship because of foreign

residence after marriage to an alien to resume her citizenship in the same manner

now prescribed for the resumption of United States citizenship by American

women who married aliens prior to September 22, 1922. It will be remembered

than an act approved July 3, 1930, repealed the presumption of loss of United

States citizenship by a woman on account of foreign residence after marriage to

an alien; but since the repeal is not retroactive this bill indicates a way whereby

the American woman whose citizenship rights were affected by the presumption

may reestablish her citizenship. At the present time there are native-born

American women who have presumptively lost their United States citizenship by

foreign residence after marriage to foreigners and who have not been able to overcome to the satisfaction of the State Department the now obsolete presumption.

Apparently they are not permitted United States passports and are not afforded

protection abroad. Yet, since their loss of United States citizenship is merely

presumptive, it is doubtful whether any court proceeding for naturalization is now

available to them.

(2) The bill repeals the provision of the existing law by which a woman ceases

to be a citizen of the United States by her marriage to an ineligible alien. Since

a man citizen of the United States does not lose his citizenship by marriage to an

ineligible alien, this repeal places the man and the woman citizen on the same

footing.

(3) The bill stipulates that if any woman was a citizen of the United States at

birth her race shall not preclude the resumption of United States citizenship

heretofore lost by her because of her marriage to an ineligible alien. There are

native born American women of a race ineligible for citizenship who have married

men of their own race and thus lost their United States citizenship, their husbands not being American citizens. A man born in the United States and of a

race ineligible to citizenship suffers no loss of his United States citizenship because

of his marriage to a person of his race.

(4) The bill closes the simple method of resumption of United States citizenship (set forth in the act of July 3, 1930) to a woman originally an alien and who

never possessed United States citizenship except by marriage to a citizen. She

may, however, pursue the regular course of naturalization.

(5) The bill (sec. 2) repeals the existing law which declares "that no woman

whose husband is not eligible to citizenship shall be naturalized during the continuance of the marital status." The repeal will equalize as between men and

women the law on that point, since no man is refused naturalization as a citizen

of the United States because his wife is not eligible to citizenship.

In the opinion of the committee, there should be no distinction between men

and women with regard to nationality rights. The citizenship of the American

man has never been affected by marriage; but the same privilege has not been

enjoyed by the American woman. Congress has gradually removed all discriminations excepting those sought to be corrected by H. R. 16975.
60 CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN

Jane Addanis, of Hull House, offers the following constructive criticism of the

situation this bill is intended to oorrect:

"A curious inconsistency of the Cable Act is that it takes away the birthright

of an American-born woman if she marries an ineligible•that is, a man from a

countrv whose people can not be made citizens•although it is precisely under

such circumstances that a woman most needs her citizenship."

The situation was graphically preseuted by Miss Laura Berrien, who represented the National Association of Woman Lawyers at the hearings. She said:

"Just as long as my Government takes the position that a woman's nationality

is not as sacred and intimate as a man's, I feel that it is a reflection not only on

me but on all women as well.

" Nationality is the relation one bears to one's country. You can not make one

law for the man and another for the woman without makiug an attack on the

woman by putting her in an inferior position and creating a sense of humiliation.

"We women of America wish to be able to feel, and wish the men to feel, that

our relation to our country is as fine, intimate, and sincere as a man's."

Dr. Emma Wold, technical adviser to the United States delegates to the recent

Conference on the Codification of International Law at The Hague, made the

following statement:

"If the objection to removing the present discrimination against women in our

Cable Act is due to sentiment against racial mixtures, let me call your attention

to the fact that it largely fails of its purpose. It does not affect many white or

Caucasian women. The provision in the law touches the large number of Chinese

and Japanese girls born in the United States with the precious heritage of United

States citizenship. If, unfortunately but perfectly legitimafely, such a girl falls

in love with one of her own race who is an alien and marries him, she is the one

who is penalized.

"So far as white women are concerned, the fact is that under the laws of many

.y^oi ourStates, especially the Western States, where Japanese, Chinese, and Hindus

are found in large numbers, the laws make illegal a marriage between a white person and a Mongolian or Asiatic person. A white woman who enters upon an

attempted marriage of this sort may be punished for the violation of the laws on

marriage, but the penalty of loss of citizenship can not fall upon her, for the

reason that there is no marriage."

H. R. 16975 will remove the last vestige of discrimination as to nationality between men and women in America. Justice to American women demands that

this bill be enacted into law. There is no other country in the world which deprives its women nationals of their citizenship for the sole reason that they marry

aliens ineligible for naturalization.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW SHOWN

In compliance with paragraph 2 (a) of rule 13 of the Rules of the House o

Representatives, changes in existing law, act of September 22, 1922, as amended

by the act of July 3, 1930, made by the bill are shown as follows:

Existing law proposed to be repealed is included in black brackets; new matter

is printed in italics; existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman:

"SEC. 3. That a woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a citizen of the United States by reason of her marriage after this [actj section, as

amended, takes effect, unless she makes formal renunciation of her citizenship

before a court having jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens. \.Provided%

That any woman citizen who marries an alien ineligible to citizenship shall cease

to be a citizen of the United States.] Any woman who has heretofore suffered an

actual or presumptive loss of her United States citizenship by residence abroad after

marriage to an alien or any woman who has heretofore ceased to be a citizen of the

United States by marriage to an alien ineligible to citizenship may resume her United

States citizenship in the manner prescribed in section 4 of such act of September 22,

1922, as amended, and if any woman was a citizen of the United States at birth her

race shall not preclude the resumption hereunder of her United States citizenship.

The provisions of such act of September 22, 1922, as amended, for the resumption of

citizenship shall not apply to any woman whose United States citizenship originated

solely by reason of her marriage to a citizen of the United States.

"SEC. 2. Section 5 of such act of September 22, 1922, is repealed.

"[SEC. 5. That no woman whose husband is not eligible to citizenship shall be

naturalized during the continuance of the marital status.J"
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN . 61

APPENDIX L

SENATE COMMITTEE REPORT ON ACT OF MARCH 3, 1931

[Seventy-first Congress, third session, Senate Report No. 1723]

The Committee on Immigration, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 10672) to

amend the naturalization laws in respect of posting of notices of petitions for

citizenship, having considered the same, reports it back to the Senate with amendments and recommends that as amended the bill do pass.

The purpose of sections 1 and 2 of this bill is to eliminate a great deal of unnecessary work which is now being performed by the clerks of the various courts

throughout the United States with no corresponding advantage to the public or

the administration of the naturalization law. The present law requires the clerks

of courts to make up a notice regarding each petition for citizenship, with information under an appropriate heading, giving the name, nativity, and residence of the

alien, the date and place of his arrival in the United States, and the date, as nearly

as may be, for the final hearing of his petition, and the names of the witnesses

whom the applicant expects to summon in his behalf.

These notices are generally posted in a suitable location in the office or building

in which the office of the clerk of the court is located. Where there is any considerable number of names, the notices are generally pasted one on top of the

other.

It has been stated by representatives of the Labor Department that these

posted notices have made no contribution to the successful administration of the

naturalization law during the entire period that they have been required by the

act of June 29, 1906, and the repeal of this provision of the law has been recommended, as wholly unproductive of good.

Your committee has added three new sections to the bill.

The purpose of section 3 is to permit persons born in the United States, who

have lost United States citizenship by naturalization in a foreign country, but

who have returned to the United States for permanent residence, to become

naturalized without compliance with the 5-year residence requirement. In lieu

thereof the petition may be filed at any time after the expiration of six months

following the declaration of intention. Of course, all other requirements of the

naturalization laws such as good moral character and attachment to the principles

of the Constitution must be complied with. It is believed that the proposed

short method of naturalization will benefit a very limited number of persons.

The purpose of section 4 is to eliminate the remaining discrimination against

married women in the statute relating to citizenship and naturalization, summarized as follows:

(1) The section permits a woman who since September 22, 1922, has suffered

an actual or presumptive loss of her United States citizenship because of foreign

residence after marriage to an alien to resume her citizenship in the same manner

now prescribed for the resumption of United States citizenship by American

women who married aliens prior to September 22, 1922. It will be remembered

that an act approved July 3, 1930, repealed the presumption of loss of United

States citizenship by a woman on account of foreign residence after marriage to

an alien; but since the repeal is not retroactive this bill indicates a way whereby

the American woman whose citizenship rights were affected by the presumption

may reestablish her citizenship. At the present time there are native-born

American women who have presumptively lost their United States citizenship

by foreign residence after marriage to foreigners and who have not been able to

overcome to the satisfaction of the State Department the now obsolete presumption. Apparently they are not permitted United States passports and are not

afforded protection abroad. Yet, since their loss of United States citizenship is

merely presumptive, it is doubtful whether any court proceeding for naturalization

is now available to them.

(2) The section also repeals the provision of the existing law by which a woman

ceases to be a citizen of the United States by her marriage to an ineligible alien.

Since a man citizen of the United States does not lose his citizenship by marriage

to an ineligible alien, this repeal places the man and the woman citizen on the

same footing.

(3) The section stipulates that if any woman was a citizen of the United States

at birth her race shall not preclude the resumption of United States citizenship

heretofore lost by her because of her marriage to an ineligible alien. There are

native-born American women of a race ineligible for citizenship who have married men of their own race and thus lost their United States citizenship, their
62 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

husbands not being American citizens. A man born in the United States and of

a race ineligible to citizenship suffers no loss of his United States citizenship

because of his marriage to a person of his race.

(4) The section closes the simple method of resumption of United States citizenship (set forth in the act of July 3, 1930) to a women originally an alien and who

never possessed United States citizenship except by marriage to a citizen. She

may, however, pursue the regular course of naturalization.

(o) The bill subdivision (b) repeals the existing law which declares "that no

woman whose husband is not elig'ble to citizenship shall be naturalized during

the continuance of the marital status." The repeal will equalize as between

men and women the law on that point, since no man is refused naturalization as

a citizen of the United States because his wife is not eligible to citizenship.

Section 5 is proposed in the interests of veterans of the World War. On

March 4, 1931, the privilege of simplified naturalization now granted the veterans

of the World War will expire. It is understood that many hundreds, if not thousands, are still laboring under the belief that they became citizens by reason of

their service, or upon demobilization. Whether there be few or many, the privilege should be granted for another two years.

APPENDIX M

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT ON ACT OP MARCH 3, 1931

(House Report No. 2937, Seventy-first Congress, third session]

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the

amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 10672) to amend the naturalization

laws with respect to posting of notices of petitions for citizenship, having met,

after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to

their respective Houses as follows:

That the Senate recede from its amendment numbered 3.

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate

numbered 1, and agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 2:

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate

numbered 2, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows:

In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate amendment insert

the following:

"SEC. 4. (a) Section 3 of the act entitled 'An act relative to the naturalization

and citizenship of married women,' approved September 22, 1922, as amended,

is amended to read as follows:

" 'SEC. 3. (a) A woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a

citizen of the United States by reason of her marriage after this section, as

amended, takes effect, unless she makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship

before a court having jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens.

" '(b) Any woman who before this section, as amended, takes effect, has lost

her United States citizenship by residence abroad after marriage to an alien or by

marriage to an alien ineligible to citizenship may, if she has not acquired any other

nationality by affirmative act, be naturalized in the manner prescribed in section

4 of this act, as amended. Any woman who was a citizen of the United States

at birth shall not be denied naturalization under section 4 on account of her race.

" '(c) No woman shall be entitled to naturalization under section 4 of this act,

as amended, if her United States citizenship originated solely by reason of her

marriage to a citizen of the United States or by reason of the acquisition of

United States citizenship by her husband.'

"(b) Section 5 of such act of September 22, 1922, is repealed."

And the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate to the title of the bill and agree to the same.

ALBERT JOHNSON,

JOHN L. CABLE,

Managers on the part of the House.

HIRAM W. JOHNSON,

DAVID A. REED,

WILLIAM H. KING,

Managers on the part of the Senate.
CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN 63

STATEMENT OF THE MANAGERS ON THE PART OF THE HOUSE

The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing

votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 10672)

to amend the naturalization laws with respect to posting of notices of petitions for

citizenship, submit the following written statement in explanation of the effect

of the action agreed upon by the conferees and recommended in the accompanying;

conference report:

Amendment No. 1: This amendment permits persons born in the United

States who have established permanent residence in a foreign country prior to

1917, and who have heretofore become naturalized under the laws of such country,

and who have heretofore been admitted to the United States for permanent

residence, to become naturalized without compliance with the 5-year residence

requirement. In lieu thereof it is provided that the petition may be filed at any

time after the expiration of six months following the declaration of intention but

within the statutory 7-year period. The House recedes.

Amendment No. 2: This amendment amends the Cable Act of 1922, as follows:

(1) A woman citizen who hereafter marries an alien ineligible to citizenship

shall not lose her citizenship by reason of such marriage.

(2) A woman who heretofore has lost her citizenship by residence abroad after

marriage to an alien or by marriage to an ineligible alien may become naturalized

according to the short method provided in section 4 of the Cable Act as amended

July 3, 1930, and by virtue of subdivision (b) of such section, as amended. After

her naturalization she will have the same citizenship status as if her marriage h**«***'

taken place after the passage of this bill.

(3) A woman who was a citizen of the United States at birth shall not be denied

naturalization under section 4 of the Cable Act, as amended, by reason of her race.

(4) The quick method of naturalization given to certain classes of women by

the Cable Act, as amended, is denied to women whose citizenship originated solely

by reason of marriage to a citizen of the United States.

(5) This amendment also repeals the provision of the Cable Act denying

naturalization to a woman married to an alien ineligible to citizenship.

The House recedes with an amendment limiting the benefits set forth in paragraph (2) of this statement to women who have not acquired any other nationality

by affirmative act, and with other amendments making clarifying changes.

Amendment No. 3: This amendment extends for two years more the time in

which alien veterans may become naturalized under the short method of naturalization, this privilege under the existing law expiring on March 4, 1931. The

Senate recedes.

The Senate amended the title of the House bill, and the House recedes from

its disagreement to this amendment.

ALBERT JOHNSON,

JOHN L. CABLE,

Managers on the part of the House.

APPENDIX N

MARRIED WOMEN'S INDEPENDENT CITIZENSHIP ACT, AS AMENDED

Naturalization and citizenship of married women

Be it enacted, etc., That the right of any woman to become a naturalized citizen

of the United States shall not be denied or abridged because of her sex or because

she is a married woman.

SEC. 2. That any woman who marries a citizen of the United States after the

passage of this act, or any woman whose husband is naturalized after the passage

of this act, shall not become a citizen of the United States by reason of such marriage or naturalization; but, if eligible to citizenship, she may be naturalized upon

full and complete compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws,

with the following exceptions:

(a) No declaration of intention shall be required; (6) In lieu of the 5-year

period of residence within the United States and the 1-year period of residence

within the State or Territory where the naturalization court is held, she shall

have resided continuously in the United States, Hawaii, Alaska, or Puerto Rico

for at least one year immediately preceding the filing of the petition.

161999•33 5
64 CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS OF WOMEN

SEC. 3. (a) A woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a citizen

of the United States by reason of her marriage after this section, as amended,

takes effect, unless she makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship before a

court having jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens.

(6) Any woman who before this section, as amended, takes effect has lost her

United States citizenship by residence abroad after marriage to an alien or by

marriage to an alien ineligible to citizenship may, if she has not acquired any

other nationality by affirmative act, be naturalized in the manner prescribed in

section 4 of this act, as amended. Any woman who was a citizen of the United

States at birth shall not be denied naturalization under section 4 on account of

her race.

(c) No woman shall be entitled to naturalization under section 4 of this act, as

amended, if her United States citizenship originated solely by reason of her marriage to a citizen of the United States or by reason of the acquisition of United

States citizenship by her husband.

SEC. 4. (a) A woman who has lost her United States citizenship by reason of

her marriage to an alien eligible to citizenship or by reason of the loss of United

States citizenship by her husband may, if eligible to citizenship and if she has not

acquired any other nationality by affirmative act, be naturalized upon full and

complete compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws, with the

following exceptions:

(1) No declaration of intention and no certificate of arrival shall be required,

and no period of residence within the United States or within the county where

the petition is filed shall be required.

(2) The petition need not set forth that it is the intention of the petitioner to

reside permanently within the United States.

(3) The petition may be filed in any court having naturalization jurisdiction,

regardless of the residence of the petitioner.

(4) If there is attached to the petition, at the time of filing, a certificate from a

naturalization examiner stating that the petitioner has appeared before him for

examination, the petition may be heard at any time after filing.

(b) After her naturalization such woman shall have the same citizenship status

as if her marriage, or the loss of citizenship by her husband, as the case may be,

had taken place after this section, as amended, takes effect.

(c) The amendment made by this section to section 4 of such act of September

22, 1922, shall not terminate citizenship acquired under such section 4 before

such amendment.

SEC. 5. (Repealed by act of March 3, 1931.)

SEC. 6. That section 1994 of the Revised Statutes and section 4 of the expatriation act of 1907 are repealed. Such repeal shall not terminate citizenship acquired

or retained under either of such sections nor restore citizenship lost under section 4 of the expatriation act of 1907.

SEC. 7. That section 3 of the expatriation act of 1907 is repealed. Such repeal

shall not restore citizenship lost under such section nor terminate citizenship

resumed under such section. A woman who has resumed under such section

citizenship lost by marriage shall, upon the passage of this act, have for all

purposes the same citizenship status as immediately prceding her marriage.

(Act of September 22, 1922 (42 Stat. 1021, 1022) as amended by the acts of

July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 854; U. S. C. Sup. IV, title 8, sees. 9 and 369) and March

3, 1931 (Public, 829, 71st Cong.).)

APPENDIX O

BIGHT TO TERMINATE CITIZENSHIP

Whereas the right to expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people,

indispensable to the enjovment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of

happiness: and whereas in the recognition of this principle this Government

has freely received emigrants from all nations, and invested them with the rights

of citizenship: and whereas it is claimed that such American citizens, with their

descendants are subjects of foreign states, owing allegiance to the governments

thereof- and'whereas it is necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this

claim of foreign allegiance should be promptly and finally disavowed: Therefore

any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any officer of the

United States which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation is declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the Republic.

(Act of July 27, 1868; R. S. 1999; U. S. Code, title 8, sec. 15.)
CITIZENSHIP BIGHTS OF WOMEN 65

APPENDIX P

METHODS OF TERMINATING CITIZENSHIP

* * * any American citizen shall be deemed to have expatriated himself

<or herself) when he (or she) has been naturalized in any foreign state in conformity with its laws, or when he (or she) has taken an oath of allegiance to any

foreign state. (Sec. 2, act of March 2, 1907; 34 Stat. 1229; U. S. Code, title 8,

*ec. 17.)

* * * a woman citizen of the United States shall not cease to be a citizen

of the United States by reason of her marriage after the passage of this act,

unless she makes a formal renunciation of her citizenship before a court having

jurisdiction over naturalization of aliens. (Sec. 3, act of September 22, 1922;

42 Stat. 1022; U. S. Code, title 8, sec. 9.)

APPENDIX Q

NATURALIZATION TREATIES BETWEEN UNITED STATES AND OTHER COUNTRIES

Great Britain-United States, May 13, 1870; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.,

"Between United States and Other Powers"; I, 691.

North German Union-United States, February 22, 1868; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," II, 1298; Flournoy & Hudson, "Nationality Laws," p. 661.

Bavaria-United States, May 26, 1868; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," I, 60;

Flournoy & Hudson, p. 661.

Grand Duchy of Baden-United States, Julv 19, 1868; "Treaties, Conventions,

•etc.," I, 53; Flournoy & Hudson, p. 663.

Kingdom of Wurttemberg-United States, July 22, 1868; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," II, 1895; Flournoy & Hudson, p. 665.

Grand Duchy of Hesse-United States, August 1, 1868; "Treaties, Conventions,

etc.." I, 949; Flournoy & Hudson, p. 666.

Belgium-United States, November 16, 1868; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," I,

80; Flournoy & Hudson, p. 667.

Norway and Sweden-United States, May 26, 1869; "Treaties, Conventions,

etc.," II, 1758; Flournoy & Hudson, p. 667.

Austro-Hungarian Empire-United States, September 20, 1870; "Treaties,

Conventions, etc.," I, 45; Flournoy & Hudson, p. 670.

Denmark-United States, July 20, 1872; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," I, 384;

Flournoy & Hudson, 673.

Treaty between Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador,

Guatemala, Honduras, United States of Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, El Salvador, United States of America, and Uruguay; August 13, 1906; "Treaties,

Conventions, etc.," Ill, 2882, Flournoy & Hudson, p. 645.

Treaty between Haiti and the United States, March 22, 1902; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," I, 939; Flournoy & Hudson, 681.

Peru-United States, May 7," 1908; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," II, 1449;

Flournoy & Hudson, 683.

Portugal-United States, May 7, 1908; "Treaties, Conventions, etc.," II, 1468;

Flournoy & Hudson, 684.

Bulgaria-United States, November 23, 1923; 17 Stat. 1759; Flournoy & Hudson,

p. 698.

Czechoslovakia-United States, July 16, 1928; "United States Treaty Series,"

No. 804; Flournoy & Hudson, 705.

NOTE•The above treaties provide that each of the signatories shall recognize

-the naturalization of Its citizens or subjects in the country of any of the other

-signatories.

TABLE OF CASES

A

P»»

Anthony v..United States (11 Blanchford 200; 24 Fed. 829).. 9

Arabs (7 Fed. (2d) 728 (ineligible)) 16

Attyah, in re (14 Fed. (2d) 323) 33

B

Beck v. McGillis (9 Barb. (N. Y.) 35; 10 op. Attv. Gen. 321) 12

Burmese (28 N. Y. S. 383) ineligible... ..." 16

C

Chang Chan v. Nagle (268 U. S. 346) 16

Colorossi, in re (292 Fed. 862) 33

Comitis v. Parkerson (56 Fed. 556) • 13

Cummings v. Priest (16 Wend. (N. Y.) 617) 12

D

Detroit v. Pequinot (16 Fed. 211) 14

Dupont v. Shanks (3 Pet. (U. S.) 242; 12 op. Atty. Gen. 7) 14

H

Happersett v. Minor (88 U. S. (7 Wall). 162) 10

Hindus (261 U. S. 204) ineligible 16

J

Japanese (260 U. S. 178) ineligible 16

K

Kelly v. Owen (7 Wallace (U. S.) 496) 15

Kontos, in re (12 Fed. (2d) 134) 33

Koreans (273 Fed. 207) ineligible 16

L

Langtry, in re (31 Fed. 879) 33

Lawson, Wm. C. v. Owen, Ruth Bryan (Rept. No. 968) 32

Leonard v. Grant (5 Fed. 11) 16

M

Mackenzie v. Hare (239 U. S. 299) - 21

Marshall, Louise Gehring, case: Memorandum, Office of Solicitor, Department of State, January 24, 1925 13

Mick v. Mick (10 Wend. (N. Y.) 379).. 12

Minor v. Happersett (88 U. S. (7 Wall.) 162) 10

Moore v. Ruckgaber (104 Fed. 947) 17

Mc

McGillis v. Beck (9 Barb. (N. Y.) 35; 10 op. Atty. Gen. 321) 12

67
68 TABLE OF CASES

N

PiC*

Nagle i>. Chang Chan (268 U. 8. 346) 16

O

Osbornp. United States Bank (22 U. S. 737) 24

Owent>. Kellv (7 Wallace (U. S.) 496) 15

Owen, Ruth Bryan r. Lawson, Wm. C. (Rept. No. 968) 32

P

Parkerson t>. Comitis (56 Fed. 656) 13

Pequinotp. Detroit (16 Fed. 211) 14

Pezzi, in re (29 Fed. (2d) 999) 36

Priest i>. Cummings (16 Wend. (N. Y.) 617) • 12

R

Rionda, in re (164 Fed. 368) 33

Ruckgaber v. Moore (104 Fed. 947) . 17

8

Shanks r. Dupont (3 Pet. (U. 8.) 242; 12 op. Atty. Gen.) 7 14

U

United States Constitution (Art. I, sec. 8. cl. 4)... 24

U. S. v. Anthony (11 Blanchford 200; 24 Fed. 829) 9

U. S. v. Martin"(10 Fed. (2d) 585) . 36

U. 8. Bank v. Osborn (22 U. S. 737) 24

W

Williams case (Wharton's State Trial, 602) 15-21

Z

Zogbaum, in re (32 Fed. (2d) 911) 14
INDEX

A

Act of: *<»*•

February 2, 1855 43

February 10, 1855 43

April 19, 1866 43

July 27, 1868 64

Parliament, August 6, 1844 12

March 2, 1907 20

September 22, 1922. See Women's independent Citizenship Act,

1922

July 3,'1930 46

March 3, 1931 58

Addams, Jane 37

Affidavit in lieu of passport 34

Alaska, residence 36

Alien:

Civil-service examination 26

Ineligible for naturalization, American woman married to 37, 39

Marriage to

Citizenship loss. See Expatriation.

Discrimination against American women married to aliens removed 39

Expatriation. See Expatriation.

Citizenship retained 39

Foreign residence 14, 18, 34, 37

Passport 35

Real estate 26

Naturalization. See Naturalization.

Occupations and professions 26

Office holding 26

Real estate 26

Return visa to United States 35

Vote 20

Enemy, World War 23

Enemy, expatriated American woman 23

Enemy, workmen's compensation 28

Husband, refusing to petition naturalization, wife must remain alien. 25

Married woman, naturalized on own petition 14

Property, recovery upon repatriation 24

Property, seizure 23

Wife of naturalized citizen 15

Wife of naturalized citizen, naturalization 15

Woman, married to American 15

Woman, married to American, naturalization. See Naturalization,

shortened process.

Woman, naturalization right, not denied because husband not citizen. 39

Woman, petition for naturalization 39

Alten, Augusta Louise de Haven 22

Ambassadors, children of. See Children, of foreign diplomatic representatives.

American Association of University Women 27, 66

American colonies, subordination of married women 9

American Federation of Labor 36

American Home Economics Association 36

Anthony, Susan B., trial 9, 10

Arabians, citizenship ineligibility 9, 10, 11

Arizona, grants equal suffrage 11

Austria 15

69
70 INDEX

B Page

Beck v. MeGillis. 12

Birth, citizenship by, women 11

Bolivia 15

Boole, Mrs. Ella A 36

Burmese, citizenship ineligibility 16

C

Cable, John L 28, 36, 38

Cable Act. See Women's Independent Citizenship Act, 1922.

Caldwell, John 11

California, grants equal suffrage 11

Canada, subject of, marriage to 11

Cecil, Sir John F 31

Children:

Born abroad, American father 11

Of foreign diplomatic representatives, born in United States, not

citizenship of United States 11

Of naturalized alien man 11

Chinese:

Citizenship ineligibilitv 16

In United States . 38

Christman, Elizabeth 36

Citizens, becoming naturalized citizens of other countries, recognized bv

United States 1 19

Citizens of Great Britain, becoming citizens of United States, recognized

by treaty 19

Citizenship:

Acquiring 11

Alien wife 11

Automat ic 15

By birth 11

By birth, women 11

By marriage 15

By marriage to native-born American 15

By marriage to naturalized citizen 15

By naturalization 11

Change of, by husband 26

Children born abroad, of American father 11

Compact between individual and sovereign 14

Independent 29, 39

Independent, common law 12

Independent, early fight for 25

Independent, faults of women's independent citizenship act 34

Independent, passage of bill 28

Jure soli. See Citizenship, by birth.

Limitation of power of Congress. , 24

Loss of. See Expatriation.

Loss of, marriage to alien. See Expatriation.

Loss of, not incurred by marriage to alien 29

Married women, inadequacy of laws 34

Of children. See Children, citizenship.

Power of Congress to confer. 21

Power of Congress to deprive 21

Renunciation, formal, American women 30

Renunciation by woman residing outside United States 30

Restoration upon renewed citizenship, repatriation. See Repatriation.

Restoration upon renewed residence 19

Resumption by former American women, special act of Congress

necessary 19

Resumption of. See also Repatriation.

Separate. See Citizenship, independent.

State and national, voting requirement 10

State v. citizenship, United States 10

State governments 10

Termination of 15
INDEX 71

Citizenship•Continued. Pag«

United States p. citizenship, State 10

Women, discriminations entirely removed 39

v. suffrage 10

Civil-service examination, by alien 26

Code of Napoleon, 1804 15

Collection of wife's rents, profits, and debts, common law 9

Colorado, grants equal suffrage 11

Comitis v. Parkerson 13

Committee on Immigration. See House Committee on Immigration,

Senate Committee on Immigration.

Common law, independent citizenship under 12, 13, 20

Companionship and services of wife, common law 9

Congress:

Legislative authority exceeded 25

Limitations on power to deal with United States citizenship 25

Power of, to deal with questions of nationality 24

Power of depriving citizenship 24

Power to confer citizenship 24

Uniform rule of naturalization 24

See also Special act of Congress.

Constitution, naturalization power invested in Congress 24

Contract, right to, married women 9

Control of property by married women 9

Copeland, Royal S 37

Costa Rica 15

Council of Jewish Women 27

Cuba 15

D

Danby, Mrs. E. E 36

Daughters of the American Revolution 27

Debts of wife, common-law ; 9

De Haven-Alten, Augusta Louise 22, 23

Denmark 15

Dilasos, Spiros ' 35

Divorce, repatriation after 40

Dominican Republic 15

Double allegiance 15

Drake, Gladys 35

Dual nationality 15

Dual nationality, American women 30

E

Edmonstone, Archibald Charles 30

Edwards, Alice 66

Equal suffrage 9, 11

Expatriated American woman, alien enemy of United States 23

Expatriated American woman, property of 23

Expatriation 15

Expatriation, automatic, marriage to alien 20

Expatriation, foreign residence, presumptive loss of citizenship 34

Expatriation, of husband, not affecting wife's citizenship 39

Expatriation, right to 30

Expatriation, to Great Britain, repatriation upon renewed residence in

United States _.. 19

Expatriation act. See act of March 2, 1907.

F

Federal court decisions, Susan B. Anthony - 9

Field, Gwendolyn 30

Fish, Hamilton 18

Flournoy, R. W 15

Foreign residence. See also Expatriation, foreign residence, presumptive

loss of citizenship.

Foreigner. See Alien.
72 INDEX

Page

Fourteenth amendment 10

Fraim, Mrs. Clarence 36

France, automatic naturalization law 15

France, subject of, marriage to 15

G

General Federation of Women's Clubs 27

Germany 15

Germany, subject of, marriage to 36

Grant, Nellie. See Sartoris, Nellie Grant.

Great Britain 15

Automatic naturalization law 15

Subject of, marriage to 15

Treaty of Peace with, 1794 . 14

Group naturalization by treaty 11

H

Hague Conference for the Codification of International Law, Mar. 15, 1930 38

Happersett, Reese 10

Harding, Warren G 28

Hawaii, residence in 36

Hindus, citizenship ineligibility 16

Hindus in United States 16

Hoover, Herbert 39

House Committee on Elections No. 1 32

House Committee on Immigration 36

House Committee on Immigration, refuses to approve special naturalization acts 25

Hudson, Manley O 15

Hughes, Charles Evans 13

Husband, change of citizenship 19, 30

I

Idaho, grants equal suffrage 11

Immigration, Committee on. Sue House Committee on Immigration,

Senate Committee on Immigration.

Immigration restriction, quota law, 1924 35

Independent citizenship. See Citizenship, independent.

Independent citizenship act. See Women's independent citizenship act,

1922.

Independent control of property, married women, early statutes 9

Intermarriage with Asiatic 37

Intermarriage with Mongolian 37

Ireland:

Native woman of, married to American 15

Subject of, marriage to 15

Italy ._ 11

Italy, subject of, marriage to 35

J

James, Harlean 36

Japanese, citizenship ineligibility

Japanese in United States 38

Johnson, Albert 28, 36

Joint Congressional Committee. See Women's Joint Congressional

Committee.

Jure soli. See Citizenship, by birth.

Justinian code, wife takes citizenship of husband 12

K

Kansas, grants equal suffrage 11

Kelly v. Owen 15

Knox, Philander Chase 26

Koreans, citizenship ineligibility 16
INDEX 73

L

Page

Lafayette and male heirs, citizens of Maryland and Virginia by special acts. 24

Laissez passer 35

Lambie, Margaret 36

Law, practice of, by alien 35

Lawson, Wm. C ... 32

Legal identity, woman's 9

Legal status of married women 9

Leonard v. Grant 16

M

McGrady, James 36

Mackenzie, Ethel Coope 20, 21

Mariano, Signor G 35

Marital relationship, termination of. See Repatriation.

Married woman, ward of husband 9

Marshall, John 24

Marshall, Louise Gehring 13

Martin, Mrs. Emily 36

Maryland, special act conferring citizenship upon Lafayette 24

Medicine, practice, by alien 35

Mexico 15

Mick v. Mick 12

Minor, Mrs. Virginia

Montana, grants equal suffrage 11

N

Napoleonic code, 1804 15

National American Woman Suffrage Association, Victory Convention,

Chicago, 1920 27

National Association of Women Lawyers 36

National Council of Jewish Women 36, 70

National Federation of Business and Professional Women 27, 36, 70

National Identity 14

National League of Women Voters 27, 36, 70

National Woman's Party 36, 70

National Women's Trade Union League 28,36

Nationality, dual. See Dual nationality.

Nationality, questions of, power of Congress to deal with 24

Nationality laws 43

Naturalization 11

Alien man, minor children of 11

Alien wife 11

Alien wife, husband not naturalized 39

Alien wife of naturalized American 12

American born women. See Repatriation, shortened process.

Automatic 15

Eligible classes 16

Group, by treaty... 11

In foreign country, of American husband 30

Independence of wife 39

Independent. See Citizenship, independent.

Individual petition 11

Individuals, by special acts of Congress, legality questioned 25

Ineligible classes 16

Not affected by marriage 11

Petition, alien women 32

Posting of notices, bill to omit 38

Presumptive loss of citizenship. See Expatriation, foreign residence,

presumptive loss of citizenship.

Naturalization, race eligibility. See Naturalization, eligible classes.

Requirements 16

Requirements, character 16

Requirements, interpretation 16

Requirements, residence 16

Requirements, residence. See also, Naturalization, shortened process.

Right to, not denied by alien's husband wish 33
74 INDEX

Naturalization, race eligibility•Continued. pas«

Shortened process _ 33

Shortened process, alien woman married to American 33

Special act of Congress 23

Uniform rule 24

Naturalized American, presumptive loss of citizenship 37

Nevada, grants equal suffrage 11

New York, grants equal suffrage 11

New York State constitution, restricting right of suffrage to male citizens.. 10

Nicaragua 15

Nineteenth amendment. 11

Nineteenth century, world-wide movement for women's right 9

Nonquota immigrants 37

North German Union, citizenship law 22

O

Oath of allegiance, to foreign sovereign, by American husband 30

Oregon, grants equal suffrage 11

Overcoming presumptive loss of citizenship. See Expatriation, foreign

residence, presumptive loss of citizenship.

Owen, Mrs. Ruth Bryan 31, 32

P

Park, Mrs. Maud Wood 28

Perpetual allegiance 14

Personal injury of wife, common law 9

Personal property of wife, common law 9

Puerto Rico, residence in 36

Portugal 15

Presumptive loss of citizenship. See Expatriation, foreign residence, presumptive loss of citizenship.

Private acts, readmission to citizenship, legality questioned 24

Profits from wife's real estate, common law 9

Property independent control of, married women, early statutes 9

Q

Quota law. See Immigration restriction, quota law.

R

Race eligibility for naturalization. See Naturalization, eligible classes.

Razovsky, Cecilia 36

Real estate of wife, common law 9

Reciprocal privileges, treaties 65

Reed, David A 39

Reeves, Prof. J. S 12

Registering as voters, women demanding 10

Removal from United States, expatriation. See Expatriation, foreign residence.

Rents of wife, common law 9

Renunciation of citizenship. See Citizenship, renunciation.

Repatriation 40, 42

After divorce or death of alien husband 40

American woman, married to alien, proof of residence 36

By continued residence in United States 40

By registration with American consul 40

Divorce 40, 41

Nonquota immigrants 37

Proof of residence 37

Residence, act of 1922

Residence requirement repealed 37

Shortened process 37, 53, 60

Wife of ineligible alien 37

Repatriation procedure 39

Representative to Congress, requirements 32

Residence, foreign. See Foreign residence.
INDEX 75

Page

Residence with alien husband. See Alien, marriage to, foreign residence.

Resumption of citizenship. See Repatriation.

Right to contract, married women's 9

Right to sue, married women's 9

Rochester, N. Y 9

Rochester, N. Y., trial of Susan B. Anthony 9

Roman Empire, married women, status of 9

Ross, Louise 35

Rumania 15

Russia 15

Sanderson, Neil 30

Sargent, Senator A. A 11

Sartoris, Nellie Grant 18,23

Sartoris, Nellie Grant. See also Special act of Congress, Nellie Grant

Sartoris 18, 19

Scott, Thomas, estate 14

Scott, Dr. James B , 20

Seizure of alien property 14

Senate Committee on Immigration 38

Separate citizenship. See Citizenship, independent.

Services of wife, common law 9

Severing allegiance to United States, inherent right to 30

Shanks v. Dupont 14

Single identity 14

Single identity, principle of, adopted by United States 20

Single identity, trend toward 14

Single woman, ward of father 9

Spain 16

Special act of Congress:

Mrs. de Haven-Alten

Nellie Grant Sartoris 18, 19

Special acts of Congress, naturalization of individuals, House committee

refuses to approve 25

State citizenship. <See Citizenship, State.

State governments, restricting privilege to vote 10

Strauss, Dorothy 36

Sue, married women's right to 9

Suffrage, campaign for equal 9

Suffrage right, conferred by State governments only 10

Suffrage versus citizenship 10

Sweden 15

T

Taxation, double. See Double taxation.

Taylor, Edward Thomas 25

Teaching in public schools, by alien 26

Termination of citizenship 15

Termination of marital relationship. See Repatriation.

Trading with the enemy act, October 6, 1917 26

Treaties, reciprocal privileges 65

Treaty, group naturalization by 11

Treaty of peace with Great Britain, 1794 14

U

Uniform rule of naturalization 24

United States:

Sovereignty of 26

Treaty with North German Union 22

Unmarried woman, common law of England 9

Utah, grants equal suffrage 11
76 INDEX

V PW

Vanderbilt, Cornelia 31

Victory Convention, National American Woman Suffrage Association,

Chicago, 1920 -- 27

Virginia, special act conferring citizenship upon Lafayette 24

Von Alten 22

Vote:

Aliens. See Alien, vote.

Requirements to, prescribed by States 10

Right to, conferred by State governments only 10

Unlawful, Susan B. Anthony 9

W

Wages of wife, common law 9

Washington:

Grants equal suffrage 11

Wife:

Alien, naturalization 34

Assuming husband's nationality 20

Wold, Dr. Emma 38

Woman's Bar Association of the District of Columbia 38

Women:

American, electing expatriation 30

American, married to aliens. See Alien, marriage to.

Citizenship, by birth 11

Citizenship, marriage not affecting. See Citizenship, independent.

Discriminations in American citizenship, abolished 39

Expatriated, alien enemy of United States 22

Inadequacy of citizenship laws 26

Married, independent control of property, 1856 9

Married, right to contract 9

Married, right to sue 9

Repatriation. See Repatriation.

Roman empire, separate legal identity 9

Separate citizenship. See Citizenship, independent.

Stateless by marriage, passport 59

Woman's Christian Temperance Union 28,66

Women's independent citizenship act, 1922 44

Advantages 39

Amendments 46, 58

As amended 63

Women's joint congressional committee 28

Women's rights, history of 9, 10

Workmen's compensation, alien enemy 28

World War 27

Wyoming, grants equal suffrage 11

Y

Young Women's Christian Association 36

Younger, Maud 36

o