Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1872-05-08

]
/ highest consequence 20 US and to those whom
we represent that we 60 to war upon rood
case, and not upon mere pretext: that we
I 20 70 war upon case that will stand not
only by our own decision, but by the decis-
ION of International law the world over.
| Now, Mr.. Speaker, the FIRST question pre-
sented is the question of the American cit
\ Izenship Of Dr.. Houard. | shall not 20 very
elaOorately over the ground so ABLY gone over
\ by my colleague on the committee. rMr.
Amber vino presented yesterday very fully.
although not as fully as he desired the lead
/ ing points touching this case | shall how
ever, II / am permitted to do 50. call the
attention OF the House more in detail To
some OF the eases and some of the law 10
which he referred IN support Of his posi-
ton.
! Mr. Speaker, tic question of American
citizenship IS not, as was stated by the zen
tleman from New York MIR Wood this
morning, a question Of fact alone. It il a
mixed question Of fact and Of law. 1t is not
/ d question either which we can safely allow
any individual to determine for himself
whether that individual be DR.. H1uard or
somebody else. This government cannot
when Its powers are t) be invoked in the
maintenance OF the rights Of an American
citizen, allow the person claiming 10 be an
American citizen to establish the fact OF his
citizenship by his own deca alton saw il
Is mixed question of law and fact It is
not a sound proposition either which WIS
urged by the gentleman from Massachusetts,.
Mr. Banks, the chairman of the committee
on iOreign affairs, that a man once a citizen
OF tie United States must remain a citizen
until be shall become citizen Of some other
country. There Is no more legal necessity
that nan once citizen Of the United
States should not lose that CITIZENSHIP until
he takes on new citizenship ir some other
country than there l. that he shall not lose
has residence i1 the United States until he
acquires residence or dOmiciIe elsewhere.
We all know how man can lose his dom
iciie IN one place, and how he can cain "A
domIciIe 10 some other place. bat it docs not
follow that be mgSt ga.n dOmicile in some
other place before he loses his original dom
Iciie- The questions are entirely separate.
they have no relation t. each other The
question whether a person is citizen " the
United States or whether be is Il subject o.
Spain is "a question % he decided by itself.
and NOT r. che proposition stated by the
gentleman, that he must be one until he be-
comes the other. Why, sir. in the case of
Martin kJszta, he was not "A citizen gf the
United States, as Is agreed cr all hands lie
had only declared ms intention of ultimate
ly becoming such a citizen He had only
resided year and eleven months in the
country Apply the reasoning cf the zen
tIeman from Massachusetts,, and Martin
k0szta was subject Of Austria because he
had not become citizen of any other cJuu-
try. But he had come to this country for the
purpose of permanently remaining, and had
expressed that purpose by his declaration of
Intention to become citizen Jf the uitei
States. That denati5nalzei him 50 far a.
Austria WAS concerned. Ii was on abandon
ment OF citizenship in Austria and alth3 ugh
it did not make him q citizen Of the United
States, it. entirely destroyed his citizenship
IN Austria. and authorized our Government
to do what it did through the hands Of Capt
Ingraham, who rescued hira from tine deck
Ot an Austrian vessel.
Mr.. RECE I desire to ask the gentleman
a question for Information, for | want in
formation about this matter. ] desire 10
ask the gentleman if HOIard had died leay-
IN. real estate in the city Of Philadelphia
which it eIuire that he should have been
citizen in order for his children 20 inherit
that property, has he done any act which
Tould have prevented those children from
inhsriting that property under our laws,
and If 50, what
Nr. WILLARD. I do not regard that ques-
ti0n as necessarily Connected with this dis
cussion at all. As ; am not familiar with
the laws of Pennsylvania, Of course | can
not answer. That is a question, as is this
other question OF citizenship, OF law and
fact, and not question 20 te decided upon
a cas-, stated hypOthetcalIy, which the gen
tIeman from Kentucky Mr.. Beck has Just
put TO me, TO be answercI off hand.
liz was decided ~ the K0sciuskO case. GA
u0ward) and in the similar case cited bv
the gentleman from Ohio. Mr.. Amber.
that the dJmicile being IN foreign country.
all questions in respect to the settlement oi
an estate are - be controlled by that domi-
ciie. But, as | said a IN Jment ago, this IS a
question OF mixed law and fact, and is not
to be decided upon any hypothetical case
that may be presented
And the question Of the abandonment of
citizenship Is a question which every nation
must decide for itself No nation can, with
any respect for its own financial condition,
its condition as d war making power, ITS duty
to it, own citizens, allow anybody, no mat
ter who that person is to decide the ques-
ton Of citizenship for himself Whenever
any person asks the protection Of the gov
ernmcnt OF the United States on the ground
that he Is an American citizen. 70 is tor the
United States IN the line Of It's policy, ac-
cOrdng to its long course of decisions, ac-
cordng to what Is tue best and sOuntest
policy, to decide that question OF citizenship;
and when it comes to the conclusion that the
individual seeking its protection Is, as a cit
zen, entitled to it, viii 20 as far any
gentleman Of this House in asking that the
United States shall stand by It's citizens,
whether those citizens are in South Caro-
lima or happen for the time being to be in
Cuba.
Now, sir, it is very clear that this matter
of citizenship, as has already been stated in
this debate, a matter Of reciprocal rights
aud duties. If the government protects the
citizen, the country Is entitled TO the support
of that citizen. Ii the citizen puts 1t out
Of his power to support and uphold the
government, or to contribute 70 Its strength
and resources, the government Is, lps0 tGcto,
clearly released from any duty to extend It's
protection to that citizen. The citizen has
abandoned his duty on the one hand, and on
the other hand the government ls released
from it's obligations
Now, sir, this is proposition which Is a
verv simple one in our ordinary affairs; we
agree to 1t every day 1t is simple PROPOSE
tion in national affairs, and one which should
be Just as readily agreed to. That Is just
the question in this case. And Tor the pur-
pose of calling attention to some authorities
which were not read yesterday IN the debate,
will mention briefly again the iact9 ln re-
spect to DR.. Houard.
DR. Houard's father, Frenchman, came
to this country some time previous to IsOO,
was naturalized in 1903, resided in Pennsyl-
vania until 1915, when DR.. Houard was
born. and i've or SIX years afterEard, or
about 1921, he enigrated to Cuba. Let as
bear in mind the force OF this expression,
because it is an accurate description OF the
act perf rmed. lie emigrated to Cuba
Spanish colony, with his iamily,a ,as colonlsI-
Whatever domicIle he may have hao IN tne
/ United States prior to that time was tuily
ahandoned. There Is no evidence in this
case and no pretense or claim, that he lett
anv nronertv in this country, that he had