Los Angeles herald., 1892-08-17
y%'AAT WILL Be THE RESULT /?
The Taylor Naturalization Case
to Come Up Today.
Some Points About 1t Which Are
Open to Criticism.
1t Is q Matter for the United States to
Consider-Peculisr Features of
the Case-Where Is the U. 8.
District Attorney?


uralization case of Robert A. Taylor will
come up this morning before Superior
Judge Smith. Then the judicial mind
will determine whether or not it is pos
sible for state court to denaturalize q
citizen.
There are number OF the bestlawyers
in the city who claim that the iurisdic-
ton of the state courts in matters of
naturalization is strictly limited to max
ing a citizen, and thequestion OF unmak-
ing him is one with which the federal
courts alone should deal. This they
hold is clearly the language of the con-
stitution OF the United States and the
federal statutes. This is very nice
point of law.
Then there is also another question.
The petition filed by John A. Pirtle to
have Taylor's naturalization cancelled,
is not calculated to bring out full in
vestigation of the affair, which Mr..
| Ward, Mr.. Whitney and Mr.. Pirtle
claim, with gusto, they want. 1t is 80
worded that the investigation as to I'll Q
| Justification of the records of the county
clerks office can be cut off if their at
] torneys demand it. 1t does not hint
| that such thing was done, but cites
only the fact that Taylor has not been
| five years resident of the United
| States, as the reason why he should be
denaturalized. The complaint is SO
gotten up that the very investigation
/ the people demand can be cut off. The
| simple question as to whether Taylor
! has or has not been a resident of the
United States for five years, is OF no
great Importance.
The charges that demand investiga-
ton, and upon which light is wanted,
are, did A. B. Whitney change the re-
| cords of the county clerks Office with
| the cognizance and consent of the said
county clerk, and if SO, why? This is
| the main issue of the case, and it should
not be side tracked.
| Another very nice point has been
raised. If there are six superior Judges
in this county, why should the judicial
Isrequisition in the Taylor case. He has
already, according to the statement of
Mr.. Pirtle, expressed an opinion in the
made an example Of" Taylor has un-
| punished, and he is going to be tried by
u u.
so he says, all of the facts surrounding
the matter. The judge has passed an
opinion in advance upon the case, based
Judge Smith might be wanted as a wit
ness in the hearing, to tell what Pirtle
told him, but he is the judge on the
bench.
Then, too, the case is brought in the
-. 81 TAh ,rk1 II
Ward, county clerk, and Robert A..
The naturalization regulations are
fixed by. the federal power. Anv
tinfraction Of those laws is solely matter
Ipof federal jurisdiction. The only in
bterest Pirtle has in the matter is that he
swore Taylor was FIVE years a resident Of
the United States when he was not.
| Yet he appears as plaintiff to correct
his own perjury. The lawyers assert
that instead OF the title of the case be-
ing John A. Pirtle against T. H. Ward.
ct al, 1t should be the United States of
America VS.. 7. III. Ward ct al.
If there has been an infraction of the
federal law it becomes the duty Of the
United States district attorney to take
the case in hand. There certainly has
! OOOb . NASAAuOh VI lCOCIdl law, DuU
thus far the United States district at
torney has been conspicuous for his
| failure to pay any attention to the case.
He is Republican appointee of Benja-
min Harrison.
One thing is certain, though. The
attention of the next United States
grand jury will be called to the whole
Taylor affair. The federal grand Jury
can return indictments against all vio-
lators of federal law. In the meantime,
however, some criminal complaints may
be fled in this county for violations OF
| the state law.
But in the meanwhile the investiga-
tion to be made in Judge Smiths court
is awaited with keen interest. There
are SO many fine points of law involved,
that the lawyers look forward to the
case, and the general public want to
know whether or not the county records
are safe from mutilation, DETACHMENT
and Justification under present custo-
dianship.