The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1893-11-03

-
the relief sought, the petition shall be
dismissed all OF which shall be en-.
tered OF record in said court"
The fact that the dismissal OF the petit
ton is put on record is OF considerable
importance. Heretofore there has been
no record whatever OF the few apDlica-
cations OF those to whom admission to
citizenship WIS refused One Judge
may refuse to naturalize man and he
can 20 before another few days later
and pass all right. But under the pro-
posed LAYS the district attorneys bound
to know OF the refusal ut once, and that
would undoubtedly be q bar 10 the court
in considering his case again, unless, OF
course, mis- application was denied in
the first instance through some techni-
eai flaw in his papers and the evidence
OF his qualifications Tor citizenship.
This provision would thus do away with
Il numbered exislingeyils, some directly
and others indirectly
EVIDENCE TO BE ADMITTED.
About the evidence which shall be
admitted, the bill is specific. SAN LEI
gal evidence" it says, "oral or written,
shall be received and considered by the
court, but the petitioner shall ~ no
case be admitted to citizenship upon
his own uncorroburated evidence; but
the confederation shall not be required
to extend to any period oil time or acts
and facts anterior to the residence OF
such petitioner within the United
States. The petitioner shall pay the
cost OF the proceeding. and thereupon
shall be entitled to copy oil the judg-
ment. or decree OF the court, properly
certified with the seal OF the court at
tached, which shall be evidence OF the
contents thereof in any court or tribu.
nal, state or federal, throughout the
United States"
All these provisionf remove the pro-
ceeding from the realm OF perfunctory
duties on the part oil the judges, and
REQUIRE proper judicial consideration
and action. Ii the district attorney
makes any pretence OF doing his duty
the denseIy Ignorant and vicious classes
viii not be admitted to the rights oil
citizenship, should the bill be passed
The penalties Tor false swearing either
on the part OF the petitioner OF the wit
nesses are made extremely heavy.
"Any petitioner for naturalization,
it says, "wbo snail knowingly swear
falsely in respect to any material matter
or thing alleged in his petition, or
which is in issue upon the bearing
thereof, and any person who shall
knowingly swear falsely us TO any ma.
terial matter or thing on the bearing OF
any such petition, or in relation to any
matters connected Herewith, shall be
deemed guilty OF perjury, and upon con-
victon thereof before any court having
jurisdiction under this act, shall be i'm
prSoned at hard LABOR not exceeding
five years, and may be fined not exceed.
ing 81 1000, one or both, in the discretion
OF the. court trying the same"
WHAT COURTS HAVE JURISDICTION.
Another question may possibly be
raised in this state, concerning the
courts which have jurisdiction, for the
purpose OF naturalization. The bill
says "The district and circuit courts
OF the United States and the district
and supreme courts oil the territories
and the state courts oil the highest
original Common-law jurisdiction, being
the next highest courts of record to the
supreme courts OF said states, shall
have exclusive jurisdiction OF the nat
uralization OF aliens"
This section, OF course, does not apply
to the name OF 4 court when it says the
supreme court" but to the fact wheth-
err or not the court is the supreme
court, or court OF highest jurisdition, in
the state. In this state the highest tri-
bunal is the court OF appeals. In Cali
fornia, for example, the court which
corresponds to the New York court OF
appeals is called the supreme court.
The next highest court, or rather the
next lowest, which is what the bill evil
IDENTIFY means. to the court OF appeals in
this state is the supreme court. Under
a strict Interpretation this might be
read to mean that the superior and
common pleas courts OF this city had
no jurisdiction to make citizens. Their
jurisdiction is practically coordinate
with that OF the supreme court, butstiit it
is not so broad in its scope. To say
that the superior and common pleas
courts were the next lower to the court
OF appeals, would be putting them
above the supreme court, or would at
least put them on exactly the same
footing with that court. That the iuris.
diction OF these three courts is exactly
the same, it might be. possibly, diff
cult to decide in the affirmative. Any
other decision, however, would exclude
the superior and common pleas courts
from continuing the work which they
have done for many years.
The bill, il it becomes Il law, will not
affect those who have declared their in
tentions of becoming citizens when il il