The Hawaiian gazette., 1917-01-02

and 2l73. of the Revised Statutes, and
section 80 of Chapter 1912 Of the Sta
tutes at Large for the year 1903, 'and
all Acts and parts of Acts inconsistent
with or repugnant to the provisions
of this Act . -fAaa-4taas-
Divergent Opinions ..s-.-
81 In some cases the courts have ex-
preSsly held that section 2l69 was not
repealed by the Act Of June Goth, 1906,
Umted states v. Balsara, $50 Fed. 649,
i03 G. G. A. ego; Bessie v. United
States, IFS Fed. 245, lOI G. c. A. COS
In others, the question is not noticed,
but the decisions assume that IL was
not repealed. In re Buntaro Knmagai,
1863 Fed. 922; In re Knight, III Fed.
200. g..
d. '''The effect Of leaving section 2169
unrepealed was virtually to re-enact il,
rs is stated by the court in the Bessie
ease, supra. SO that the case stands as
IL the Act of June Goth, 1906, contained
section 2l69 as one Of its provisions,
declaring,
The provisions Of this act shall
apply to aliens being free white per-
sous and to aliens of African nativity
anu W DtlHOnb VI AlElCdu utbCtnIs
Where Exceptions Are Made
1T is claimed, however, that section
1869 limits the naturalization of aliens
20 free white persons and to persons of
African nativity or descent, and that
it has no application to any persons
except aliens; and that section 80 Of
the Act of June Goth applies TO class
Of persons who are not aliens, and pro.
vides for their naturalization. That is
true, but how does section 30 provide
for the naturalization of this class of
persons, which it authorizesf By ap-
plying to such persons all the applica-
BILE provisions of the laws providing
for the naturalization of aliens.
Language Is Plain
I" Is not section 21G9 of the Revised
Statutes an applicable provision of nat
uralization lawsi The very language
of il makes il read itself into every
provision of the naturalization laws.
None of the provisions of the natural.
| ization laws apply to any except free
white persons and those of African de-
scent or nativity.
ain the Lopez case Justice Gould
said: ..2ss.&
"'But section 1859 is not applicable
to petitioner. He is not an alien nor
is he Of African nativity or descent.
/ Justice Could Erred -.:
"He should have added, nor white
person. But Justice Gould erred in
holding that these facts made section
/ 2l69 inapplieable to the petitioner,
That one does not come within the
classs OF persons designated in section
1850, does, not make II inapplicable to
him. 1t applies, and forbids his
naturalization unless he. does come
within one Of the classes therein speci
/ fed. 80. -. '.... " ~
J SIT is no answer to say that the see
ton applies to aliens, and that the
| petitioner is not an allen. II is by
virtue of the provisions of the laws
made for the naturalization of aliens
into every one of which by its very
terms section 1869 reads itself, that
| the petitioner for naturalization, claim
ing 10 come within the class of per
sons designated in section 80 Of the
Act of june goth, 1906, must be ad
mitted if at all.
Question Of Limitation
80 If section 1859 of the Revised
Statutes does not limit the class OF
persons authorized by Section 80 of tn,
Act Of June goth, 1906, to be natural
lied, then there is no limitation. Thos,
of the Chinese, the japanese and tn,
Malay, as well as the Filipino races
all persons not citizens who owe per
manent allegiance to the United States
and who may become residents of an,
State or organized Territory of tn,
| United States, may all come in and b,
! naturalized under section 30.
"If section 30 takes the Filipino ou
of the operation of section 2l69, i
takes out all races,
~" Did Congress have any such pur
pose in the incorporation of that sec
tion in the Naturalization Actf I d.
not think 80.
"Let US examine a little further int,
the matter. The Act of June Goth
1905, was passed for the purpose o
restricting rather than increasing
DECENTRALIZATION.
Little Discussion On Amendment
There was but little discussion up
on the amendment, which was agree
to without objection. And the bill wa
further amended by inserting tn
words, 'and Porto Rico after Alask
in the section comforting jurisdiction
on courts, so as to confer Jurisdiction
on the United States District Court
in Porto Rico as well as those of tn
ether Territories, to grant naturaliza
tiouy the author of this last amendment
Senator Mallory, of Florida, saying a
the time, that he would not go 8
far as TO include the courts of tn
Philippine Islands. Can it be doubte
that If there had been any effort :
repeal section 1850 or to make it in
applicable to the class of persons au
thorized by section 80 to be natural
lied, there would have been opposition
and discussion3 -
Question Of Allegiance
docs the section provide for tn
naturalization Of persons who owe pei
manent allegiance to the United State
of persons who do not owe such pei
manent allegiahcef II reads, 'all pei
sons not citizens who owe permanen
! allegiance to the United States TIL
language has been construed TO mea
persons who owe permanent allegianc
! TO the United States, who are not cit
zens; and the clause, owing such pen
manent allegiance, in the last sentenc
of the section, and other circumstance
. Ignnnnrf. anaL' ,cnustruotinn no tha ait