Source: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/279/12/case.html
Timestamp: 2017-04-26 08:03:31
Document Index: 299500148

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 392', '§ 389', '§ 354', '§ 405', '§ 374', '§ 362', '§ 384']

McDonald v. United States (full text) :: 279 U.S. 12 (1929) :: Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center Log In
› McDonald v. United States
McDonald v. United States 279 U.S. 12 (1929)
U.S. Supreme CourtMcDonald v. United States, 279 U.S. 12 (1929)McDonald v. United StatesNo. 117Argued January 10, 1929Decided February 18, 1929279 U.S. 12CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
1. Service on a vessel of foreign registry cannot be considered residence in the United States for naturalization purposes. P. 279 U. S. 19.
2. A proviso is not always limited in its effect to the part of the enactment with which it is immediately associated; it may apply generally to all cases within the meaning of the language used. P 279 U. S. 20. Page 279 U. S. 13
3. For the proper construction of a proviso, consideration need not be limited to the subdivision in which it is found; the General purpose of the section may be taken into account. P. 279 U. S. 22.
does not relate to the special classes of persons made eligible to naturalization by the preceding parts of the same paragraph, but (like other provision in the paragraph) states a rule of general application. P. 279 U. S. 22.
Certiorari, 277 U.S. 581, to a judgment of the circuit court of appeals which affirmed a judgment of the district court denying a petition for naturalization. Page 279 U. S. 18
Petitioner, a British subject, was born in Nova Scotia in 1877. He lawfully entered the United States at New Page 279 U. S. 19 York, September 17, 1920. He immediately established, and has since maintained, a place of residence at or near Boston, Massachusetts, where his wife and child joined him September 1, 1921, and have since lived. Since his entry, he has continuously served as a master of a vessel of British registry belonging to the United Fruit Company, a New Jersey corporation, plying between Boston and Central American countries. November 30, 1921, he filed his declaration of intention to become a citizen in the District Court for Massachusetts, and December 22, 1926, his petition for naturalization. That court denied his application, and its judgment was affirmed by the circuit court of appeals, 22 F.2d 747. There is conflict between that decision and one of the Circuit Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit. United States v. Nicolich, 25 F.2d 245. This Court granted a writ of certiorari. 278 U.S. 581.
"Provided further, Page 279 U. S. 20 that service by aliens upon vessels other than of American registry, whether continuous or broken, shall not be considered as residence for naturalization purposes within the jurisdiction of the United States, and such aliens cannot secure residence for naturalization purposes during service upon vessels of foreign registry."
As a general rule, a proviso is intended to take a special case or class of cases out of the operation of the body of Page 279 U. S. 21 the section in which it is found. Wayman v. Southard, 10 Wheat. 1, 23 U. S. 30; United States v. Dickson, 15 Pet. 141, 40 U. S. 165; Ryan v. Carter, 93 U. S. 78, 93 U. S. 83; United States v. McElvain, 272 U. S. 633, 635 [argument of counsel -- omitted]. But a proviso is not always limited in its effect to the part of the enactment with which it is immediately associated; it may apply generally to all cases within the meaning of the language used. United States v. Babbit, 1 Black 55. Springer v. Philippine Islands, 277 U. S. 189, 277 U. S. 207. Little if any significance is to be given to the use of the word "provided." In Page 279 U. S. 22 Acts of Congress, that word is employed for many purposes. Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester, etc., Ry., 205 U. S. 1, 205 U. S. 10. Sometimes it is used merely to safeguard against misinterpretation or to distinguish different paragraphs or sentences. Georgia Banking Co. v. Smith, 128 U. S. 174, 128 U. S. 181. For the proper construction of the provision in question, consideration need not be limited to the subdivision in which it is found; the general purpose of the section may be taken into account. United States v. Whitridge, 197 U. S. 135, 197 U. S. 143.
Petitioner contends and it may be assumed that, under the Act of 1906 before the amendment, mere absence of a sailor in pursuit of his calling whether serving on vessels of United States or of foreign registry did not interrupt the required period of residence in the case of one maintaining a domicile in this country. United States v. Rockteschell, Page 279 U. S. 23 208 F. 530. United States v. Habbick, 287 F. 593, 595.
"[3] any alien serving in the military or naval service of the United States during the time this country is engaged in the present war may file his petition for naturalization without making the preliminary declaration of intention and without proof of the required five years' residence within the United States; [id., § 392.]"
"[4] any alien declarant who has served in the United States Army or Navy, or the Philippine Constabulary, and has been honorably discharged therefrom, and has been accepted for service in either the military or naval service of the United States on the condition that he becomes a citizen of the United States, may file his petition for naturalization upon proof of continuous residence within the United States for the three years immediately preceding his petition, . . . and, in these cases, only residence in the Philippine Islands and the Panama Canal Zone by aliens may be considered residence within the United States, and the place of such military service shall be construed as the place of residence required to be established for . . . naturalization. [Id., § 389.]"
"[5] Members of the Naturalization Bureau and Service may be designated by the Secretary of Labor to administer oaths relating to the administration of the naturalization law; [id., § 354.]"
"[6] and the requirement of section ten of notice to take depositions to the United States attorneys is repealed, and the duty they perform under section fifteen of the Act of June twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and six, . . . may also be performed by the Commissioner or deputy Commissioner of Naturalization: [id, § 405.]"
"[7] Provided, that it shall not be lawful to make a declaration of intention before the clerk of any court on election day or during the period of thirty days preceding the day of holding any election in the jurisdiction of the court: [id, § 374, and see § 362.]"
"[8] Provided further, that service by aliens upon vessels other than of American registry, whether continuous or broken, shall not be considered as residence for naturalization purposes within the jurisdiction of the United States, and such aliens cannot secure residence for naturalization purposes during service upon vessels of foreign registry. [Id., § 384.]"