Court Opinion

ID: 9651007
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 16:01:38.527605+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:28.828397
License: Public Domain

HOUGH, Circuit Judge
(dissenting from result). With the law as stated by Judge HAND I entirely agree, and believe that the opinion will aid a much-needed clarification of the relative meanings of the words “domicile’’ and “residence.”
It is also in my opinion true that Neuberger’s ex parte statements, whieh, with those of his wife, make up the bulk of this record, do not as matter of law show him as disqualified for citizenship, yet I feel compelled to dissent from the result announced, because it seems to me that as matter of fact the applicant has failed to bear the burden of proof on a vital point not mentioned in the prevailing opinion.
1'n this case we certified to the Supreme Court the question of our jurisdiction in naturalization and the manner of its exercise. The answer (filed April 12, 1926) was that we are required to hear such matters as this on appeal, not writ of error. That means that we must examine the evidence and draw our own conclusions therefrom, as in equity.
The burden of proof is clear, for (said Brandéis, J., in this ease) “the applicant for citizenship, like other suitors * * * must allege * * * the fulfillment of all conditions upon the existence of which the alleged right (of receiving naturalization) is made dependent, and he must establish these allegations by competent evidence to the satisfaction of the court.”
The present statute, and in substance its predecessors for a century or more, requires the petitioner to show that during the five years “immediately preceding” his application he has “behaved as a man * * * attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same.” Therefore Neuberger must allege (as he does) this statutory requirement, and prove that for five years before his application date (April 28, 1924) he did behave as required by statute.
When one has listened, as I have, to several thousand applications for citizenship, and observed the average intellectual development displayed by the petitioners, it is difficult to maintain a serious mind in respect of their asserted attachment to the principles of the Constitution, for the most prominent mental trait of the over-whelming majority of them is inability to comprehend the meaning of the somewhat stilted statutory phrase. However, as linguistic skill and learning of the books have not for a long time been thought necessary for citizens or voters, the practical interpretation *544of the statute has been to ascertain what the petitioner has done and how he has acted, and infer from conduct the necessary attachment, substantially on the same principle that M. Jourdain found himself an adept in French prose. • .
This applicant is a man of intelligence, and, as an artillerist, of some scientific attainments; consequently his acts and behavior are of even greater significance than those of the ignorant. The rule is general that a man is judged by his opportunities and capacities, as were the servants in Scripture by the number of their talents.
Neuberger came to this country before he was 30, and even then a reserve captain. It is not true that he resigned; he was, retired, and was perféetly aware that he still remained at the call of his military superiors. The captaincy was a badge of social distinction, and his conduct in using America for business for upwards of 10 years, while maintaining German nationality, marks him as one of that class, large and well known, of Germans of commissioned rank, who before the World War preferred the nationality that gave that rank consideration of a kind unknown in a democracy, which every teaching leading to the rank he cherished led him to despise.
His war duties were not different from those of' most officers over 40 and not recently identified with troops; he was ordered to a service corps. For present purposes it is well to say that he worked in the Nuremberg post office, and this may be true in the same sense that a commissariat officer may be said to work in a grocery. The military order which he obeyed was to “take charge of the parcel station of the Third Bavarian Army Corps.”
After the close of hostilities he remained nearly 2% years in Germany, a period which includes 2 years (1919-21) of the 5 during which, as he must satisfy the court, he was attached to the principles of the Constitution and well disposed to the good order 'and happiness of the United States.
He does not satisfy me; he has not, I think, borne the burden of proving a change of heart, for no man could be at the same time a qualified German officer and attached to such a form of words as the Constitution of this country.
I know well how cheap we have made the privilege of American citizenship, but do not believe the statute requires quite this degree of cheapness; so I dissent.