Mr. AUSTIN. I move that the sections we have gone over, as amended, be approved. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. REES. The new section 203 reads as follows: (a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States. (b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, is declared to be a citizen of the United States. That amendment was put in there principally to straighten out a situation down there. I think there is somewhat of a long story back of it, and if any member of the committee thinks that the amendment is unfair, let him speak up. Mr. LESINSKI. I thought that was the law today. I know that many children are born there of American parentage, and they have been held to be American citizens. Mr. REES. We have a representative of the Department who can tell us about that. Mr. HAZARD. That is in the present law. That was put in at the request of the War Department. It does not change the current law. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. (The amendment was agreed to.) Mr. MASON. If we approve all the sections as we go along, why should we approve the amendments, which are parts of the whole thing? We will have motions to adopt the sections as amended. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the section is agreed to. On page 7, line 9, "204" is changed to "205," and in line 10 "203" is changed to "204." Without objection, those amendments are agreed to. (The amendments were agreed to.) Mr. REES. We come now to chapter III-Nationality Through Naturalization. Section 301 deals with jurisdiction to naturalize persons as citizens of the United States. Mr. AUSTIN. I presume that is the present law. Mr. REES. Yes. There are some technical changes. In line 15 we have some changes. Subsection (b) reads: A person who petitions for naturalization in any State court having naturalization jurisdiction, may petition within the State judicial district or State judicial circuit in which he resides, whether or not he resides within the county in which the petition for naturalization is filed. Mr. AUSTIN. Federal courts have that jurisdiction. The CHAIRMAN. The State courts have jurisdiction as well. Mr. REES. We have this difference, however: Under this Act, a person may, if he resides within the jurisdiction of the judicial district, apply for and receive a naturalization certificate. Under the old law he is required to reside within the county for a period of time before he is entitled to go even before the district court. This provides that if he resides within the district he may be naturalized in the district and not in the county in which he resides. You can see how this would facilitate the proceedings, especially in some of the larger cities where county lines run through the city. This makes for greater convenience. The CHAIRMAN. We are now discussing the provisions on page 8? Mr. REES. Yes; page 8. The CHAIRMAN. You have another amendment in line 23, where you strike out the language "admitted to become," and insert the language "naturalized as"; and in line 25 you strike out the word "chapter" and insert the word "Act." Mr. REES. Yes; in lines 23 and 25. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, those amendments are agreed to. (The amendments were agreed to.) The CHAIRMAN. On page 9, you strike out the language in the lines from 6 to 15, and insert a new section 303. Mr. REES. The new section 303 reads as follows: The right to become a naturalized citizen under the provisions of this Act shall extend only to white persons, persons of African nativity or descent and descendants of races indigenous to the Western Hemisphere: Provided, That nothing in this section shall prevent the naturalization of native-born Filipinos having the honorable service in the United States Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard as specified in section 324, nor of former citizens of the United States who are otherwise eligible to naturalization under the provisions of section 317. Now, the principal change in the law here is the statement that races indigenous to the Western Hemisphere may have the right of naturalization. If I am wrong in that statement, you may correct me. Mr. AUSTIN. Except Hindus. Mr. REES. It relates to Indian races in the Western Hemisphere, and there may be some others that are not exactly Indians, but they are persons who really belong to races indigenous to North and South America. It includes Esquimos. The fact of the matter is, as I understand it, that it is for the purpose, more than anything else, of showing a little good will toward the South American countries. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Will this nullify any privilege now granted persons who served during the World War, such as orientals Mr. REES. No; it will not take anything away from them. This changes the law by including those who served in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard. The old law provided that those who served in the Navy and Marine Corps would be entitled to naturalization, but did not include the Army. It seems that the Department has had trouble over that. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I think at that time that the Navy and Marine Corps were the only branches that would take them. Mr. LESINSKI. What do you mean by "persons of African nativity or descent"? Mr. HAZARD. Negroes, in some cases, were descendants of people who were slaves in the United States prior to the War between the States. We have a good many West Indian Negroes who would come in as descendants of original Africans. Mr. LESINSKI. What does that have to do with bringing them into the United States? Mr. HAZARD. This does not have anything to do with bringing them into the United States under the immigration law. It expresses exactly what the law says. It is the present law. It says that it shall 65495-45-20 apply to aliens, either white persons, or aliens of African nativity or descent. Mr. LESINSKI. It applies to South America and the West Indies. We have some trouble there. These Negroes say that they are waiting for a quota opportunity to come in. Mr. HAZARD. This has nothing to do with quotas. It does not open up anything, but it is repeating what is in the present law. It does not change it at all. Mr. LESINSKI. As I understand it, persons of African nativity or descent would take in people from Turkey, Japan, and other countries. Mr. HAZARD. No, sir; they would be African Negroes. Mr. VAN ZANDT. This would take in people coming from the Canal Zone? Mr. HAZARD. It does not permit those in the Canal Zone to be counted as residents of the United States. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Negroes down there are people of African nativity or descent. All of those Negroes of African nativity or descent can come over here and would be eligible to citizenship. Mr. HAZARD. This would be the same as under present law. That has been the law since 1870. This simply follows the present law. It does not change it at all. Mr. REES. I think I can simplify that by saying that there are two changes here. One is that persons who are indigenous to North and South America, which would include only Indians and Eskimos, may be admitted to citizenship, and the second provision or change includes Filipinos who served in the Army and are now residing in the United States. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, section 303 will be agreed to. The committee amendment will be agreed to, and we will strike out that portion from line 6 to line 15. (Sec. 303 and the amendment, striking out lines 6 to 15, were agreed to.) The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendments in line 17, striking out the word "chapter" and inserting the word "Act," and striking out the words "or admitted," will be agreed to. (The amendments were agreed to.) Mr. AUSTIN. I think that the language in section 305 is about as hazy as anything could possibly be. The intent in putting that provision in there was either a positive or a negative intent. If the intent was a positive one, there is certainly nothing positive about section 305. Mr. LESINSKI. That covers anarchists. Mr. AUSTIN. It is hazy. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Why not say "those who advocate the overthrow of the Government by force"? That would cover it. The CHAIRMAN. Then we would be getting into a squabble about what constitutes certain overt acts. We hope to get around that in another way. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I think it would be easier to clarify a situation which apparently has existed for years, and that is now the subject of an investigation on the part of Congress. I think it would be easier to settle that problem right here in this paragraph. Mr. LESINSKI. Section 305 starts with the words "No person who disbelieves in or who is opposed to organized government," and so forth, and that is in connection with the words on page 10, "shall be naturalized or made a citizen of the United States." Mr. AUSTIN. It forbids them from becoming citizens. Mr. VAN ZANDT. It says, "No person who disbelieves in or who is opposed to organized government," and so forth, "shall be naturalized or made a citizen of the United States." Mr. AUSTIN. I think we should clarify that language. That is not clear. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I think it would save some discussion on the floor. It might arouse some opposition to the bill. Mr. AUSTIN. You have a chance right here to give them a knock-out. Mr. LESINSKI. I still maintain that the reading here is not proper. This language reads: No person who disbelieves in or who is opposed to organized government, or who is a member of or affiliated with any organization entertaining or teaching disbelief in or opposition to organized government, or who advocates or teaches the duty, necessity, or propriety of the unlawful assaulting or killing of any officer or officers, either of specific individuals or of officers generally, of the Government of the United States, or of any other organized government, because of the official character of such officer or officers, shall be naturalized or made a citizen of the United States. I think there should be a closer connection between the language, "No person who disbelieves in or who is opposed to organized government," etc., and the language, "shall be naturalized or be made a citizen of the United States.' Mr. MASON. No person shall be naturalized or become a citizen of the United States who does those things. Mr. LESINSKI. I know that is what is intended, but does it mean that? Mr. MASON. It says that no person who disbelieves in or is opposed to organized government, and so forth, shall be naturalized or become a citizen of the United States. Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. That is the law at the present time, is it not? Mr. MASON. Yes. Mr. LESINSKI. I want to make it clear. Mr. MASON. You want the prohibition before you analyze it. Mr. AUSTIN. He wants to make it affirmative instead of negative. I move that section 305 be referred back to the committee for whatever further action the committee desires to take with reference to it. Mr. MASON. In order that they may insert proper language to shut out Communists. (The above motion was adopted.) Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. There is a change in section 307. Mr. REES. Yes. Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. The only change there is in line 21. Mr. VAN ZANDT. In section 306, could we not have some kind of a prohibition to stop people who deliberately come into the United States on board ships and desert the ships, or overstay their leave? Mr. LESINSKI. I think section 306 is in the present law. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. Yes, sir; that is the present law. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Could we not put something in there that would apply to persons who come here on board ship, and desert or overstay their leave? I am talking about foreigners who come in on board ship or are admitted on visitors' visas. I mean people who come in on board foreign ships, then desert the ships, get married here, have children, and then come before the committee in an effort to obtain citizenship. It might be if we set up a prohibition in here, we would not have so many of them. Mr. SHAUGHNESSY. There is no way for them to do that unless they have a certificate of arrival, and they cannot have a certificate of arrival unless the record shows lawful admission with a view to becoming permanent residents. Mr. MASON. The only way by which that can be done is by special bills. Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. We will have that as long as we are here. We will continue to do that. Mr. LESINSKI. If there is no objection, section 306 is approved. (Sec. 306 was approved.) Mr. LESINSKI. In section 307, there is a change in line 21, where the words "admitted to citizenship" are stricken out, and the word "naturalized" is inserted. Without objection the amendment is agreed to. (The amendment was agreed to.) Mr. LESINSKI. On page 11, line 4, insert the word "sub" making it read "subsection." Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. (The amendment was agreed to.) Mr. MACIEJEWSKI. The next change is on page 12, line 9. Mr. LESINSKI. In line 9, page 12, the words "residence outside" are stricken out, and the word "absence from" are inserted in lieu thereof. Without objection, the amendment is approved. (The amendment was agreed to.) Mr. LESINSKI. On page 13, line 9, the word "their" is stricken out, and the word "its" is inserted in lieu thereof. Without objection, that amendment is agreed to. (The amendment was agreed to.) Mr. LESINSKI. On page 13, line 15, the following proviso is inserted: Provided, That this subdivision shall not apply to service on vessels operating in and about the Canal Zone in connection with the maintenance, operation, protection, and civil government of the Panama Canal and Canal Zone. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to. (The amendment was agreed to.) Mr. REES. I would like to call attention, if I may, to the language beginning with line 16, page 13. Beginning with line 10, the language reads: The following shall be regarded as residence within the United States within the meaning of this chapter: (1) Honorable service on vessels owned by the Government of the United States, whether or not rendered at any time prior to the applicant's lawful entry into the United States. Then we add the proviso That this subdivision shall not apply to service on vessels operating in and about the Canal Zone in connection with the maintenance, operation, protection, and civil government of the Panama Canal and Canal Zone. Mr. VAN ZANDT. That takes care of the civilian labor. Mr. REES. Yes. The next paragraph reads—————— (2) Continuous service by a seaman on a vessel or vessels whose home port is in the United States and which are of American registry or American owned, |