Mr. Fish to Mr. Wing
Sir: Your dispatch (No. 39) of the 7th of November last, inquiring “what rules will the United States apply to Ecuadorians who have taken out American naturalization papers, and to their children,” has been received. In reply, I have to state that the same rules must be applied to them as to other foreigners in their native country, who may have been naturalized in the United States. It is not conceived that you are bound to recognize any Ecuadorian as a citizen of the United [Page 254] States merely because he may have been so recognized by one of your predecessors. That recognition may have been occasioned by a misapprehension of the claims of the Ecuadorian to that character, or by other causes. It is certain that in every case of a native of Ecuador claiming of you protection as a naturalized citizen of the United States, it would be your right and duty to require him to exhibit to you his certificate of naturalization. If you should have no reasonable doubt of its authenticity, then there will be occasion to apply to the case the rules set forth in the second and third paragraphs of the circular of this Department of the 14th of October, 1869. An eminent predecessor of mine in this Department, in an instruction to a minister of the United States in a foreign country, expressed the opinion that “it can admit of no doubt that the naturalization laws of the United States contemplate the residence in the country of naturalized citizens, unless they shall go abroad in the public service, or for temporary purposes.” In addition, the test prescribed in a recent instruction to another minister of the United States abroad may be applied. These are, in substance, when, and in what assessment district the returns required by the internal revenue laws of the United States have been made by the naturalized citizen. Where, and to whom, have the taxes been paid? The instruction referred to also says, that “the omission to have made the returns, or to have paid any tax, would necessarily cast grave suspicions upon the claim of the party applying for the protection of a govment from whose support he has withheld the contributions required of all the citizens whether resident at home or abroad, and if such omission has been long continued it will, as a general rule, justify the refusal of a recognition of the claim to protection.” No Ecuadorian who may have merely declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States will have any right to your interference in his behalf. The law, justly regarding a change in his allegiance by a foreigner as an act of grave importance, wisely provides that there shall be two steps in the process. By the first, the purpose of change is announced. Between this and actual naturalization the lapse of a considerable interval is required, in order that the final step may be taken with due deliberation. Persons who may have declared their intention to become citizens often change their minds, and fail to carry that intention into effect. They have seen occasion to avail themselves of the locus penitentiœ which the law allows. It is certain that no children of a foreigner, born before he was naturalized, can claim to be citizens of the United States merely because of his naturalization. It is hoped that these instructions will be sufficiently comprehensive to guide you in all cases which may arise in Ecuador. If, However, you should desire special instructions in any particular case, they shall be forwarded whenever that wish shall be made known to the Department.
I am &c.,