No. 160.
Mr. Bayard
to Mr. Pendleton.
Washington, April 27, 1886.
Sir: Your dispatches, No. 188 of the 1st of February last, and No. 219 of the 29th ultimo, in relation to the questions which have arisen with the Imperial Government in relation to the citizenship of Charles L. George, have been received and considered.
It is an established principle of international law that a child born abroad to a citizen of the United States partakes of his father’s nationality, [Page 328] subject, however, to the divesting of this nationality by his election, when he arrives at full age, to accept allegiance to the country of his birth. This right cannot be taken from him either by municipal legislation or by treaty enactments to which the country of his inherited allegiance is not a party. From this it follows that the American citizenship, inherited by Mr. George and elected by him when of full age, cannot be divested either by the municipal laws of Germany or by a treaty between Germany and France.
It is also a principle of international law that allegiance can be divested by naturalization in a foreign land, and that this prerogative cannot be divested by the municipal legislation of any particular country to which legislation the naturalizing country is not a party. Hence, even if the first position here taken be waived, which it is not, it must be insisted that Mr. George is now a citizen of the United States, not subject to the municipal laws of Germany unless it be shown that he has abandoned his United States citizenship.
The facts in the case under consideration, as stated in an affidavit of Mr. C. L. George, are as follows: His father, Peter George, a native of Germany, came to the United States in 1840, was naturalized in 1848, returned to Germany in 1851, and married there. The son Charles was born at Lambertsloch, Alsace-Lorraine, in 1859, that is, after his father had been residing there eight years. Both father and son continued to reside there until May, 1875, the son being then sixteen years of age, when they came to the United States. They have since resided, more or less, continuously in Philadelphia. The son states that he voted when he came of age, that is in 1881, by virtue of his father’s citizenship, but he appears, in anticipation of his return to Germany, to have taken out naturalization papers on May 10, 1884.
The German foreign office seems to have ignored the American citizenship of Mr. C. L. George as the son of a naturalized citizen of the United States, and to have assumed that having been born in Alsace he became a citizen of France, under the French law of 1851, and, therefore, was subject to German law as a citizen of Alsace-Lorraine, after its cession to Germany. But under the rules of international law, the son, having been born in Alsace-Lorraine, of an American father, had the option of remaining there until his majority and electing to take the allegiance of his birth, or of claiming the allegiance of his father. It appears, however, that he did not remain in Alsace until he obtained his majority. He came to the United States during his minority, and when he arrived at his majority evinced his election of American citizenship by exercising the rights which pertain thereto, and by other acts indicating the same election. Under these circumstances his subsequent taking out of naturalization papers is to be regarded merely as cumulative evidence of his election to take the United States as the country of his allegiance. He was already a citizen of the United States, and was none the less so because he may have entertained unfounded doubts on the subject, as from his conduct would appear to have been the case.
I am, sir, &c.,