Mr. Hay to Mr.
Hengelmüller.
Department of State,
Washington, November 9,
1899.
Personal.]
My Dear Mr. Hengelmüller: I beg to send herewith a memorandum in reply to
the aide-mémoire touching the desire of the Austro-Hungarian Government
to amend its naturalization treaty to the United States.
I am, etc.,
[Page 80]
[Inclosure.]
Aide-mémoire.
The grievance complained of in the Austro-Hungarian memorandum is
male fide naturalization of Austro-Hungarian subjects for the mere
purpose of escaping military duty. The remedies suggested are two:
- First. Amending the naturalization treaty so that the
recognition of naturalization be made to depend on the
previous Austro-Hungarian consent thereto. As to this, if
the treaty were so amended, it would in effect abrogate it,
since it would virtually relegate the whole question to the
local laws of Austro-Hungary.
- Second. Amending the treaty by omitting the last sentence
of article 11, which exempts naturalized citizens from
punishment for nonfulfillment of military duty in all cases
save the three cases thereinbefore specified. These three
specifications would expressly subject to punishment
offenders falling within that description, and the saving
clause being abrogated, the effect would be to relegate the
whole question of protection and of punishment in all such
cases to the Austro-Hungarian tribunals.
Either amendment would annul all the beneficial provisions of the
treaty as regards subjection to military duty.
There are doubtless grave abuses of the privileges of naturalization.
But while there would be no difficulty in providing a theoretical
remedy, the practical difficulty in determining whether a man has
become naturalized with such fraudulent intent or not is very great.
It is so difficult that no rule has ever been formulated by statute
defining naturalization, and the attempt to do so, directly or
indirectly by treaty, would probably be futile. Only one phase of
the difficulty, however, is suggested by the Austro-Hungarian
memorandum.
