Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1900
Mr. Hardy to Mr. Hay.
Athens , April 5, 1900 .
Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith further correspondence in the case of L. Economopoulos, all previous notes between Mr. Romanos and myself having been forwarded in my No. 32 of March 22 last.
I am, etc.,
Mr. Romanos to Mr. Hardy.
Mr. Minister: I hastened to transmit your note of February 20 to my colleague of the department of war.
Mr. Tsamados informs me that he deeply regrets that he can not release L. Economopoulos from military service.
In fact, Mr. Minister, the soldier in question, before acquiring American citizenship, should have obtained permission to abandon his Greek nationality according to the forms required by our civil code and discharged his military obligations to the country of his birth.
I take this occasion to renew, etc.,
Mr. Hardy to Mr. Romanos.
Mr. Minister: I hasten to reply to your note of March 18/31 last, in which you say that the American citizen Economopoulos can not be released from military service because before acquiring American citizenship he should have obtained permission to abandon his Greek nationality and discharged his military obligations to the country of his birth. Permit me to call your excellency’s attention to the fact that this answer does not meet the circumstances of the case.
As a matter of fact, Economopoulos has changed his nationality, and has become a citizen of the United States in accordance with the provisions of its laws. This fact is not in dispute, and the question at issue therefore is What, under these circumstances, can the Greek Government legally require of him on his return to Greece to make, in good faith, a brief visit on his parents.
If I understand correctly the rulings of Greek courts hereinafter cited Economopoulos, being an American citizen, can not be held for service in the Greek army; for according to the well-known decisions dated June 14, 1886, to be found in the [Page 641] Collection of Opinions and Sentences of the Legal Council on Doubtful Administration, pages 290 and 291, it is a recognized principle that only a Greek subject can be so held. No. 16, above referred to, is as follows:
“Vu que, conformément à ce que le Conseil de Révision admet, l’interjetant a légalement acquis la qualité de sujet étranger, eté en conequence, l’autorité Hellénique ne peut plus le saisir et l’obliger à remplir une obligation, bien que cette obligation existe avant sa naturalisation, car on n’est soumis au service militaire envers l’Etat qu’à la condition d’avoir la qualité de sujet Hellénique, conformément à l’Article 6 de la loi 15 (Article 7 de la loi en vigueur) et l’Etat d’autre part a cessé d’avoir sur l’inter jetant l’autorité à le contraindre à remplir telle obligation. La raison que l’interjetant est soumis à poursuite pénale n’importe pas, vu que les lois pénales s’étendent sans distinction sur toutes les personnes résidant dans le pays (Article 3 de la loi civile). Pour cela elle modifie etc. & exempte etc.”
No. 17 states the case still more clearly.
The question was “Whether one acquiring a foreign allegiance is regarded as a foreigner if he was a minor when he asked permission therefor?” and the opinion declares that it was immaterial whether he was a minor or not, “because he was able even without such permission to change his nationality, subject only to the penalty prescribed by the penal code.” It is clear that according to your own law a minor can change his nationality without the royal assent, subject only to the penalty prescribed by the penal laws. That Economopoulos is liable to that penalty I willingly admit, though in its application it is to be hoped that the long and unwarrantable service to which he has been compelled will be taken into account.
In the case of Emmanuel C. Catechi, released in 1890, which I had the honor to cite to your excellency as a precedent, the request of my predecessor, Mr. Snowden, was based upon the foregoing decision, and in view of its clear applicability to the case of Economopoulos I must renew my request for his release from military service, whatever may be his liability under the penal code.
It further appears, as I am informed, that when a former subject surfers the penalty prescribed by the penal laws for a change of nationality without royal assent he loses his civil rights.
If then Economopoulos, being subject only to the provisions of the penal code according to the above opinion, be turned over to the civil law and subjected to its penalties, he thereby loses his civil rights and can not therefore be liable for military service, since it is a recognized principle that the protection of a State and obligation thereto go hand in hand. The latter can not be enforced if the former is denied.
In my former requests I have appealed solely to the friendly spirit which has marked the settlement of such cases in the past. To these precedents, which I cited, your excellency’s reply makes no reference. Am I to understand that they are disavowed?
If so, there still remains the opinion of the council above quoted, which asserts the essential question to be whether the appellant “legally acquired foreign allegiance according to the laws of that foreign State.” Of this there is no dispute in the case of Economopoulos. I have therefore the honor to renew my request for his release from military service on the ground of his legally acquired American citizenship, and his exemption under the above judgment from obligation for military duty.
I seize this opportunity to renew, etc.,