now for any purpose, or for any period of time, no matter how brief, than he had before the surplusage quoted was stricken out by Congress; for, in leaving the country, he passes out of the dominion and jurisdiction of the United States, and, being a foreign subject, he owes no allegiance to the Federal government (1). At all events, it is self

(1) There is nothing in any of the cases reported in the books indicating that the applicant for citizenship may, during the time he is acquiring a residence qualification, leave the country for any length of time, or for any purpose, except as a mariner serving in an American merchant vessel, without forfeiture of that which he may have previously gained. And the residence must be or a permanent nature, such as to show the bona fide intention of the applicant to remain permanently in the country. Sojournment or transi ory residenee is not enough. "Proof that the applicant has continued within the jurisdiction of the United States for more than the required five years is not enough. The law contemplates territorial residence."4 N. Y. Leg. Obs., 98; 1 Abb. Dig., 628). An alien might, for instance, travel throughout the United States, from place to place, for purposes of pleasure or business, covering a period of five years or more, without acquiring fixed residence anywhere. He would thus have been continuously within the dominion and jurisdiction of the United States, nevertheless he would be disqualified for admission to citizenship, for the reason that he was merely a sojourner and not a resident. Being continuously within the dominion and jurisdiction of the United States does not im ly residence, but continuity of residence in the United States does imply being continuously within its dominion and jurisdiction.

Several cas s are recorded in which the courts have passed upon the subject of continuity of resi ence as an essential element in the admission of an applicant for citizenship.

In 1804, an alien named Walton applied to the Circuit Court at Alexandria for citizenship. An affidavit was submitted in his behalf, which showed that the applicant had "resided within the United States upwards of six years; that during that period he was absent from the country a short time on business, but left his family in the United States; that he had resided for more than one year last past in Alexandria, in the Distri t of Columbia, and that during all the aforesaid time he has behaved as a man of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same; that the said Walton removed to the United States, as this deponent understood, and doth verily believe, with the intention of making said States his place of permanent residence, and that he hath not relinquished his intention." The application was objected to and rejected by the court, because the residence did not appear to be a continued residence.--1 Cranch, 186.

Another alien, named James Saunderson, applied to the same Court for admission to citizenship, in which it appeared that the continuity of his residence had been disturbed. William Hodgson, the witness testifying to the applicant's residence, filed an affidavit setting forth that Saunderson came to the United States in October, 1797, and continued to reside here until 1800, when he went to England and returned in April, 18c1. In the fall of 1801, he went to England again, and returned to the United States in 1802, after that remaining continuously in Alexandria until the date of his application for admission to citizenship, the various periods of his residence in the

evident that a removal from the United States into a foreign country, and there engaging in his regular occupation, or in any permanent form of trade, requiring presumptively regular and permanent residence therein, would be, in itself, conclusive proof of an abandonment of the residence previously acquired in the United States, and a voluntary surrender of all advantage in the process of naturalization gained through it, for it would demonstrate that the intent of the applicant for citizenship was not bona fide. And a declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United States, made in due form prior to removal to a foreign country, would not avail, for like reason. It is evident Congress had in mind the possibility of such a combination of circumstances. And its intention that an alien's residence in the United States, so interrupted, should operate to his disadvantage, was clearly manifested in the fact that it made an exception in the case of a seaman, being a foreigner, who desired to acquire citizenship by naturalization, by providing that after a declaration of his intention to become a citizen had been made, followed by three years' service on board of a merchant vessel of the United States, he could acquire it on application to any competent court, the production of a certificate of dis

country, when combined, aggregating more than five year. The Court refused to admit him, because he had not continued to reside according to the act of 1804.-1 Cranch, 219.

The application of an alien, named Pasqualt, to be naturalized, in whose favor an affidavit showed that he had resided in Alexandria upwards of five years, and that he had during that time sailed from the port of Alexandria in American vessels, as a mariner, was granted, and he was admitted (1 Cranch, 243), because his absence from the country was clearly admissible under that provision of the naturalization laws defining the manner in which an alien seaman may be admitted to citizenship. (See p. 23.)

charge and good conduct and of the certificate of his declaration of intention. The acquirement of Federal citizenship under these favorable conditions is permissible only for the specific purpose of pursuing his avocation as a seaman thereafter on merchant vessels carrying the flag of the United States.

"Every seaman, being a foreigner, who declares his intention of becoming a citizen of the United States, in any competent court, and shall have served three years on board of a merchant vessel of the United States subsequent to the date of such declaration, may, on his application to any competent court, and the production of his certificate of discharge and good conduct during that time, together with the certificate of his declaration of intention to become a citizen, be admitted a citizen of the United States; and every seaman, being a foreigner, shall after his declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United States, and after he shall have served such three years, be deemed a citizen of the Uuited States for the purpose of manning and serving on board any merchant vessel of the United States, anything to the contrary in any act of Congress notwithstanding; but such seaman shall, for all purposes of protection as an American citizen, be deemed such, after the filing of his declaration of intention to become such a citizen."Rev. Stats. U. S., Sec. 2174.

But the three years' service, as a seaman, has to be rendered on a vessel belonging to the mercantile (1) marine of the United States, which, by a fiction of law, as previously stated (2), is constructively a part of the United States. He will have been, thus, in the pursuit of his regular occupation, in the eyes of the law, a continuous resident of the United States for the required period subsequent to the declaration of his intention to become a citizen. Any interruption to the continuity of this service, by employment as a seaman on a vessel sailing under a foreign flag, or under another employer on foreign soil, would be fatal to his claim for admission to citizenship and serve as a forfeiture of whatever advantage he had previously gained through his declara

(1.) It has been held that this section of the naturalization laws does not apply to the naval service.-14 Phila., 211.

(2) See Federal Citizenship by Inheritance," p. 5.

tion and the service he had rendered on an American vessel following it, for the reason that he, being still a foreign subject, had gone without the "dominion and jurisdiction of the United States" during the period of his employment in a foreign vessel or on foreign soil. In like manner, and for like reason, A. B., who has been a resident of the United States for three years, declares his intention to become a citizen of the United States and then removes to a foreign state where he follows his ordinary avocation, has, on his return to the United States, forfeited all the advantage gained by him through his past residence and his declaration of intention; and to lawfully acquire Federal citizenship, it will be necessary for him to begin de novo, as if he had never been a resident of the United States, or had never made a declaration of intention to become a citizen. A residence thus interrupted can not have been continuous, and it has not, therefore, been bona fide. Residence is, consequently, an essential element in the naturalization of an alien. If there is any irregularity in this respect, it must, necessarily, be fatal to all other proceedings in the applicant's efforts to become naturalized. A declaration of intention makes no change in an alien's allegiance. He remains as much a subject of a foreign country as if he had made no declaration of intention to renounce his allegiance to it; and he continues to owe allegiance to it until the laws of this country permit him to perform the final act of renunciation; that is, "a foreign subject remains such until naturalization is complete according to our

で

laws (1)." He owes no allegiance to the government of the United States; nor has that government any claim upon his allegiance until his original allegiance shall have been renounced. As a foreigner residing within. the dominion of the United States, the Federal government has nominal jurisdiction over him. But if he passes out of its dominion, he also passes out of its jurisdiction, and the act must be construed as an abandonment of his declared intention to become a citizen of the United States; and all the advantage he may have acquired under such declaration, and during the time of his residence within the dominion and under the jurisdiction of the United States, up to the time of leaving such dominion and escaping from such jurisdiction, will have been forever forfeited. Return to the country does not relieve the forfeiture, no matter how brief the absence from it or the object of such absence.

Wherever it has been possible for Congress to express, in the naturalization laws, the necessity for the intending citizen to preserve an unbroken residence during the probationary term of five years, so as to regularly qualify, it has emphasized the declaration, even going so far as to refuse to permit the oath of the applicant on the subject to be taken by the court, placing that responsible duty upon those who are citizens, on the presumption that their loyalty to the government is a barrier to fraud, and their disinterestedness a defence against perjury, which a foreigner, in his overweening desire to acquire Federal citizenship, might be tempted to commit. (1) 4 Dillon, 425; 25 F. R., 673; 3 Wall jr. 1.