In re Peter Coleman, on Habeas Corpus. Court, before Judge Benedict, may be referred to. There, an indictment, under § 5,512 of the Revised Statutes, which makes it an offence to fraudulently register, not having a lawful right so to do, alleged that the defendant fraudulently registered, having no lawful right to register. It was objected that the indictment was insufficient, because it simply averred that the accused fraudulently registered, without stating any facts to show that a fraud was committed, or to enable the accused to know what he was charged with having done. The indictment was held insufficient, on the ground that it did not point out the fraud which it was supposed the accused had committed, so that he could know what it was that he was called on to explain. The subject has recently been considered by the Supreme Court, in United States v. Cruikshank, (2 Otto, 542, 557,) and, within the principles there laid down, it must be held that the affidavit of Mosher failed to disclose "probable cause" for the issuing of the warrant. It is not intended to be held, that, if the evidence before the Commissioner, on the examination, showed the defendant to have been guilty of an offence against § 5,423, or, if the evidence taken in the proceedings on this habeas corpus showed such guilt, it would necessarily follow that the defendant must be now discharged, because of the insufficiency of the original affidavit and warrant. The main question discussed, on the hearing on the writ, was, whether the certificate of citizenship which Coleman used was unlawfully issued. It was contended, by the attorney for the United States, that the certificate was unlawfully issued, because there was no matter of record in the Superior Court on which to found it; and that, what has been found in, and produced from, the books and files of that Court, does not constitute a record of the naturalization of Coleman. The proceedings in the Superior Court, in the case of Coleman, took place under the Act of April 14th, 1802, (2 U. S. Stat. at Large, 153,) and the Act of May 26th, 1824, (4 Id., 69.) The 1st section of the Act of 1802 contained In re Peter Coleman, on Habeas Corpus. the following provisions: "Any alien, being a free white person, may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States, or any of them, on the following conditions, and not otherwise: First. That he shall have declared, on oath or affirmation, before the Supreme, Superior, District or Circuit Court of some one of the States, or of the territorial districts of the United States, or a Circuit or District Court of the United States, three years at least before his admission, that it was, bona fide, his intention to become a citizen of the United States, and to renounce forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty whatever, and particularly, by name, the prince, potentate, state or sovereignty whereof such alien may at the time be a citizen or subject. Secondly. That he shall, at the time of his application to be admitted, declare, on oath and affirmation, before some one of the Courts aforesaid, that he will support the Constitution of the United States, and that he doth absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty whatever, and particularly, by name, the prince, potentate, state or sovereignty whereof he was before a citizen or subject; which proceedings shall be recorded by the clerk of the Court. Thirdly. That the Court admitting such alien shall be satisfied that he has resided within the United States five years at least, and within the State or Territory where such Court is at the time held, one year at least; and it shall further appear to their satisfaction, that, during that time, he has behaved as a man of a 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; provided, that the oath of the applicant shall in no case be allowed to prove his residence. Fourthly. That, in case the alien applying to be admitted to citizenship shall have borne any hereditary title, or been of any of the orders of nobility, in the kingdom or state from which he came, he shall, in addition to the above requisites, make an express renunciation of his title, or order of nobility, in the Court to which his application shall be made, which renunciation shall be recorded in the said Court." Section 3 In re Peter Coleman, on Habeas Corpus. of the Act of 1802 provides, that "every Court of record in any individual State, having common law jurisdiction, and a seal and clerk or prothonotary, shall be considered as a District Court, within the meaning of this Act." The 1st section of the Act of 1824 provides as follows: "Any alien, being a free white person and a minor, under the age of twenty-one years, who shall have resided in the United States three years next preceding his arriving at the age of twentyone years, and who shall have continued to reside therein to the time he may make application to be admitted a citizen thereof, may, after he arrives at the age of twenty-one years, and after he shall have resided five years within the United States, including the three years of his minority, be admitted a citizen of the United States, without having made the declaration required in the first condition of the first section of the Act to which this is an addition, three years previous to his admission; provided such alien shall make the declaration required therein at the time of his or her admission; and shall further declare, on oath, and prove to the satisfaction of the Court, that, for three years next preceding, it has been the bona fide intention of such alien to become a citizen of the United States; and shall, in all other respects, comply with the laws in regard to naturalization." Propositions are announced in this case, by the attorney for the United States, the accuracy of which cannot be questioned-such as, that the admission of an alien to citizenship is a judicial act; that it is essential that a Court should act; and that the evidence submitted to the Court for the purpose of admission to citizenship must be legal evidence. It is further contended, by the attorney for the United States, that the proceedings and judgment of admission must be recorded. The Act of 1802 provides, that the alien may be admitted to become a citizen "on the following conditions, and not otherwise:" (1.) He must have declared his intention. (2.) IIe must take an oath to support the Constitution, and renouncing his former allegiance. The statute then says: "which proceedings shall be recorded by the clerk In re Peter Coleman, on Habeas Corpus. of the Court." Then follow the third and fourth conditions: (3.) The Court must be satisfied, by proof, as to the prescribed residence and character of the applicant, some other oath than his own being required to prove his residence. (4.) The applicant must expressly renounce all titles and orders of nobility, "which renunciation shall be recorded in the said Court." It is hardly to be supposed that Congress intended to make the applicant for citizenship responsible for a noncompliance with any other conditions than such as he had the power to comply with. The applicant can declare his intention, and can take the prescribed oath and make the renunciation. But he cannot see to it that the proceedings and renunciation are recorded. He can produce a witness as to his residence and character, and can appear in person in the proper Court, and be sworn there in open Court, with his witness, as to the matters prescribed in the statute. When this is done, he can do nothing more except to receive such a certificate from the Court as that which Coleman received from the Court-a certificate which sets forth that it is given "by the Court" under its seal; that Coleman appeared in the Court on a day named, and applied to it to become a citizen, and produced to it such evidence, and made such declaration and renunciation, and took such oaths, as are required by the Acts of Congress on the subject; and that, thereupon, the Court ordered that he be admitted, and he was accordingly admitted, by the Court, to be a citizen of the United States. When he has done what the certificate says he has done, and when he leaves with the clerk of the Court such papers as he has signed, and when the Court tells him, as it does by the certificate, that, he having done all that, the Court had thereupon ordered that he be admitted to be a citizen, and had admitted him to be a citizen, and when the Court gives the certificate into his keeping, he has done all he can to comply with the statute. It cannot be held that the word "conditions" applies to anything further. There must, undoubtedly, be an act of admission, but what shall be the evidence, directed by the Court, of such act of admis In re Peter Coleman, on Habeas Corpus. The sion, is another question. The provision for recording "proceedings," at the close of the second condition, and the provision for recording the renunciation mentioned in the fourth condition, are introduced in such form that they may very well be regarded as merely directory, and as no part of the "conditions." The conditions are well satisfied by limiting them to what the applicant is required to do, in the first, second and fourth paragraphs, and to what the Court is required to do, in the third paragraph. The admission to citizenship is to follow the observance of those conditions. The recording is to follow the admission and not precede it. The admission separates the conditions from the recording. Court admitting to citizenship must have evidence of the prior declaration of intention, or, in the case provided for by the first section of the Act of 1824, evidence of what is required by that section, and satisfactory evidence as to residence and character, and the applicant must take the prescribed oaths and make the prescribed renunciations, and then the Court is authorized to admit him to become a citizen. Even if the evidence as to residence and character is required to be recorded, yet it, and all evidence as to a prior declaration of intention, and the oaths and renunciations of the applicant, and the evidence as to residence and character, may very well be recorded by placing the written papers on the files of the Court, in the shape in which the Court receives them as complete. Such papers, when filed, are just as much recorded, and just as much records of the Court, as if they were bound in book form, and the book were filed, or as if they were copied at length in a book, and the book were filed. As said before, there must be an act of admission by the Court. But, the Court has a right to say what it will regard as its act of admission, and it has a right to say what it will regard as its order that the applicant be admitted, and what it will regard as his admission. Whatever the Court says is its act of admission, and whatever the Court says is its order of admission, is such act and such order, whenever the ques |