Kasson to Henry Sterne, December 15, 1880

Mr. Kasson to Mr. Sterne.

Sir: In answer to the inquiries of your note of the 12th instant, I have to say:

• The law of Hungary, it is well understood, cannot change the provisions of our treaty of September 20, 1870. Our naturalized citizens have on their return to Austria-Hungary all the rights guaranteed by the first and fourth articles of that treaty. The latter article shows that one can only become a citizen “of his own accord,” and cannot be “constrained to resume his former citizenship.” The law in question, if applied to former Austro-Hungarian subjects naturalized in the United States, and not “of their own accord” accepting the new citizenship, it seems clear, would be a constraint in violation of the treaty. My opinion is based upon the translation of the law published over the signature of the British consul-general. This law states that the residence is to be for “at feast five consecutive years” within the state of Hungary; and the name must also have “been entered in the register of tax-payers” in some parish. The fair construction of the law would be for the five consecutive years next preceding the time when they claim to apply the law to a foreign citizen.
• But the construction which the Hungarian courts will give to it cannot, of course, be foreseen by this legation. If he was not between 1865 and 1874 “entered in the register of tax-payers,” it would seem that Klein could not be affected till the lapse of five years from 1878, if at all.
• I see no objection to your delivering to each American citizen a certificate of the purport of that of which you transmit a copy in your letter of the 12th instant.
• Touching the evidence of citizenship upon which you would feel justified in acting, I have only to say that there are two classes of persons claiming to be citizens who have from time to time presented themselves to this legation. The one class is composed of either native or naturalized citizens who have had homes and business in America, and who evidently regard that country as their real home, and its government as the one to which their allegiance is due. For them a passport of whatever date or a final naturalization certificate (their identity being shown) would be enough to justify your proposed certificate. The other class is composed of those who appear only to have lived long enough in the United States to obtain their papers, and then returned to their original country, and there resided without the intention of returning to the United States to live. This class of ten is composed of people who have only obtained papers by which they hope to escape the obligations of allegiance to the country of their birth without assuming any toward the country in which they were naturalized, Our laws are not intended to aid such persons in their objects; and this legation has refused, in clear cases, to recognize them as lawful citizens of the United States. The only occasion when they actually claim to be such is when they seek to escape some duty of a subject, or demand charitable relief. It must be left to your good judgment to make the proper distinction.
• If the emigration of a man from whom military service is claimed occurred before he was “drafted at the time of conscription” (see article 2, convention with Austria of September 20, 1870), he cannot afterward be held to military punishment for such emigration, nor is he liable to army service while remaining bona fide an American citizen. The case you give does not appear to be such a case of drafting.

Very respectfully,