Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

If both Chambers vote favorably and the vote receives the royal sanction, the Minister of Justice delivers to the applicant a certified copy of the act of naturalization. Thereupon the applicant must within two months declare before the mayor of his place of residence that he accepts the naturalization thus conferred upon him. Finally, the act of naturalization is published in the Official Gazette.

With naturalization in this sense the new law has little to do, save to say that "A foreigner who has obtained Belgian naturalization becomes Belgian." In fact, the recent law is composed chiefly of rules for the determination of the nationality of minors and married women. Out of the eighteen articles, two of which are "Transitory Provisions" and a third a repealing clause, thirteen articles deal more or less with the nationality of children. The status of this embryo citizen is fixed from the moment of conception (Article 3) up to and including years of discretion. Not only the unborn child but the natural born, the foundling and the post-marital child are provided for.

The doctrine of election is recognized and adopted both in the case of children of foreigners who acquire Belgian nationality and of children of Belgians who lose their allegiance. The twenty-second year is the period during which, generally, the election must be declared in writing before the proper authorities or officials, but upon reaching the age of eighteen the minor may, with the consent of a parent or other of his forefathers, acquire the high privileges of Belgian nationality. The Belgian law thus follows the generality of Continental codes which provide for election at majority. In America, however, the reverse is the situation. Until a recent act of Congress, it is doubtful if any statute ever confirmed the doctrine, though there appears to be a well established doctrine of election which the courts have recognized.

Subject to election at majority, the minor unmarried children of a foreigner in general acquire Belgian nationality with their parents. Whether in order to do so the children must go to Belgium to reside, is not expressly stated and it would seem, remains an open question. In the United States a child in such a case is not deemed a citizen until he "begins to reside permanently in the United States."

Next to children, the nationality of married women is most largely considered in the Belgian statute. In general, the national character of a wife is that of her husband, whether she is a foreign or a Belgian woman. In the latter case she may recover her nationality provided she has retained or effectively renewed her domicile in Belgium. In this

connection, it may be observed that the act of Congress of March 2, 1907, on this subject is very similar.

Under the old Belgian law, nationality was lost by "naturalization " abroad or by settling in a foreign country without intention of returning, that is, by acquiring a domicile there. The presumption, however, was against the giving up of the intention. By the new law, however, the loss of nationality by acquiring a domicile abroad is omitted altogether, while the loss of the nationality of children by change of nationality of parents is added.

The recovery of lost nationality is made in general simply by properly and effectively establishing a domicile in Belgium. This includes Belgian women after the dissolution of a foreign marriage, and children who have the right of an election at twenty-one.

The nationality law of Belgium is a good example of the application of the doctrine of jus sanguinis to citizenship. But one instance is noted where birth alone on Belgian soil supports citizenship and this only where a child is born of parents "legally unknown or without fixed nationality." Even birth in Belgium of foreign parents must be followed by domicile there. But, roughly speaking, birth of parents of whom at least one is or was a Belgian is a prerequisite to Belgian nationality. This is common in civil law countries where the jurisdiction follows. the person, while in common law countries where jurisdiction is territorial jus soli is the rule. Both rules, however, have been greatly modified and more or less blended by statute.

If, as stated, citizenship is a municipal status to be determined solely by local laws, it is evident that cases may arise where two or more countries claim the citizenship of the same person. Such a person would logically owe double allegiance, but practically he would be a citizen of that one of the interested countries in which he is for the time residing. The difficulty comes when he enters an uninterested country which must then decide the conflict of laws. The Belgian law, however, by convenient provisos, overcomes to a degree this inconvenience. Thus children born abroad of parents of Belgian origin are Belgian "if the father has no fixed nationality;" also a post-marital child is Belgian "if the mother enjoys Belgian nationality at the time of the child's birth," etc.

This law affords a good example of the consistent and it would seem proper use of the words "domicile" and "residence." "Domicile" is a technical legal term which appears to have a well settled meaning. To

constitute domicile, there would generally seem to be required, among other things, coincidence of intention to make a home at a certain place and physical presence in that place; whereas "residence," if the conflicting decisions of the courts can be reconciled, means physical presence chiefly, the intention playing little or no part. In the Belgian law the word "residence" appears but once and then in its appropriate garb, while “domicile" is properly used in a dozen places. This should be compared with the recent American laws on nationality, in which the word "residence" is almost exclusively used, though apparently at times in the sense of "domicile."

THE FOURTH INTERNATIONAL AMERICAN CONFERENCE

The Fourth International American Conference, which will be held at Buenos Aires in July of this year, will be one of the most important gatherings of its kind which has ever been held upon the Western Hemisphere. That its importance is generally recognized is evidenced by the character of the men whom the different American governments are appointing as delegates. The very best men in the public, professional and business life of these nations will make up the Conference, and should reach conclusions which will be of benefit to all America. The United States delegation is headed by Honorable Henry White, who has served twenty-seven years in the diplomatic service and held as his last position the ambassadorship to France. The other members are Colonel E. H. Crowder of the United States Army, who has distinguished himself in the legal constructive work of the Philippines and Cuba; Lewis Nixon, who is one of the leading business men of New York and who has also made a close study of international relations; John Bassett Moore, who is one of the best known authorities on arbitration and has written many books on international law; Dr. Bernard Moses, who was a member of the Philippine Commission when President Taft was Chairman of it and who has been long associated with the University of California; Dr. Paul Samuel Reinsch, who was a delegate of the United States to the last PanAmerican Conference in Rio de Janeiro and to the Pan-American Scientific Congress in Santiago; Lamar Charles Quintero, who is one of the principal lawyers of New Orleans, and David Kinley, dean of the faculty of the University of Illinois.

Many important subjects will come before the Conference for consideration and action, as will be shown by the full programme which follows:

Programme of the Fourth International Conference of the American Republics to be held at Buenos Aires, Argentine Republic, July 9,

1910.

I. The organization of the Conference.

II. Commemoration of the Argentine National Centenary and of the

Independence of the American Republics as suggested by the fact that many of those nations celebrate their national centenaries in 1910 and neighboring years.

III. Submission and consideration of the reports of each delegation as to the action of their respective governments upon the Resolutions and Conventions of the Third Conference held at Rio de Janeiro in July, 1906, including a report upon the results accomplished by the Pan-American Committees and the consideration of the extension of their functions.

IV. Submission and consideration of the report of the Director of the International Bureau of the American Republics, together with consideration of the present organization and of recommendations for the possible extension and improvement of its efficiency.

V. Resolution expressing appreciation to Mr. Andrew Carnegie of his generous gift for the construction of the new building of the American Republics in Washington.

VI. Report on the progress which has been made on the Pan-American Railway since the Rio Conference, and consideration of the possibility of cooperative action among the American Republics to secure the completion of the system.

VII. Consideration of the conditions under which the establishment of more rapid mail, passenger and express steamship service between the American Republics can be secured.

VIII. Consideration of measures which will lead to uniformity among the American Republics in consular documents and the technical requirements of customs regulations, and also in census and commercial statistics.

IX. Consideration of the recommendations of the Pan-American Sanitary Congresses in regard to Sanitary Police and quarantine and of such additional recommendations as may tend to the elimination of preventable diseases.

X. Consideration of a practicable arrangement between the American Republics covering patents, trade-marks and copyrights.

XI. Consideration of the continuance of the treaties on Pecuniary Claims after their expiration.

XII. Consideration of a plan to promote the interchange of professors and students among the universities and academies of the American Republics.

XIII. Resolution in appreciation of the Pan-American Scientific Congress held in Santiago, Chile, 1909.

XIV. Resolution instructing the Governing Board of the International Bureau of the American Republics to consider and recommend the manner in which the American Republics may see fit to celebrate the opening of the Panama Canal.

XV. Future Conferences.

BAIL IN EXTRADITION CASES

The recent case of In re Mitchell, decided by the District Court for the Southern District of New York, June 30, 1909 (see Judicial Decisions, this JOURNAL, p. 484), involved the increasingly recurring question of the right of our courts to grant bail in extradition cases. In this case the District Judge, on the authority of Wright v. Henkel, 190 U. S. 40 (see this JOURNAL, Vol. 1, p. 202), granted bail to a defendant held under extradition process initiated by the Government of Great Britain upon what seems to have been a charge of larceny committed within the Dominion of Canada. The judge justified his action in granting bail in this particular case on the ground that

It seems to me that the hardship here upon the imprisoned person is so great as to make peremptory some kind of enlargement at the present time, for the purpose only of free consultation in the conduct of the civil suit upon which his whole fortune depends. Those special circumstances alone move me to allow him to bail, and his enlargement is to be limited strictly to the period of that suit. As soon as that is terminated he must be returned to the Tombs prison to await the determination of the commissioner upon the extradition proceedings.

I am also moved to this disposition from the fact that he has long known of these proposed proceedings and has made no effort to avoid them or to escape.

Waiving for the moment the question as to whether or not the interpretation placed by the court upon Wright v. Henkel is correct, it should be observed that in granting bail to the fugitive the court does not appear to have taken into consideration or at least to have been controlled by any of the ordinary questions usually considered in granting bail in criminal cases. For example it seems to be quite well established

« ZurückWeiter »