Weber

This is a consolidated appeal from judgments denying the petitions for naturalization of six several applicants. A motion for diminution of the record was made and the proffered additions are ordered. The present record 1 shows concerning each petitioner that:

“Upon the record submitted to it, the Court found that each applicant had an extended history of charitable aid during the five years prior to the applicant’s naturalization hearing. Also that the applicant did not meet the requirements of 8 U.S.C.A. § 382 , and has not been attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States for the past five years.” (Emphasis supplied).

The finding of the second sentence that “Also” each applicant “has not been attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States for the past five years” is supported by the record upon which the appellants, petitioners below, rely for their appeal, as to all of them, save, possibly, Elizabeth Rowan Aird, whose appeal is later considered. The record does not disclose that any of these…

(dissenting in part).

These are consolidated appeals from orders denying appellants’ petitions for naturalization. The record consists of an agreed statement 1 2from which it appears that, in each of the cases, the court below found that the petitioner “did not meet the requirements of 8 U.S.C.A. § 382 ,” 2 which provides:

Thus, in order to be admitted to citizenship, it was necessary for each of these appellants, at the hearing of his or her petition, to prove by the oral testimony of at least two credible witnesses, citizens of the United States, that he or she possessed the qualifications required by § 382. The record discloses no such proof. Indeed, so far as the record shows, no witness other than appellants themselves testified orally at any of the hearings. 3 The court, therefore, was compelled to find, as it did, that appellants had not met the requirements of § 382. Accordingly — and properly — it denied their petitions.

The United States Attorney has filed in this court a document entitled “Confession of Error by Appellee,” which reads as follows:

There was and is no basis for the “conclusion” mentioned. The statute (§ 382, supra) not only-warranted, but compelled…