In re Valhoff

I concur. The language of paragraph 1 of section 4, to the effect that an alien making a “declaration” under the old law shall not “be required to renew such declaration” means, if words mean anything, that he shall not be required to renew — i. e., make anew — any declaration for the purpose of petitioning for-citizenship; in other words, that the declaration already made by him shall be sufficient in form whenever he chooses to petition. Careful search of subsequent provisions in the Naturalization Daw fails to reveal to my mind any language inconsistent with, or contrary to, this plain, unambiguous, and specific direction of Congress. In view of its presence in the act, general words of limitation must be held to apply .only to declarations made after the passage of the act.

The petitioner here made a declaration of intention to become a citizen on the 31st day of October, 1904. He filed his petition to become a citizen on the 31st day of January, 1916. More than seven years had elapsed after his declaration of intention before the application was filed. He made his declaration, as will be seen, prior to the passage of the act of June 29, 1906, and the question of the validity of such declaration under this act is the question at issue. This question was carefully considered in U. S. v. Lengyel, 220 Fed. 720 , by Judge Orr of the Western District of Pennsylvania. In that opinion the material parts of the act qre set out, and the reasoning to justify the conclusions of the court that the act did not affect declarations made prior thereto, seems unanswerable. Yet there are other reasons why such a declaration is valid.

[ 1 ] In order to understand what is here said, it is necessary to quote a part of the act, to wit:

The declaration required by the first paragraph above quoted is quite different from the declaration required by law before the adoption of this act. Revised Statutes 1878, § 2165. The phrase “such declaration,” as first used in the first…