Mr. Broadhead to Mr. Gresham.
Legation of the United States, August 20, 1894. (Received August 30.)
Sir: I have the honor to submit the following matter for the information of the State Department, and for such instruction as may be thought proper by you to give me in the case.
Fred Tschudy, a native of the Republic of Switzerland, emigrated to the United States in June, 1888, when he was a minor, and upon his arriving at age he was naturalized by the court of common pleas at Camden, N. J., on the 17th day of October, 1893, and on the 25th of October, 1893, he left the United States on a visit to Europe, arriving at Antwerp on the 8th of November, 1893. Thence he proceeded to Winterthur, in the canton of Zurich, where his father and mother resided.
On the 9th of June, 1894, upon his application I gave him a passport as a naturalized citizen of the United States, on his presenting his certificate of naturalization. He was then temporarily residing at Winterthur.
Sometime during the month of July or early in this month he was, by the authorities of the canton of Zurich, ordered to the recruiting service for the 23d of August at Winterthur.
Mr. Tschudy complained to me about the matter, told me that he showed the officer his passport and his certificate of naturalization, but that no regard was paid to them; he has paid the military tax for the time he was absent in the United States after he became of age, the receipts for which he showed me. Thereupon I addressed a note to the President of the Confederation, who is also chief of the military department, of the date of the 6th of August, in regard to the case of Mr. Tschudy, asking that the matter be inquired into, and that he be relieved from the performance of military service, and stating the fact that he was a naturalized citizen of the United States, and that I had given him a passport as such. A copy of my note to the President is herewith inclosed (No. 1).
On the 15th of August I received a note of the date of August 14, from Mr. Lachenal, the chief of the department of foreign affairs of the Confederation, a copy of which is herewith inclosed (No. 2), in which, answering my note addressed to the President, he says that Mr. Tschudy can not be excused from presenting himself on the 23d of next August to the council of revision of Winterthur, for the reason that he is still a Swiss citizen and can not, therefore, invoke in Switzerland the protection of the State of which he has also acquired the right of citizenship.
I replied to Mr. Lachenal by note of the 17th of August, a copy of which is herewith inclosed (No. 3), in which I stated what I conceived to be the uniform and inflexible doctrine of the United States on the subject of the right of expatriation, and the construction which should be given to the existing treaty between the two nations.
Mr. Tschudy informs me that he has offered to pay the military tax for the year 1894, but that the authorities here refused to receive it. The important matter, however, is that his certificate of naturalization and his passport have been repudiated as of no effect here, and as giving him no right of protection by the United States Government.
In my reply to Mr. Lachenal’s note I have been governed by the provisions [Page 684] of sections 1999 and 2000 of our Revised Code, in the former of which our Government asserts the right of expatriation, which has always been maintained from the foundation of our Republic, and in the latter declares that all naturalized citizens of the United States shall receive from this Government the same protection of person and property which is accorded to native-born citizens.
I refer also to the letter of Mr. Evarts to Mr. Fish, of the date of November 12, 1879,1 where a similar question arose in regard to the removal of property by a naturalized citizen of the United States who was a native of Switzerland, and also to the letters of Mr. Freling-huysen to Mr. Cramer, of the dates of December 19, 1882, and of July 28, 1883, and also to the letter of Mr. Bayard to Mr. Cox, of the date of November 28, 1885, in which last case the Sublime Porte set up the same claim to the perpetual allegiance of its subjects that is now maintained by the Republic of Switzerland. I shall keep the Department informed as to what final action is taken by the Swiss Government in Mr. Tschudy’s case, and in the mean time I respectfully ask for instructions on the subject.
Most respectfully, etc.,