711.652/131c: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Italy (Phillips)
189. Department’s 186 of December 2. We have been concerned because of the lack of progress so far made during the negotiations in respect of a satisfactory solution of the problems involved in Article 6.
In instruction No. 163 of August 9, 1937, it was pointed out that we were not at all clear as to the meaning of the first Italian counter proposal and the Embassy was requested to obtain from appropriate Italian officials a full explanation of its purpose and intent, including some indication of the rights which in the opinion of the Italians would be accorded thereunder. The statement in Italian memorandum of September 22 that the first Italian counter proposal relates to the provision of the Italian law which in certain cases requires the citizen naturalized abroad to perform military obligations does not throw sufficient light upon the extent, if any, to which the Italian Government is prepared to go in order that a solution of the problems involved might be worked out. The language of the second Italian counter proposal (Italian memorandum of September 22) is clearer but it offers no assurances whatever with respect to the question of which persons are included within the term “citizens of the United States in Italy” and “Italian citizens in the United States of America”.
In view of our uncertainty and lack of information with respect to whether or not the Italian Government is prepared to make any concessions whatever to the end that a solution of the question might be worked out, we think it would be futile to attempt to formulate a new proposal.
[Page 482]On the other hand, it is our view, and no doubt you will agree, that this long standing problem is one that ought to be satisfactorily adjusted in the new treaty if that is at all possible. The necessity for a satisfactory adjustment becomes more apparent when it is considered that the treaty may remain in force for many years. Indeed, inasmuch as many Senators are familiar with the problem due to the complaints of their constituents, there is the possibility, too, that the treaty may be opposed in the Senate should it fail to contain satisfactory provisions relating to drafting for compulsory military service.
You are requested, therefore, again to take the matter up with the appropriate officials on the basis of the original proposal of this Government with the additional paragraph hereinafter indicated.
Since our original proposal was made, it has come to the Department’s attention that the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken the position that an Italian citizen naturalized in the United States does not lose his Italian citizenship unless he complies with Article 2, paragraph 3, and Article 5 of the Italian Royal Decree No. 2560 of December 28, 1919, which provides that an Italian citizen naturalized abroad inform the Officer of Civil Status in the Commune of his birth of his foreign naturalization in order that it may be transcribed in the Register of Citizenship. This is in addition to the two requirements for the loss of Italian citizenship specified in paragraph 1 of Article 8, of Law No. 555 of June 13, 1912, concerning Italian Citizenship, and in Italian Regulatory Decree No. 949 of August 2, 1912, namely, voluntary acquisition of a foreign citizenship and transfer of residence abroad. (See Italian Note Verbale to Embassy, dated July 20, 1936, in foreign exchange case of Attilio Taraboletti, also case of one Biagio Mataluni.) The Department contests the interpretation indicated in the cases cited above which imposes compliance with Royal Decree No. 2560 as an additional requirement for the loss of Italian citizenship. The purpose of Royal Decree No. 2560 as stated in its preamble is to coordinate the Civil Status regulations relating to the Register of Citizenship and Italian Law No. 555 of June 13, 1912, concerning Italian Citizenship, approved by Royal Decree No. 949, of August 2, 1912. It is not stated in Royal Decree No. 2560 that non-compliance therewith in any way affects the loss of Italian citizenship. To prevent, therefore, this apparently arbitrary interpretation of Royal Decree No. 2560 for the purpose of establishing that naturalized Americans of Italian birth never lost Italian citizenship and accordingly are subject to Italian military service in category of dual citizens, you are requested to propose that Article 6 of the original American draft be amended by adding the following new paragraph: [Page 483]
“Natives of the Party drafting for compulsory military service who have become nationals of the other High Contracting Party by naturalization according to its laws and have not declared an intention to acquire or resume the nationality of the country of their birth may not be drafted for compulsory military service by the latter country and shall not be denied at any time the privilege of departing from its territories: Provided, however, that they do not permanently reside in such territories.”
You may in your discretion make use of any of the information set forth in this cable and also emphasize in any other way you may deem appropriate our reluctance to leave the problem in reference without a satisfactory solution.