The United States District Court
Western District of Washington
Northern Division
In the Matter of the Application of Margaret Roy for Writ of Habeas Corpus
In the Matter of the Application of Janet Roy-Mackay for Writ of Habeas Corpus
#4517
Decision.
#4516
Filed Feb. 14, 1919.
Robert C Saunders, U.S. Dist. Atty., Atty. for Government.
Ralph S. Pierce, Atty. for Petitioners.
NETERER, District Judge, -----
These cases were heard together. The petitioners are sisters, and are held by the Commissioner of Immigration under an order of deportation issued by the Secretary of Labor under provisions of Section 4289 1/4 B, U.S. Compiled Statutes 1918, which provide, among other things that:
"The following classes of aliens shall be excluded from admission into the United States: Persons *** who disbelieve in or are opposed to organized government *** or persons likely to become a public charge **";
And Section 4289 1/4 J J, U.S. Compiled Statutes, supra, which provides, among other things:
"At any time within five years after entry, any alien who at the time of entry was a member of one or more of the classes excluded by law ***; any alien who at any time after entry shall be found advocating or teaching the unlawful destruction of property or advocating or teaching anarchy or the overthrow by force or violence of the government of the United States or of all forms of law."
The petitioners are 26 and 23 years of age, respectively, and came to the United States in October, 1916. They had not to exceed
Twenty-five Dollars each when they arrived; they did "housework" at
Lawrence, Massachusetts for a time, then went to Chicago and did
similar work, and also worked in the I. W. W. bindery, and came to
Seattle in October, 1918, and were, shortly thereafter, arrested.
The evidence in each case is very similar. Each petitioner charges that there is no evidence to support the warrant of deportation and that she was not accorded a fair hearing. An examination of the testimony is conclusive that each of the petitioners believes in the overthrow of all present forms of government and that any and all means necessary to gain that end are justified, even resorting to violence, and, that the general beliefs of the petitioners were the same at the time of entrance into the United States, although not so intensified, and that they advocated this doctrine and principle when opportunity afforded. Margaret Roy, in response to the question, "And you advocated this doctrine wherever you could?" said "Yes". The beliefs, practise and teachings of each petitioner are practically the same. There are several ways by which a person may teach or advocate. It need not be from the public platform or through the public press. It may be done in any way by which intelligent thought may be conveyed, by personal expression or any avenue through which information may be disseminated, or by the adoption of the expressed sentiment of others, or suggestions with relation to the guidance of the conduct of others.
For Janet Roy-Mackay, it is contended that after the order of deportation was made and while she was at liberty on bond awaiting deportation, she married a citizen of the United States and thereby became a citizen and that she may not be deported.
On the hearing it was stated that the husband of Janet
Roy-Mackey was born in Scotland, that he came to the United States
with his parents while a minor; he believed his father had become
naturalized while he was a minor, and that acting under such belief
--2--
he had excercised the rights of a citizen and because of such fact,
it is asserted that a presumption would obtain that he is a citizen.
In answer to his assertion, it is only necessary to say that
citizenship is a privilege; it is the highest privilege that the government
can give. It places a man of foreign birth on an equality with the
native born. It is a privilege which the Congress of the United
States may grant or withhold. It may grant it to certain classes of
people or nationalities and withhold it from others, and residence in
the United States or the exercise of any rights without compliance
with the requirements will never ripen into citizenship. Citizenship
may not be acquired by presumption. Before a person can be granted
that high privilege, certain requisites are necessary. He must establish
by competent testimony, among other things, that he is a
lover of this, his adopted, country, and its Constitution and laws,
and in sincerity dedicate his life to its service, and conscientiously
agree to defend it against all enemies. There is no evidence before
the court that Mr. Mackay's father was a citizen, and, if it be
conceded that this issue is rightly before the court, it has not been
sustained. The only matter for the Court's determination is whether
the order of deportion of the Secretary of Labor is supported by any
evidence however slight. If there is any evidence, the findings of
the Secretary of Labor are conclusive. I think there is evidence to
support the findings and the Court may not interfere.
Each petition is denied.
Jeremiah Neterer
Judge.
No.[]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
NORTHERN DIVISION
Tx
Filed in the United States District Court
Western District of Washington
Northern Division
Feb 14 1919
F. M. Harshberger, Clerk
By S. E. Leitch Deputy
