Inheritance by Alien Netherlanders. trary, it proceeds upon an admission that the power of dismissal belongs to the President. It is simply a regulation which is to follow a dismissal, providing, in certain contingencies, for the restoration of the officer to the service, and leaving the dismissal in full force if those contingencies do not happen. As to the consequences which you suggest may follow upon carrying this section into effect, and the questions which may then arise, I have only to say now, that any opinion upon them at this time would be premature. So far as they properly enter into the question of the constitutionality of the section I have considered them, and do not find that they operate against the conclusion stated. I am, sir, very respectfully, Your obedient servant, Hon. GIDEON WELLES, HENRY STANBERY. Secretary of the Navy. INHERITANCE BY ALIEN NETHERLANDERS. 1. It seems that there is no existing treaty stipulation between the United States and the Netherlanders on the subject of the rights by inheritance of children of a deceased child of a Netherlander dying intestate in the United States. 2. In this absence of treaty stipulation, the subject-matter is regulated by the laws of the respective States, and they, as a general rule, recognize the children of a deceased child as entitled to represent their deceased parent in the share which he would have taken from the intestate if such deceased parent had survived the intestate, the descent being per stirpes, and not per capita. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, SIR: I have the honor to reply to your note of the 20th ultimo, addressed to my predecessor, requesting an answer to the following question, propounded by Mr. Van Limburg: "Whether, and to what extent, Netherlanders can inherit ab intestato in the United States, when they are, in Inheritance by Alien Netherlanders. relation to the deceased, children of a son who had died before him?" I do not find any treaty stipulation between the Netherlands and the United States upon this subject, except a section of a treaty of early date, which seems only applicable to personalty, and is perhaps superseded by later treaties. It is, therefore, a subject-matter belonging to the States respectively; and as the laws of the respective States differ in many particulars as to the rights of aliens and the course and rules of descent, it would be a great, and I suppose unnecessary, labor to go through all this legislation, so as to answer the question in detail for every one of the States, when perhaps the actual case which gives rise to the question depends on the laws of a single State. This much, however, I feel at liberty to say upon the question at large, that the policy of our States generally in respect to aliens in the matter of descent and inheritance is liberal, and that the usual rule-so far as my observation goes, the uniform rule-is to recognize the children of a deceased child as entitled to represent their deceased parent in the share which the deceased parent would have taken from the intestate if such deceased parent had survived the intestate, the descent being per stirpes, and not per capita. I am, sir, very respectfully, Your obedient servant, Hon. Wм. H. SEWARD, Secretary of State. HENRY STANBERY. Case of Madame Berthemy. CASE OF MADAME BERTHEMY. This lady was born in France. Her father, at the time of her birth, was a citizen of the United States. She married in France a French citizen, and continued after the death of her husband to reside in the country of her nativity. Held, that she is a citizen of France, and not of the United States. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, August 13, 1866. SIR: The only question, as I understand, intended to be referred to me in the case of Madame Berthemy is, whether that lady is a citizen of the United States or of France? The facts of the case, I assume, are, that she was born in France; that her father was, at the time of her birth, a citizen of the United States; that she married in France. a French subject or citizen; that she never contracted a second marriage, and is at the present time a widow; and, finally, that she is now, and has been always, domiciled in the country of her nativity. Whatever uncertainty may have existed anterior to the statute of February 10, 1855, in regard to the actual legal condition, in respect of nationality, of persons born beyond the jurisdiction and limits of the United States of American parents, that statute, it is clear, naturalized all persons born, before as well as after its passage, in foreign countries, whose fathers were, at the times of their births, citizens of the United States. When a question, therefore, arises now before an executive department touching the status, at a particular time, of a person of American paternity and foreign nativity, the legal presumption in the first instance is, that the party is a citizen of the United States, and it rests upon any such person making a claim of exemption from our jurisdiction to show that, anterior or subsequent to the statute, he duly acquired, and is at the time invested with, the full rights of citizenship in a foreign country. If that fact be established, the primitive or original nationality impressed by the statute of 1855 may be Case of Madame Berthemy. regarded as having determined. I do not here discuss the general question of the right of expatriation under our law. The practice of the Government has long since rendered that discussion a mere abstraction. Has Madame Berthemy acquired the rights of a French subject or citizen? It is observable that the Code Civil does not adopt the principle of English and American law, and constitute citizens absolutely of all persons born within the limits and jurisdiction of France of parents domiciled in that country. It provides that the quality of a citizen. may be acquired by a person born in France of foreign parents on complying with certain conditions during the year following his majority. If he omit to comply with the formalities required during the time limited, he continues thereafter, and until otherwise naturalized, to be as much an alien in France as if his birth had occurred in a foreign country. "Tout individu né en France d'un étranger, pourra dans l'année qui suivra l'epoque de sa majorité, reclamer la qualité de Français, pourvu que, dans le cás on il residerait en pays étranger, il fasse sa soumission de fixer en France sou domicile, et qu'il l'y établisse dans l'année, a compter de l'acte de soumission." (Liv. 1, chap. 1, art. 9.) The case, as submitted, does not state whether Madame Berthemy acquired French citizenship, under this provision of the Code Civil, during the year which followed the period of her majority. The question of her national character depends, therefore, upon the effect of her French marriage. That question is distinctly answered by this provision of the Code Civil, "Létrangère qui aura epousé un Français, suivra la condition de sou mari." (Liv. 1, chap. 1, art. 12.) She has, therefore, a good title by her marriage to the citizenship of France. A similar provision, respecting the marriage of foreign-born women with native-born or naturalized citizens of the United States, is contained in our statute of 1855, which again is substantially like the English statute of 7 and 8 Victoria, sec. 16. It is unnecessary to advert to the question whether a person formerly a Paris Exposition. citizen of the United States by birth or naturalization, who may have acquired, under the law of a foreign country, a new nationality, may by domiciliary residence in the United States become reinvested with the quality of a citizen of this country; because, in the case of this lady, there appears to have occurred, according to the statement submitted, no such domiciliary residence here as could. constitute evidence of a desire and intention on her part to assume the duties and obligations of an American citizen. I am therefore of opinion, on the facts stated, that Mrs. Berthemy is a citizen of France. I am, sir, very respectfully, Your obedient servant, Hon. Wм. H. SEWARD, Secretary of State. HENRY STANBERY. PARIS EXPOSITION. The Secretary of State has authority, under the joint resolution of July 5, 1866, to pay the moneys appropriated for the Paris Exposition to be expended in Europe, in coin. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, August 14, 1866. SIR: I have considered the question submitted in yours of the 14th instant, in relation to the Paris Exposition. It appears that, by joint resolution of July 5, 1866, certain moneys were appropriated to cover expenses to be incurred by the United States "in order to enable the people of the United States to participate in the advantages of the exhibition," &c. The appropriations, six in number, are for specific purposes, some of which involve the payment of expenses, salaries, &c., to be made at Paris, such as the construction of fixtures at Paris necessary for the exhibition of our productions, and the compensation of commis |