1. Service on a vessel of foreign registry cannot be considered
residence in the United States for naturalization purposes. P.
279 U. S.
19.
2. A proviso is not always limited in its effect to the part of
the enactment with which it is immediately associated; it may apply
generally to all cases within the meaning of the language used. P
279 U. S.
20.
Page 279 U. S. 13
3. For the proper construction of a proviso, consideration need
not be limited to the subdivision in which it is found; the General
purpose of the section may be taken into account. P.
279 U. S.
22.
4. In paragraph Seven, added to the Naturalization Law by the
Act of May 9, 1918, the proviso declaring
"That service by aliens upon vessels other than of American
registry . . . shall not be considered a residence for
naturalization purpose within the jurisdiction of the United
States, and such aliens cannot secure residence for naturalization
purposes during service upon vessel of foreign registry,"
does not relate to the special classes of persons made eligible
to naturalization by the preceding parts of the same paragraph, but
(like other provision in the paragraph) states a rule of general
application. P.
279 U. S.
22.
22 F.2d 747 affirmed.
Certiorari, 277 U.S. 581, to a judgment of the circuit court of
appeals which affirmed a judgment of the district court denying a
petition for naturalization.
Page 279 U. S. 18
MR. JUSTICE BUTLER delivered the opinion of the Court.
Petitioner, a British subject, was born in Nova Scotia in 1877.
He lawfully entered the United States at New
Page 279 U. S. 19
York, September 17, 1920. He immediately established, and has
since maintained, a place of residence at or near Boston,
Massachusetts, where his wife and child joined him September 1,
1921, and have since lived. Since his entry, he has continuously
served as a master of a vessel of British registry belonging to the
United Fruit Company, a New Jersey corporation, plying between
Boston and Central American countries. November 30, 1921, he filed
his declaration of intention to become a citizen in the District
Court for Massachusetts, and December 22, 1926, his petition for
naturalization. That court denied his application, and its judgment
was affirmed by the circuit court of appeals, 22 F.2d 747. There is
conflict between that decision and one of the Circuit Court of
Appeals of the Fifth Circuit.
United States v. Nicolich,
25 F.2d 245. This Court granted a writ of certiorari. 278 U.S.
581.
The sole question is whether service on a vessel of foreign
registry is to be considered residence in the United States for
naturalization purposes.
The fourth subdivision of § 4 of the Act of June 29, 1906, 34
Stat. 598, provides that, on the petition of an alien for
citizenship, it shall be made to appear "that, immediately
preceding the date of his application, he has resided continuously
within the United States five years at least." U.S.C. Tit. 8, §
382.
That Act was amended May 9, 1918, 40 Stat. 542, by adding to § 4
seven subdivisions. The seventh subdivision, being the first of
those so added, is here involved, and, so far as material, its
substance is indicated in the margin.
* It contains the
following:
"
Provided further,
Page 279 U. S. 20
that service by aliens upon vessels other than of American
registry, whether continuous or broken, shall not be considered as
residence for naturalization purposes within the jurisdiction of
the United States, and such aliens cannot secure residence for
naturalization purposes during service upon vessels of foreign
registry."
U.S.C. Tit. 8, § 384.
If that provision relates only to those classified in the added
subdivision, petitioner is entitled to naturalization; but if it is
given general application, the judgment below is right.
As a general rule, a proviso is intended to take a special case
or class of cases out of the operation of the body of
Page 279 U. S. 21
the section in which it is found.
Wayman v.
Southard, 10 Wheat. 1,
23 U. S. 30;
United States v.
Dickson, 15 Pet. 141,
40 U. S. 165;
Ryan v. Carter, 93 U. S. 78,
93 U. S. 83;
United States v. McElvain, 272 U.
S. 633, 635 [argument of counsel -- omitted]. But a
proviso is not always limited in its effect to the part of the
enactment with which it is immediately associated; it may apply
generally to all cases within the meaning of the language used.
United States v.
Babbit, 1 Black 55.
Springer v. Philippine
Islands, 277 U. S. 189,
277 U. S. 207.
Little if any significance is to be given to the use of the word
"provided." In
Page 279 U. S. 22
Acts of Congress, that word is employed for many purposes.
Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester, etc., Ry., 205 U. S.
1,
205 U. S. 10.
Sometimes it is used merely to safeguard against misinterpretation
or to distinguish different paragraphs or sentences.
Georgia
Banking Co. v. Smith, 128 U. S. 174,
128 U. S. 181.
For the proper construction of the provision in question,
consideration need not be limited to the subdivision in which it is
found; the general purpose of the section may be taken into
account.
United States v. Whitridge, 197 U.
S. 135,
197 U. S.
143.
The general rule in respect of residence of aliens seeking
naturalization was established by § 4 of the Act of 1906. The
subdivision added by the amendatory act takes out of that rule four
classes, which include (1) native-born Filipino declarants having
served in the Navy, Marine Corps or Naval Auxiliary; (2) aliens, or
Porto Ricans not citizens of the United States, having served in
the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard or on merchant or fishing
vessels of the United States; (3) aliens in the military or naval
service during the war, and (4) alien declarants who have been
honorably discharged from the Army, Navy or Philippine Constabulary
and have been accepted for military or naval service on condition
that they naturalize. As to those included in the first three
classes, no proof of residence is required. As to members of the
fourth class, three years' residence is required. Provisions
regulating procedure in cases covered by the subdivision follow.
After these are the clauses designated in the margin, 5, 6, and 7,
followed by the proviso above quoted.
Petitioner contends and it may be assumed that, under the Act of
1906 before the amendment, mere absence of a sailor in pursuit of
his calling whether serving on vessels of United States or of
foreign registry did not interrupt the required period of residence
in the case of one maintaining a domicile in this country.
United States v. Rockteschell,
Page 279 U. S. 23
208 F. 530.
United States v. Habbick, 287 F. 593,
595.
The amendatory act was passed in war time, and the new classes
include those who, by reason of service in support of the national
purpose, specially merit the protection of our flag and the
benefits of citizenship. As to them, Congress undoubtedly intended
generously to relax the requirements for naturalization.
See House Report No. 502, 65th Congress,2d Session. But
petitioner is not within any of the new classes; he claims under
the earlier act. And he insists that service on vessels of foreign
registration is to be deemed residence for naturalization of aliens
domiciled here who are within the five-year rule. But, under that
construction, such service cannot be considered as residence for
those within the favored classes created by the amendment.
Moreover, there is nothing in the subdivision to which the
proviso can reasonably be held to relate. And, if not construed to
apply to those who, like petitioner, are subject to the five-year
rule, it would have no effect. This is plainly so because those in
the first three classes are not required to prove any period of
residence, and the place of their military service is the place of
residence required to be established by those belonging to the
fourth class.
The subdivision contains provisions plainly not limited to the
special classes created by it. It is manifest without discussion
that the clauses numbered 5, 6 and 7 in the margin are intended to
have effect beyond the scope of the subdivision. The language and
circumstances attending the enactment of the amendment do not
permit a construction of the proviso limiting its effect to the
special classes aforesaid. It was intended to apply generally
according to its terms, and to establish the rule that service on
foreign vessels would not be deemed residence within the United
States for the purposes of naturalization.
Decree affirmed.
* [The numbers and other matter within brackets are added for
convenience in reading.]
"Seventh. [1] Any native-born Filipino of the age of twenty-one
years and upward who has declared his intention to become a citizen
of the United States and who has enlisted or may hereafter enlist
in the United States Navy or Marine Corps or the Naval Auxiliary
Service, and who, after service of not less than three years, may
be honorably discharged therefrom, or who may receive an ordinary
discharge with recommendation for reenlistment;"
"[2] or any alien, or any Porto Rican not a citizen of the
United States, of the age of twenty-one years and upward, who has
enlisted or entered or may hereafter enlist in or enter the armies
of the United States, . . . or in the . . . Navy or Marine Corps,
or in the . . . Coast Guard, or who has served for three years on
board of any vessel of the United States government, or for three
years on board of merchant or fishing vessels of the United States
of more than twenty tons burden, and while still in the service on
a reenlistment or reappointment, or within six months after an
honorable discharge or separation therefrom, or while on furlough,
. . ."
"[The Filipinos, aliens and Porto Ricans aforesaid] may, on
presentation of the required declaration of intention petition for
naturalization without proof of the required five years' residence
within the United States; . . . [U.S.C. Tit. 8, § 388,
and
see R.S. § 2174.]"
"[3] any alien serving in the military or naval service of the
United States during the time this country is engaged in the
present war may file his petition for naturalization without making
the preliminary declaration of intention and without proof of the
required five years' residence within the United States;
[
id., § 392.]"
"[4] any alien declarant who has served in the United States
Army or Navy, or the Philippine Constabulary, and has been
honorably discharged therefrom, and has been accepted for service
in either the military or naval service of the United States on the
condition that he becomes a citizen of the United States, may file
his petition for naturalization upon proof of continuous residence
within the United States for the three years immediately preceding
his petition, . . . and, in these cases, only residence in the
Philippine Islands and the Panama Canal Zone by aliens may be
considered residence within the United States, and the place of
such military service shall be construed as the place of residence
required to be established for . . . naturalization. [
Id.,
§ 389.]"
". . . [Provisions governing procedure follow.] . . ."
"[5] Members of the Naturalization Bureau and Service may be
designated by the Secretary of Labor to administer oaths relating
to the administration of the naturalization law; [
id., §
354.]"
"[6] and the requirement of section ten of notice to take
depositions to the United States attorneys is repealed, and the
duty they perform under section fifteen of the Act of June
twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and six, . . . may also be performed
by the Commissioner or deputy Commissioner of Naturalization:
[
id, § 405.]"
"[7]
Provided, that it shall not be lawful to make a
declaration of intention before the clerk of any court on election
day or during the period of thirty days preceding the day of
holding any election in the jurisdiction of the court:
[
id, § 374,
and see § 362.]"
"[8]
Provided further, that service by aliens upon
vessels other than of American registry, whether continuous or
broken, shall not be considered as residence for naturalization
purposes within the jurisdiction of the United States, and such
aliens cannot secure residence for naturalization purposes during
service upon vessels of foreign registry. [
Id., §
384.]"