CHAPTER THREE E-GUANO ISLANDS § 3916. (R. S. § 5570.) Claim of United States to islands. Acquisition of Islands-The United States has never acquired sovereignty of any kind or to any extent over the Swan Islands in the Carribbean Sea by reason of the provisions of this section. 31 Op. Atty. Gen. 216. Sec. CHAPTER THREE F-THE VIRGIN ISLANDS (THE DANISH WEST INDIES) Sec. 39244 d. Tax laws continued; tax on sugar. 3924ee. Quarantine and passport fees. § 392414a. (Act March 3, 1917, c. 171, § 1.) Jurisdiction; gov ernor. Nature of dominion over Islands.The Virgin Islands acquired by treaty, while appurtenant to the United States, are not a part thereof, within several meanings, such as citizenship, revenue laws, and judicial establishment, and are governed as to judicial proceedings by this act (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1919, §§ 39244a-39241⁄4h), continuing in effect the local laws, "in so far as compatible with the changed sovereignty," to be administered through the local tribunals; but such territory is under the absolute dominion of the United States, and the inhabitants are entitled to the protection of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments and other constitutional guaranties. Soto v. U. S. (C. C. A. Virgin Islands) 273 F. 628. Governor's powers.-After Civ. Code Virgin Islands, c. 1, § 5a, authorizing the governor to appoint two judges for the district court, to hold office during good behavior, was repealed by the President under the power given by this act, the governor had no authority to remove a judge from office and appoint his successor, even if he would have had such authority under that section. U. S. v. Malmin (C. C. A.) 272 F. 785. Cited without definite application, 32 Op. Atty. Gen. 422. § 392414b. (Act March 3, 1917, c. 171, § 2.) Local laws contin ued; courts. Offenses and prosecutions thereof. Conviction of felony by trial beginning by a police investigation, at which the evidence was reduced to writing and followed by trial by the district court without a jury, in which the written testimony was used, but no witnesses called, though defendants were offered right to do so, was not according to due process of law, and could not be sustained. Soto v. U. S. (C. C. A. Virgin Islands) 273 F. 628. Admiralty jurisdiction and procedure. -A judgment of the sheriff court of St. Thomas and St. John, Virgin Islands, extending execution on a judgment of the District Court against a schooner to her cargo, on an allegation that the cargo was liable to the vessel, but expressly disclaiming jurisdiction to determine the question of such liability, and postponing that question for decision by the proper court, held not a final judgment, from which an appeal by the cargo owner would lie to the Circuit Court of Ap peals. The Edgewood (C. C. A. Virgin Islands) 279 F. 348. A judgment of the District Court of St. Thomas and St. John, Virgin Islands, in a suit in admiralty quasi in rem against a schooner for repairs, though rendered on the return day of summons served on the master, and not in accordance with the procedure under the system of laws of the United States, held a final judgment, and not invalid as depriving the owner of his property without due process of law, but valid as in accordance with due process under the local law, retained in force in the Virgin Islands by this section. Id. Where the claimants of a cargo appeared and gave bond to release the cargo from attachment after the attachment had been confirmed by the District Court for the Virgin Islands. and the record returned to the sheriff court for execution, and took an appeal on the record made in the District Court, without attacking the judgment of the District Court in the sheriff court, the libelant is entitled to have the case tried de novo on appeal; it being an admiralty case. Sugar Products Co. v. St. Thomas Ship Brokers' Ass'n (C. C. A. Virgin Islands) 280 F. 821. An appeal from a judgment of the District Court of the Virgin Islands, sustaining an attachment against a vessel and her cargo and freight, but awarding execution only against the vessel and the cargo, does not raise any question as to the liability of the demurrage and freight due the vessel from the cargo owner for the charges of plaintiffs, which were for services rendered when the vessel put into port in distress. Id. A judgment rendered by the District Court of the Virgin Islands in conformity with the Danish law, confirming a writ of attachment against a vessel and her cargo for services rendered to her when she put into port in distress, and declaring plaintiffs entitled to execution against the vessel, her freight and cargo, is a final judgment entered in due course of local law, which was compatible with the changed sovereignty, and from which an appeal would lie. Id. Appeal and error.-By this section, providing that the local laws shall be administered through the local judicial tribunals, and that "in all cases arising in the said West Indian Islands and now enforceable by the courts of Denmark the writs of error and appeals shall be to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit," Congress must be presumed to have intended to invest that court with an appellate jurisdiction which would make its review of cases possible and practicable; and since the distinction between causes at law and in equity is unknown in the courts of the Islands, and all judgments were reviewable de novo on the record by the Supreme Court of Denmark on appeal, such judgments may be similarly reviewed on appeal, both as to facts and law, by the Circuit Court of Appeals, irrespective of whether the cause of action would have been in equity or at law in the courts of the United States. Clen v. Jorgensen (C. C. A. Virgin Islands) 265 F. 120. The Circuit Court of Appeals reviews law and fact on an appeal from a conviction in the district court of St. Thomas and St. John in the Virgin Islands. Soto v. U. S. (C. C. A. Virgin Islands) 273 F. 628. Under this section, providing for review by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, by appeal or writ of error, of decisions of the courts of the Virgin Islands in cases then reviewable by the courts of Denmark, such jurisdiction is limited to which, within the principle of federal law, have gone to final judgment. The Edgewood (C. C. A. Virgin Islands) 279 F. 348. cases Cited without definite application, 32 Op. Atty. Gen. 258; 32 Op. Atty. Gen. 422. § 39241/4bb. (Act July 12, 1921, c. 44, § 1.) Colonial councils; eligibility to membership in. No person owing allegiance to any country other than the United States of America shall be eligible to hold office as a member of the colonial councils of the Virgin Islands of the United States nor to hold any public office under the government of said islands. (42 Stat, 123.) From the Naval service appropriation act for the year 1922, cited above. § 39241/4cc. (Act July 12, 1921, c. 44, § 1.) Income tax laws of United States in force. The income tax laws now in force in the United States of America and those which may hereafter be enacted shall be held to be likewise in force in the Virgin Islands of the United States, except that the proceeds of such taxes shall be paid into the treasuries of said islands. (42 Stat. 123.) From the Naval service appropriation act for the year 1922, cited above. § 392414d. (Act March 3, 1917, c. 171, § 4.) Tax laws continued; tax on sugar. Cited without definite application, 32 Op. Atty. Gen. 422. § 39241/4ee. (Act July 1, 1922, c. 259.) Quarantine and passport fees. Quarantine and passport fees collected in the Virgin Islands shall hereafter be paid into the treasuries of said islands. (42 Stat. 788.) From the Navy Department and Naval Service appropriation act for the year 1923, cited above. Sec. TITLE XXIV-CIVIL RIGHTS 3925-3928. [Notes.] 3929. Jurors not to be excluded on account of race or color. 3930. Review of proceedings under act. Sec. 3932. Civil action for deprivation of .rights. 3944. Peonage abolished. §§ 3925-3928. (R. S. § 1977, Act March 1, 1875, c. 114, §§ 1-3.) Cited without definite application, (D. C. N. Y.) 272 F. 137. § 3929. (Act March 1, 1875, c. 114, § 4). Jurors not to be excluded on account of race or color. Right to negro jurors.-In a murder case, negro defendants were discriminated against in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution and this section, where negroes were excluded from the petit jury solely on account of color. Ware v. State (Ark.) 225 S. W. 626. Cited without definite application, Marcus Brown Holding Co. v. Pollak (D. C. N. Y.) 272 F. 137. § 3930. (Act March 1, 1875, c. 114, § 5.) Review of proceedings under act. Cited without definite application, (D. C. N. Y.) 272 F. 137. § 3932. (R. S. § 1979.) Civil action for deprivation of rights. Cited without definite application, Marcus Brown Holding Co. v. Pollak (D. C. N. Y.) 272 F. 137. § 3944. (R. S. § 1990.) Peonage abolished. 7. Violation of statute-State laws. -Acts 1905, p. 726, punishing one who entices a laborer or renter of another to leave his employment before the ex piration of his contract, is not in conflict with the federal Peonage Act. Johns v. Patterson (Ark.) 211 S. W. 387. (1242) Sec. TITLE XXV-CITIZENSHIP 3946. Who are citizens. 3947. Citizenship of children of citizens born abroad. 3948. [Repealed.] 3951. Citizenship of certain Indians born within the United States. 3951a. Indians serving in military or naval establishments during war with Germany. 3952. Rights as citizens forfeited for desertion, etc. 3954. Rights as citizens forfeited for desertion. 3955. Right of expatriation declared. 3956. Protection to naturalized citizens in foreign states. 3957. Release of citizens imprisoned by 3958. [Repealed.] sumption as to naturalized cit- § 3946. (R. S. § 1992.) Who are The word "citizen," while not convertible with the word "resident," is often used synonymously with it, without any implication of political privileges. Id. 2. Citizenship of states and of United States. By "citizen of the state" is meant a citizen of the United States whose domicile is in such state. Prowd v. Gore (Cal. App.) 207 P. 490. 6. Citizenship by birth in general.The adoption statute of California (Civ. Code, § 221 et seq.), which permits the adoption of infants by residents of the state, having certain qualifications, without requiring that they be citizens, does not change the status, as a citizen, of an infant. Cabrillos v. Angel (C. C. A. Cal.) 278 F. 174. Every person is a citizen or subject of the country of his birth, and owes allegiance to that country, unless and until his allegiance has been transferred with his country's consent. In re Siem (D. C. Mont.) 284 F. 868. Every person is a citizen or subject of the country of his birth. Id. A native-born child of Japanese parents is an American citizen and as such entitled to acquire and hold property, real and personal, and her infancy did not incapacitate her from becoming seized of the title to real estate. In re Tetsubumi Yano's Estate (Cal.) 206 P. 995. § 3947. (R. S. § 1993.) Citizenship of children of citizens born abroad. See Ex parte Gilroy (D. C. N. Y.) 257 F. 110. In general. A child born out of wedlock, in a foreign country, of an American father and an alien mother, and subsequently legitimated in accordance with the laws of the State of his father's domicile, through marriage of the parents or acknowledgment by the father, is a citizen of the United States within this section. 32 Op. Atty. Gen. 162. Where the father of a child born in Canada is an American citizen the child is an American citizen. Doyle v. Town of Diana (Sup.) 196 N. Y. S. 864. Exclusion of Chinese.-Where Chinese persons, who had been regularly admitted and were residing in the country, were arrested in the executive proceedings for their deportation, and made a claim of citizenship under this section, supported by proofs which showed the claim was not frivolous, they were entitled to habeas corpus to have their claim of citizenship judicially determined, since the want of such citizenship was essential to the jurisdiction of the immigration officials, and, if those officials had jurisdiction, their findings of fact would be conclusive, and the courts would have no power to interfere, unless there 'was a denial of a fair hearing, or the finding was unsupported by evidence. Ng Fung Ho v. White, 42 S. Ct. 492, 259 U. S. 276, 66 L. Ed. 938, affirming judgment (C. C. A. Cal.) 266 F. 765. The mere fact that Chinese persons seeking entry into the United States claimed to be citizens under this section, does not entitle them, under the Constitution, to a judicial hearing as to their right to enter. Id. Where Chinese persons were admitted as citizens of the United States after a hearing, subsequent executive proceedings by the immigration cfficers for their deportation were not void ab initio, merely because of such claim of citizenship. Id. § 3948. [Repealed.] Where claim of right under this section, to enter the United States, made by appellant, a Chinese person alleg. ing himself to be a citizen, was not first determined by a special board appointed under Act Feb. 20, 1907, appellant is entitled to a writ of habeas corpus, unless within a reasonable time proceedings are instituted against him in accordance with law. Jeong Quey How v. White (C. C. A. Cal.) 258 F. 618. In view of this section, and notwithstanding sections 4358, 4359, paragraph "F" of rule 9 of the Chinese admission regulations, which, in effect, denies citizenship to foreign-born children of American Chinese, is invalid. 30 Op. Atty. Gen. 529. This section (R. S. § 1994), relating to citizenship of women, was repealed by Act Sept. 22, 1922, c. 411, § 6, 42 Stat. 1022. Said repealing section provides that "such repeal shall not terminate citizenship acquired or retained under" this repealed section or Act March 2, 1907, c. 2534, § 4, 34 Stat. 1229, also repealed, "nor restore citizenship lost under section 4 of the Expatriation Act of 1907," repealed as above stated. Notes of Decisions Naturalization of husband.-Under this section, married woman who comes to this country to join her husband, who has been duly naturalized as a citizen of the United States, is deemed an American citizen, and her status as such is unaffected by section 22 of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917 (U. S. Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1919, § 428941). 32 Op. Atty. Gen. 209. § 3951. (Act Feb. 8, 1887, c. 119, § 6, as amended, Act March 3, 1901, c. 868, and Act May 8, 1906, c. 2348.) Citizenship of certain Indians born within the United States. Severance of tribal relations.-A Flathead Indian, who selected lands under Act Cong. June 5, 1872, § 3, permitting Indians having certain qualifications and who remained on land in the Bitter Root Valley to pre-empt 160 acres and to receive a patent without power of alienation, provided such Indian abandoned his tribal relations and intended to remain in the valley, under this section, by reason of his abandonment of tribal relations became a citizen of the United States with all rights of citizens, including that of the beginning and defending an action of ejectment or trespass in the state or federal courts, in view of proceedings under Act March 2, 1889, providing for sale by Secretary of Interior. Smith v. Northern Pac. Ry. (Mont.) 186 P. 684. Trust patent Indians holding allotted lands under the Burke Act, amending this section, who have become civilized persons of Indian descent, and who have severed their tribal relations for two years next preceding an election, may be qualified electors at such election under Const. Amend. art. 2, § 121. Swift v. Leach (N. D.) 178 N. W. 437. Though trust patent Indians holding allotted lands under Burke Act, amending this section, are dependent upon federal government, yet, where they have become civilized persons, and for more than two years preceding a general election have severed their tribal relations, and superintendent of Indian agency in charge testifies that they are qualified as civilized persons to be electors, and their exercise of the suffrage under Const. Amend. art. 2, § 121, does not conflict with federal policy, they were electors at a general election on proposition to remove county seat. Id. Issuance of patent in fee simple to heirs.-By Act Cong. Feb. 8, 1887, § 6, as amended by Act May 8, 1906 (U. S. Comp. St. §§ 3951, 4203), and Act Cong. June 25, 1910, made applicable to Oklahoma by Act Cong. Feb. 14, 1913 (U. S. Comp. St. § 4228), the Secretary of the Interior was vested with authority to ascertain the legal heirs of deceased Indians, and cause to be issued to said heirs, in their name, a patent in fee simple for lands held in trust by the United States for the original allottee, and the Secretary's action in determining the legal heirs is conclusive and final. Maz-he v. Jefferson Trust Co. (Okl.) 198 P. 319. Determination of right to inheritance. An order of the Secretary of |