avoidance of a certificate found to have been obtained by fraudulent representations. Those representations may be false either as regards the alleged facts as to residence or as to the existence of the alleged intention to reside. Residence is a fact capable of proof. Intention to reside is not equally capable of proof, and many cases have occurred where subsequent events have shown that no such intention could, in fact, have been entertained. There are many cases where naturalization has been sought for the sole purpose of obtaining protection in a foreign country in which the naturalized person intended to reside. There is no power under the act of 1870 to set aside or revoke a certificate of naturalization which has once been granted by reason of its having been obtained by false and fraudulent statements of fact as to actual residence or as to intention to reside.

39. We think that there should be power, vested, as the case may be, in the secretary of state or in the governor of a British possession to which such an order in council as has been above referred to applies, to revoke a certificate of naturalization which was proved to his satisfaction to have been obtained by false or fraudulent representation and that the certificate thereupon become void.

40. Except as hereafter mentioned, we think that it should be made clear that persons under disability, i. e., minors, married women, idiots, and lunatics, should not be capable of receiving certificates of naturalization.

41. Certificates of naturalization granted under the act of 1870 should, we think, operate as if granted under the new act; and the secretary of state should be empowered to grant, if he thinks fit, a certificate under the new act to any person holding a certificate under the act of 1844 or who has been naturalized by a special act.

42. The act of 1870 contains a provision enabling the secretary of state to grant a certificate of British nationality to "a person with respect to whose nationality as a British subject a doubt exists." Different views have been entertained as to the effect and scope of this provision. It has on the one hand been regarded as being introduced simply in order to meet the case of a person who might possibly be already a British subject, but who had fulfilled the conditions necessary for naturalization, by providing that the grant of a certificate of naturalization should not be evidence that he was not a British subject prior to his naturalization. The provision has, on the other hand, been regarded as having a much wider operation and as entitling the secretary of state, in any case in which he might consider a doubt existed whether or not a person was a British subject, to grant a special certificate of naturalization, though the conditions prescribed by the act have not been fulfilled. We think it should be made clear that the jurisdiction of the secretary of state extends only to the granting of a certificate in such a form as not to prejudice the question whether or not the applicant was already a British subject. The certificate should contain a statement of the existence of the doubt, but in all other respects the conditions ordinarily required for the grant of a certificate should be observed. This is in fact in accordance with established practice.

43. Having dealt with the acquisition of nationality, we next proceed to deal with the ways in which nationality may be lost. In the law as it at present stands the provisions relating to the case of a natural-born and of a naturalized British subject are to some extent

different. By section 4 of the naturalization act, 1870, a person who is a British subject by reason of his having been born within the King's dominions but who also became at birth (by reason of parentage or otherwise) a subject of a foreign state may, if of full age and not under any disability, make a declaration of alienage, and shall from and after the making of such declaration cease to be a British subject. There is a similar provision with regard to a person born out of His Majesty's dominions to a father being a British subject. This section, as it stands, is open to criticism on the ground that it appears to assume that in every case a person born out of His Majesty's dominions to a father who is a British subject would be himself a British subject. This, however, is not always so, as has already been pointed out.

44. The object of this section is to obviate as far as possible the complications arising from double nationality, which have been already referred to, by allowing a person who is a natural-born British subject and also by birth a subject of a foreign state the right of divesting himself of his British nationality. We think these provisions should be simplified and redrafted, but we do not suggest any alteration of the law. The only case in which a person who has become a British subject by naturalization is empowered to make a declaration of alienage is the peculiar case provided for by section 3 of the act of 1870 and referred to in paragraph 26 of this report.

45. Nationality may also be lost when a British subject, whether naturalized or natural-born, becomes voluntarily naturalized in a foreign country.

The expression" voluntarily naturalized" is not entirely free from obscurity. Does it imply some act done for the express and primary purpose of obtaining a foreign nationality, or an act which, though voluntary, is not done for this express purpose, but for some other object to which change of nationality is attached as an incident? For instance, different views have been entertained by different legal experts whether the marriage of a British subject with a foreign woman, the legal consequence of which in her country is to invest the husband with her nationality, is voluntary naturalization within the meaning of the section. Or, again, to take an extreme case, suppose that by the law of a foreign state all persons landing on its shores at once become its subjects, would the act of landing with or without a knowledge of the consequence be a voluntary naturalization? We think that the law should be made more definite and that British nationality should not be lost unless the person who is naturalized in the foreign country has expressly applied for naturalization or done some act from which acceptance of the foreign nationality may reasonably be inferred."

46. The mode in which nationality may be lost by persons under disability will be dealt with in a later portion of this report.

47. We come now to consider the questions which have given rise to the greatest difficulty in practice the effect of naturalization upon the status of dependent persons.

48. First as to the wife. By section 16 of the act of 1844 (7 and 8 Vict., c. 66) it was provided that any woman married to a natural

a See pp. 64, 65, of the Appendix to the Report of the Royal Commission of 1869. Case of New Granada.

See note by Sir Dennis Fitzpatrick, infra.

born subject, or person naturalized, should be deemed and taken to be herself naturalized and have all the rights and privileges of a naturalborn British subject. No provision was made for the case of a natural-born or naturalized British woman marrying an alien. The common law still governed her status, and she did not lose her British nationality. The act of 1870 adopted the general principle that the nationality of the married woman should be that of her husband: "A married woman shall be deemed to be a subject of the state of which her husband is for the time being a subject."

49. We do not propose any substantial alteration in the law. We think, however, that it should be so expressed as to purport to deal only with the question whether or not the woman becomes or ceases to be a British subject according to the law of this country, and not to attempt to define her status as regards the law of other countries. All that our law is concerned with is whether the woman is an alien or a British subject, and when and by what means she ceases to be, or becomes, the one or the other. The substantial maiters are that a woman who is an alien becomes a British subject by marrying a British subject; that a woman who is a British subject ceases to be a British subject by marrying an alien; and that whenever during the continuance of a marriage the husband becomes or ceases to be a British subject the wife at the same moment becomes or ceases to be a British subject.

50. It will be convenient here to consider the effect upon the status of the woman of the dissolution of marriage by death or divorce. The act of 1870 is not clear as to the effect of dissolution of marriage in these cases. At present, if a woman is married to a British subject or to an alien and the marriage is terminated by his death, she continues to be a British subject or an alien, as the case may be, until something further occurs to alter her status. The same probably holds good when the marriage is terminated by divorce. We think, however that the position of a divorced woman should be made clear.

51. A question arises whether in the case of a woman who has lost her British nationality by marrying an alien, and has become a widow, there should be any relaxation of the ordinary conditions which must be fulfilled before she can be readmitted to British nationality. At present a widow may obtain a certificate of readmission to British nationality in the manner prescribed by section 8 of the act of 1870. This is in practice held to impose upon the widow the same conditions as to residence and intention to reside as are imposed upon any alien applying for a certificate of naturalization. The principal reason for any relaxation of such conditions is to be found in the facilities which might result to her infant children to become more speedily British subjects, and so to relieve them from any disqualifications on this ground from entering the public service. The latter question, however, we propose to deal with otherwise. Apart from this indirect advantage, we see no reason why a woman who has lost her nationality by marrying an alien should be placed on a footing different from that of any other alien, and we therefore recommend that, as is in fact required at present, a woman in this position before again becoming a British subject should fulfil the conditions required for naturalization.

52. We have next to deal with the effect of naturalization of a parent upon the status of children born (1) before, (2) after, naturalization.

53. The present law on this subject is contained in subsections 3, 4, and 5 of section 10 of the naturalization act, 1870. There has been some conflict of opinion in regard to the strict interpretation of this section, but in recent practice its effect has been taken to be as follows: Any child who is born in a foreign country, whether before or after naturalization of the parent, and who during infancy becomes resident with the father or mother (being a widow) in any part of the United Kingdom, is deemed to be a naturalized British subject. Conversely, where a father or a mother (being a widow) has lost British nationality any child who during infancy and after the naturalization of the parents abroad has become resident in the country where the father or mother is naturalized, and has, according to the law of that country, become naturalized therein, becomes a subject of that country and thereupon ceases to be a British subject. There is also a provision for resumption of British nationality by a child whose parent has been readmitted to that status, but as we propose to dispense with the distinction between naturalization and readmission this needs no further notice.

54. It will be seen that the test at present of the acquisition of British nationality by an infant is (1) the naturalization of the parent; (2) residence with the parent in the United Kingdom. Loss of British nationality depends (1) on loss by parent; (2) on residence in the country where the parent is naturalized; (3) on the law of that country recognising the child as also naturalized therein. It appears to us that the law as it stands is needlessly complicated, and that it leaves undefined the amount and character of residence necessary in each case to affect the nationality. We think it would be desirable to adopt a clearer and more easily applied test of the nationality of minor children.

55. Dealing first with the case of children born before the naturalization of the parent, we see no reason why, if the parent so desires and the secretary of state approves, such children should not be naturalized at the same time with the parent and their names included in his certificate. All that seems necessary is that the parent should make a declaration of his intention that the child sought to be naturalized with him should reside with him in His Majesty's dominions. It will be in the discretion of the secretary of state to include or not to include the minor in the certificate. The nationality of the child would if this recommendation is adopted be provable at once by the evidence of the certificate itself, and would not depend upon questions of law and fact which may be more or less uncertain and difficult to ascertain. But we think that it is right that after the child comes of age he should within a time to be limited (say one year) have the option of becoming an alien by declaration of alienage. The power given to the secretary of state should be extended to naturalizing authorities in British dominions.

@Anson's History of the Constitution (Part II, p. 69); Dicey's Conflict of Laws, p. 191; and Hall's Foreign Jurisdiction of the British Crown, p. 27.

56. If our recommendation is adopted that the distinction between a natural-born and a naturalized British subject should be as far as possible abolished, it should be enacted that every child born to a naturalized father after naturalization, whether born within His Majesty's dominions or not, is a British subject. The requirement of residence with the naturalized parent which at present exists should, we think, be abolished.

57. A case of hardship sometimes arises when a woman who is a British subject has lost her nationality by marrying an alien, and is left a widow with infant children. Her home and connexions being in the United Kingdom she desires her infant sons to enter the British army or navy or some branch of the civil service. She cannot however be readmitted to British nationality without satisfying the requirement of five years' residence, and consequently the sons cannot obtain the necessary naturalization by "becoming resident " with her. The difficulty has been hitherto met by the secretary of state feeling himself at liberty to grant a certificate of naturalization to a minor for the purpose of enabling him to enter the public service. It is, however, doubtful whether the act of 1870 contemplates the grant of a certificate to a minor at all. We think this power should be expressly given, and that the secretary of state should be entitled in suitable cases, for special reasons which he may consider sufficient, to grant to a minor a certificate of naturalization without fulfilment of the conditions ordinarily required.

58. With regard to the effect upon a minor child of loss of British nationality by the father, whether by declaration of alienage or otherwise, we think that the principle that the nationality of a minor child should depend upon that of the father should govern, and that the child should lose his British nationality at the same moment that his father becomes an alien. Any hardship which this rule might work in individual cases would, we think, be sufficiently obviated by the power above recommended to be given to the secretary of state to grant certificates for sufficient reasons to minors.

59. The status of the children of a widow of a British subject who loses her nationality by marriage with a subject of a foreign state is somewhat obscure under the provisions of section 10 (3) of the act of 1870. According to one view, if she not only become an alien by English law, but also becomes a subject of foreign state, and the child by her former husband becomes resident in the foreign country, and also becomes naturalized therein, such child becomes a subject of that state and loses British nationality. A doubt has, however, been expressed whether this provision applies to the case of a widow who loses her nationality by marriage with an alien. We recommend that this obscurity should be cleared up. We are not entirely agreed as to the most desirable amendment of the law. The majority of the committee think that the marriage of a widow-being a British subject-with an alien should not affect the national status of her children, if any, by her first husband, whether or not they became residents in and subjects of the country of the second husband. To meet the case where the children as a fact follow the mother and are invested with the nationality of the stepfather, they think that such children should be empowered on coming of age to make a declaration of alienage. The minority are of opinion that it would be more