naturalization of her father on July 26, 1901. She lost such citizenship through her marriage in 1913 to the subject's father, but regained United States citizenship through her naturalization in the United States District Court at Brooklyn, N. Y., on July 31, 1930. Mr. Schiller entered the United States in June of 1931 for the purpose of joining his mother and attending school in this country, but was not then in possession of an immigration visa, and apparently no record was made of his entry. He has remained here since that time, with the exception of a visit to Canada, at which time he reentered the United States in August 1938 and was admitted, according to information furnished by him, as a citizen of the United States, believing that he had acquired citizenship through his mother. He was to receive his degree in law at the University of Missouri in June last. In considering his case it was directed that inasmuch as a private bill (H. R. 7245) had been introduced last July for the purpose of legalizing his entry into the United States at Noyes, Minn., in June of 1931, no action be taken looking to his enforced departure from the United States until the close of the present session of Congress. This young man being a native of Canada, a nonquota country, is not subject to the quota provisions of the Immigration Act of 1924. Therefore, it is possible that there might be no particular hardship in requiring his departure to Canada except for the fact that should he depart and thereafter be legally admitted for permanent residence upon presentation of a nonquota immigration visa, he could not acquire citizenship until after the lapse of 5 years following the date of his legal admission. If the proposed bill should be enacted into a law, however, he could immediately file a declaration of intention and proceed to final naturalization within an approximate period of 2 years, inasmuch as the bill provides for the legislation of his entry as of June 1931. In consideration of the unusual features of this case, and particularly by reason of the fact that Mr. Schiller always has been of the honest belief that he was a United States citizen by virtue of his mother's birth and repatriation in this country, I am not disposed to offer any objection to favorable consideration being given to the pending bill. Very truly yours, FRANCES PERKINS, Your committee, after carefully considering the facts and evidence in this case, recommend that the bill be favorably reported to the Senate and the bill, as amended, do pass. O MARIA TERESA VALDES THOMPSON APRIL 22, 1940.-Ordered to be printed Mr. HERRING, from the Committee on Immigration, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 3245] The Committee on Immigration, to whom was referred the bill (S. 3245) for the relief of Maria Teresa Valdes Thompson, having considered the same, report it back to the Senate without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. PURPOSE OF THE BILL That in the administration of the immigration and naturalization laws, the Secretary of Labor is authorized and directed to record the lawful admittance for permanent residence of Maria Teresa Valdes Thompson, wife of an American citizen, in August 1939, and that she shall, for all purposes under the immigration and naturalization laws, be deemed to have been lawfully admitted to the United States as an immigrant for permanent residence. GENERAL INFORMATION The following letter from the Secretary of Labor addressed to the chairman of the committee explains in detail facts in the case. Hon. RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Jr., FEBRUARY 9, 1940. United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR Russell: I have your letter of February 2, 1940, addressed to the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization, requesting the views of this Department on bill S. 3245, introduced by Senator Mead for the relief of Maria Teresa Valdes Thompson. A review of the immigration file in this case discloses that Mrs. Thompson, who is a native and citizen of the Philippine Islands, 29 years of age, arrived at Vancouver on August 23, 1939, accompanied by her 4-year-old daughter, who is a citizen of the United States. She was in possession of a Commonwealth of the Philippines passport visaed as a nonimmigrant at Manila on July 26, 1939. Mrs. Thompson was excluded from admission to the United States on the ground that she was an immigrant not in possession of an unexpired immigration visa, but the excluding decision was reversed by this Department on appeal, and she was admitted on September 8, 1939, as a nonimmigrant visitor for a period of 1 year. At the time of her admission Mrs. Thompson stated that her husband died on July 23, 1938. She claimed to have property in Little Falls, N. Y., valued at around $26,000, besides property in the Philippines; that she was destined to the mother of her late husband; and that she desired to remain in this country for at least a year, the real purpose being to educate her child in the United States. She had made inquiry in the Philippines concerning the obtaining of an immigration visa for permanent residence but was told that the quota was exhausted. According to her testimony her husband was a citizen of the United States. It is my recommendation that the bill be given favorable consideration. Sincerely yours, Secretary. Your committee, after carefully considering the facts and evidence in this case, recommend that the bill be favorably reported to the Senate and that the same do pass. О STINA ANDERSON APRIL 22, 1940.--Ordered to be printed Mr. KING, from the Committee on Immigration, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 6965] The Committee on Immigration, to whom was referred the bill H. R. 6965, for the relief of Stina Anderson, having considered the same, report it back to the Senate with amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The amendment is as follows: On line 9, change the colon to a period and the words following the period be stricken from the bill. PURPOSE OF THE BILL The purpose of the bill is to authorize the Secretary of Labor to cancel the warrant of arrest and order of deportation. GENERAL INFORMATION This bill passed the House of Representatives on July 31, 1939, and there is printed below copy of the House Committee report which sets forth fully the facts in the case. [H. Rept. No. 1274, 76th Cong., 1st sess.) The Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6965) for the relief of Stina Anderson, having considered the same report it back to the House without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. PURPOSE OF THE BILL The purpose of the bill is to authorize the Secretary of Labor to cancel the warrant of arrest and order of deportation. GENERAL INFORMATION Congressman Holmes, the author of the bill, appeared before the committee urging favorable consideration. There was also present a representative of the Department of Labor who produced the records in the case. There is no fraud in connection with this case. The basis of the deportation proceedings is that the alien may become a public charge. The facts as presented by the Department and by the author of the bill are, briefly, as follows: Stina Anderson was born in Sweden and came to the United States legally in 1926. She came to marry a sweetheart who had also entered the United States legally, and they were married in the year 1926. There was one child born to these aliens in Worcester, Mass. In 1930 the husband was killed in a railroad accident. She received in settlement for the death of her husband $2,000. A large part of this was paid for the expenses of the funeral, etc. On account of the shock of the death of her husband and being otherwise in poor health, she decided to visit her parents in Sweden. She applied for and received a reentry permit in 1931. She stayed in Sweden about 6 months and came back legally on her reentry permit. She secured a position in household work. As the times were not good, she soon was out of work. As she had this small American-born child to support, she was advised by her neighbors to apply to the Emergency Relief Administration, a sewing project. She made application for a position, which is considered a relief position. This information was forwarded to the immigration officials and is the basis of the deportation order, because of the fact that she had secured a position and accepted Federal relief. The child is 9 years of age and under the Massachusetts law, being an orphan, is entitled to a small allowance for his keep. At about this time, a family welfare worker, who was assisting her and her child, suggested that she take another trip to Sweden and ascertain if her parents were in a position to assist her. She, therefore, again received permission to leave the United States and went back to Sweden. On her arrival she found that her father was quite aged and was only receiving a small pension from the government, and that he was not financially able to give her any assistance, so she returned to Massachusetts. Under the law, she is deportable as liable to become a public charge. It was stated by the author of the bill that a Swedish welfare association was willing to assist her and that they were of the opinion that as she had recovered her health, she would be able to support herself and child, with such assistance as they would render her. The committee, after considering the evidence presented, reported the bill favorably. Your committee, after carefully considering the facts and evidence in this case, recommend that the bill as amended be favorably reported to the Senate and that the same do pass. |