American consul in Warsaw issued to the subject a nonquota immigration visa pursuant to section 4 (a) of the Immigration Act of 1924, supra, as amended by the act of May 29, 1928 (45 Stat. 1009), which provides that "an immigrant who is the unmarried child under 21 years of age, * of a citizen of the United States *"" is a nonquota immigrant. At that time the subject was an unmarried minor son of his citizen father and was entitled to the status and the visa representing that status. Thereafter, in May 1929, the subject married in Warsaw. At this time he was already in possession of his nonquota immigration visa as the unmarried minor son of an American citizen. He then proceeded to the United States and applied for admission at the port of New York June 23, 1929. The record of his admission contemporaneously made pursuant to the requirement of statute shows that in answer to the question of whether he was married he said "no," it thus being made to appear that he was, as his immigration visa represented him to be, the unmarried minor son of an American citizen. He was admitted for permanent residence. Wakerman continued to reside in this country until 1937 when, upon application to the Department of State for a passport as a citizen of the United States, it appearing at that time that he had derived American citizenship following his admission through the citizenship of his father, he was issued the passport with which he proceeded abroad and returned, being admitted on return, August 30, 1937, at the port of New York as a United States citizen. On the occasion of that admission, in answer to the question as to his marriage status, he stated he was married. Thereafter, in March 1938, he filed his petition with the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization pursuant to section 9 of the Immigration Act of 1924, supra, requesting nonquota status for his wife and a minor son. He represented that he was a citizen of the United States through the naturalization of his father, that he had married May 29, 1929, and that bis son was born August 20, 1929, in Poland. So far as appears this was the first information coming to official notice that at the time of the subject's original admission in June 1929 he was already married. Notwithstanding this notice, the petition for nonquota status for the wife was approved and in the usual course the consul in Warsaw was authorized to issue a nonquota visa to the wife under section 4 (a) of the Immigration Act of 1924, supra. As for the son, the petition was not approved but the petitioner was informed that as the son appeared to have been born abroad subsequent to the acquisition of citizenship of the petitioner the son appeared to be a citizen of the United States pursuant to section 1993 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, which at that time provided that children born abroad to American citizen fathers are citizens of the United States. The petitioner was instructed to place the proof of the son's citizenship before the American consul for the purpose of obtaining for him a passport of the United States as a citizen. In connection with the effort to obtain a passport for the son the Department of State invited the attention of this Department to the facts disclosed concerning the original admission of the subject of these proceedings, that he was at that time not unmarried, and inquired whether his admission was considered to have been legal. The result was that this Department thereupon held that the admission of the subject in 1929 was not a legal admission, that the subject did not begin permanently to reside in the United States, did not, therefore, acquire citizenship through his father, was not a citizen of the United States, and therefore was not entitled to obtain a nonquota status for his wife, and revoked the previous authorization for a nonquota status in her case. The Department of State, presumably concurring in the views of this Department that the subject petitioner was not a citizen of the United States, declined to issue a citizen passport to the son in Poland on the ground that at the time of his birth there his father was not a citizen of the United States. Section 4 (a) of the Immigration Act of 1924 heretofore quoted provides that an unmarried child under 21 years of age of a citizen of the United States is a nonquota immigrant. Section 9 of the same act provides that a citizen may, in manner therein described, apply for and have authorized a nonquota status for a relative admissible under subdivision (a) of section 4. That very section in subdivision (f) provides "nothing in this section shall be construed to entitle an immigrant, in respect of whom a petition under this section is granted, to enter the United States as a nonquota immigrant if, upon arrival in the United States he is found not to be a nonquota immigrant." Section 2 of the Immigration Act of 1924 provides the manner of issuing visas and in subdivision (g) thereof provides "nothing in this act shall be construed to entitle an immigrant, to whom H. Repts., 76-1, vol. 5-31 an immigration visa has been issued, to enter the United States if, upon arrival in the United States, he is found to be inadmissible to the United States under the immigration laws. * * * "" Clause (1) of section 28 provides that "the term 'unmarried,' when used in reference to any individual as of any time, means an individual who at such time is not married, whether or not previously married." It is very plain from these provisions that an immigrant must not only have the status which he claims at the time of receiving a visa but must likewise have that status at the time of applying for admission at a port of entry in the United States. It is likewise conceded that at the time of application for admission to the United States in June 1929 the subject of these proceedings was then married and was not, therefore, an unmarried minor son of a citizen and hence was not a nonquota immigrant as specified in his immigration visa. Section 13 of the Immigration Act of 1924 in subdivision (a) provides: "No immigrant shall be admitted to the United States unless he * * * (3) is a nonquota immigrant if specified in the visa in the immigration visa as such, and (4) is otherwise admissible under the immigration laws.' Furthermore, section 14 of the same act provides that: "Any alien who at any time after entering the United States if found to have been at the time of entry not entitled under this act to enter the United States, * * * shall be taken into custody and deported in the same manner as provided for in sections 19 and 20 of the Immigration Act of 1917." The subject not having been legally admissible at the time of his admission in 1929 had neither a status in the United States from which he could derive citizenship through his father nor from which he could claim a right to return without appropriate immigration documents. When, therefore, he departed and reentered the United States in possession of a passport his admission in 1937 was likewise illegal since under section 13 of the Immigration Act of 1924 as an immigrant he was inadmissible unless in possession of an immigration visa. Other than the circumstances surrounding the illegal entry Wakerman appears to have been a law-abiding man. He has never been on relief. His wife and child are residing in Poland. On March 7, 1939, the Department directed that, in view of the circumstances in this case, an order of deportation be not entered at that time, but that Wakerman be required to depart from the United States to any country of his choice, except Canada. The specific charge against him in the immigration proceedings is that at the time of his entry he was a quota immigrant not in possession of an unexpired immigration visa. Cordially yours, By direction of the Commissioner, W. W. BROWN, Assistant. O ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE MILITARY JUNE 30, 1939.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. SNYDER, from the committee of conference, submitted the following CONFERENCE REPORT [To accompany H. R. 6791] The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 6791) making additional appropriations for the Military Establishment, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1940, and for other purposes, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective House as follows: That the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 2, 3, and 4. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 1, and agree to the same. J. BUELL SNYDER, Managers on the part of the House. ELMER THOMAS, CARL HAYDEN, JOHN H. OVERTON, RICHARD B. RUSSELL, JOHN G. TOWNSEND, Jr., Managers on the part of the Senate. STATEMENT OF THE MANAGERS ON THE PART OF THE HOUSE The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 6791) making additional appropriations for the Military Establishment for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1940, and for other purposes, submit the following statement in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon and recommended in the accompanying conference report as to each of such amendments, namely: Amendment No. 1: Appropriates $64,862,500 for construction at military posts, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $63,662,500, as proposed by the House. Amendment No. 2: Strikes out the provision inserted by the Senate making $5,000,000 of the appropriations contained in the bill available for topographic surveys and mapping. Amendments Nos. 3 and 4: Strikes out the legislation inserted by the Senate relating to the provision of facilities and equipment at the expense of the Government in the plants of contractors for supplying military or naval equipment, etc. J. BUELL SNYDER, Managers on the part of the House. 2 O READJUSTING COMMISSIONED PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES COAST GUARD JUNE 30, 1939.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. BLAND, from the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 5611] The Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 5611) to amend section 9 of the act of July 3, 1926 (44 Stat. 817), entitled "An act to readjust the commissioned personnel of the Coast Guard, and for other purposes," having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended to pass. The amendment is as follows: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following: That section 9 of the Act entitled "An Act to readjust the commissioned personnel of the Coast Guard, and for other purposes", approved July 3, 1926 (44 Stat. 817), is hereby amended by striking out the second and third sentences and substituting in lieu thereof the following: "All officers in the grades of district commander and constructor on active duty are hereby transferred to the line of the Coast Guard and shall be commissioned in the grades of commander, lieutenant commander, and lieutenant, according to the ranks held by them on the date of such transfer, and shall when so transferred and commissioned take precedence (1) with each other in their respective grades, according to length of commissioned service as district commander or constructor, as the case may be, (2) with other line officers in such grades, according to length of service in the ranks held by them on the date of such transfer, and (3) in higher grades to which they may be promoted, according to the dates of commissions in such higher grades: Provided, That the President is hereby authorized to appoint Charles Walker to the grade of lieutenant commander with precedence next after Irwin B. Steele. Each officer commissioned pursuant to this section shall be an extra number in his grade and in the grades to which he may be promoted, and shall be eligible for promotion, if otherwise qualified, whenever the officer in a regular number in line of promotion next above him on the senority list becomes eligible for promotion; or if there be no such officer in his grade, he shall be eligible for promotion, if otherwise qualified, when a vacancy occurs in the next higher grade. Any officer commissioned pursuant to this section shall |