No. 680.
Mr. Russell to Mr. Fish.
Caracas, May 10, 1875. (Received June 7, 1875.)
Sir: I have the honor to inclose an extract from the law of immigration and decree enforcing said law, (Featro de Legislaceon, vol. 2, p. 213,) with a translation, snowing that the claim of Venezuela referred to in my No. 41 and No. 66, in regard to the immediate denationalization and naturalization of all immigrants on their arrival, is not supported by the law cited to maintain the claim.
Even if the words which I have translated “will obtain” and “will receive,” should be translated “shall obtain” and “shall receive,” the intent would be clear, viz, that immigrants may receive naturalization papers if they desire, not that they must receive them; still less, that without receiving papers they become Venezuelan citizens by the mere fact of arrival, or the receipt of food, shelter, or other benefit. I have given all the law on the subject. A “resolution “of December 1, 1869, issued by the ministry of justice and the interior, provides: “Those are Venezuelans who have come to the country, or shall come, in the capacity of immigrants, and their minor children, at the time of their arrival, if” they have received the benefits of the laws of immigration.” (Recopilaceon oficial, No. 26. Gaeeta Oficial.) I give the original:” Son Veuezolanos cuanlos han venido al pais ó vinieran en calidad de inmigrados, i sus hijos menores al tiempo de su Uegada, su han recibido los beneficios de los leyes de immigracion.” The President, who cites the law of May, 1855, and the decree of July 2, 1855, seems to have drawn his ideas and language not from those sources, but from this unauthorized statement of the law. There is no pretense that the ministry of justice possesses the right of legislation. It is remarkable that this government, in making a stringent application to ignorant strangers of the maxim that every man is supposed to know the law, should furnish proof that the highest officials are sometimes ignorant of it. The Inclosure should have been sent with No. 66; but I was pressed for time when that was sent. I would repeat that no practical question has arisen, or is likely to arise, for the United States on this point. There has been no occasion for official discussion of it, and all my unofficial applications in behalf of immigrants have been promptly and courteously granted; Still, it has seemed proper to treat the subject more fully than I have done before. With Spain, France, and perhaps with Italy, grave questions may arise.
I am, &c.,