the Government of the United States or its institutions sufficiently to become a citizen; while in another case, in re: Rodriguez, 81 Fed. 337, the United States Court held that an alien who was ignorant and unable to read and write, and who could not explain the principles of the Constitution, was entitled to be naturalized where it was shown that he was peaceable, industrious, of a good moral character, and law-abiding.

In Revised Statutes, Section 165 (U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 1329) it is provided the applicant must prove that during the five years of his probation he has behaved as a man of good moral character attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same. The words "attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States" surely indicate that the man must have a reasonably intelligent knowledge of those principles.

On another subject in connection with lack of uniformity in the administration of the naturalization laws, there is the discretion given to the courts upon the petition of the alien to make a decree changing his name, and that his certificate of naturalization shall be issued to him in accordance therewith. In some of the courts this decree is entered simply upon the request of the petitioner, without any examination whatsoever as to the reasons which induce the applicant to apply for the change of name. In other courts, great care is taken to learn, by a careful examination of the applicant, why he desires the change of name, whether he has been and is conducting any business in his existing name, as to whether he has any judgments or outstanding claims of creditors against him, and generally, to learn if the applicant has some ulterior purpose by which he will, by the change of his name, conceal property already acquired or to be acquired, from the just and righteous claims of his creditors, or by others who would be injured by such change.

At the present time, when our daily press contains so many references to aliens, the rights which they claim, and the wrongs which they suffer, the possible dangers of their presence while our country is at war with the mother country of which such aliens are subjects, it is surely a matter of considerable concern' that the citizens of the United States should demand, upon the

part of the courts, both national and state, which administer the naturalization laws, such uniformity in their practice and decisions which will protect the loyal citizenship of the United States, as well as the alien in such rights as are guaranteed to him under the laws of our own country or the treaty or other rights which exist for the like protection of such alien.

An influential journal in my own city, stated editorially: "In these days of wars and rumors of wars, it is good to get down to a practical definition of citizenship and its obligations, and in this connection it would be a fine thing if all citizens, native and adopted, could have the opportunity of reading the address which a Judge of the Common Pleas Bench delivered to a group of aliens he was called upon to naturalize in his court. It was said to be a combination of simplicity and strength, and it placed in plain words the precise meaning of citizenship to those who have heretofore given allegiance to other countries than the United States. In the course of his short talk, the Judge said:

"I am addressing you now so you may be impressed with the greatness of the oath you are about to take. I want you to understand it, and unless you intend to obey it to the letter, you should not take it. It means bidding good-bye to the old country, renouncing all allegiance whatsoever to the former government, and declaring yourself ready to defend the doctrines of this government. If we should have war with Germany, those of you who are Germans should take your gun as readily and willingly as those who come from other foreign countries, and, if necessary, fight your own father and brother. That is what the oath of allegiance means and requires, and I hope you intelligently understand it before you take it. After it is administered, you have undergone a wonderful transformation. You will have ceased to be a subject, and will have become one of the rulers of this great Republic. You may then well hold your heads just a little higher.'

"It was the carelessness with which an oath is regarded by some, and the looseness with which some oaths are administered, not impressing the one being sworn with the solemnity of the same, which led this Judge to call to the attention of applicants for citizenship, the sacredness of the oath that would proclaim them American citizens."

The native American citizen takes no oath of allegiance, as we all know, but, as members of the Bar and occupants of the Bench, we are all under the solemn obligations of the oaths we have respectively taken, as officers of the courts in which we

practice or sit in judgment. We are all "servants of a common purpose, filled with the spirit of service, and should aspire to be true to our very best impulses." Let us strive, by our conduct and example, to show that we are "just American through and through, always have been and always will be."

"It is well to remember, that patriotism, which is also good citizenship, does not consist in loud-mouthed arguments and indiscriminate waving of the flag. It is something greater and deeper than that. It means obedience to the laws, it means respect for constituted authority, and, finally, it means . . . . the willingness to shoulder a gun and go to the defence of the nation, whenever it shall be attacked or its rights invaded by any other country under the sun."

PROCEEDINGS

OF THE

NINTH ANNUAL MEETING

OF THE

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY

HELD AT

SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK

September 3 and 4, 1917

OFFICERS OF THE INSTITUTE

1917-1918.

President.

GEORGE W. KIRCHWEY, Dean of Columbia University Law School, New York.

Vice-Presidents.

JAMES BRONSON REYNOLDS, New York.

EDWARD LINDSAY, Warren, Pa.

EDWARD A. DEVINE, New York.

LOUIS D. BRANDEIS, Justice U. S. Supreme Court, Washington, D. C. ROBERT H. GAULT, Chicago, Ill., Professor of Law, Northwestern University.

Secretary.

EDWIN M. ABBOTT, former Chairman of the Pennsylvania Commission on the Revision of Penal Laws, Land Title Bldg., Philadelphia, Pa.

Treasurer.

BRONSON WINTHROP, 32 Liberty St., New York, N. Y.

For term expiring 1918:

Executive Board.

WILLIAM N. GEMMILL, Judge of Municipal Court, Chicago, Ill.

H. E. GODDARD, Director of Institute for Feeble-Minded, Vineland, N. J. WILLIAM A. WHITE, M. D., Superintendent of Government Hospital for Insane, Washington, D. C.

KATHARINE B. DAVIS, Commissioner of Corrections, New York, N. Y. For term expiring 1919:

LOUIS N. ROBINSON, Professor of Sociology, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa.

JOEL D. HUNTER, Chief Probation Officer, Juvenile Court, Chicago, Ill. CHESTER G. VERNIER, Professor of Law, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Cal.

BERNARD GLUECK, M. D., Director of Psychiatric Clinic, Sing Sing Prison, Ossining, N. Y.

For term expiring 1920:

FRANKLIN CHASE HOYT, Chief Justice of the Children's Court, New York City.

WILLIAM E. MIKELL, Philadelphia, Pa., Dean of Law School, University of Pennsylvania.

DR. THOMAS W. SALMON, Medical Director of Committee of Mental Hygiene, New York.

HERMAN M. ADLER, State Criminologist, Chicago, Ill.

Ex Officio.

JOHN H. WIGMORE, Dean of Law School, Northwestern University, 31 W. Lake St., Chicago, Ill.

NATHAN WILLIAM MACCHESNEY, Commissioner on Uniform State Laws, 30 LaSalle St., Chicago, Ill.

JOHN B. WINSLOW, Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.

ORRIN N. CARTER, Justice of Supreme Court of Illinois, Chicago, Ill. QUINCY A. MYERS, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Indiana, Indianapolis, Ind.

IRA E. ROBINSON, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of West Virginia, Grafton, W. Va.

FREDERIC B. CROSSLEY, Managing Director of the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 31 W. Lake St., Chicago, Ill.

ROBERT H. GAULT, Managing Editor of the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and Associate Professor of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill.

JOHN P. BRISCOE, Judge of the Maryland Court of Appeals, Prince Frederick, Md.

The ninth annual meeting of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology was held at Town Hall, Saratoga Springs, on September 3 and 4, 1917.

Three of the largest and most interesting sessions were crowded with excellent reports and discourses on the most important branches of criminal jurisprudence and research.

The annual address of President John P. Briscoe, Judge of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, entitled "Reforms of the Crimi