Visas, Passports, Nationality ...

This post has nothing to do with Sigint history, but arises from a discussion a few of us were having about nationality on Twitter. We had established that there is no right for a British citizen to a passport, nor for a foreign national to a visa to entry the UK. We also discussed the consequences of the Naturalization Act 1870 by which women, on marriage, took on the nationality of their husband 

Looking at documents dating from the 30s and 40s, what strikes me is the fact that decisions are taken by relatively junior members of staff, in a haphazard or arbitrary manner. For example, this report is from the Security Control Officer at Shoreham Airport, and is dated 4 November 1939:

'The below mentioned Alien arrived at this Control 4/11/39 by KLM plane from Amsterdam.

SALZMANN, Paul Von             Nationality: German Jew

Passport No 1296, issued 18/4/39 London

Visa No 10806, issued 2/11/39 Copenhagen

Born 21/8/18 at Berlin

Address 26 Nottingham Place, London W1

Salzmann arrived in UK July 1933 and studied at several places, the last being the South Western Agriculture College, Wye. He left England 26 June 1939 for Denmark for a holiday and there expected to join his parents who were coming from Germany. The parents were unable to leave Germany and Salzmann was told by the Danish police to leave Denmark. He stated that he had come here because he does not want to be sent to Germany. He was refused permission to land as he has no money.' (KV 2/914)

There is a lot to unpack here. A 21 year old German, resident in the UK for several years since he was 14 years old had gone to Denmark and was stranded there by the outbreak of war. The Passport Control Officer in Copenhagen (acting as PCO and not as the Head of the SIS Station) granted him a visa without reference to London as Salzmann was a "returning resident". (Ironically his father, who had left the UK precipitously early in August 1939 was a German spy but that's not the point at issue here.) He was met by his sister, who worked at the Japanese Embassy in London and who said that she would provide for him, but the Security Control Officer took it upon himself to refuse entry to the UK and had him placed on a KLM plane to Amsterdam the next day, in spite of Salzmann's claiming accurately to be half Jewish (though his passport had no prominent "J") and was of an age to join the German Armed Forces if returned to Germany.

His sister, Elsbeth, was by now Mrs MacQueen. She had married a British Subject, and had acquired British nationality and a British passport. She would be interned in 1940 (quite properly) but at this stage looked to be somebody whose husband had left her, and whose parents had left the country, and who was working to keep body and soul together.

She had applied for Naturalisation two years earlier, and the Home Office file contains a minute dated 15 November 1937, in which the official dealing with the query suggests not allowing the application yet, even though she was eligible.

'According to Central Register particulars, Miss Salzmann arrived here in July 1930. She was 21 years old last June and desires to apply for naturalisation. She is a student at London University.

Her parents came to this country a few months before she did, the father being a German.

Both on the grounds that there is no reason to make this girl of a different nationality from her parents and because of her "student" status, I think she should be discouraged from applying although she is in fact eligible by residence to do so and there appear to be no "conditions" attached to her residence.

? Say that on the information before him the Secretary of State would not be prepared to naturalise her and therefore advises that she defers an application for a certificate of naturalisation until, if she remains in this country, her studies are completed.'

The "?" is the official's recommendation and so was subject to internal Home Office discussion, if it hadn't been accepted by all. From a 2022 perspective, it is unthinkable that the application of somebody eligible could be turned down on what looks like a whim.

Gustav Lachmann was a German aeronautical engineer working for Handley Page. He had married an English widow in Japan. In such a sensitive position he had been subject to MI5 enquiries:

'His wife is registered: LACHMANN, Evelyn Wyatt, German, formerly British, born 13/11/97 in Kobe. Former name HAIGH, British, changed to Lachmann, German, by marriage on 29/12/26 in Tokyo. Was GILL, British, by parentage, though born in Japan, father British. Changed to HAIGH, British, by marriage on 19/11/17 in Tokyo. Husband, William, died in September 1923 in Japan. Arrived in the UK 11/11/29 from 10/17 Fukuyoshi Chi, Akaoka, Tokyo. Holds German passport 401 issued 29/12/26 in Tokyo, and registration Certificate 420043 issued 10/1/30 by Bow Street, Serial EZ.172066.' (KV 2/2733 7 February 1930)

This says everything you need to know about the effect on her nationality of a woman marrying a foreigner.

He was in interned on 3 September 1939. Superintendent Herbert Simmons of the East Sussex Constabulary reported:

'… in consequence of instructions from the Special Branch, Metropolitan Police … I arrived at Heydown Farm, Heathfield, where I saw Lachmann, who I immediately arrested.

He was staying at the Farm in company with his wife, two-step-daughters and a maid. He told me that he had arrived there on the 1st September 1939 … Arrangements were made by Lachmann for his family to remain at "Heydown Farm".' (KV 2/2734 3 September 1939)

His wife and children weren't on any list so they were allowed to continue living their normal lives. Lachmann was interned until late in the war, but resumed – in fact never left – employment with Handley Page and on 24 February 1949 obtained a Certificate of Naturalisation, which meant that his wife therefore becomes British by marriage: but not his children. At least one had to apply for naturalisation (KV 2/2735):

'Application for a certificate of naturalisation referred to MI5 by Home Office.

Name: Evelyn Leopldine Lachmann

Address: 49 Weymouth Street, London SW1

Occupation: Radiographer MSR

DOB: 6 December 1927

POB: Tokyo, Japan

Nationality: German'

 Finally, an item from Guy Liddell's diaries (KV 4/185 15 October 1939): a sad story. It might need a trigger warning, as the attitudes underlying the piece are deeply of their time (as is the archness of its language). But equally important, and, I suggest, as deeply of its time, is the Legal Adviser's concern that a young woman is about to do something catastrophically dangerous to herself, and must be stopped.

'A fine legal point has arisen on the application by Miss Phyllis Dalrymple for a permit to travel to Yugoslavia where she intends to marry a German, Alois Brasch, and return with him to his native town of Gratz. This matter was submitted to the Legal Section who replied in the following terms:

 "It is abundantly true that for the purposes of the Trading with the Enemy Act a person shall be deemed to have traded with the enemy:  'if he (and by the blessed Interpretation Act 1889 words importing the masculine gender shall include females) has had any commercial, financial or other intercourse with, or for the benefit of an enemy.' It may be assumed, I fancy, that Miss Dalrymple is intending to have intercourse with an enemy. That in all conscience should be enough. We need not delve into the difficult problem as to whether it would be for the benefit of the particular enemy, who may indeed be pathetically unfit, that Miss Dalrymple should have intercourse with him. Speculation would not be uninteresting on the basis of the particulars supplied on Form P. in respect of the Irish birth, hazel eyes, and dark blonde hair of the young lady, but let it pass! No man who cared anything for the melody of words will be pleased by the name of the individual to whose address Miss Dalrymple desires to proceed, see form P. para 8. A terrifying aspect of this proposed course of conduct is that it may indeed be perilously near to High Treason. I will find out tomorrow. Meanwhile she should not be allowed to leave."'