Nick Delmore birth

[sdeitche]

Been researching Nicholas Delmore for my book and came across some contrary evidence that he was not born in Italy. In 1955 a judge declared him a natural born citizen and said he was not born in Italy.

Mainly it deals with a suit that Delmore brought against US Immigration in 1953 to have himself declared a natural born citizen. He contends he was born in San Francisco where his father moved in 1895 as a Union Pacific railroad employee. Delmore said his records were destroyed in the San Fran earthquake of 1906 and that his sister told him in the 1910s that he was born in San Fran.

Among the evidence the judge cited in 1955 when he decalred that Delmore was born in the US was the Italian birth records the US brought to the trial, supporting their assertion that Delmore was born Nicola Amoruso in Italy. THere was no indication on those records of the borth of NIck's sister Felicia. Also, there was this 1942 letter from INS affirming he is a citizen:

"Eugene A. Liotta, Esquire, "1139 East Jersey Street "Elizabeth, New Jersey.
"My dear Mr. Liotta:
"Reference is made to your letter of September 28, 1942, concerning the citizenship status of Nicholas Delmore.
"It appears that Mr. Delmore was born at San Francisco, California in 1888, the son of Luigi Amoruso and Providenzia Amoruso; that both his parents were natives and subjects of Italy; and that he was given the name of Nicholas Amoruso. *475 It further appears that he was taken to Italy by his parents when a small child; that he returned to the United States when he was 14 years of age, adopted the name of Nicholas Delmore, and that he has remained in this country since.
"You are advised that it is the view of this Service in light of the facts submitted and considered, that Mr. Delmore may properly be regarded a native and citizen of the United States.
"Sincerely yours,
"Earl G. Harrison,
Commissioner
"By /s/ T. B. Shoemaker
"T. B. Shoemaker,
Deputy Commissioner"

Here is the main part of the judgement:


Plaintiff testified that after believing for many years that he had been born in New York, he was told in the late 1920s by his sister Felicia that he had been born in San Francisco on December 25, 1888. Felicia died in 1941.

Plaintiff's cousin, Louis Bruno, testified that he was born in Nicosia, Sicily, lived in the same neighborhood as the plaintiff's family and had been his childhood playmate. The children of the neighborhood called the plaintiff the "Americano" and Bruno, curious, asked plaintiff's mother why this was so. She replied that it was because plaintiff was born in America.

Written documents were introduced by the defendants intended to bring home to the plaintiff discrepancies with regard to the place and date of his birth in papers signed by him. They are:

(1) A signature card of the Hoboken Trust Company, dated November 30, 1908, in which his birthplace is given as Italy and his birth date as December 25, 1881. (Defendants' Exhibit 6.)

(2) The records of his first marriage on June 4, 1919 in New York City consisting of the certificate and record of the marriage showing his birthplace as New York City and that he was 31 years old at the time of his marriage (Defendants' Exhibit 1) and the application for marriage license, dated May 13, 1919, which gave his age as 31 years on December 25, 1918 (Defendants' Exhibit 2).

(3) An application for insurance in the Lincoln National Life Insurance Company, dated July 8, 1930, in which his birthplace is given as New York City and his birth date as December 25, 1888 (Defendants' Exhibit 5).

(4) A fingerprint record of Union County, New Jersey, dated October 19, 1933, in which his birthplace is given as San Francisco and his birth date as December 25, 1888 (Defendants' Exhibit 4).

(5) A permanent voting registration record, dated May 21, 1940, showing that plaintiff disclosed himself to be "native born" on December 25, 1888 (Defendants' Exhibit 3).

Of the foregoing five items, 4 and 5 are consistent with the plaintiff's position in this case. It is true that in item 3 his birthplace is given as New York City, but he explains that this application for insurance was made by his wife, who is listed thereon as beneficiary, and that she gave the material to the insurance agent and all that he did in connection with it was to sign it. In item 2 of the year 1919, the age discrepancy of one year "31 years on December 25, 1918" can be understandable error and certainly does not coincide with the defendants' contention that he was born in 1891. His designation of New York City as *477 his birthplace can be reconciled with his assertion that he then believed that he had been born in New York, and had not learned from his sister, Felicia, until the late 1920s that he was born in San Francisco. On item 1 his only writing is his signature. All other information on it is in another handwriting. Plaintiff testified in relation to it that his cousin suggested to him that inasmuch as he was making good money as a boiler-maker he should bank some of it against the future. Plaintiff agreed and signed the card, but the cousin gave the information on it to the person who filled it in at the bank. It is interesting to note that the age given on the card would have made plaintiff about 73 at the time he appeared for the trial of this case. His appearance indicated no such advanced years and his statements in connection with the card seemed consistent and plausible.

None of these documents were impressive in impugning the plaintiff's veracity, but on the other hand seemed reconcilable with his theory of the case. In fact, except for item 1, the signature card, they all tend to corroborate the assertions of the plaintiff that he has always regarded himself as native born. It is especially significant that these statements were made by him at times long before he could have anticipated the necessity for defending himself in deportation proceedings.

Concededly for the purpose of affecting the plaintiff's credibility, he was asked on cross examination if he had ever been an officer of the Tropical Steamship Company or the Zuber Steamship Company. He replied that he did not know whether he had been an officer of either. Defendants then introduced evidence, documentary as well as testimonial, which, taken together, rather conclusively established that plaintiff had once been vice-president of both corporations. Defendants argue that it is inconceivable that plaintiff should not remember holding these offices within the last decade. That may be. But it should be remembered that defendants are, in this instance, setting up a straw man only to knock him down. Defendants have revealed nothing about plaintiff's association with these concerns other than that he was vice-president of them and his reluctance to admit it. It would appear that defendants deliberately picked this topic knowing that plaintiff would be loathe to testify about it. If there were illicit connotations surrounding these enterprises it was not brought out and indeed such evidence would be of doubtful admissibility. What reasons plaintiff had for his reticence are not relevant or appropriate for speculation here. This effort by defendants did not seriously impair the plaintiff's credibility.

The defendants place their main emphasis around their introduction of what was at first described as a birth certificate of Nicolo Amoruso, born at Nicosia, Sicily, on December 23, 1891. Introduction was attempted under 28 U.S.C.A. �§ 1741:

...
The government's original offer under this statute was rejected because of improper authentication. It requested and was granted time in which to cure this defect. The case was continued for a month at which time the government returned with a properly authenticated document, but one that was merely a statement by an Italian official of what was contained in the records under his care and was not a copy as required by the statute.

This exhibit consisted of two sheets tied together by the same ribbon and authenticated together by the same seal and signature. Their translations are *478 set out below.[2] Nothing is more obvious than that both sheets are and were meant to be one and the same document. One sheet contains a recital that the official found in the records of Nicosia, Sicily, a birth certificate of Nicolo Amoruso born December 23, 1891, the son of Luigi Amoruso and Provvidenza Rizzo Amoruso. These were the names of plaintiff's parents. The second sheet contains a similar recital of the contents of other records relating to the Amoruso family. It shows the marriage of Luigi Amoruso and Provvidenza Rizzo and recites the births and deaths of their children. Besides giving the names and birth dates of three children who died in infancy or childhood, this paper shows that this Amoruso family had two sons named Graziano and Arcangelo. This plaintiff admits having two brothers by those names, one 15 and the other about 10 years older than he. The recitals fit this description and at the bottom of the list is shown the birth on December 23, 1891, of a Nicolo Amoruso. If plaintiff is the Nicolo Amoruso, whose birth is recorded in these documents the defendants have, of course, met their burden of proof.

Plaintiff objected to the defendants' offer of this proof, but later agreed that they could, if given time, get a copy of a document showing the same facts as those recited in the "Birth Certificate" of Nicolo Amoruso and withdrew his objection to the introduction of the "Birth Certificate" on the ground that it was not a copy of an official record as the statute requires. However, plaintiff did this with the reservation that he could attack the weight to be given the alleged *479 "Birth Certificate". To do this plaintiff utilized the second sheet which recited the births in the Amoruso family. He pointed out that there was a vital omission from this record �" it contains no reference to plaintiff's sister, Felicia, whose existence cannot be doubted. The government objected, refused to have this document marked as part of its exhibit, and consequently the second sheet of the record recitals transmitted from Italy became plaintiff's exhibit instead of the defendants'.

The defendants, having introduced one sheet of the document transmitted to them from Italy, cannot validly object to the introduction of the remainder of the document by the plaintiff for the purpose of attacking the weight or relevancy of that portion first introduced. Grobelny v. W. T. Cowan, Inc., 2 Cir., 1945, 151 F.2d 810; Cox v. United States, 7 Cir., 1939, 103 F.2d 133; 7 Wig. �§ 2113; 31 C.J.S., Evidence, �§ 190.

Only a factual decision remains to be made. Has the government overcome plaintiff's prima facie case by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence? The government's case stands or falls upon the alleged "Birth Certificate". If it is established by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence that the Nicolo Amoruso whose birth is recorded therein is Nicholas Delmore, plaintiff in this case, then of course, judgment must be for the government. But the government has not succeeded in making its proof by that exacting standard. Plaintiff's attack upon the weight to be accorded the government's exhibit entitled "Birth Certificate" by showing that the records of Nicosia do not show the birth of a daughter Felicia to the Amoruso family whose geneological history has been exhibited here demonstrates either a crucial inaccuracy casting a shadow on the entire record, or the description of an Amoruso family other than that of the plaintiff. It is such as to leave a lingering doubt that the plaintiff is the same person whose birth is recorded in the introduced documents. This is especially so in view of testimony that the names Amoruso, Luigi, Provvidenza and Rizzo were very common names in Nicosia, at that time a fairly large town of from 15,000 to 20,000 inhabitants.

...
Hence it is found that the defendants have not met the exacting standard of proof demanded of them in this case.

An order should be settled for judgment in favor of the plaintiff declaring him to be a citizen of the United States.





Here are some case links:

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/app ... 98/440614/

http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/1u7ec1 ... -brownell/

[sdeitche]

Interesting trip into the weeds and far out of the overall scope of my book, but a fun few hours digging this up.

[Antiliar]

I can add this:

Luigi (Louis) Amoruso, born 19 April 1845, Nicosia, Enna, Sicilia - died unkown
Provvidenza Rizzo, born 7 Feb 1851, Nicosia, Enna, Sicilia - died 4 Dec 1943, Nicosia
married 20 Jan 1872, Nicosia
Arcangelo Amoruso, 3 Feb 1873, Nicosia - 2 Aug 1881, Nicosia
Graziano Amoruso, 1 Jul 1879, Nicosia - 1939

[B.]

it does sound like he was most likely born in the US after all.

Rick -- is Nick's mother Provvidenza Rizzo? That must be the connection to the Rizzo (DeCavalcante) family, though it would also indicate that Delmore was technically not Sam's uncle, but probably a paternal cousin. Limey has Francesco Rizzo (DeCavalcante) as being from Monreale (I've had trouble confirming it given his true name Rizzo is so common), so I wonder if they are originally from that area or Nicosia/Enna. The "title" that he adopted as a last name DiCavalcanti/DeCavalcante is also strange, as Cavalcanti is a surname and doesn't seem to refer to any geographical area or anything else that I know of (i.e. "of Cavalcanti").

Delmore/Amoruso and the Rizzo-DeCavalcantes fit in strangely with their mob family also. They of course were related, but outside of that they don't appear to have married into any other known Elizabeth/Union County families. Bobby Occhipinti was a maternal cousin of Sam's who was later recruited but that's all I'm aware of.

[Chaps]

In an earlier post I quoted an FBI report that had an interview with Sam's brother. He told the agent that the family name was Rizzo but that his father (Frank) adopted the last name DeCavalcante because it sounded more like he had a title or something to that affect.

[Pogo The Clown]

In an earlier post I quoted an FBI report that had an interview with Sam's brother. He told the agent that the family name was Rizzo but that his father (Frank) adopted the last name DeCavalcante because it sounded more like he had a title or something to that affect.

Plus I'm sure the name just sounded cooler.


Pogo

[Antiliar]

it does sound like he was most likely born in the US after all.

Rick -- is Nick's mother Provvidenza Rizzo? That must be the connection to the Rizzo (DeCavalcante) family, though it would also indicate that Delmore was technically not Sam's uncle, but probably a paternal cousin. Limey has Francesco Rizzo (DeCavalcante) as being from Monreale (I've had trouble confirming it given his true name Rizzo is so common), so I wonder if they are originally from that area or Nicosia/Enna. The "title" that he adopted as a last name DiCavalcanti/DeCavalcante is also strange, as Cavalcanti is a surname and doesn't seem to refer to any geographical area or anything else that I know of (i.e. "of Cavalcanti").

Delmore/Amoruso and the Rizzo-DeCavalcantes fit in strangely with their mob family also. They of course were related, but outside of that they don't appear to have married into any other known Elizabeth/Union County families. Bobby Occhipinti was a maternal cousin of Sam's who was later recruited but that's all I'm aware of.

I wouldn't assume that the Rizzos are related. They might be, but without evidence I can't confirm or refute. According to the 1920 census Frank Rizzo arrived in 1904, but it's such a common name that I don't know. His World War I draft registration says he's from Palermo, but sometimes they reported the province and not the city. If he was born in Palermo proper we can verify his name in the birth index. I don't know where Limey got Monreale. I found several Francesco Rizzos who could be him.

As for Decavalcante, it should be read as "de Cavalcante" or "the count." Sam Decavalcante's father claimed royalty. Maybe Frank Rizzo as a royal count, I don't know.

[B.]

I was able to find the 1920 census as well and that is the same Frank Rizzo that would later go by DeCavalcante given the children's names and ages. They were still living in NYC in 1915 and by the next year they were in Westfield NJ which is right next to Elizabeth. Some time between 1920 and 1930 Frank remarried and their primary surname starts showing up on records as "R(izzo) Di Cavalcanti" instead of simply Rizzo. Between 1930 and 1940 they move to Trenton.

Another potential match from the 1910 census has a Frank Rizzo of the same age in Manhattan with a wife whose name and age both match. Was living with a father "Tommy" (b. ~1851) and brother Salvatore (b. ~1882). If this is the same Frank, it has his immigration year as 1901 along with brother Salvatore. Father "Tommy" immigrated in 1898. Searches for Gaetano or Tommaso Rizzo and Salvatore Rizzo within the parameters didn't lead me anywhere meaningful.

[Antiliar]

I was able to find the 1920 census as well and that is the same Frank Rizzo that would later go by DeCavalcante given the children's names and ages. They were still living in NYC in 1915 and by the next year they were in Westfield NJ which is right next to Elizabeth. Some time between 1920 and 1930 Frank remarried and their primary surname starts showing up on records as "R(izzo) Di Cavalcanti" instead of simply Rizzo. Between 1930 and 1940 they move to Trenton.

Another potential match from the 1910 census has a Frank Rizzo of the same age in Manhattan with a wife whose name and age both match. Was living with a father "Tommy" (b. ~1851) and brother Salvatore (b. ~1882). If this is the same Frank, it has his immigration year as 1901 along with brother Salvatore. Father "Tommy" immigrated in 1898. Searches for Gaetano or Tommaso Rizzo and Salvatore Rizzo within the parameters didn't lead me anywhere meaningful.

Did you try Steve Morse's site?: http://www.stevemorse.org/

[B.]

Never heard of it -- thanks! Looking forward to seeing what I can find.

[Antiliar]

I was able to find the 1920 census as well and that is the same Frank Rizzo that would later go by DeCavalcante given the children's names and ages. They were still living in NYC in 1915 and by the next year they were in Westfield NJ which is right next to Elizabeth. Some time between 1920 and 1930 Frank remarried and their primary surname starts showing up on records as "R(izzo) Di Cavalcanti" instead of simply Rizzo. Between 1930 and 1940 they move to Trenton.

Another potential match from the 1910 census has a Frank Rizzo of the same age in Manhattan with a wife whose name and age both match. Was living with a father "Tommy" (b. ~1851) and brother Salvatore (b. ~1882). If this is the same Frank, it has his immigration year as 1901 along with brother Salvatore. Father "Tommy" immigrated in 1898. Searches for Gaetano or Tommaso Rizzo and Salvatore Rizzo within the parameters didn't lead me anywhere meaningful.

I found Francesco Paolo Rizzo in the Palermo Birth Index for 6 October 1889 (an exact match for his World War II draft registration card), his father was Gaetano and mother Concetta Pernice. So he was definitely born in Palermo and not Monreale.

[B.]

I was able to find the 1920 census as well and that is the same Frank Rizzo that would later go by DeCavalcante given the children's names and ages. They were still living in NYC in 1915 and by the next year they were in Westfield NJ which is right next to Elizabeth. Some time between 1920 and 1930 Frank remarried and their primary surname starts showing up on records as "R(izzo) Di Cavalcanti" instead of simply Rizzo. Between 1930 and 1940 they move to Trenton.

Another potential match from the 1910 census has a Frank Rizzo of the same age in Manhattan with a wife whose name and age both match. Was living with a father "Tommy" (b. ~1851) and brother Salvatore (b. ~1882). If this is the same Frank, it has his immigration year as 1901 along with brother Salvatore. Father "Tommy" immigrated in 1898. Searches for Gaetano or Tommaso Rizzo and Salvatore Rizzo within the parameters didn't lead me anywhere meaningful.

I found Francesco Paolo Rizzo in the Palermo Birth Index for 6 October 1889 (an exact match for his World War II draft registration card), his father was Gaetano and mother Concetta Pernice. So he was definitely born in Palermo and not Monreale.

Great info. Thanks!

The father's name makes sense as Francesco also had a son named Gaetano (known by the now unfortunate nickname "Gay" -- Gay's son, on the other hand, goes by the name Guy). Seems Francesco is the same one on the 1910 census who had a father named "Tommy".

[Antiliar]

Yes, we were successful with Rizzo-DeCavalcante, but struck out for now with Chiri.