A better “gotcha” would be finding scholarly works that support what you say about Vattel.
Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1785
The first Question is settled by Vattel in the following Paragraph, viz— “Among the modern Institutions for the utility of Commerce...
Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789
TUESDAY, AUGUST 29, 1786
To evince the contrary let us recur to the writers on the laws of Nations on the subject.] (Vattel, vol. i. p. 105. book 1. chap. 21. sec. 260
The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 [Farrand's Records, Volume 1]
MADISON Wednesday June 27. in Convention
Mr L. Martin contended at great length and with great eagerness that the General Govt. was meant merely to preserve the State Governmets: not to govern individuals: that its powers ought to be kept within narrow limits; that if too little power was given to it, more might be added; but that if too much, it could never be resumed: that individuals as such have little to do but with their own States; that the Genl. Govt. has no more to apprehend from the States composing (the Union) while it pursues proper measures, that a Govt. over individuals has to apprehend from its subjects: that to resort to the Citizens at large for their sanction to a new Governt. will be throwing them back into a State of Nature: that the dissolution of the State Govts. is involved in the nature of the process: that the people have no right to do this without the consent of those to whom they have delegated their power for State purposes; through their tongue only they can speak, through their ears, only, can hear: that the States have shewn a good disposition to comply with the Acts, of Congs. weak, contemptibly weak as that body has been; and have failed through inability alone to comply: that the heaviness of the private debts, and the waste of property during the war, were the chief causes of this inability; that he did not conceive the instances mentioned by Mr. Madison of conpacts between Va. & Md. between Pa. & N. J. or of troops raised by Massts. for defence against the Rebels, to be violations of the articles of confederation—that an equal vote in each State was essential to the federal idea, and was founded in justice & freedom, not merely in policy: that tho’ the States may give up this right of sovereignty, yet they had not, and ought not: that the States like individuals were in a State of nature equally sovereign & free. In order to prove that individuals in a State of nature are equally free & independent he read passages from Locke, Vattel, Lord Summers—Priestly. To prove that the case is the same with States till they surrender
[Note 3: 3 See June 28 note 2.]
Page 438 | Page image
their equal sovereignty, he read other passages in Locke & Vattel
The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 [Farrand's Records, Volume 1]
KING Wednesday 27. June
Martin I think that the proposed Reform of the confederation must rest upon the State Govts: the reform ought to be for yr. safety and protection—whatever is of an external & merely general nature shall belong to the US. Whatever is internal and existing between the separate states & individuals shall belong to the particular States. if there shall be occasion for farther powers being given to the US. a future convention may propose ym. if you give more than enough, it never can be reclaimed—It is said if the Genl. Govt. legislates for individuals & not for States, the Govt. is not federal—but if the object of this Legislation is of an external nature, the Govt. is federal—Our Reform must be federal—The States are equal & must have equal Influence and equal votes—I will proceed on first principls. every man out of society is equal, in Freedom, & every other quality of man—Lock, Vattel, & others prove this position—
YATES Wednesday, June 27th, 1787
The first principle of government is founded on the natural rights of individuals, and in perfect equality. Locke, Vattel, Lord Somers, and Dr. Priestly, all confirm this principle. This principle of equality, when applied to individuals, is lost in some degree, when he becomes a member of a society, to which it is transferred; and this society, by the name of state or kingdom, is, with respect to others, again on a perfect footing of equality—a right to govern themselves as they please. Nor can any other state, of right, deprive them of this equality. If such a state confederates, it is intended for the good of the whole; and if it again confederate, those rights must be well guarded. Nor can any state demand a surrender of any of those rights; if it can, equality is already destroyed. We must treat as free states with each other, upon the same terms of equality that men, originally formed themselves into societies. Vattel, Rutherford and Locke, are united in support of the position, that states, as to each other, are in a state of nature.
As far as scholars....well, lets see there's Kent, Story, Tucker, Wilson, de Tocqueville; Pres. Wilson (law professor); Pres. F. D. Roosevelt; Pres. T. Roosevelt; B. Obama (adjunct law lecturer, see the NY Times, they posted his course study packet info & it included Vattel's Law of Nations) & the latest hot off the press (2010 1st addition) & aqcquired from Oxford in GB...America & the Law of Nations 1776-1939 by Janis (Prof Law @ Mich & Fellow of Law @ Oxford)...want me to go on?