Okay, I empathize, mostly because I'm the same way...not to mention I've become a slacker when it comes to organizing my notes. :-)
My first impression was that you were looking for an explicit definition of natural born, but the more I thought about it, the more I wondered if you weren't looking for the English / American Law correlation related to denization - the state of legal residency that starts the clock for the naturalization requirement.
In England, denization was under the Monarchy -
Between alien friends, who are temporary subjects, and subjects naturalized or natural born, a species of subjects intermediate is known to the law of England. They are distinguished by the appellation of denizens. The power of denization is a high and incommunicable portion of the prerogative royal. A denizen is received into the nation, like a person who is dropt from the clouds. He may acquire rights, but he cannot inherit them, not even from his own parent: he may transmit rights to his children, who are born after his letters patent of denization; but not to those who were born before.
James Wilson , Collected Works, vol. 2, Lectures on Law
Whereas in America, the authority belonged to the States.
The common law has affixed such distinct and appropriate ideas to the terms denization, and naturalization, that they can not be confounded together, or mistaken for each other in any legal transaction whatever. They are so absolutely distinct in their natures, that in England the rights they convey, can not both be given by the same power; the king can make denizens, by his grant, or letters patent, but nothing but an act of parliament can make a naturalized subject. This was the legal state of this subject in Virginia, when the federal constitution was adopted; it declares that congress shall have power to establish an uniform rule of naturalization; throughout the United States; but it also further declares, that the powers not delegated by the constitution to the U. States, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, respectively or to the people. The power of naturalization, and not that of denization, being delegated to congress, and the power of denization not being prohibited to the states by the constitution, that power ought not to be considered as given to congress, but, on the contrary, as being reserved to the states.
George Tucker
And who does Tucker attribute the 10th Amendment to?
whereby it is expressly declared, that, "the powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." This article is, indeed, nothing more than an express recognition of the law of nations; for Vattel informs us, "that several sovereign, and independent states may unite themselves together by a perpetual confederacy, without each in particular ceasing to be a perfect state.
George Tucker
---
If this isn't what you were looking for, keep thinking about it and let me know. :-)
I remember at the time that it moved St George Tucker from being sort of "neutral" on the topic, to firmly over into the Jus Sanguinus camp.
I'm not sure it's worth looking for though, the only person here who needs evidence won't believe any when he sees it. I certainly don't feel like putting much effort into arguing with an idiot, and I expect you don't either.
Do you remember Jeff Winston? I remember that clown making a HUGE DEAL out of the fact that James A. Bayard, Jr. wrote a book which he claimed supported his stupid Jus Soli argument. He swore up and down that this was a GREAT EXPERT and was the LAST WORD on the subject.
I pointed out that Bayard's words were not nearly so supportive of Jeff's position as Jeff seemed to believe and he kept on and on an on about Bayard until I finally shut him up.
Turns out he was an idiot, just like I told him.
Remember that? Well we've got another wannabe Jeff, but not so intelligent or resourceful.
Remember this?
Kinda blows a big hole in their "Born on the Soil English Law" shtick, doesn't it? :)
Yeah, in England the children born of Foreigners had special taxes put on them, and couldn't inherit any property, weren't allowed to perform certain jobs, and were basically second class citizens.