Mr. Schade. Yes, sir; foreigners and their children since 1790.
By this point, you'd have a hard time separating out "foreigners and their increase" from the "native born since 1790" because there's been so much intermarriage and interbreeding.
And why would anyone really want to introduce such a distinction? Maybe it works for determining who gets into the DAR, but do we want that sort of a distinction in our political life?
In any case, it does bring up an interesting aspect of the topic: I fit in with the "foreigners since 1790 and their increase," but Obama? Which side of the line is he on?
Is any court really going to decide that someone who was born here and had ancestors who've been living and dying here continuously since the 1640s isn't a "natural born citizen"?
__________________________________________________________
Now. I want to give you some proof, taken also from the census of 1880, showing that this assertion of mine, this calculation is correct. In 1880 the foreigners and their children (not grandchildren) outnumbered the natives in the following States(see chart in the records)
The Chairman. Are you allowing the natives any children or only the foreigners?
x Mr. Schaue. I repeat again that this statement is taken from the census of 1880. The census stated, for instance, that the foreigners number so many and those born in this country of foreign parents were so many. By adding them together I construed the above table.
The Chairman. You compare those with the native born?
Mr. Schade. I give the foreigners and their children. I do not add their grandchildren, because I give them to the natives.
Representative Geissenhaineb. You do add the children?
Mr. Schade. Yes, sir.
________________________________________________________
The report was based on how many were born of foreigners aka how many aliens born in the US. Native status was deferred to the 3rd generation.