“If ‘soil’ babies born to foreigners are US citizens at birth as you state, then why as of the 1892 was the US government still classifying these ‘soil’ babies as foreigners at birth?”
I’d argue that it’s because in 1892 counting the children of foreigners as citizens, though plainly demanded by the 14th amendment, had apparently not yet become common knowledge. Or perhaps that particular person simply chose to ignore it. In any case, things definitely changed with the Wong Kim Ark case, as you know. That was a short 6 years later, in 1898, as you also know.
Which makes me wonder why you brought up the random guy compiling statistical data in some random year in the first place. Who has more weight, SCOTUS or Joe Census?
You are not getting away that easy because as YOU & ALL OTHER DRONES have repeatedly stated that soil of birth WAS the common knowledge of acceptance defining citizenship. Talk about double speak. You have officially won the AWARD( http://www.bukisa.com/articles/250875_the-doublespeak-campaign-the-doublespeak-award-the-orwell-award-and-the-ncte ):
And 'thank you' for also agreeing that jus soli was NOT common law known by all, thus it could not have been our common law.