To carry that same point further, they also existed at a time when women were not able to contract, and essentially had no legal status. This interpretation has morphed over time. At the time of John Jay, status had to be transferred from the father. but I don't see you arguing that. I wonder why not, if the definition and meaning of terms and phrases are so important to your assertions.
The truth of it is and I have said this for support of my case, is that the interpretation I am using is modern or better said 20th century, not the 16th.
As you should know, Constitutional interpretations employ a number of techniques, including Textualism, Strict Constructionalism, Originalism, Balancing, Prudentialism, Doctrinalism, Precedent, and Functionalism.
You are making a argument from only one perspective. Which is why I disagree.
1758 Vattro Chapter XIX
Natives Indigenous