A view of the Constitution of the United States of America by Rawle, William, 1759-1836 (citizen)
same link as above. (common law)
Where do you find that? There are the links so you shouldn't have any problem stating upon which page Rawle does so. I've even made the links available with the search results for "citizen" and "common law" loaded.
Your help would be greatly appreciated.
He made this argument in the case of "Negress Flora vs Joseph Graisberry" and the Supreme court of Pennsylvania voted Unanimously that he was wrong and told him he was wrong.
Sadly, that case eludes my ability on finding things online. Do you perchance have an online reference? Trust, but verify. You know how it is.
Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.
Now I happen to know *WHY* he was deliberately lying about this. It took me awhile to figure it out. See if you can guess why he would LIE about this particular point.
Not anymore. It is a struggle every time I have to find it. I find it, and then lose it.
The transcript of the trial is lost, and we have the verdict and the writings of Rawle, and his co counsel to work with. We also have the history of other freedom cases to discern exactly what Rawle was trying to argue before the court. Rawle's argument was the same argument he always made. Being born on the soil entitled a person to citizenship, and therefore Flora could not be a slave and must therefore be a citizen.
We know the court was unanimously against him, and Flora remained the property of Joseph Graisberry.