Replies

The point is that “natural born” (the English term) did not come from Vattel. The term “natural born” in fact was taken from English common law, as the post and the link clearly state.

That the term “natural born” was used at all indicates that they were using a term known to them from English common law. Were they to have used Vattel as their intended meaning and been intelligent fellows, the LAST thing they would do is use a term that was so obviously taken from English common law.

That you all cannot see this is a choice you have made to be intellectually dishonest. Either that or you’re just stupid.

"What do you think “natives” and “indigenes” mean if not natural born”?"

T.E. is indeed trying to ofucate the truth.

The Original French text:

Translating the french text: "les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pays, de parents citoyens"

To English, gives this: "the natural, or indigenous, are those born in the country, parents who are citizens"

Furthermore, Blackstone has this to say:

“all children, born out of the king’s ligeance, whose fathers were natural-born subjects, are now natural-born subjects themselves, to all intents and purposes, without any exception;”

Coupled with no known action of Barry renouncing his born with allegiance to the crown...he continues to be British to this day (see Blackstone).

So no matter which way someone try's to explain this thing...Barry WAS and IS British BY BIRTH.

b.t.w. I've no doubt that the framers were specifically referring to Vattel, as he's the only one who defined the term that appears in our Constitution.