Posted on 05/12/2010 12:36:53 PM PDT by rxsid
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 from the U.S. Constitution states:
"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States."
another view of the 1758 edition:
http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1858&Itemid=27
BINGO..got the right one-FULL version
the 1758 edition has des citoyens & naturels
the 1773 des citoyens & des naturels
des translates today to “of”
is this important?
Yes Vattel is saying that citizens and naturels are distinct.
des translates today to “of”: is this important?
Yes. “AND” in legal terms means they are 2 distinct persons. If they were similar, Vattel would have used “OR”. Every society has citizens, but not all citizens are natural born citizens.
James Kent: There is a still more general division of the inhabitants of every country, under the comprehensive title of aliens and natives, and to the consideration of them our attention will be directed in the present lecture.
Natives are all persons born within the jurisdiction of the United States. If they were resident citizens at the time of the declaration of independence, though born elsewhere, and deliberately yielded to it an express or implied sanction, they became parties to it, and are to be considered as natives; their social tie being coeval with the existence of the nation.
This is why the phrase "natural born" is used. If it was meant for all natives, then there would only have been a need to say " A Native citizen, 35yrs old & resident of the US for 14 yrs or a Native citizen at the time of the adoption. According to Kent, all citizens at the time of the adoption of the constitution were natives, but not all natives became citizens hence the generalization of the term. Natural born is a very specific term. This is why that pesky holding allegiance to a foreign nation that the trolls & drones like to disregard is such a poking point to them. And as St. George Tucker put it, per his edition on Blackstone's commentaries, a man can not owe 2 allegiances at once and as long as the Constitution or statutes never put the concept of "dual citizenship" into positive law, then it was automatically the law of nature that applied.
I can’t figure out where in each version you are refering to. Can you give page numbers (in the originals)?
"Les citoyens" and "Les naturels." He's clearly describing two "kinds" of citizens.
Original French version of Vattel's Law of Nations:
Emer de Vattel, Le droit des gens, ou Principes de la loi naturelle, vol. 1 (of 2) [1758]
From Chapter XIX, 212 (page 248 of 592):
Title in French: "Des citoyens et naturels"
To English: "Citizens and natural"
French text (about citizens): "Les citoyens sont les membres de la societe civile : lies a cette societe par certains devoirs et soumis a son autorite, ils participent avec egalite a ses avantages."
-------------------
To English: "The citizens are the members of the civil society: linked to this society by certain duties and subject to its authority, they participate with equality has its advantages."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
French text (about "natural" born citizens): "Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pays, de parens citoyens"
-------------------
To English, gives this: "the natural, or indigenous, are those born in the country, parents who are citizens"
And yes, as we know, Vattel clearly made a distinction between a "citizen" and a natural born citizen.
A reminder...your translation of naturels to naturals is incorrect. Naturels according to the Founders, Vattel and Dumas means natural born.
The above page xv. Des citoyens & naturels (1758)
page 485 lists Des citoyens & des naturels (1773)
Whoa, what? Sorry, apparently I missed that translation. From what source do we know that the framers translated “Naturels” to “natural born” and not simply “the natural” or “natural”? Doesn’t “ne” or “nes” translate to “born” in French?
Should be: Doesn’t “ne” or “nes” translate to “born” in English?
It has been posted several times the Founders understood the word naturels to mean natural born not natural.
There is a translation in 1781 of a letter from the French Foreign Minister on behalf of His Most Christian Majesty to the Congress in Convention.
The document and translation is in the Congressional Record.
The documents are posted on FR.
What translates today cannot compare to the 18th century meaning and understanding of words.
I sent you a post several days ago..we should make a thread on this subject regarding the meaning of naturels being natural born, with you taking the lead.
El Gato and I have the links in the CR where the Founders translated naturels to natural born. not natural.
This is the missing link.
Please see El Gato’s post 20 this thread.
The founders translated sujects naturels to natural born subjects.
This clearly means they understood naturels to mean natural born.
We are wasting time on Hawaii, WND and Tim Adams. It matters not where Obama was born. His father is an alien.
Naturels means natural born not natural according to the Founders.
The documents are posted #’s 25 and 26. The letter from the French and the Founders translation.
El Gato provided the link in post 20.
Naturels means natural born. It does not mean “natural” according to Vattel and the Founders.
The 1781 documents were overlooked during previous court cases regarding citizenship cases in the past. Seems only a few here on free republic understand their importance.
“Among the Hebrews, citizenship was derived by birth of Israelite parents”
“As, however, the arms of Rome extended her empire over the world, so did participation in her citizenship become an object of desire as a ground of honour, a source of protection, and a means of advancement.
“The right was variously acquired, by descent, merit, and manumission: — I. By birth from parents who were Roman citizens, thus in the Acts (xxii. 26), — ‘I was free bom;’ the rule being, that citizens beget citizens, but only in matrimonium justum, or where both parents were Romans”
http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=nxUBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA372&dq=citizen+parents&hl=en&output=text#c_top
The People’s Dictionary of the Bible, 3rd Edition 1850
Chapter 2. Both parents citizens.
4th Century Athens. Two citizen parents.
The idea of two citizen parents did not begin with Vattel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.