 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
BRUTUS was a pseudonym for Robert Yates. |
Posted on 05/12/2010 12:36:53 PM PDT by rxsid
|
|
|
|
|
BRUTUS was a pseudonym for Robert Yates. |
"Sir: Mr. Temple presented to me this Morning the Commission which I have now the Honor of transmitting to your Excellency, herewith enclosed. It appoints him Consul General of his brittanic Majesty throughout the United States of America.Two questions arise on this Occasion--
(1.) Whether he is to be received de Jure [legitimate, lawful]
(2.) Whether it will be expedient to receive him de Gratia.The first Question is settled by Vattel in the following Paragraph, vizt--.
"Among the modern Institutions for the utility of Commerce, one of the most useful is that of Consuls, or Persons residing in the large trading Cities, and especially in foreign Sea Forts; with a Commission empowering them to attend to the Rights and Priveleges of their Nation, and to terminate Misunderstandings, and Contests, among its Merchants. When a Nation trades largely with a Country, it is requisite to have there a Person charged with such a Commission, and as the State which allows of this Commerce, must naturally favor it; so for the same Reason, it is likewise to admit a Consul. But there being no absolute and perfect Obligation to this, the Nation disposed to have a Consul, must procure itself this Right by the very Treaty of Commerce. "
Looks like there is no 1787 version that states "natural born" instead of native.
Appreciate a comment on rxsid’s posting chapter XIX from the 1787 edition..
What say you?? There seems to be a discrepancy what you told us and what is posted.
Noticed the 1787 posted has 802 pages..the one in the Jefferson room at the Library of Congress has 728 pages.
Your post lists two different pages..802 and 728.
It’s interesting because it list’s pages as 802, and then physical pages as 728. Strange. I wonder if the 802 page reference is a typo by whomever entered the electronic description.
We should compare the Luke White, the one in the Australian library..something is amiss..
Someone needs to visit the Library of Congress..to see the darn thing..to many times..an online website says they have a certain edition..but it is not what we are looking for..
It is a rare book..lets not commit this is the real deal...agreed?
Unfortunately...Im inclined to believe this latest find. It comes directly from a resource from a university research library. The only way its not a true representation...is if this company that provides the direct access to the l.o.c and other libraries and research institutions around the world is providing bogus information. At this point...we have two sources that contradict the allegation of someone online. I hope Im wrong...but Im 99% sure devattel is incorrect based on this documentation.
99% is an agreement...how did you access the site??
Sandwich, February 10th, 1813
An Abstract of a British Act for naturalizing such Foreign Protestants, and others therein mentioned, as are settled, Of shall settle in any of his Majesty's Colonies in America. Passed in the Thirteenth Year of his present Majesty's Reign.
"ENACTED, That after the first Day of June, 1740, all Foreigners who have inhabited, or shall inhabit for Seven Years or more, in any of our American Colonies, and shall not be absent from some of the said Colonies more than two Months at any one Time during the said Seven Years; and shall take and subscribe the Oaths, and make, repeat, and subscribe the Declaration appointed by the Act I Geo I. or being a Quaker, shall make and subscribe the Declaration of Fidelity, and take the affirm the Effect of the Abjuration Oath, appointed by the Act 8 Geo I. and also make and subscribe the Profession of his Christian Belief, appointed by the Act I W. & M before any one of the Judges of the Colony wherein such Persons have inhabited, or shall inhabit, shall be adjudged to be his Majesty's natural born Subjects of this Kingdom, to all Intents and Purposes, as if they had been really born in the same; that the said Judges shall give the said Oaths, &c. in open Court, between the Hours of Nine and Twelve in the Forenoon; which shall be entered in the same Court, and also in the Secretary's Office of the Colony wherein such Person so inhabit, for doing whereof, Two Shillings shall be paid at such respective Place, under Penalty of 10 l. for every Neglect: Every Secretary is also required to make such Entry in a Book to be kept for that Purpose in his Office, on Notification by a Judge of the same Colony, under the like Penalty. All Persons duely qualifying themselves to be naturalized, (except Quakers or Jews ) shall receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Super in some Protestant Congregation, in Great-Britain , or in some of the American Colonies, within three Months next before their taking and subscribing the said Oaths, and Declaration; and shall, at the Time of taking and subscribing the said Oaths, &c. produce a Certificate signed by the Person administering, the said Sacrament, and attested by Two credible Witnesses, whereof an Entry shall be made in the Secretary's Office of the Colony wherein they shall inhabit, as also in the Court where the said Oaths shall be taken, without Fee or Reward.Whenever a Jew presents himself to take the Oaths pursuant to this Act, the Words (upon the true Faith of a Christians) shall be omitted in administring the same; and the taking the said Oaths without those Words, as the Jews were permitted to take the Oath of Abjuration by the Act 10 Geo. I. shall be deemed a sufficient Taking according to this Act. A Certificate under the Seal of any of the said Colonies, of any Persons having conformed in the several Particulars required by this Act, shall be deemed a sufficient Testimony thereof, and of his being a natural born Subject of Great Britain, to all Intents and Purposes, in every Court within the King's Dominions."
Here, we see a clear example how how a FOREIGNER could come into the British colonies in America and, after having meet certain residency requirements, Christian faith affirmation & taken an oath....then became a British "natural born subject" for all "intents and purposes."
This was the process by which a NATURALIZED foreigner BECAME a natural born subject of the King.
Clearly, our process is much different. Our Naturalized citizens do NOT become "natural born Citizens," let alone, for all "intents and purposes" (i.e. POTUS eligibility).
in the 1700's, a British natural born subject was NOT the same thing as a natural born citizen as known in natural law.
I’m afraid this is of no affect because until the people repent/turn back, I have absolutely no confidence in any ploitician, man or woman, at this point. Sure Obama may be ousted in 2012 due to economic reasons, but will a Republican of any sort be any better? Absolutely not unless they disavow that which they stood silently by in order for what happenned in 2008 go forward as if there had been no wrong done. Until they turn back to what is principled & right in the eyes of God, we have no voice no matter how much historical evidence we bring forward. So pray, just don’t do it right after you have eaten a big ham sandwich, pock chop or other things He calls abominations and especially, do not say a prayer of thanks to Him for these abominations either. Proverbs 28:9
The real property law of the state of New York: being chapter fifty of the Consolidated laws (passed February 17, 1909 ; chapter 52, laws of 1909) and all the amendments thereto
This is great. Now if you can find where the State of NY defines who the “natural born” citizens are and who are just “citizens” we would be one more step closer.
As the article's author, Stephen Tonchen said:
"In 1736, Matthew Bacon defined "natural-born Subject" as:"
All those are natural-born Subjects whose Parents, at the Time of their Birth, were under the actual Obedience of our King, and whose Place of Birth was within his dominions. (Page 77 in this 724-page (48MB) PDF file: Matthew Bacon, A New Abridgement of the Law, Vol 1, 1736)."
Initially I just wanted to make sure the quote was correct, and use it as a rebuttal to all of those Blackstone quoters out there, but in the process of finding a copy I discovered something interesting. The Boston Public Library has a copy of this book available for viewing on line.
They do not have just any copy, they have JOHN ADAMS' COPY!
(It has his signature on the title page!)
This is a DIRECT LINKAGE with a prominent founder, and since it was HIS BOOK, and HE signed it, it cannot be denied that the definition contained therein of "natural born subject" was likely familiar to him. Since this definition of "natural born subject" is virtually identical to the Vattel definition of "natural born citizen", it makes it all the more probable that this was the commonly understood meaning of the Article II term. Anyway, some photos.
And about the time I think it can't get any more significant, I notice this: 
It has a pasted-on emblem of John Adams' son, John Quincy Adams! Apparently the Son used the Father's law-books as well! :)
Good find!
A fantastic find..going to the book.
Suggest you post a thread. Mr Rogers head is going to explode.
A fantastic find..going to the book.
Suggest you post a thread. Mr Rogers head is going to explode.
Not just yet. I'm currently laying a trap for "Ha Ha Thats Very Logical" by trying to get him to assert the English Common law regarding "natural born subject" is the basis of Article II "natural born citizen." I suggest everyone else, as quietly as possible, do the same to your favorite Obama eligibility defender. :)
How these guys will try to walk THAT statement back I can't even imagine, but it promises to be entertaining! :)
John Adams law book located by DiogenesLamp..
“All those are natural-born Subjects whose Parents, at the Time of their Birth, were under the actual Obedience of our King, and whose Place of Birth was within his dominions.”
(Page 77 in this 724-page (48MB) PDF file: Matthew Bacon, A New Abridgement of the Law, Vol 1, 1736)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/2512143/posts?page=376#376
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.
