Jeff, once again you are a LYING piece of sh*t. You DELIBERATELY misrepresent the vote to seat Williams as a referendum against Dr. Ramsey's scholarship (which even Madison himself Acknowledged) and you completely ignore Madison's argument regarding William Smith's Jus Sanguinus Heritage. William Smith HIMSELF quotes Vattel in presenting his case!
Madison simply points out that the GENERAL RULE in the absence of an explicit law, is to use the place of birth. He specifically notes that it is not the ONLY criteria. He also bemoans the fact that South Carolina did not have an explicit law defining citizenship,and if it had, it would have made the decision simple. Once again, NONE of this addresses the issue of "natural born citizen" as required of the Presidency.
You further ignore the fact that Under Madison, the US Ambassador to France (John Armstrong, who WAS a Member of Congress in 1787) EXPLICITLY rejected the claim that birth in the United States equaled citizenship. You likewise ignore Madison's letter to the Alexandria Herald explicitly stating that James McClure wasn't a citizen just because he was born in Charleston South Carolina.
"Publius", 1811 (Madison's Pen name when he wrote some of the Federalist papers.) 
In other words, You ignore anything which puts the lie to your theory, and you twist anything you can into appearing to support your theory.
And Samuel Roberts, who not only wasn't a Constitutional Convention delegate, he didn't even have any known direct connection to any of the major Founders or Framers.
No, Samuel Roberts wasn't a constitutional Delegate, but William Lewis, who trained him, WAS a member of the Pennsylvania Legislature that ratified the Constitution. (James Wilson, invoked Vattel at the Ratification debate.)
Once again, Robert's credentials are better than Rawle's, who was EXPLICITLY trained in English law, and had no direct knowledge of the specific Deliberations of the founders except what he could glean from having had lunch with some of them.
Rawle was a close personal friend of both Washington and Franklin,
Big deal. Everyone in the Philadelphia legal circles of that time period knew each other. Martha Washington had Sex with George, but that didn't mean she learned anything.
met with them and other Founders for months in Philadelphia leading up to the Convention,
He met with them casually, and what could he have learned BEFORE they discussed article II, to which they added the "Natural born citizen" requirement late?
was asked to be US Attorney General by President Washington, was appointed US District Attorney for PA, and was one of our major early legal experts.
Yes, he succeeded William Lewis (you know, the guy who TRAINED Roberts) as United States Attorney for the District of Pennsylvania. Like I said, Lewis was a member of the Legislature that debated Ratifying the US Constitution, what was Rawle again? Private Lawyer at the time?
Once again, you attribute to Rawle God like knowledge and certainty without a qualm about his training or motivation. Once again, I will tell you that he attempted his "English Common Law Argument" on behalf of a slave for who's freedom he was suing, and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania rejected his argument and found Unanimously against him.
He just waited till those Judges were dead to get the last laugh when he wrote his book.