Also apparently according to Senator Jacob Howard, who, when he introduced the amendment to the Senate, said "This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already."
Which is a perfectly reasonable thing to say if you believe that the "law of the land" already excludes people born to foreigners, as citizens.
Senator Jacob Howard, in 1866:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
And what piece of Legislation was it to which he was referring when he offered that clarification? It was this one, the Civil rights act of 1866.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States;Any suggestion that Senator Howard intended to grant citizenship to "anchor babies" is an intentional misrepresentation of his meaning. His focus, and the focus of the entire congress of that era, was to insure citizenship and protection for newly freed slaves.
The reason most of these historical references to people born to foreigners are casually is because nobody at that time BELIEVED ANYONE WAS STUPID ENOUGH TO DO THAT!