Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: EnderWiggins; DoctorBulldog; Lmo56; Red Steel; Velveeta; Danae; syc1959; LucyT; STARWISE; ...

> The copy of Law of Nations on John Adam’s nightstand said
> nothing about natural born citizens. Neither did any
> other edition until it was inserted by an unknown
> translator into the 1797 London edition.

Once again, you show your ignorance on this topic. Let me help you.

First of all, John Adams was quite literate and lingual in French, as he went with Ben Franklin to Paris to create a treaty and ask for funding for the Revolutionary War. He and Franklin clearly used "Law of Nations" for definitions and as a primer for French with which they were not familiar; Franklin commented as such in 1775 (if memory serves me correctly, Franklin had 4 copies):

Adams would have continued to negotiate with the French, but because of his “stern and haughty” nature, by the summer of 1780 the French refused further communication with Adams; henceforth they would deal only with Franklin.

Later, when John Adams served as US Ambassador to Britain, Thomas Jefferson would also have been required to speak French when he served as US ambassador to France in the mid-1780s. They had to be able to speak and write French, and did so by reading the books available at the time (since the WWW and Babelfish weren’t quite available yet).

As the Framers eschewed the phrase “Natural Born Subject”, they began to use phrase “Natural Born Citizen” to put additional distance between themselves and the Crown they had just declared independence from in 1776. In fact, you’ll find that the home States of the Second and Third “Committee of Eleven” that inserted the “Natural Born Citizen” qualification in July and August of 1787, at the bequest of Washington and John Jay, began to migrate from the phrase “Natural Born Subject” to “Natural Born Citizen” in the early to mid 1780s, such as Adams' home State of Massachusetts:

So, where did “Natural Born Citizen” originate and who used it FIRST? Not from Blackstone certainly as he did not use the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” to describe “Natural Born Subject”.

Framers would have likely been familiar with the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” from the London-based multi-lingual translator “J. Patsall”, known for his French and Latin translations into English. He’s attributed to the first-known use of the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” in this 1774 English translation (from the Latin) classic Institutio Oratoria, by Marcus Fabius Quintilianus (published in the first century A.D.):

Although it is unknown who is responsible for the 1797 London-based English translation of the French version of the "Law of Nations" on John Adam's nightstand in the 1770s through the mid-1790s, most experts (including myself) agree that London-based multi-lingual translator “J. Patsall” is likely responsible. There just weren't that many translators in those days with France and England as enemies.

And since J. Patsall first introduced the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” in 1774 — 23 years before the 1797 English Translation was available — the likelihood is very, very, VERY high that the Founders and Framers derived their use and understanding of the phrase from Vattel's French "Law of Nations", instead of from Blackstone ... who never used the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” in the first place:



860 posted on 02/16/2010 2:34:38 AM PST by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 665 | View Replies ]


To: BP2

Excellent information. I had not known about J. Patsall’s usage of Natural Born Citizen.

Thanks for the info.

Cheers


861 posted on 02/16/2010 5:49:48 AM PST by DoctorBulldog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 860 | View Replies ]

To: BP2

BRILLIANT POST and fantastic Research!

There should be awards for this level of work!


863 posted on 02/16/2010 6:11:36 AM PST by Danae (Don't like our Constitution? Try living in a country with out one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 860 | View Replies ]

To: BP2
Thanks, BP ... quite an interesting, suddenly engaged and entrenched jouster. Could be usuper courtroom and stalking points advocacy practice.

Maybe it's Siddarth Velamoor ...or no, probably too 'Chicago' in the abrasiveness of tone that naturally seeps into verbiage.

Personally, this is what I'd like to see on billboards everywhere:

WHO'S YOUR DADDY?

868 posted on 02/16/2010 8:16:13 AM PST by STARWISE (They (LIBS-STILL) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war- Richard Miniter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 860 | View Replies ]

To: BP2
Okay... that was certainly a unique and innovative post, and I commend you for the effort.

Why you spent so much time slaying again the already slain (i.e. that John Adams spoke French) is entirely beyond me. Everybody knows that both Franklin and Adams spoke French. We also know, however that no Birther has ever been able to show us where either of them did what no professional translator ever did before 1797... translate de Vattel to read "natural born citizen."

But the most entertaining part of your posts was this:

" Although it is unknown who is responsible for the 1797 London-based English translation of the French version of the "Law of Nations" on John Adam's nightstand in the 1770s through the mid-1790s, most experts (including myself) agree that London-based multi-lingual translator “J. Patsall” is likely responsible. There just weren't that many translators in those days with France and England as enemies."

Okay. Now explain to me again how a 1797 edition of de Vattel can possible have been on John Adam's nightstand twenty-years before it was published?

I gotta say... that's a pretty neat trick.

You then go on:

"And since J. Patsall first introduced the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” in 1774 — 23 years before the 1797 English Translation was available — the likelihood is very, very, VERY high that the Founders and Framers derived their use and understanding of the phrase from Vattel's French "Law of Nations", instead of from Blackstone ... who never used the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” in the first place:"

To recap you position here. A translator who you think (for no apparently good reason) might have maybe been responsible for the 1797 translation of de Vattel magically managed to go back in time and give the founders access to a translation he would not actually get around to doing for another 20 years?

Does that pretty much sum it up?
880 posted on 02/16/2010 9:29:56 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 860 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson