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

To: Mr Rogers; bushpilot1; RachelFaith

Excerpts from the Guardian, I wonder why George kept the books, hmmmm???:

NEW YORK — If George Washington were alive today, he might face a hefty overdue library fine.

New York City’s oldest library says one of its ledgers shows that the president has racked up 220 years’ worth of late fees on two books he borrowed, but never returned.

One of the books was the “Law of Nations,” which deals with international relations. The other was a volume of debates from Britain’s House of Commons.

Both books were due on Nov. 2, 1789. According to the Guardian, “At today’s prices, adjusted for inflation, he would face a late fine of $300,000.”

New York Society Library head librarian Mark Bartlett says the institution isn’t seeking payment of the fines, but would love to get the books back.

The ledger also lists books being taken out by other founding fathers, including Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr and John Jay.

The entry on Washington simply lists the borrower as “president.”


594 posted on 08/03/2010 8:57:34 AM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies ]


To: danamco; bushpilot1; RachelFaith

Ref book borrowed by George Washington:

The book was overdue as of Nov. 2, 1789.

The first translation of Vattel to use ‘natural born citizen’ was published in 1797, 8 years later. So whatever else George read in it, he didn’t find “natural born citizen”. He found “The natives, or indigenes...”.

If the Constitution had been following Vattel, it would require a President to be a “native, or indigenous citizen”.

Also, note the “or indigenes”...defined as “originating in and characteristic of a particular region or country; native (often fol. by to ): the plants indigenous to Canada; the indigenous peoples of southern Africa.”

For an example, pulled almost at random, “Indigenous Australians are the original inhabitants of the Australian continent and nearby islands and the descendants of these peoples.[2] Indigenous Australians are distinguished as either Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders, who currently together make up about 2.7% of Australia’s population.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Australians

A person can go back a number of generations and not be ‘indigenous’.


619 posted on 08/03/2010 1:27:47 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (When the ass brays, don't reply...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 594 | 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