“How did he get to Great Britain without a US Passport in the first place?”
He would have been 10 years old. And when he was born, his father was still a British subject. So by the English statutory laws, James would have been a British subject. So I guess he could have had a British passport. But when he needed to go to France, he would have needed a US passport (what with the Napoleonic Wars).
But there was another question I had from this article. It says that under the 1792 Law of Virginia “’all free persons born within the territory of this Commonwealth’ is deemed to be a citizen”. And goes on to say that in Virginia, the “alien, as well as a citizen, can beget a citizen”.
But the language of the 1792 Law is almost identical to the 1779 Virginia law (”that all white persons born within the territory of this commonwealth” are deemed to be citizens.) The 1779 law was drafted by Thomas Jefferson.
So was jus soli the law in Virginia from 1779 to 1792? It would appear so.
You have obviously studied this more than I have. I'll have to catch up before I can offer a sensible opinion.
But there was another question I had from this article. It says that under the 1792 Law of Virginia “’all free persons born within the territory of this Commonwealth’ is deemed to be a citizen”. And goes on to say that in Virginia, the “alien, as well as a citizen, can beget a citizen”.
Yes it does, with the provision that their parents remain in and reside in the state, as well as take an oath of loyalty. (In other words, "naturalize.")
But the language of the 1792 Law is almost identical to the 1779 Virginia law (”that all white persons born within the territory of this commonwealth” are deemed to be citizens.) The 1779 law was drafted by Thomas Jefferson.
If you read it carefully, you will note that the 1792 law incorporates the 1779 law as well.
So was jus soli the law in Virginia from 1779 to 1792? It would appear so.
No, The law written by Thomas Jefferson was a jus sanguinus law. It is difficult to follow, but if you read it carefully it says the Father (or if dead, the mother) must be a citizen of Virginia in order for the Children to be a citizen of Virginia. Yes, they changed it in the 1792 law to allow for any children born in the Commonwealth to be automatically a citizen, but that is a change from the earlier 1779 law.
It is not remarkable, the states had the authority to set whatever requirements for citizenship of their state that they wished. Other States enacted rules that required someone to be citizen, or in the process of becoming a citizen in order for their children to be considered citizens. There is, of course, a distinction between State Citizenship and Federal Citizenship.
“But there was another question I had from this article. It says that under the 1792 Law of Virginia “’all free persons born within the territory of this Commonwealth’ is deemed to be a citizen”. And goes on to say that in Virginia, the “alien, as well as a citizen, can beget a citizen”.
But the language of the 1792 Law is almost identical to the 1779 Virginia law (”that all white persons born within the territory of this commonwealth” are deemed to be citizens.) The 1779 law was drafted by Thomas Jefferson.”
It’s not almost identical, it is exactly identical because you have failed to realize that you are quoting the same exact law - the Virginia law. The article does not say there was a South Carolina law in 1792. There was no such law. Publius points out that South Carolina has no such law as Virginia had, hence McClure required naturalization. Publius argues that McClure was naturalized, not when his father was born, but in 1802 when the new naturalization law was passed.
See my response below to your question re the 1790 act.
“But the language of the 1792 Law is almost identical to the 1779 Virginia law (”that all white persons born within the territory of this commonwealth” are deemed to be citizens.) The 1779 law was drafted by Thomas Jefferson.”
My first reply on this point mistook your question as to have stated that there was a 1792 act in South Carolina similar to the 1779 Virginia act. Apologies. I see now you were referring to both the 1779 and 1792 acts of Virginia.
ma bad... im grumpy before my morning coffee :)