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

To: 4Zoltan
The Massachusetts legislature uses the term “natural born subject” and “natural born citizen” interchangeably from 1785 through 1791.

As this is the transition period from Monarchy to Free Republic, it is not even noteworthy that they were transitioning terms as well. Natural born Subject, and Natural born citizen are the closes analogous terms between the very different forms of government, but the requirements of the one was very different for the requirements of the other. The principle of someone claiming ownership or you merely because you were born on their Land, is incompatible with the foundation of American Government. Our Federal existence is based on Natural Law, not the enforced servitude to a King.

1,478 posted on 03/14/2013 11:13:59 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1465 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp; Jeff Winston

“this is the transition period”

Did the transition period continue until June, 1798?

“Resolve Requesting the Senators and Representatives in Congress to Propose an Amendment to the Constitution Providing, that None but Natural Born Subjects be Eligible to Certain Offices”

http://books.google.com/books?id=rnYQAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA211&dq=massachusetts+natural+born+subject+amendments&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mxOpUI3PN83rigLNmYGgAw&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=massachusetts%20natural%20born%20subject%20amendments&f=false

In the body of the resolve it uses the term “natural born citizen”.

During the transition period what would have been the definition of “natural born citizen”?

BTW, the English considered their legal system to be based on Natural Law.


1,489 posted on 03/14/2013 12:50:38 PM PDT by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1478 | 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