What the Act actually said was that if your father had never been RESIDENT in the U.S., a child born beyond the sea could not be considered as a natural born citizen.
Here ‘s the exact wording of the relevant passage: “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.”
http://www.indiana.edu/%7Ekdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html
And what sort of Person would have "never been RESIDENT"? A Foreigner, That's who.
The act was meant to interdict the Children of Citizens who had American citizenship but never lived in the country from passing on citizenship. As a matter of fact, I believe that is exactly what it says in the congressional record regarding that act.
If someone possessing American Citizenship, but who had never been RESIDENT could not pass on citizenship, by what argument could you claim that a foreign man could do so?
Bear in mind, that by English Common law, (your favorite legal authority when discussing this issue) *ONLY* the Fathers could pass on Citizenship if the child was born in a Foreign land.