My simple question as to why it takes 14 judges to decide if "Calvin" was born on the soil is obfuscating? There is definitely obfuscating going on all right, but it isn't me.
The case was not about the principle of birth on the soil of the country, which was already established, but about whether a person born in another country which had the same King as England should be treated as an alien for the purposes of inheriting an estate in England, or not.
Calvin's case is also known as "the Case of the Postnati". "Postnati" in this case (I know how you hate Latin) Means after-born, or in better English, "Born- After". It refers to the fact that "Calvin" was "born-after" King James I became King of England, so there is NO QUESTION about "Calvin" being born in another country. He wasn't.
Let me repeat. "Calvin" was BORN-AFTER James I ascended the throne of England and thereby Uniting England and Scotland, so under the rules of English law, anyone born in Scotland AFTER James I became King, was born as a subject of the King.
So why did it take 14 judges and much deliberation to figure this out?
I STUDIED Latin, you idiot. What I hate is your pretentiousness in bandying it about as if you know what the hell you're talking about, and are some kind of authority, when you don't, and aren't.