“Children born in England to aliens could NOT inherit property, holdings, etc., from their parents. “
Proof?
“So while Blackstone may choose to say that “children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such,” the fact remains that there indeed were significant differences in the rights and privileges of each.”
Proof?
Many of the original cases involving NBC were ones of property, and I can’t recall any that hinged on if the NBC/NBS had alien parents or not.
Lynch, for example, was born in the USA of English parents visiting here for a few months - but she was declared a NBC.
Blackstone hedged with “generally speaking” because there were exceptions, such as ambassadors.
By the common law of England, every person born within the dominions of the Crown, no matter whether of English or of foreign parents, and, in the latter case, whether the parents were settled or merely temporarily sojourning, in the country, was an English subject, save only the children of foreign ambassadors (who were excepted because their fathers carried their own nationality with them), or a child born to a foreigner during the hostile occupation of any part of the territories of England. No effect appears to have been given to descent as a source of nationality.
Cockburn on Nationality, 7.
The English statute of 11 & 12 Will. III (1700). c. 6, entitled
An act to enable His Majesty’s natural-born subjects to inherit the estate of their ancestors, either lineal or collateral, notwithstanding their father or mother were aliens,
enacted that “all and every person or persons, being the King’s natural-born subject or subjects, within any of the King’s realms or dominions,” might and should thereafter lawfully inherit and make their titles by descent to any lands
from any of their ancestors, lineal or collateral, although the father and mother, or father or mother, or other ancestor, of such person or persons, by, from, through or under whom
title should be made or derived, had been or should be “born out of the King’s allegiance, and out of is Majesty’s realms and dominions,” as fully and effectually, as if such parents or ancestors “had been naturalized or natural-born subject or subjects within the King’s dominions.” 7 Statutes of the Realm, 90.
It's in Blackstone's own work. The same exact one in which he states, "The children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such."
Blackstone's own words:
"A denizen is an alien born, but who has obtained ex donatione regis letters patent to make him an English subject: a high and incommunicable branch of the royal prerogative. A denizen is in a kind of middle state between an alien, and natural-born subject, and partakes of both of them. He may take lands by purchase or devise, which an alien may not; but cannot take by inheritance: for his parent, through whom he must claim, being an alien had no inheritable blood, and therefore could convey none to the son. And, upon a like defect of hereditary blood, the issue of a denizen, born before denization, cannot inherit to him"http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_4_citizenships1.html
Do you even read any of what you post? Or understand any of it if you do happen to take the time to read it?
Like I said, Blackstone uses the disclaimer "generally speaking" because he knew for a FACT that the English-born children of aliens did NOT have the same rights and privileges as English-born children of English subjects.