You misunderstood Justice Story’s commentary with respect to Article 2. The grandfather clause applied not only to Washington and others who were not natural born citizens of the United States but also to naturalized citizens such as Alexander Hamilton who was born in the British settlement of Nevis Island West Indies.
The colonies became states with the Declaration of Independence. The citizens of each state constituted the citizens of the United States when the Constitution was adopted. The Constitution was adopted in 1787 and the first presidential election took place in the year following the ratification.
All colonialists that had automatically become citizens were eligible to be President if they had accumulated 14 years of residency prior to election. The 14 years was to accomodate persons held in high esteem such as Hamilton and others. Hamilton had come to the New York Colony in 1773, exactly 14 years before the adoption.
The citizen requirement at the time of adoption also known as the grandfather clause was not aimed at only foreigners that had shown great patriotism but to all citizens at the time. Again the 14 year requirement was put there as Justice Story describes but you construed a narrower scope and you have gone off on a tangent of error where I expect you cannot return from because you are too invested in your own fallacy.
Here are Justice Story’s comments:
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_5s2.html
§ 1473. It is indispensable, too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States; or a citizen at the adoption of the constitution, and for fourteen years before his election. This permission of a naturalized citizen to become president is an exception from the great fundamental policy of all governments, to exclude foreign influence from their executive councils and duties. It was doubtless introduced (for it has now become by lapse of time merely nominal, and will soon become wholly extinct) out of respect to those distinguished revolutionary patriots, who were born in a foreign land, and yet had entitled themselves to high honours in their adopted country. A positive exclusion of them from the office would have been unjust to their merits, and painful to their sensibilities. But the general propriety of the exclusion of foreigners, in common cases, will scarcely be doubted by any sound statesman. It cuts off all chances for ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe. Germany, Poland, and even the pontificate of Rome, are sad, but instructive examples of the enduring mischiefs arising from this source. A residence of fourteen years in the United States is also made an indispensable requisite for every candidate; so, that the people may have a full opportunity to know his character and merits, and that he may have mingled in the duties, and felt the interests, and understood the principles, and nourished the attachments, belonging to every citizen in a republican government. By “residence,” in the constitution, is to be understood, not an absolute inhabitancy within the United States during the whole period; but such an inhabitancy, as includes a permanent domicil in the United States. No one has supposed, that a temporary absence abroad on public business, and especially on an embassy to a foreign nation, would interrupt the residence of a citizen, so as to disqualify him for office. If the word were to be construed with such strictness, then a mere journey through any foreign adjacent territory for health, or for pleasure, or a commorancy there for a single day, would amount to a disqualification. Under such a construction a military or civil officer, who should have been in Canada during the late war on public business, would have lost his eligibility. The true sense of residence in the constitution is fixed domicil, or being out of the United States, and settled abroad for the purpose of general inhabitancy, animo manendi, and not for a mere temporary and fugitive purpose, in transitu.
No, I haven't.
It's true that if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson hadn't been natural born citizens, then the grandfather clause would have made them eligible.
But they never needed it. They were natural born citizens.
Story states that it was passed "out of respect to those distinguished revolutionary patriots, who were born in a foreign land, and yet had entitled themselves to high honours in their adopted country."
That means it specifically WAS NOT PASSED for the sake of George Washington, et al. Again: They didn't need it. They were natural born citizens.
Incidentally, if the birther claim that "you couldn't be a natural born citizen, because the United States didn't exist when the Founders were born" were true, then George Washington could not have been inaugurated as President. Because his first inauguration came less than 14 years after the Declaration of Independence.