Are you saying the law of 1952 didn’t exist before 1937? I’ve misunderstanding you. What are you saying?
I said Congress created the naturalization law in 1934 of which the 1952 law is subsequent. Beyond that, the first time Congress created this sort of citizenship was in 1922 with the Cable act.
It was a naturalization act in 1934, and it was still a naturalization act in 1952. That it specified "at birth" was a subjective preference of the law, and not the consequence of a transfer of "natural allegiance."
Under the English law system, "natural allegiance" is by soil. Canada follows this system, and those who have been claiming that we do as well are now backpedaling furiously from this position and are now claiming 1/2 "Sanguinus" is the basis.