Named one of his state’s delegates to the Constitutional Convention, Mason traveled to Philadelphia, his only lengthy trip outside Virginia. Many clauses in the document bear his stamp, as he was active in the convention for months before deciding he could not sign it. He cited the lack of a bill of rights most prominently in his Objections, but also wanted an immediate end to the slave trade, which he opposed, and a supermajority for navigation acts, which might force exporters of tobacco to use more expensive American ships. Although he lost there, and again at the Virginia Ratifying Convention of 1788, his prominent fight for a bill of rights led his fellow Virginian, James Madison, to introduce one during the First Congress in 1789, and it was ratified in 1791, a year before Mason died. Long obscure, Mason is today recognized for his contributions to the United States, and to Virginia.
See below for George Mason’s statement regarding British Common Law in another post preceding this one.
Your assumption that the newly formed American government committees would not consider Mr. Vattel is indicative of your attitude for anything written in French. French speaking people can READ and understand what is said in french. By the way, the first English Translation made an error in translating which was not discovered until a later edition.
“See below for George Mason’s statement regarding British Common Law in another post preceding this one.”
It is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. No one is saying America had to follow English common law, but that the meaning of the words used were the meanings all the Framers had grown up with - and those MEANINGS came from English common law.
“Your assumption that the newly formed American government committees would not consider Mr. Vattel is indicative of your attitude for anything written in French.”
What color is the sky in the world where you live?
The point of the quote I provided was that no one mentioned Vattel during their discussions. There is literally ONE mention of him:
“...there is one single reference by one delegate at the Federal Convention of 1787 to Vattel (in reference to several works of different authors to support an argument for equal voting representation of the states in the proposed Congress), there is no other reference to the work in the entire notes of any of the framers published on the proceedings of the Federal Convention of 1787,and specifically there is no reference or discussion of the work at all in relation to citizenship at the Convention, in the Federalist Papers, or in any of the state ratifying conventions.”
It doesn’t get much clearer than that. Vattel was referenced ONE TIME when discussing how the states should be able to vote. That was it. They cannot find any other reference to him being mentioned. Never brought up in discussions on citizenship. Not one time.