“...any challenge to the citizenship of Chester Arthur had to rely on his father not being a United States citizen at the time of birth...”
All the attacks on Chet’s eligibility centered on allegations that he was born not in Vermont but in Canada, his mother’s lifelong U.S. citizenship having (rightly) never been questioned, and his father’s U.S. citizenship having been (falsely) assumed by all to be timely.
Russia? Brooklyn Eagle? Nothing on William. Why make things up—are you trolling, are you daft...what is it?
All the attacks on Chet’s eligibility centered on allegations that he was born not in Vermont but in Canada, his mother’s lifelong U.S. citizenship having (rightly) never been questioned, and his father’s U.S. citizenship having been (falsely) assumed by all to be timely.
Of course the only legal attacks on Chester Arthur's eligibility do not center on the citizenship of his father. Not because the foreign citizenship of the father was unknown, but as a legal argument, it is manifestly stupid. Not even a political operative, a New York lawyer, hired to do a hit piece on Arthur, would consider such a ridiculous legal argument.
Everyone knew William Arthur was a foreigner. He was a preacher and he spoke off-the-boat English.
The information that Chester Arthur's father was an Irish citizen was a matter of very public record. The information that William Arthur immigrated to Canada, was a teacher in Canada, and got married in Canada was public knowledge. How the hell could Hinman research and write a book and not know that William Arthur was not a citizen when Chet was born???
Prominently plastered on the pages of the New York Times, 12/22/1880, regarding Hinman was the following: "He has privately stated to leading Democratic citizens, however, that he is employed by the Democratic National Committee to obtain evidence to show that Gen. Arthur is an unnaturalized foreigner."
There was this New York lawyer, hired to find proof that Arthur was an unnaturalized foreigner, and he missed the New York Times.
You may be delighted to know that James Buchanan's British-born father emigrated to the U.S. in 1783, having sailed from Derry, like William Arthur. President Buchanan was born 23 April 1793, a natural born United States citizen.
Russia? Brooklyn Eagle? Nothing on William.
You can admit it. You have not read them and have no idea what they say, or do not say.
That Chester Arthur's father was Irish was so well known that a St. Petersburg, Russia correspondent wrote about the alleged Irish citizenship of President Chester Arthur in 1881, which was republished in the New York Herald.
(By cable to the Herald.)London, December 12, 1881
Our St. Petersburg correspondent telegraphs under the date of the 9th:—To-day's Novoe Vremya contains the following article, which I translate literally, without softening or accentuating the opprobrious language of the article:—"Arthur's Message to Congress is surprisingly strange if the telegraphic version before us be accurate. It congratulates Americans on their growing prosperity, as if this was anything new to the honorable Yankees. Arthur takes upon himself his views on foreign politics. France and Germany receive friendly patronage, but with regard to the the much talked of friendship with England not a word is said; and how could it be expected from an Irishman? Arthur even refrains from making comments on English home affairs—the Irish rebellion, for instance, which is agitating millions of American citizens, who are also born Irishmen like the President. ...
Where on Earth did they get the idea that President Chester Arthur was an Irish citizen? Do you think they got that idea from his American mother? Could it be they were referring his father having been an Irish citizen. Or as you infer, nobody knew of William Arthur's Irish citizenship until 2008, so they just plucked Irish citizenship out of the air and applied it to President Chester Arthur.
Hinman was hired by the Democrat party and Senator Bayard was a democrat. Arthur became Vice President on March 4, 1881 and he became President on September 20, 1881. In January 1881, the author of the book was already working on that citizenship crap.
New York, January 7th, 1881.Hon. Thos. F. Bayard, U. S. Senator
Dear Sir:—What is the construction of Article II, § 1, Clause 5, of the Constitution of the United States—that "No person, except a natural-born citizen, etc, shall be eligible, etc." * * *
Yours respectfully
A. P. HINMAN
Hinman asked, Bayard answered.
Senate of the United States
City of Washington, January 10th, 1881A. P. Hinman, Esq., New York
Dear Sir:—In response to your letter of the 7th instant—the term "natural born citizen," as used in the Constitution and Statutes of the U. S., is held to be as native of the U. S.
The naturalization by law of a father before his child attains the age of twenty-one, would be naturalization of such minor.
Yours respectfully,
T. F. BAYARD
Oh, what to do? Anyone a native of the U.S. was a natural born citizen. He had to make believe Arthur was not born in the United States.