Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: woodpusher

In other words, I’m right. Nobody suspected his father’s foreign citizenship at his birth.


112 posted on 07/13/2024 4:09:09 AM PDT by one guy in new jersey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]


To: one guy in new jersey
In other words, I’m right. Nobody suspected his father’s foreign citizenship at his birth.

You are always right because you declare it so.

Nobody suspected William Arthur's foreign citizenship as of 1829, not even the person who signed his naturalization papers on 31 August 1843, and made his naturalization a matter of official record. Only aliens are eligible for naturalization. As a matter of public record, William Arthur was certified to have been an alien until 31 August 1843.

Nobody who read the New York Times of December 22, 1880 stating, "Gen. Arthur is an unnaturalized foreigner," could have suspected William Arthur's foreign birth.

Nobody who read A.P. Hinman's claim that Chester Arthur was born in Ireland could have suspected that William Arthur was Irish.

Indeed, nobody who heard the words that came out of the mouth of the Rev. William Arthur every Sunday could have even suspected that he was of foreign birth. They must have suspected he sounded as he did because of a speech impediment.

Nobody reading the following passage from the book, "How a British Subject Became President of the United States," by Arthur P. Hinman, could possibly have suspected that William Arthur had been a natural born subject of the king:

Almost a century ago there lived in Ballymena, County Antrim, Ireland, a Scotchman named Gavin MacArthur. He had a wife and several children, and had emigrated from Scotland, on account of a family difficulty, arising from his having embraced the Protestant religion while his friends and relatives were of the Roman Catholic faith. Shortly after his arrival in Ireland his religious zeal caused him to change his family name from MacArthur to Arthur. It is understood that he made this change to distinguish his branch of the family from that of the Roman Catholic branch.

In the year 1796, a son was born to this Gavin Arthur, and he was named William Arthur, in honor of William of Orange. This boy was educated at what was then known as the Blue School, in Belfast. He simply acquired a common school education. On leaving school, in the year 1818, he emigrated in a sailing vessel from Derry, Ireland, to Three Rivers, in Canada. It may here be remarked that, like a great many of the young men of his age, he was very fond of the three great evils of this life, viz: R. W. T.

"Billy" Arthur, as he was familiarly called by his associates in Canada, came direct from Three Rivers to a place called Upper Mills, now known as Stanbridge, Canada, looking for employment as a teacher. He offered to give lessons in writing, being a fine penman, at a very small salary. He was engaged for one term in the year 1819. Two of his scholars at that time, Erastus Chandler and Luther Burley, are still living.

Nobody who read the New York Times, December 22, 1880, stating "Gen. Arthur is an unnaturalized foreigner," could possibly have had cause to suspect that father William Arthur was foreign born.

Nobody who read the New York Herald, December 1881, could have suspected that William Arthur was born a foreigner.

(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. ...

Nope, "[n]obody suspected his father’s foreign citizenship at his birth." Everyone could only suspect that having a baby transformed an alien into a citizen. Apparently they all confused making a baby with naturalization. Everybody back then was really, really stupid.

Of course, nobody had cause to suspect William Arthur was a U.S. citizen when Chester Arthur was born because William Arthur had not been naturalized, and there is no apparent claim by anyone that William Arthur was a U.S. citizen when Chester Arthur was born.

The Proceedings of the Vermont Historical Society, Autumn 1970 Vol. xxxviii No.4, pg. 292:

The public got its first real glimpse of Arthur's background in a campaign polemic by General James S. Brisbin, a lively volume published shortly after the Garfield Arthur nominations. Within a 23-page sketch of Arthur's life it was noted that he had been born at Fairfield, Franklin County, Vermont, October 5th, 1830. Shortly, during the summer and fall of 1880, rumors spread of evidence that Arthur had been born in a foreign country (first it was Ireland, then Canada), was not a natural-born citizen of the United States, and was thus, by the Constitution, ineligible for the Vice Presidency.

Clearly, nobody had cause to suspect William Arthur was an alien when Chester Arthur was born, not even the people who spread such crap.

While A.P. Hinman toiled tirelessly to show that Chester Arthur was not a U.S. citizen, when he inquired of Senator Bayard as to who were the natural born citizens referred to in the Constitution, he received the reply:

Senate of the United States
City of Washington, January 10th, 1881

A. 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

Every child, native born to the United States and subject to its laws, was automatically at birth a citizen of the United States. This was so before the 14th Amendment which incorporated this into the Constitution and placed it beyond the power of Congress to change. There was every reason to believe that whether William Arthur's citizenship in 1829 had been Irish, Canadian, or American, it did not make a good hot damn to the natural born citizenship of Chester Arthur or his eligibility to be President.

Other than that, nobody had reason to suspect that Chester Arthur's father was not a citizen when Chester Arthur was born.

113 posted on 07/15/2024 2:08:25 PM PDT by woodpusher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson