You’re choosing to assume that William Blackstone was wrong in his understanding of the common law of England and that James Madison was wrong in his understanding of the wording of the Constitution of the United States. Even aside from the fact that the Constitution makes Congress the judge of presidential elections, no court is going to agree with you.
The Madison quote to which you are referring needs to be read in context.
Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, Document 6, James Madison, House of Representatives, 22 May 1789Papers 12:179—82.
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_2s6.html
As the title indicates this speech was about Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2. which reads:
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
It was not about “natural born citizenship, but rather citizenship at the time of the Declaration of independence.
Madison is saying “citizenship” is determined by place of birth, not natural born citzenship, which doesn’t even enter into the criteria of eligibility to the House of Representatives.
We also find Vattel’s definition behind the wording of the Naturalization Act of 1790 right after the Constitution was written:
“And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States:”
Note that children of citizens were to be “natural born citizens”, according to them, no matter where they were born. And the father not the mother was the determining factor of that citizenship.