My BFF Squeeky Fromm, saw this post of yours and said that you are a BIG FAT LIAR!
First, here is a link to the ACTUAL 1808 “The Report of the Judges of the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania” (She noted that you did NOT give a link, so that you could better get away with being a BIG FAT LIAR!)
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Report_of_the_Judges_of_the_Supreme/DyI2AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=report+of+the+judges+of+the+supreme+court+of+pennsylvania+1808&printsec=frontcover
Your page 26 Aliens page is NOWHERE TO BE FOUND in that document! She said to ask you, what are you trying to be - the new Mike Wallace of Free Republic??? What she did find in that document was, on page 36:
An act to enable his Majesty’s natural born subjects to inherit the estates of their ancestors either lineal or collateral, notwithstanding their father or mother were aliens.
The recommendation was that the English act be incorporated into the laws of Pennsylvania.
Then, she decided to try to find where your BIG FAT LIAR page 26 Aliens came from. Well, guess what - she found it!
A Digest of Select British Statutes by Samuel Roberts, and here is a link so that everybody can see what a BIG FAT LIAR you are!!!
https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Digest_of_select_British_Statutes_comp/AKdXAAAAcAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%2212.+In+this+particular+our+laws+differ+from+the+English+laws%22&pg=PA26&printsec=frontcover
While this book contains “The Report of the Judges of 1808” -this book was not published until 1817, and the opinions therein are those of Samuel Roberts, not “The Judges of the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania” as you FALSELY stated!!!
And on page 19 of that book, 7 pages before Page 26, we find:
“The natives, or indigenes, says Vattel, are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.” These become citizens, it is believed in every community, merely by their tacit consent.”
By the laws of England, however, not only the children of citizens, but of aliens born within the British dominions, become citizens by birth, provided at the time of their birth their parents were under actual obediance to the king.”
In other words, the same stuff you find in Wong Kim Ark.
But you, being a BIG FAT LIAR, hid page 19 from people here so that you could lie to everybody!!!
Page 26, in the meantime, is simply Robert’s opinion about a narrow subject matter, and about the same as the dissent in Wong Kim Ark, and deals more fathers born outside the country and their children born inside the country. The dissent and Roberts, think that International Law should control in these situations, not common law. Robert’s opinion is NOT law, and your attempt to pass it off as the opinion of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania was a BIG FAT LIE!!!
You should be ashamed of yourself!!!
That is what Squeeky said to you.
As far as me, I think that you are a mentally ill person, who has gone so far down the rabbit hole of delusion, that you will simply say anything to keep from having to admit that you and other two-citizen parent Birthers have wasted 16 years of your life on a bunch of idiocy.
In a way, I feel sorry for you, and I encourage you to seek professional help from a qualified therapist.
First, here is a link to the ACTUAL 1808 “The Report of the Judges of the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania” (She noted that you did NOT give a link, so that you could better get away with being a BIG FAT LIAR!) Oh my God! You found a link! You are a freaking GENIUS!!! Was it the clues I gave you, like *TELLING YOU THE NAME OF THE BOOK* that helped you find it?
While this book contains “The Report of the Judges of 1808” -this book was not published until 1817, and the opinions therein are those of Samuel Roberts, not “The Judges of the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania” as you FALSELY stated!!!
Well, as Samuel Roberts would have falsely stated if you were correct that it is *HIS* opinion, and you could be right because he was a Judge, and so therefore possibly a liar and an idiot. So your argument is that a prominent Pennsylvania Judge was a *LIAR*?
But given that all the rest of the Pennsylvania legal system accepted the book, and given that William Tilghman,
who was still alive and presiding as Chief Justice over the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from 1806 to 1827, didn't raise a fuss, and the book got reprinted again in 1847, I'm kinda thinking the book is exactly what it says it is.
And for what it's worth, ALL of these judges had a connection to the Constitutional convention and/or ratification.
William Tilghman. Died April 29, 1827. Delegate to the Maryland state ratifying convention.
Jasper Yeates Died March 14, 1817. (Book was submitted in January of 1817) After the Revolution, Yeates was a delegate to the Pennsylvania convention that ratified the United States Constitution in 1787.
Thomas Smith Died March 31, 1809. Delegate from Pennsylvania to the Constitutional convention.
Hugh Henry Brackenridge Died June 25, 1816. Member Pennsylvania state assembly which ratified the constitution.
And for what it's worth, Samuel Roberts was the apprentice of William Lewis. (One of William Rawle's co-counsel in Negress Flora v Joseph Grainsberry) Lewis was a member of the Pennsylvania state legislature in 1787. (The Constitutional convention was in the Philadelphia state house, or legislative house.)
He was also a Federal Judge in the 1790s.
You have been blindsided by being shown the existence of this book, and now you are whistling past the graveyard with your efforts to ignore the significance of this very prominent and widely used legal book that came right out of the Philadelphia legal community.