scoal 2013-08-15 - mcinnish goode v chapman - rille amicus brief2

8/22/2019 SCOAL 2013-08-15 - McInnish Goode v Chapman - Rille Amicus Brief2

1/64

M ttpreme Court 01 ^Uabmnu

CASE NO. 1120465

H U G H McINNISH, et al..

Appellants,

FILED

AUG I 5 2013

SUPflEME f 'P * " ^ ^ ^ ^

V .

BE T H CH A P MA N , in her capacity as Secretary ofState,

Appellee.

ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT C OUR T OF

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, A L A B A M A

C V 2012-1053

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE

In support of the Plaintiffs/Appellants, the Constitution of Alabama, the

Constitution of the United States ofAmerica, the Rule of Law, the Citizens and

Residents of the State of Alabama, the American People, and Priceless LIBERTY.

By Scott Rille, Amicus curiae

Natural-bom American Citizen

August 4, 2013

COVER SHEET


2/64

in ttpremt Court llOaliama

CASE NO. 1120465

H U G H McINNISH, et al..

Appellants,

V .

BE T H CH A P MA N , in her capacity as Secretary ofState,

Appellee.

ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, A L A B A M A

C V 2012-1053


In support of the Plaintiffs/Appellants, the Constitution of Alabama, the

Constitution of the United States ofAmerica, the Rule ofLaw, the Citizens and

Residents of the State of Alabama, the American People, and Priceless LIBERTY.

By Scott Rille, Amicus curiae

Natural-bom American Citizen

August 4, 2013

1


3/64

TABLE OF CONTENTS

L T A B L E OF AUTHORITffiS 2

IL CONCISE STA TEM ENT OF THE IDENTITY OF THE AMICUS

CUIUAE AND ITS INTEREST IN THE CASE 5III. CON STI TUT ION AL QUE STI ON OF L A W PRESENTED 5

m. TWO POSSIBLE ANS WE RS TO THE QUESTION 6

IV. WH Y AMIC US CURIA E'S QUESTION SHOU LD BE ANS WER ED 6

VI. CONCLUSION 12

VII. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 13

VIII. EXHIBITS 1 - 9 ATTACHED HERETO

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

I. United States Constitution. Article L Section 8, Clause "Offenses against the

Law ofNations": "The Congress shall have Power . . . To define and punish

Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the

Law ofNations."

IL 1775 Edition. Le Droit Des Gens. Livre I. Chapitre X I X , Page 115: . 212.

"Des citoyens & naturels: Les citoyens sont les members de la societe civile:

lies a cette societe par certains devoirs, & soumis a son autorite, ils participant

avec egalite a ses avantages. Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sontnes dans le pays, de parens citoyens."

III. United States Constitution. Article IL Section!. Clause 5: "No Person except

a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the

Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President:

neithershall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to

the Age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a Resident within the

United States."

IV . Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure

NOTE: Amicus curiae believes a Constitutional Amendment, pursuant to United

States Constitution. Article V , would be required to redefine, amend or repeal the

2


4/64

original wording or meaning of Clause 5 above, that no such Amendment has been

lawfully added to the Constitution, and that Clause 5 continues to be controlling

lawin the

United Statesof

America, includingthe State of

Alabama.

[NOTE: The 1775 Edition ofLe Droit Des Gens portrayed in Exhibit 2 is the very

volume Dr. Benjamin Franklin deposited in 1775 at The Library Company of

Philadelphia, which he and some other businessmen founded in 1731, and the

edition used extensively by the Founders and Framers. (Please see Exhibit 2

attached hereto.)] [Eng. Tr. ofabove French clause: Translated as Founding Father

John Jay may have translated it before writing his famous letter, dated July 25,

1787, to George Washington, Presiding President ofthe Constitutional Convention

at Philadelphia [1787] (Please see Exhibit 1 attached hereto.): The citizens are the

members ofthe civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, & subject to

its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natural bom citizens

(naturels, natural, naturally, bora, inborn, begotten), or natives (indigenes,

indigenous, naturally, inborn), are those bom in the country, ofparents who are

citizens. (Please see Exhibit 4 attached hereto.) Please take note ofthe fact that the

marginal entry, ".212. Des citoyens & naturels" and the text "Des citoyens" and

"de parens citoyens" clearly indicate the subject of this section is CITIZENS.

John Jay was fluent in the French language and thoroughly qualified to interpret

3


5/64

and translate French and EngUsh. (Please see Exhibit 3 attached hereto.) Would it

be unreasonable to conclude that anyone fluent in French reading .212 could

easily and logically combine the three terms "Les naturels'"[natural, natural-bom],

"nes" [bora], and "citoyens" [citizens] into the phrase "natural bora citizens"?

Amicus curiae believes it would be illogical to believe John Jay could read ''Les

naturels''in Le Droit Des Gens and not contextually translate these words into

anything but "natural bora Citizens", as he wrote in his letter to His Excellency

General Washington on 25 July 1787 (Please see Exhibit lattached hereto).

John Jay was a delegate to the First & Second Continental Congresses and was

elected President of the 6^ Continental Congress. Benjamin Franklin wrote:

MonsignorCharles F. W. Dumas

Chez E. van Harrevelt

Amsterdam

Dear Sir,

Philadelphia, 9 December, 1775.

1 am much obliged by the kind present you have made us ofyouredition of

Vattel. It came to us in good season, when circumstances of a rising state make

it necessary frequently to consult the law ofnations. Accordingly, that copy,

which 1 kept (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the

other to the College ofMassachusetts Bay, as you directed), has been continually

in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much

pleased with yournotes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem

fortheir author.

Kindest regards,

Benjamin Franklin

(Please see Exhibit 2 attached hereto.)

4


6/64

Amicus curiae believes that it would be unreasonable to assume during all the

years John Jay participated and served in the Continental Congresses and being

fluent in French, that he did not thoroughly familiarize himselfwith Vattel's Le

Droit Des Gens "continually in the hands of the members of our Congress", and

discuss Vattel's "PRINCIPES DE L A L O I N A T U R E L L E " [Principles of the

Natural Law] with his fellow delegates in intimate detail (Please see Exhibit 5). In

addition, John Jay owned his own personal copy of The Law of Nations.

CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE IDENTITY OF THE AMICUS CURIAE

AND ITS INTEREST IN THE CASE

Amicus curiae's name is Scott Rille, he lives in Tulare, C A , is a 73-year-old

Vietnam-era Veteran, Narural-bom American Citizen and A M E R I C A N

PATRIOT. Amicus curiae's interest in the case is his intense love of the priceless

LIB ER TY he inherited at birth, and love of his Constitution of the United States of

America and his Constitutional Republic. Amicus curiae sincerely believes that

lackof a Constitutionally defensible and authoritative definition of"natural born

Citizen" is a clear and present dangerto his L I B E R T Y and the LIB ER TY of every

Alabamian and American, and is foundational to this Court arriving at a just

decision in this matter.

CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION OF LAW PRESENTED

Amicus curiae respectfully requests this Honorable Court courageously and with

5


7/64

Constitutional authority, clearly and unambiguously answerthe following

Constitutional question of law:

Where does the Constitution of the United States specifically require the

President ofthe United States must be bom in the United States ofAmerica?

TWO POSSIBLE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION

AnswerNo. 1: The Constitution ofthe United States does not specifically require

the President of the United States must be bom in the United States of America.

NOTE: Amicus curiae believes that most intelligent, knowledgeable, logical and

rational citizens would reject AnswerNo. 1 as legally unacceptable, illogical,

irrational and ludicrous.

AnswerNo. 2: The Constitution ofthe United States, by Constitutional extension

and authority, does specifically require the President ofthe United States must be

bom in the United States ofAmerica. Amicus curiae sincerely believes the

Constitution does so through a unique, 2-step Constitutional process.

WHY AMICUS CURIAE'S QUESTION SHOULD BE ANSWERED

The Constitution ofthe United States and the Constitution of Alabama are the Rule

of Law for Alabama citizens, residents, businesses, governments, courts, and other

lawful entities. Preamble to the Constitution ofthe State of Alabama:

"We the people of the State ofAlabama, in orderto establish justice, insuredomestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our

posterity, invoking the favor and guidance ofAlmighty God, do ordain and

establish the following Constitution and form ofgovernment for the State of

Alabama."

6


8/64

By requiring that the President ofthe United States must be a "natural born

Citizen" [United States Constitution. Article IL Section 1. Clause 5]. Amicus

curiae believes our Founding Fathers and Constitutional Framers created a new

and unique class of "Person" and "Citizen", and that only "Persons" and "Citizens"

belonging to this unique class (which includes most Americans bom on U.S. soil)

are eligible to hold the Office ofPresident of the United States and Commander-in-

Chiefof the Armed Forces of the United States.

It is a well-established fact that our Founding Fathers and Constitutional Framers

relied heavily on Emmerich de Vattel's Le Droit Des Gens [The Law of Nations],

First French Edition 1758, Second French Edition 1775, while involved in the

weighty matterof creating our Constitution and Constitutional Republic (Please

see Exhibits land 2 attached hereto). Founding Fatherand future first Chief Justice

of the United States, John Jay, on July 25, 1787, sent a letterto George

Washington, Presiding President of the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia

[1787]. Jay wrote:

"Permitme to hint, whetheritwouldbe wise andseasonable to provide a strong

checkto the admission of Foreigners into the administration of ournational

Government; and to declare expressly thatthe Commanderin Chief of the

American army shallnot be given to, nordevolve on, any but a naturalbornCitizen "

Amicus curiae believes that John Jay may have been fully aware of the root

meanings of"Les naturels, ou indigenes''(Please see Exhibit 4 attached hereto),

7


9/64

that strong feelings and intent to create a new and unique Constitutional Republic,

free ofthe beliefs, actions, and laws that governed the nations of Europe, and

governed by new, distinctly American laws were prevalent among the Founders

and Framers, and that John Jay may have chosen to knowledgably interpret

Vattel's "Les naturels''as "natural bom citizens". Amicus curiae believes that John

Jay was intellectually capable and possessed his inahenable right to do so. Many of

the Framers were fluent in French, including Jay, the delegates unanimously

accepted the clause "natural born Citizen" written in the letter Jay sent to

Washington as valid without debate oropposition, and wisely included this

extremely important to the safety of ourNation clause at United States

Constitution. Article n . Section U Clause 5.

Amicus curiae believes that many people in the United States falsely believe and

claim that the Constitution of the United States fails to define the "natural born

Citizen" clause found at United States Constitution. Article IL Section I. Clause 5.

Amicus curiae believes, and respectfully submits, that said beliefand claim are

patently false, that the Framers ofthe Constitution ofthe United States did not fail

to Constitutionally define "natural born Citizen", and that the Framers wisely

and purposely did so through a unique, 2-step Constitutional process:

STEP I: United States Constitution. Article L Section 8. Clause "Offenses against

the Law ofNations": "The Congress shall have Power . . . To define and punish

8


10/64

Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law

ofNations."

STEP 2: The Law ofNations. Book L ChapterX I X . 212. 'The citizens are the

members ofthe civil society: bomid to this society by certain duties, & subject to

its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natural bom citizens

(naturels), or natives (indigenes), are those bom in the country, ofparents who are

citizens." (Parenthesis supplied.)

By granting the Congress "Power . . . To define and punish Piracies and Felonies

committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law ofNations", Amicus

curiae sincerely believes our Founding Fathers and Constitutional Framers

extended Constitutional authority to The Law ofNations.

The Law ofNations, First French Edition 1758, Second French Edition 1775,

clearly and unambiguously defines "natural bom citizens". Natural bom

citizenship contains two (2), not one (1), eligibility requirements. To qualify as

"natural bora citizens" persons must be 1. "bom in the country," and 2. "ofparents

who are citizens." No exceptions.

Amicus curiae believes that to be eligible to hold the Office ofPresident of the

United States, that "Person" must be a "natural born Citizen", meaning he or she

must be bora in the United States ofAmerica [including United States Territories]

9


11/64

and both parents ofsaid "Person" must have been citizens of the United States at

the time ofsaid Person's birth, and also meet the othereligibility requirements

found at United States Constitution. Article IL Section L Clause 5.

Amicus curiae sincerely believes that electing and inaugurating an ineligible

person as president in violation of the Constitution would be tantamount to

rendering the Constitution null and void, and to tossing it, the Constitutional

Republic it undergirds, and the priceless LIBERTY it guarantees onto the

garbage heap ofhistory!

On 4 June and 18 June, 1940, SirWinston Churchill spoke these immortal words

of wisdom and courage to the Parliament and beleaguered people ofGreat Britain:

"We shall go on to the end. We shallfightin France, we shallfighton the

seas andoceans^we shallfightwith growing confidence and growing

strength in the air, we shalldefendour island, whatever the costmay be.

We shallfighton the beaches, we shallfighton the landing grounds, we

shallfightin the fields and in the streets, we shallfightin the hills; weshallneversurrender,..." "But if we fail, then the whole world,

including the UnitedStates^including allthatwe have known andcared

for, will sinkinto the abyss of a new dark age made more sinister^and

perhaps more protracted, by the lights of pervertedscience. Let us

therefore brace ourselves to ourduties, and so bearourselves, thatif the

British Empire and its Commonwealth lastfor a thousand years, men will

stillsay, 'This was theirfinesthour!'"

Amicus curiae sincerely believes that YourHonor's courage to review and to

Justly rule on this weighty matter herein presented could be your"finesthour!**

May God bless the citizens and residents ofthe great State ofAlabama and the

United States ofAmerica.

10


12/64

Amicus curiae believes that this matterofjustly answering his Constitutional

question of law, and thereby establishing the authoritative. Constitutional

definition of the "natural bom Citizen" clause, is the most important matter,

relevant to the survival of our priceless LIBERTY, State of Alabama and

Constitutional Republic of the United States ofAmerica, and the Rule of Law

adjudicated in the history of this Court. Honorable Justices, you are hereby

afforded the weighty opportunity to responsibly and courageously honor your

solemn Oaths:

"I, .. ., solemnly swear (oraffirm, as the case may be) that I will support the

Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Alabama, so

long as I continue a citizen thereof; and that I will faithfiilly and honestly discharge

the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter, to the best ofmy ability. So

help me God." SECTION 279 [Alabama Constitution],

and to become Alabama's and America's

"CHAMPIONS for LIBERTY"!

Since 1775, millions of Patriots have sacrificed then" lives and sustained horrific

injuries in defense of our Constitutions, Constitutional Republic, and priceless

LIBERTY. As a genuine American Patriot, Amicus curiae proudly and

courageously stands shoulder-to-shoulderwith our Founding Fathers, who

mutually pledged to each other theirLives, their Fortunes, and their sacred Honor,

and with our courageous men and women in uniform in defense of LIBERTY, and

11


13/64

with their families.

Amicus curiae respectfiilly invites this Honorable Court to review and take Judicial

notice ofthe Exhibits attached hereto.

Quotation from Abraham Lincoln's address, "The Perpetuation ofOurPolitical

Institutions", before the Young Men's Lyceum ofSpringfield, Illinois, January 27,

1838:

"Let reverence for the laws be breathed by every American mother. Let it be taught

in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges. Let it be written in primers, [in] spelling

books and in almanacs. Let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative

halls, and enforced in the courts ofjustice. In short, let reverence for the law

become the political rehgion ofthe nation. . . Shall we expect some transatlanticmilitary giant, to step over the ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! - All the

armies ofEurope, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure ofthe earth (our

own excepted) in theirmilitary chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not

by force, take a drinkfrom the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial

of a Thousand years. At what point, then, is the approach ofdanger to be expected?

I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from

abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a

nation of freemen, we must live through al l time, or die by suicide."

CONCLUSION

Amicus curiae sincerely believes and respectfully submits that confusion

concerning the definition of"natural born Citizen" threatens the LIBERTY,

safety and well-being ofevery Alabama citizen, resident, and American, threatens

the survival of the Rule ofLaw, threatens the survival ofthe State ofAlabama and

Constitutional Republic ofthe United States ofAmerica, that this Honorable Court

should have a compelling interest in settling this weighty matter forall time, that a

clear, unambiguous and Constitutionally defensible and authoritative definition of

12


14/64

"natural born Citizen" urgently needs to be identified, and respectfully requests

this Honorable Court, with Constitutional authority, in the interest of preserving

the personal LIBERTY, safety and well-being ofall Alabamians and Americans, in

the interest of preserving the Rule ofLaw, and in the interest ofJustice answer the

above Constitutional question of law and issue its findings and ruling.

Respectfully submitted this 4^ day of August, 2013.

Scott Rille, Amicus curiae 139 East Tulare Avenue, 325

Natural-bom American Citizen Tulare, C A 93274

A M E R I C A N PATRIOT 559-688-0357

Vietnam-era Veteran [email protected]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I H E RE BY CERTIFY that a tme copy of the following document, BRIEF OF

AMICUS CURIAE has been fumished by U.S. Mail this 8^ day ofAugust, 2013 tothe following parties:

H U G H McINNISH, et al. through theirattomey:

Larry Klayman, Esq.

Klayman Law Firm

2020 Pennsylvania Avenue, N W

Suite 800

Washington, D.C. 20006

Counsel for Appellants

BE T H C H A P M A N , Alabama Secretary ofState through herattomeys:

Honorable Attomey General ofAlabama LutherStrange and the

13
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


15/64

Honorable Assistant Attomey General Margaret L. Fleming

Office of the Attomey General ofAlabama

501 Washington Street

Montgomery, Alabama 36130

CounselforAppellee

Dated: August 8, 2013

/s/ Scott Rille

14


16/64

EXHIBITS 1-9

A T T A C H E D TO


m THE SUPREME COURT OF A L A B A M ASTATE OF A L A B A M A

CA S E NO. 1120465

ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF

MO N T G O ME R Y C O U N T Y , A L A B A M A

C V 2012-1053

AUG I 5 2013

S U P R E M E C Q I I R T O F ALABAM

by SCOTT RILLE, Amicus curiae

A U G U ST 4, 2013

MonsignorCharles F. W. Dumas


Amsterdam

DearSir,


I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of youredition ofVattel. It came to

us in good season, when circiunstances ofa rising state make it necessary frequently to consult

the law of nations. Accordingly, that copy, which I kept (after depositing one in ourovm public

library here, and sending the other to the College ofMassachusetts Bay, as you directed), has

been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much

pleased with yournotes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their

author.

Kindest regards,

Benjamin Franklin

PLEASE SEE EXHIBIT 2

(COLOR PHOTOS AND TEXT IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT.)

Page 1 of 4


17/64

The appearance m

)c Vaiut. as J nufor autbority on natural juritpnMknce. and hb bookqukldy beonw th

moH important workon internaiionat taw in the t^^wccnth century. A philoMpher. iu

and difiloinaL Vattd (i7


18/64

JOHN JAY'S LETTER TO HIS EXCELLENCY GENERAL WASHINGTON, NEW YORK25 JULY 1787ON THIS DATE GEORGE WASHINGTON WAS PRESIDING PRESIDENT OF

THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION AT PHILADELPffiA 1787

r


19/64

TRANSCRIPTION OF JOHN JAY'S LETTERTO HIS EXCELLENCY GENERAL WASHINGTONNEW YORK25 JULY 1787

f HfHi tKfri tnOi*nmjf honoreti K'ttKyOtu" CtuccUetxcyiptu-Oro/

tKc J i i Xtut: 6 isnmcduUcfy dcUAOtxd'the^ Lciie4'Umc(oK


20/64

EXHIBIT 2

As evidenced below, there can be no doubt whatsoever our Founding Fathers and Constitutional Framersreliedheavily on The LNations as they struêd with the weighty matter ofcreating our Constitution and Constitutional Republic.

I Lftlcrs ofdclegalcs Ui Congress. 1774-1 784. Volume 2. Sopicmhcr1 7?5-I)ci;fnibcr1775 Pai:c I of4

Dtlr%atts to (ttnf^rr%%. I.eltrm ofdrk^le to Confim. I774-I789, \'otuinc 2, Septcmbrr 1

Dtcembcr 1775l-lccironic lc\t Center. riiivcr>.iiy of\'irj;ini;t I ihr;ir\

Tabic ofContcBH for Ihia woHtAll O B - l i B e datahatw t tttxtCenter llomcpw

Benjamin Franklia to To: Charles V\ illiam Frederic Dumas

Dear Sir.I'liilAdclphia, *J DcctmK-r.

I rcedu'd >our so eral favors, otM J > 18ih. June . 'Hh. and Jul\ Sih. by Mcisr*; N'ailiant and IVxhard,

Jj ''ti tii if! could scrvtfupon vour tcuimmendaium, ii wuuUl mc j;rcrat pleasiwv. Ihcir total vantoil.nÛ'ih is at prciiT an obstruction lo iheirycuinii any employment ami>n us, hut 1 hope thc> v^swii obtain >ome kni* Icd e ot ii. lliis is a jjiKKi t:ountr\ tiiranitlceri or taimcrs; but gcntlcnx'n ol'mere science m les hclles ktires eannoi w. easily xuhsisi here, there being linle demand tortheirassistance amon an industrious p>ple. uho. as > et, ha\e nit muth leisure lorvtudici ifthat kind

I am much obliged b> the kind present \ou ha\e made us or'>ouredition of\'diici. It eame to us in(Hd seawm. vhen the cireumsianecs oCa nsinj; stiiie make it neccssar> t'requenll> to consult the law ofnations AeeordingN that topy, whith I kept, (afterdepi'- iting txie in tuirown public library here, andsendine the olJier lo tbeColletie i>fMassachusetts Ha>, a- >ou directed.) has been conltnuaII> m thehands ofthe membcri. ofour Congress. ni>\\ silting. \ ho arc much pleased v ith \ouriKitesand preface,and ha\e entertained a high and just esteem fortheirauthor >'ourm uscnpt 'idee surtc Uouvemcmeiltet la Royautc" is also well a'lished. and ma%. in lime, have tts ctTect I thank >ou. likevxise. forthe othersmalWr pieces, which accompanied Vattel "Ic coun Ixpose decc qui scst passe entrc laCourHritanntqiic et les Colonics." hi-, bciny a very ioncisc and clearstatement offacts, vv'ill be repnnted herefor ihc use ofournew friends m Canada. Ihe translaimns ofthe prtvccdings ofour Con res:* arc \er\acceptable, I send vou hcrcv ith vshat ut'iiwm has been farthcT published here, together 'Ailh a t'e\snewi papers, containing acciHinls ofsome ofthe successes Providence has favored u% v\iih We arethreatened from l-nylar with a very powertul force, to come next vearagainst us.jjj *c are makm allihe provision in ourpt erhere to opptMw that force, and we hope v\c shall be able to defend ourselv esBut. as the ev ems ol warare ajvav s uncertain, possibly,

aftcr arutihcr campaign. v\c mayfindit neccs ar. to askthe aid ofs me lt>reiyn ptiuer.

It ivos us rcat pleasure lo loam from vou, that louie Tfurope nou i souhailc le plus heureux succespt)urle maintien de nos liberies. Hut wish to knov . v hcther an\ one ot them, from prirwiples ofhunwiits, is disptvscd macnaninunisKlo sitp m forihe icticl oi an oppressed people, orVihcthcT. jf. a>It sLx-ms likely lo happen, vvc shcmid bcoblij;ed lo breakoffall connexion with Britain, and declareourselves an independent people, there ]s an; slate orp mer in I un*pc, vvho would be willmg to enterinto an aUiatvcc with us forthe benellt ol ourcommerce, which amounted, before the war. to nearsevenmillions sterling perannum, and must cominualK increase, as ourpcjple increase m*"sl rapidlv.Contldin *. mv dear fnend. in )Ourôod\M I ! IO US and to ourcause, and in your sagacilv and abilities torbusiness, the tommiiiee ofCongress. app


21/64

PHOTO IMAGES OF "A NUMERICAL CATALOGUE" AND "LE DROIT DES GENS" 1775 EDITIONUSED BY PERMISSION FROM THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA

1314 Locust St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 546-8229

i 'rfmrrfcn/ (//////p^^7/r

Q U A R I O

PHOTO IMAGE OF TITLE PAGE OF "A NUMERICAL CATALOGUE"THE LOG BOOK FOR INCOMING BOOKS INTO THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA

PHOTO USED BY PERMISSION FROM THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA

(PLEASE REFERENCE PAGE 1 OF EXHIBIT 2.)

-2 of6 -


22/64

PAGE SHOWING ENTRY OF "LE DROIT DES GENS forVATTEL" INTO"A NUMERICAL CATALOGUE"

SHORTLY AFTER BENJAMIN FRANKLIN DEPOSITED TT AT THE LIBRARY IN 1775.


- 3o f 6 -


23/64

DE VATTEL

DROIT DES GENS

l l u i mate* II ftif MwafiJi purp-nct id b.

L E DROIT DES GENS [1775]


- 4 of 6 -


24/64

TITLE PAGES OF 1 OF THE 3 VOLUMES BENJAMIN FRANKLIN RECEIVED FROM PUBLISHER

DUMAS IN AMSTERDAM, HOLLAND, INCLUDING HAND-WRITTEN NOTE BY DUMAS,

DEPOSITED AT THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA BY BENJAMIN FRANKLIN.

"Presentedto the Library Company by Monsignor Dumas (Charles F. W, Dumas). "

PHOTOS USED BY PERMISSION FROM THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA

- 5 of 6 -


25/64

Le Droit Des Gens [1775], LIV. I. CHAP. XIX. 115

The Law ofNations [1775], B O O K I. CHAPTER XIX. Page 115


Les citoyens sont les membres de la societe civile: lies a cette societe . 212

par certains devoirs, & somnis a son autorite, ils participent avec egali- Des citoyens

te a ses avantages. Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes & naturals,

dans le pays, de parens citoyens.

- 6 o f 6 -


26/64

EXHIBIT 3

FOUNDING FATHER JOHN JAY'S COMMAND OF THE F R E N C H L A N G U A G E

L I F E

or

J O H N J A Y :

VITR

hKl.eCTWSi8 PROM HIS CORRESrONDKNCfi

.

(f nil >D,

W I L L I A M J A Y .

t.> TWO VOLUMESVOU I.

NEW.YORK:

nUSTTKU i.SL rUBUSHD BV i. J. lUirKK,

Courtesy ofWESTCHESTER CO UN TY HISTORICA L SOCIETY

Elmsford, New York

Page 1 of?


27/64

i

ly un or *Mit tA\:

hi wi*. Mr. PpkMfiin. ot BiiAjL SOOB tikn I141 TCUITD,

in I7S, Jay inmied Miry tkr. iinghirr oTJambui

VanCnrtiamtt. H


28/64

13 Lire i r tomn JAV.

He Mni to IK mckiutal mili a very goodrapacity, U

Tcrr rrKrviyl, aixl (juite of hit Itrodii:!'Jun^t'i du|Kaili mUtr. Wilb the *anicnmrfty

ba pnrwed al Ui^rtodjtisawi si-.-ally allmtiipl


29/64

for which he had afterward so much use." John Jay's grandfather, Augustus Jay, was bom in

France. Important; " . . . a language for which he had afterword so much use." French was the

diplomatic and court language in use in Europe in the 1700s. John Jay was the United States

Ministerto Spain [September 27,1779 - May 20, 1782]; Ministerto France [1782-1784],

assisting in the Treaty ofParis negotiations; and 2' '* Secretary ofForeign Affairs [May 7,1784

- March 22, 1790]. His command of the French language served our country well.

Etienne Claviere pour la' Societe des Amis des Noirs [Etienne Claviere forthe Society of

Friends ofthe Blacks] - Paris Manumission Society to the New YorkManumission Society.

9

,4jrt*UnttaA ; 4*tm*.^ nmyyi, j/ ^fr^jw^f}

A^fWy'./Mb

-4of7 -


30/64

V

t

w ^ '.fci jc*- *yMfKA V jr. .wafc.nuw 'x^yr^ - -

I ^ ^ r ^ r

ny^ttA *w^aC,fcy^^.tt,/U^ wuy! ^

kwA, - I tir ri f if^ ^ X M f K t n ^ ' *A A A O

t sA. uWic tr^M* & - *y


31/64

L a S o c i e t e e t a b l i e a P a r i s , a I ' i n s t a r de c e l l e d ' A n g l e t e r r e e t d'Amerique, p o u r

o p e r e r I ' a b o l i t i o n de l a T r a i t e et de I' Es cl av ag e des N e g r e s ;

a l a S o c i e t e e t a b l i e a New-Yorck, p o u r I ' A f f r a n c h i s s e m e n t de s E s c l a v e s :

L a c o n f o r m i t e q u i e x i s t e , e n t r e l e s v u e s de n o t r e S o c i e t e , e s l e s v o t r e s , nous

engage a vous informer que M. J e a u P i e r r e B r i s s o t de W a r v i l l e , qu i a et e, ju squ *

a p r e s e n t , n o t r e S e c r e t a i r e , e t q u i , p a r s e s s e n t i m e n s d ' h u m a n i t e , s e s l u m i e r e s

e t un zele i n f a t i g u a b l e , a p r i n c i p a l e m e n t c o n t r i b u e a 1 ' e t a b l i s s e m e n t e t au x

p r o g r e s de n o t r e S o c i e t e , a e n t r e p r i s u n voyage dans I ' A m e r i q u e S e p t e n t r i o n a l e ;

que dans l e co ur se de ce v o y a g e , i l se p r o p o s e se r e c u e i l l i r t o u t e s l e s l u m i e r e s

p o s s i b l e s , sur l e s o r t des N e g r e s , dans c e t t e p a r t i e du monde; s u r l e s mesures

p r i s e s s o i t p o u r l e s a f f r a n c h i r , s o i t p o u r m e t t r e f i n a l e u r i m p o r t a t i o n , s u r l e s

r e s u l t a t s ac tu el s de ces mesures, tous par rap po rt a l a c u l t u r e des t e r r e s , qu'au

c a r a c t e r e m o r a l des N e g r e s , et en general sur tout ce qui c o n c e r n e c e t t e

m a l h e u r e u s e , m a i s i n t e r e s s a n t e p o r t i o n de I ' e s p e c e humaine, e t p o u r s e r v i r a

det erm ine r en sa fa ve ur l e s Gouvernemens e t l e s I n d i v i d u s : e t comme l e suc ces des

p o u r e t a b l i r en tre notr e Soc ie te et l a Vo tre , une r e l a t i o n de f r a t e r n i t e , et de

C o r r e s p o n d a n c e m u t u e l l e : a q u o i nous e s p e r o n s que v o u s ne r ef us er ez pas de

c o n c o u r r i r e t nous v o u s p r i o n s d ' a j o u t e r p l e i n e e t e n t i e r e f o i , a t o u t ce que l a

d i t S i e u r de W a r v i l l e vous exposera , a ce su j et de no tr e p a r t .

En f o i de quoi nous avons f a i t a p p o s e r a c e t t e L e t t r e , l e sce au de n ot re

S o c i e t e , e t l a s i g n a t u r e de n o t r e P r e s i d e n t .

F a i t , a P a r i s , l e 29. A v r i l . 1788.

E. C l a v i e r e , P r e s i d e n

- 6 o f 7 - [ P a r i s , 29 Ap. 1788]


32/64

The S o c i e t y e s t a b l i s h e d a t P a r i s , l i k e tho se of Eng lan d and Ame ric a, t o

promote t h e a b o l i t i o n of the Treatment' and S l a v e r y of Negroes

To the S o c i e t y E s t a b l i s h e d a t New Yo rk f o r th e L i b e r a t i o n o f S l a v e s

The Co nf or mi ty which e x i s t s between th e Vie ws o f ou r S o c i e t y & of you rs ,

i n d u c e s us to i n f o r m you t h a t John P i e r r e B r i s s o t de W a r v i l l e , who has been,

u n t i l now, our S e c r e t a r y ; and who by h i s Se nt ime nt s of Humanity, h i s T a l e n t s and

h i s 2 C Q 1 u n r e m i t t e d Z e a l , has p r i n c i p a l l y c o n t r i b u t e d to the I n s t i t u t i o n &

P r o g r e s s of our S o c i e t y , has undertaken a Voyage t o N o r t h A m e r i c a ; T ha t i n t h e

Course of t h i s Voyage he proposes to a c q u i r e a l l t h e I n f o r m a t io n p o s s i b l e ,

C r e d i t to whatever the S a i d M". de W a r v i l l e s h a l l communicate to you on t h i s

S u b j e c t on our P a r t ^

In Wi tn es s whereo f we have caused the S e a l of our S o c i e t y to be a f f i x e d t o

t h i s L e t t e r , and a l s o t h e S i g n a t u r e of our P r e s i d e n t

Done a t P a r i s 29 Ap. 1788

(signed) E. C l a v i e r e , P r e s i d e n

LS, NNC (E J: 7287 ). Tr an s, i n J J ' s hand (EJ : 7288). E ndor sed: " T r a n s l a t i o n o f

L e t t e r from P a r i s S o c i e t y / 2 9 A p r i l 1788". E n c l o s u r e , da te d 22 Apr . 1788, i n

French and t r a n s , i n J J ' s hand: " E x t r a i t des R e g i s t r e s de l a S o c i e t y e t a b l i e a

P a r i s , pour d ' a b o l i t i o n de l a T r a i t e des Negr es," {EJ: 7286, 7289).

1. T r a i t e des Negres r e f e r s to the s l a v e t r a d e .

2. For B r i s s o t de W a r v i l l e ' s v i s i t to Am er ic a, see th e e d i t o r i a l note "John

J ay , A n t i - S l a v e r y , and th e New Yo rk Ma nu mi ss io n S o c i e t y , " above [5 Feb. 17 85 ].

- 7 o f 7 -


33/64

EXfflBIT 4

FRENCH TO ENGLISH TRANSLATION AND DICTIONARY EXCERPTS REVEAL NAT UR AL & NATIVE "BO RN " ROO T MEANINGS.

GOOGLE TRANSLATE:

FRENCH: naturels ENGLISH: natural

indigenes indigenous, natives

1758 First French Edition ofLe Droit Des Gens:

.212 Les Citoyens sont les membres de ia Societe Civile: Lies a cette Societe par

Des ctioyens certains devoirs, & soumis a son Autorite, ils participent avec egalite a ses ad

& Naturels. tages. Les Naturels, ou Indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pais, de

Citoyens.

1760 Edition ofThe Law ofNations, First English Translation:

. 212 The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by

Ofthe citi- certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advan-

zens and tagcs. The natives, orindigenes, are those bom in the country ofparents who are

natives. Citizens.

1787 Edition, The Law ofNations, English Translation:

C H A P . XIX.

fi r Cmmtrjt W tie fivtnl mMgttUi rtimtt U,

i f ^ H E w4wk ofa conon? foMoA bfiuiioa mi

" A UbfoQ. to io IBWS. itnm, M ve hiw AstifCat,

iuttniiana; aad N blhccomano eowttiy

*mWiMitjf ihcy equaD| paitk^MC

i itt adtant^ct. TbeMivrt, or itiCigtan, m dwfe bom in the eoMrr of

pamHs who are dtizens. Societf not betn| able to fub-

M . aad perpetuate iticif* but by the cbiMrea of tbe

diofe diiMiai natsnUy tottmr the oonditkm

iheirhthat, ami fttccee


34/64

1775 Edition, Le Droit des Gens, Livre I, Chapitre X I X [Edition used by the Founders]:

Les citoyens sont les membres de la societe civile: lies a cette societe . 212.

par certains devoirs, & soumis a son autorite, ils participent avec egali- Des dioyens

te a ses avantages. Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes & naturels.

dans le pays, de parens citoyens.

A French teacher, ofFrench ancestry and heritage, provided Amicus curiae herein with the

following insight:

Dear Mr Rille,

Vattel used the words "naturels " (naturals/naturally born) and "indigenes" (from the Latin

word "indigena" which means "natives" ) to refer to French natives who inherit their French

citizenship through their French parents (right ofblood) as opposed to foreigners born in

France who would only be considered as inhabitants ofFrance, not as French citizens.

http://www.1828-dictionarv.com/

[OE. natunl F. naturd, ft L. nmtralc, fr, mzura. S Xatwel

1828 DefiiiidoB

NATURAL* a. (to be bom or produced]

1. Peitaittfflf to sitwe; produced or effected by nature, or by the of

gro tlb, fomatiofi or motioo txi4>ressed on bodies orbeings by dhinepower. Tlnn we speakof tbe natxxnl growth ofanimals 01 plants; thenatural motion ofa graWutmg bod>; natural strength or disposition; thenatwd heat of the body; latml color, natural beauty. In ttis sense, oaturis opposed to artiiktal or acqtmd.

11. Okfstioiate; bm out ofwnflock; is a oatml son.

F.natura

to be

bom

bom outof

wedlock

- 2 of6-
http://www.1828-dictionarv.com/http://www.1828-dictionarv.com/


35/64

http://www.merriam-webster.com/

" Merriam-WebsterDictionary

n a t u r a l - b o r n adj

Oefimtton ofNATURALBORN f)^

2 a : being in accordance with or determined by nature

b : having or constituting a classification based on features

existing in nature

3 a (1): begotten as distinguished from adopted; also :

^GrnMCkTE (2): being a relation by actual consanguinity as

distinguished from adoption

b : r^GH^MATE

4 : having an essential relation with someone or something :

followmg from the nature of the one in question

5 : implanted or being as if implanted by nature : seemingly

inborn

begotten

ILLEGITIMATE (born out of

wedlock)

Inborn

- 3 of6-
http://www.merriam-webster.com/http://www.merriam-webster.com/


36/64

Ortgin of NATURAL

Middle English, horn Anglo-French natural, from Latin

fiMturalis of nature, from navura nature

Anglo-French naturel

First Known Use: I4th century

ReUted to NATURAL

born, congenitalSynonyms: born, congenital

Antonyms: nonnatural

>: more

Synonym Discussion ofNATURAL

\4Tu;Li :\3E\uDys, N C S , u\ S0J - :snciTD, i:tT^S5 mean free

from pretension or calculation. N&Tu! >i_implies lacking

artificiality and self-consciousness and having a

spontaneousness suggesting the natural rather than the man

-made world . :\G\L'DL!S

implies inability to disguise or conceal one's feelings or

intentions . \Ar;

suggests lack ofworldly wisdom often connoting

credulousness and unchecked innocence


37/64

i n - d i g e n e < noun . n c ^ j ^ n

Defindiofi of INDIGENE

Variants of INDIGENE

in^j-^cn* 4 also in-di-gn ndig*ns

First


38/64

Related to NATIVE

Synonyms: aboriginal autochthonous, born, domestic, born

endemic, indigenous indigenous

Synonym Discussion ofNATIVEI N D I G E N O U S

NATIVE , INDIGENOUS, ENDEM IC , ABOR IG INAL mean belonging to

a locality, NATIVE implies birth or origin in a place or region ^ j^h

and may sugges t compatibility with it . I N D I G E N O U S applies to species or races and adds

to NATIVE the implication of not having been introduced from

elsewhere . ENDEM IC implies

JOHN J A Y A N D THE PHILADELPHIA C ONVE NT ION [May 1787], from Volume 4 of the

Selected Papers of John Jay, Columbia University (unpublished work in progress).

"Jay was undoubtedly the most influential proponent ofconstitutional reform who was denied

an opportunity to attend the Philadelphia convention. Adams later said that Jay was 'of more

importance than any of the rest, indeed of almost as much weight as all the rest. That gentleman

had as much influence in the preparatory measures, in digesting the Constitution, and in

obtaining its adoption, as any man in the nation.'"

7. John Adams to JamesLloyd, 6 Feb. 1815, LbkC, MHi: Adams; JAW, 10: 115.

Courtesy of The Papers ofJohn Jay Project, Rare Bookand Manuscript Library, Butler Library, Columbia

University.

- 6 o f 6 -


39/64

EXHIBIT 5

FOUNDING FATHERJOHN JAY AND LE DROIT DES GENS [THE LAW OF NATIONS]

AUTHOR: EMMERICH de VATTEL

FIRST FRENCH EDITION 1758; FIRST ENGLISH EDITION 1759-60; 2 ^ FRENCH EDITION 1775

John Jay was elected as a Delegate to the First Continental Congress from New York.

In office September 5, 1774 - October 26, 1774.

He was elected as a Delegate to the Second Continental Congress from New York.

Inoffice December 7, 1778 - September 28, 1779.

He was elected the 6th President of the Continental Congress from New York.

Inoffice December 10, 1778 - September 28, 1779.

Benjamin Franklin is the only Founding Father who is a signatory ofall four ofthe major documents of the

founding ofthe United States: the Declaration of Independence, the Treaty ofParis, the Treaty ofAlliance with

France, and the United States Constitution. Tn 1775 he wrote:

Monsignor Charles F. W. Dumas


Amsterdam

Dear Sir,


I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us ofyour edition ofVattel. It came to us in good

season, when circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations.

Accordingly, that copy, which I kept (after depositing one in our own public library here, and sending the other

to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed), has been continually in the hands of the members of

our Congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a

high and just esteem for their author.

Kindest regards,

Benjamin Franklin

Founding Father John Jay owned his own personal copy ofThe Law ofNations.

John Jay was United States Minister to Spain from September 27, 1779 - May 20, 1782. He wrote the following

letter [reproduced in part] to his friend and confidant Gouvemeur Morris, from San [s*". ] Ildefonso, Spain. San

Ildefonso, or La Granja, or La Granja de San Ildefonso, is a town and municipality in the province of Segovia,

Spain, situated some 54 km northwest ofMadrid. The Royal Palace ofLa Granja, located at San Ildefonso, was

buih by King Philip V in 1724. The palace has been called "the Versailles ofSpain".

Gouvemeur Morris [January 31,1752 - November 6, 1816] was an American statesman, a Founding Father of

the United States, and a native ofNew YorkCity who represented Pennsylvania in the Constitutional

Convention of 1787, and U.S. Minister Plenipotentiary to France 1792-1794.

Page 1 of5


40/64

To G o u v e m e u r M o r r i s

I l d e f o n s o 28 Sep. 178

D". M o r r i s

My l a s t t oyo u was o ft h e 24"^. U l t . T r i p l i c a t e s have been s e n t I have

rec*^. none f r o m you l a t e r t h a n 10 J u l y by M aj^ . F r a n k s Y o u r s o ft h e 2'^. Jan^". & 4

March never reached

me^ th er e i s Reason t o b e l i e v e t h a t ^ ^ t h e m i n i a tor- PRIME MINISTERHERE HAS THEM

T e l l me what you t h i n k o f MY LETTER, TO t h e P r c g i d c n t ^CONGRESS^ OF THE [ ]

-inotont ^OF THIS MoNTH' I wuG Peace does not a p p e a r v e r y n i g h . THIS COURT AND THAT OF

FRANCE DO NOT DRAWp e r f e c t l y w e l l EXCEPT AJEW, I CAN HEAROF n o t h i n g so p e r f e c t l y

ODIOUS TO AS p a n i a r d AS AFRENCHMAN. THIS GOVERNMENT HAS l i t t l e MONEY, LESS WISDOM, NO

CREDIT, NOR ANY [ i l l e g i b l e ] ^RIGHT^ TO I T THEY HAVE PRIDE WITHOUT DIGNITY/ CutiHiHo WITHOUT

POLICY, AND NOBILITY WITHOUT HONORI speake w i t h c e r t a i n t y what WHAT NEW MEN may

'^MIGHT^ DO IS UNCERTAIN YOURBILLS HAVE DONE MUCH MISCHIEF THE KING MEANS WELL BUT KNOWS

n o t h i n g VA T T E L S LAW OF NATIONS^"^ WHICH I FOUND QUOTED I N a L e t t e r I r e c ^

f r o m CONGRESS IS PROHIBITED HERE I c o n f i d e i n your P r u d e n c e & S e c r e c y .

I h e a r so Seldom f r o m & so l i t t l e o f my F a t h e r s F a m i l y , t h a t you w i l l o b l i g e me

g r e a t l y by men tio nin g from time t o Time what you may know o r h e a r ab" them

The Cypher I use i s N . 1. The o n l y one I have as y e t r e c ^ I hope, a

D u p l i c a t e o f i t w i l l not be s e n t u n l e s s by a very safe opp^. I am v e r y much yours

J J

remember us t o our F r i e n d s a t P h ^ . you know who t h e y are'''


41/64

4. Emmerich de V a t t e l was c i t e d by delegates i n Congress, notably James

Madison, to deny the right of a nation holding the mouth of a r i v e r to bar

"innocent passage." Peacemakers, 239.

Excerpted from drafts ofthe work on Jay and natural bom citizen being done for volume 4 ofthe Selected

Papers ofJohn Jay, The Papers ofJohn Jay Project, Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Butler Library,

Columbia University.

Minister to Spain John Jay's instructions from Congress to be conveyed to " h i s Catholic Majesty"

Charles III, King ofSpain [1759-1788].

From t h e P r e s i d e n t o f C o n g r e s s (Samuel H u n t i n g t o n ) ^

J ay 's I n s t r u c t i o n s

P h i l a d e l p h i a O c t . 17. 178

S i r ,

C o n g r e s s h a v i n g i n t h e i r I n s t r u c t i o n s o f t h e 4"". I n s t . ^ d i r e c t e d you t o

a d h e r e s t r i c t l y t o t h e i r f o r m e r I n s t r u c t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f th e

U n i t e d S t a t e s , t o i n s i s t on t h e N a v i g a t i o n o f t h e M i s s i s s i p p i f o r t h e C i t i z e n s o f

t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n Common w i t h t h e S u b j e c t s o f h i s Catholic Majesty, as a l s o on

a f r e e P o r t o r P o r t s b e l o w t h e N o r t h e r n l i m i t o f W e s t F l o r i d a and a c c e s s i b l e t o

M e r c h a n t S h i p s , f o r t h e Use o f t h e f o r m e r and b e i n g s e n s i b l e o f t h e I n f l u e n c e

w h i c h t h e s e C l a i m s on t h e P a r t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s may have on y o u r N e g o t i a t i o n s

w i t h t h e C o u r t o f M a d r i d , have t h o u g h t i t e x p e d i e n t t o e x p l a i n t h e Reasons and

P r i n c i p l e s on w h i c h t h e same a r e f o u n d e d , t h a t youmay be e n a b l e d t o s a t i s f y t h a t

C o u r t o f t h e E g u i t y & J u s t i c e o f t h e i r I n t e n t i o n s .

"An innocent Passage (saidV a t t e l ) i s due to a l l Nations with whoma State

i s at Peace, andthis Duty comprehends troops eq ua ll y with Individuals" i f


42/64

a Right to a Passage by Land through other Countries may be claimedf o r

troops which are employed i n the Destruction of Mankindhow much more may

a Passage by Water be claimed f o r Commerce which i s b e n e f i c i a l to a l l

Nations. ^

These o b s e r v a t i o n s you w i l l r e a d i l y d i s c e r n a r e n o t communicated t o be u r g e d a t

a l l Events and as the y here sta nd i n S u p p o r t of th e C l a i m s t o w h i c h t h e y r e l a t e .

They a r e i n t e n d e d f o r y o u r p r i v a t e i n f o r m a t i o n an d us e and a r e t o be u r g e d so f a r

and i n such form o n l y as w i l l b e s t S u i t t h e temper & S e n t i m e n t s o f th e C o u r t a t

which you r e s i d e and b e s t f u l f i l l t h e o b j e c t o f t h e m .

By Order o f Congres

(Signed) Sam. H u n t i n g t o n P r e s i d e n t ^

1. I n a l e t t e r t o BF o f 28 Oct., James L o v e l l , c h a i r m a n of th e committee for

f o r e i g n a f f a i r s , e x p l a i n e d t h a t , on O c t . 6, C o n g r e s s had s e l e c t e d a committee

{James Madison, John S u l l i v a n and James Duane) t o w r i t e a l e t t e r t o J J and BF

t h a t w ou ld " e n f o r c e " i t s i n s t r u c t i o n s t o J J o f 4 Oct. (above) . Congress acce pte d

the committee's d r a f t , i n t h e hand o f James M a d i s o n , p r e s e n t e d t o i t on 16 Oct.

L o v e l l t h e n t o l d BF t h a t he was t h e o n l y member of the f o r e i g n a f f a i r s committee

t h e n a t t e n d i n g Congress and t h a t he h ad no s e c r e t a r y . He a s k e d BF t o t r a n s m i t t o

J J a l l t h e p a p e r s d i r e c t e d t o J J t h a t he r e c e i v e d . See JCC, 18: 908, 935-47;

PBF, 33: 471-72.

P r i o r t o s u b m i t t i n g t h e d r a f t t o Congress, Madison had d i s c u s s e d most o f th

major p o i n t s i t r a i s e d w i t h M a r b o i s , who u n i f o r m l y r e j e c t e d Madison's

c o n t e n t i o n s . For th e i n t e n s e p r e s s u r e b o t h M a r b o i s and F r a n c i s c o Rendon e x e r t e d

on Congress t o r e t r a c t i t s i n s i s t e n c e on M i s s i s s i p p i n a v i g a t i o n and boundary, see


43/64

PJM, 2: 114-17, 127-36; and LDC, 16: 154-59.

2. See above, and "Congress Appoints John Jay Minister to Spain" ( e d i t o r i a l

n o t e ) , v o l . 1, p. < >, and n o t e s t o P r e s i d e n t o f C o n g r e s s t o J J , 16 Oc t. 1779.

9. See Emmerich de Vattel, Law of Nations, Book 3: No. 123, andBook 2: No. 119.

Excerpted from drafts ofthe workon Jay and natural bom citizen being done for volume 4 ofthe Selected

Papers ofJohn Jay, The Papers ofJohn Jay Project, Rare Bookand Manuscript Library, Butler Library,

Columbia University.

FOUNDING FATHERTHO MAS JEFFERSON OWNED HIS OWN PERSONAL COPY OF

EMMERICH de VATTEL'S "L E DROIT DES GENS" [1775]

Chapirr a at

ThomtatJt/fcr^on' library: A Cmtaiog-ifh t/ir finirift in iti% (hrn OrJrr

.t i ll.m-


44/64

EXHIBIT 6

Law ofNationsEmmerich de Vattel

Law ofIVations; or Principles of the Law ofNature: Applies to the Conduct & Affairs of Nations &

Sovereigns

1759. 1st. English Edition.

Emmerich de Vattel

Emmerich de Vattel's The Law of Nations was key in framing the United States as the world's first

constitutional republic.

The myth that the founding ofAmerican Republic was based on the philosophy ofJohn Locke could only have

been maintained, because the history ofLeibniz's influence was suppressed. The American Revolution was, in

fact, a battle against the philosophy ofLocke and the English utilitarians. Key to this struggle, was the work

ofthe Eighteenth-century jurist, Emmerich de Vattel whose widely read text, The Law of Nations,guided the framing of the United States as the world's first constitutional republic. Vattel had challenged

the most basic axioms of the Venetian party, which had taken over England before the time of the

American Revolution, and it was from Vattel's The Law of Nations, more than anywhere else, that

America's founders learned the Leibnizian natural law, which became the basis for the American System

Virtually unknown today except amongst specialists, Emmerich de Vattel was bom on April 25, 1714, in the

principality ofNeufchatel, which was part ofSwitzerland. He became an ardent student ofLeibniz, and in 1741

published his first work, a defense ofLeibniz, Defense du systeme leibnitzien.

His most famous work, The Law ofNations; or, Principles ofthe Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and

Affairs ofNations and Sovereigns: http://w\vu' lonangconVexlibris/vattei/indexhtml

Vattel's The Law of Nations, was the most influential book on the law of nations for 125 years following

its publication. The firstEnglish translation appeared in 1759. Numerous editions ofThe Law ofNations were

printed in England during the Eighteenth century, which were widely read in the American Colonies, along wit

editions in the original French. The first American edition appeared in 1796.

Vattel was the most popular of all writers on the law ofnations in America before, but especially after,

the American Revolution. Vattel's The Law of Nations arrived, shortly after its publication, in America.

No later than 1770, it was used as a textbook in colleges. It was often quoted in speeches before judicial

tribunals and legislatures, and used in formulating policy. Following the Revolution, Vattel's influence

grew.

Among those citing Vattel in legal cases and government documents, were BenjaminFranklin, John Adams,

James Wilson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay, and John Marshall. John Adams, the fiiture

delegate to the Continental Congress, second President of the U.S., and father of President John Quincy Adam

recorded in his Diary on Feb. 1, 1763, that after spending the day frivolously, instead of reading and thinking,

"The Idea ofM. de Vattel indeed, scowling and frowning, haunted me. In 1765, Adams copied into his Diary

three statements by Vattel, "of great use to Judges," that laws should be interpreted according to the intent ofth

author, and every interpretation which leads to absurdity should be rejected. In a letter to the Foreign Minister

1
http://w/vu'http://w/vu'http://w/vu'


45/64

ofDenmark, in 1779, Benjamin Franklin quoted Vattel, and "his excellent Treatise entitled Le Droit des Gens

' James Madison, as a member of the Continental Congress in 1780, drafted the instructions sent to John

Jay, for negotiating a treaty with Spain, which quotes at length from The Law of Nations. Jay

complained that this letter, which was probably read by the Spanish government, was not in code, and

"Vattel's Law of Nations, which 1 found quoted in a letter from Congress, is prohibited here." Later,

John Marshall, during his thirty-four years as ChiefJustice of the U.S. Supreme Court, quoted Vattel by

far the most among all authors on the law of nations.

The Law of Nations and The Declaration of Independence

Delegates to the First and Second Continental Congress, which produced the Declaration of

Independence, often consulted The Law of Nations, as a reference for their discussions. One important

reason why the delegates chose to meet in Carpenters Hall, was that the building also housed the Library

Company ofPhiladelphia. The librarian reported that Vattel was one of the main sources consulted by

the delegates during the First Continental Congress, which met from Sept. 5 to Oct. 26, 1774. Charles

W.F. Dumas, an ardent supporter of the American cause, printed an edition ofThe Law of Nations in

1774, with his own notes illustrating how the book applied to the American situation. In 1770, Dumas ha

met Franklin in Holland, and was one ofFranklin's key collaborators in his European diplomacy. He

sent three copies to Franklin, instructing him to send one to Harvard University, and to put one in the

Philadelphia library. Franklin sent Dumas a letter, Dec. 9,1775, thanking him for the gift. Franklin

stated, "I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us ofyour edition ofVattel. It came to us

in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law o

nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept, has been continually in the hands of the members of our

congress, now sifting...."

The study ofThe Law of Nations by the delegates to the Continental Congress, to answer questions "of

the circumstances of a rising state," is reflected in the Declaration of Independence ofJuly 4, 1776. The

central ideas of that document are coherent with Vattel's arguments on the criteria of a people to

overthrow a tyrannical sovereign. The Declaration of Independence states that governments are

instituted to fulfill the "inalienable rights" of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," and can be

changed if they fail to meet these obligations to the people.

Governments should not be changed for light and transient causes, but only after a long chain ofabuses to the

fiandamental rights ofthe people, with repeated requests for redress of grievances, which were refiised.

Repeated appeals were made to our "British Brethren," but since they "have been deaf to the voice ofjustice an

ofconsanguinity," we are prepared to face them either in war or in peace. Therefore, we declare ourselves

independent of the British Crown, with the fiall powers of a sovereign govenmient, "to levy war, conclude

peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which Independent States ma

ofrightdo."

The inclusion of the central conception ofThe Law of Nations, Vattel's Leibnizian concept of happiness,

as one of the three inalienable rights, is a crucial statement of the Declaration's Leibnizian character. Th

Declaration of Independence was prepared by a committee consisting ofBenjamin Franklin, Thomas

Jefferson, John Adams, Robert Livingston, and Roger Sherman. Jefferson was assigned by this

committee to write the draft of the Declaration, after John Adams turned down the task, because of his

numerous other responsibilities. The fact, that Jefferson was a strong proponent of the philosophy of

John Locke by as early as 1771, is often used as evidence that the Declaration was based on Locke's

philosophy. However, Locke had argued, in his Two Treatises ofGovernment, that the fundamental righ

ofmen is to "Life, Liberty, and Property." The inclusion of "the pursuit of happiness," rather than

2


46/64

"property," as an inalienable right, was a crucial statement, that the American Revolution would be a

"battle for the establishment of a true Republic, rather than merely a dispute between two groups of

aristocrats over the division of property. [NOTE: Thomas Jefferson's personal copy ofVattel, "Droit des

Gens", Ed . de 1775, is found in the Thomas Jefferson Library, Library of Congress, Chapter 16, item 40

The Law of Nations and The Constitution

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Vnion^ establish Justice, insure

domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the

Blessings ofLiberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the

United States ofAmerica."Preamble of The Constitution of the United States

The Law of Nations was crucial in shaping American thinking about the nature of constitutions.

To this day, Great Britain does not have a written constitution, but instead a collection oflaws, customs, and

institutions, which can be changed by the Parliament.

The only place ofappeal which the American colonists had for unjust laws was to the King's Privy Council.

Attempts by the colonists to argue that actions by the British Monarchy and Parliament were unlawful or

unconstitutional would be stymied, if they stayed within this legal framework which was essentially arbitrary.

Although Vattel praised the British constitution for providing a degree offreedom and lawfulness not seen in

most of the German states, his principles of constitutional law were entirely different from the British

constitutional arrangements.

Consequently, the American colonists attacked the foundation ofthe King and Parliament's power, by

demanding that Vattel's principles of constitutional law be the basis for interpreting the British constitution.

http://www.freerepublic.comyfocus/f-chat/2148074/posts

3
http://www.freerepublic.comyfocus/f-chat/2148074/postshttp://www.freerepublic.comyfocus/f-chat/2148074/posts


47/64

EXHIBIT 7

Forgotten Influences of the Founders

Ourown Founding Fathers were convinced, and history has proven them prescient, that they

were building a new and everlasting republic that would do what otherrepublics of the ancient

world had failed to do: survive the effects of the maladies of self-government and bequeath tothe subsequent generations ofAmericans a sound and stable republic if they could kee

it.*

Forthe ingredients necessary to brew the right antidote to the poisons of democracy and

tyranny, the Founders drew from several sources. From the recent past, there was the English

legacy of the right ofthe people to the enjoyment ofcertain unalienable rights such as trial by

jury and due process; there was the legacy of ancient Greece and Rome that citizens are and

by rights should be entrusted with the power ofself-determination; and there was the faculty o

renown continental thinkers and jurists who propounded the principle of natural law and its

blessings and burdens better than any theorists before orsince. The Founders wisely chose from

among the best and brightest, and combined their words and deeds into a potent concoction that

they then reduced down with the fire ofrevolution into a remedy that, despite its base of

history, was uniquely American.

Emmerich de Vattel

The fourth of the FourHorsemen ofAmerican liberty is Emmerich de Vattel. Although last inthis list of forgotten influences, it can be claimed, without exaggeration, that it is Vattel's

interpretations and writings on the subject of the proper constitution of government that was

most influential on the Founders of the American Republic. As a matter of fact, Thomas

Jefferson, indisputably one of the lead framers of our nation's government, ranked Vattel 's

seminal The Law ofNationSjor the Principles of NaturalLaw as highly as similartreatis

Grotius and Pufendorf FurtherproofofVattel's impression on the Founders is the fact that

Vattel's interpretations of the law of nature were cited more frequently than any other writer's

on international law in cases heard in the courts of the early United States, and The Law of

Nations was the primary textbook on the subject in use in American universities.

The Swiss-bom Vattel learned to love God from his father, a pastor in the Reformed Church. I

was Vattel's beliefthat the law of nations was given to man by God for their happiness. Vattel

wrote that the best constitution was that constitution founded most firmly on natural law and

least liable to be unmoored from it. Vattel stated, "It is ... the constitution ofa state which

determines its progress and its aptitude to attain the ends ofa society." These words were

Page 1 of2


48/64

instructive to the authors of the American Constitution and encouraged them in the sometimes

arduous struggle to frame a well-constructed and long-lasting Constitution for the new republic

They learned from the distinguished Vattel that ifa country is to be successfril then it must

begin as it means to continue, built upon an unshakeable fr)undation of natural law and

separated power.

As with many of the ancient historians and our own Founding Fathers, Vattel recognized the

insidious hann done to constitutions by those who weaken it from the inside over time. James

Madison's warning in this regard is oft quoted: ''I believe there are more instances of the

abridgment of the freedom ofthe people by gradual and silent encroachments ofthose in power

than by violent and sudden usurpations." Madison undoubtedly believed this independently, but

he was certainly inspired by his reading in The Law ofNations wherein Vattel admonished:

"The constitution and laws ofa state are rarely attacked from the front; it is against secret and

gradual attacks that a nation must chiefly guard." In this instance and many others, one can

appreciate the weight and value ofVattel's theories on those of our most illustrious thinkers.

Words ofWisdom

The lessons our Founders learned from the wise men discussed in this article are just as

valuable for us, theirpolitical and philosophical heirs. We must V i g i l a n t l y and

zealously guard and treasure the republican government established

by the Constitution and the eternal principles of natural law upon

which it is built. Let us be fervent and grateful protectors ofliberty

and resist all attempts to wrest our government from us or from its

firm foundations of popular sovereignty and the right ofself-determination.

http://www.freedomproiect.com/latest/articles /66-forgotten-influences

* Outside Independence Hall when the Constitutional Convention of

1787 ended, Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin,

"Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With

no hesitation whatsoever. Franklin responded,

"A Republic, ifyou can keep it."

http://quotes.libertv-tree.ca/quotes bv/beniamin+franklin

Page 2 of2
http://www.freedomproiect.com/latest/articles/66-forgotten-influenceshttp://www.freedomproiect.com/latest/articles/66-forgotten-influenceshttp://www.freedomproiect.com/latest/articles/66-forgotten-influenceshttp://quotes.libertv-tree.ca/quoteshttp://quotes.libertv-tree.ca/quoteshttp://quotes.libertv-tree.ca/quoteshttp://www.freedomproiect.com/latest/articles/66-forgotten-influences


49/64

EXHIBIT 8

V a t t e l ' s I n f l u e n c e o n t h e t e r m a N a t u r a l B o r n C i t i z e n

Theodore T. Moran

What is a natural bom citizen? Where did the framers come up with this term? Where was it used before? So

many questions, and the answers are right there if anyone wishes to search out the tmth.

The term Natural bom Citizen appears in our Constitution, in Article 2, Section 1, with these words, 'Wo perso

excepta naturalbom citizen, or a citizen of the UnitedStates, at the time of the adoption ofthis Constit

shallbe eligible to the office ofPresident: neithershallany person be eligible to thatoffice who shallnoth

attainedto the age ofthirty five years, andbeenfourteen Years a residentwithin the UnitedStates"

Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Bom Citizen is from the legal treatise "the Law

ofNations." written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758 In bookone chapter 19,

212, O f the citizens and mXwes.

"The citizens are ihe members of ihe civil society: hound to this society by certain duties, CUKI subject to its

authority, they equally participate in its advantages. 7'he natives, ornatural-horn citizens, are those born

the country, ofparents who are citizens. As the society cannotexistandperpetuate itselfotherwise tha

children of the citizens, those children naturallyfollow the condition oftheirfathers, andsucceedto allth

rights. The society is supposedto desire this, in consequence ofwhatitowes to its own preservation; a

presumed, as matterofcourse, thateach citizen, on enteringinto society, reserves to his children the r

becomingmembers of it. The country of thefathers is therefore thatof the children;andthese become tr

citizens merely by theirtacitconsent. We shallsoon see whether, on theircomingto the years ofdiscr

may renounce theirright, andwhatthey owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in ord

the country, it is necessary thata person be born of afatherwho is a citizen; for, if he is bom there of a

foreigner, itwillbe only theplace of his birth, and not his country.^'

"Please note that the correct title of Vattel's Book I, Chapter 19, section 212, is "Ofthe citizens and naturals". I

is not "Ofcitizens and natives" as it was originally translated into English. While other translation errors were

corrected in reprints, that 1759 translation error was never corrected in reprints. The error was made by

translators in London operating under English law, and was mis-translated in error, or was possibly translated t

suit their needs to convey a different meaning to Vattel to the English only reader. In French, as a noun, native

is rendered as "originaire" or "indigene", not as "naturel". For "naturel" to mean native would need to be used

as an adjective. In fact when Vattel defines "natural bom citizens" in the second sentence ofsection 212 after

defining general or ordinary citizens in the first sentence, you see that he uses the word "indigenes" for natives

along with "Les naturels" in that sentence. He used the word "naturels" to emphasize clearly who he was

defining as those who were bom in the country of two citizens of the country. Also, when we read Vattel, we

must understand that Vattel's use of the word "natives" in 1758 is not to be read with modem day various

alternative usages ofthat word. You must read it in the lull context ofsentence 2 ofsection 212 to flilly

understand what Vattel was defining from natural law, i.e., natural bom citizenship ofa country. Please see the

photograph of the original French for Chapter 19, Section 212, here in the original French ifyou have any

doubts. Please do not simply look at the title as some have suggested that is all you need to do. Vattel makes it

Page 1 of5


50/64

" quite clear he is not speaking of natives in this context as someone simply bom in a country, but ofnatural

' born citizens, those born in the country of two citizens of the country. Our founding Fathers were men of

high intellectual abilities, many were conversant in French, the diplomatic language ofthat time period.

Benjamin Franklin had ordered 3 copies ofthe French Edition of"Le droit des gens," which he deferred to as

the authoritative version as to what Vattel wrote and what Vattel meant and intended to elucidate."

Ifnot Vattel, then where did they arrive at this term. Many ofthose who ridicule us like to quote Blackstone as

authoritative that the United States adopted English Common Law. They like to state that Blackstone's natural

bom subject is equivalent of a natural bom citizen. There is no doubt that the Founding Father's were

influenced from Blackstone's Commentary. However, the Framers ofthe Constitution recognized that it was

Blackstone, who argued that the Parliament and King could change the constitution at will. Blackstone was

increasingly recognized by the Americans as a proponent ofarbitrary power. In fact, the framers rejected the

notion that the United States was under English Common Law, "77? common /ovt' ofEngland is nol the

common law ofthese States.''George Mason one ofVirginia's delegates to the Constitutional Convention.

As to what is a natural bom subject, Blackstone went on to say that any person, freeman or alien, except those

ofdiplomats who were bora in the realm ofthe King ofEngland was a natural bom subject. There is a problem

with a simple substitution of citizen in place of subject, that some people think are synonymous. In England, no

all natural bom subjects ofthe Crown can become the King. This is reserved for a very small subset ofnatural

bom subjects called the royalty. This is drastically dissimilar to the American concept that any Natural Bora

Citizen can become President. Under Blackstone's subjects only a very, very small subset ofNatural Bom

Subjects could rise to be King, the American Presidency is drawn from the largest class of citizens, the natural

bom. Like the analogv of a field of clover, the Founding Fathers were not looking for that elusive genetic

mutation of a four-leaf clover, they were looking for the common, naturally occurring three-leaf clover to be

President.

But Blackstone is confiising on this issue. Blackstone also writes, "7b encourage alsoforeign commerce, it w

enactedby statute 25Edw. Ill st. 2. thatall children born abroad, providedboth their parents were at t

of the birth in allegiance to the king, andthe motherhadpassedthe seas hy herhusband's consent, migh

inheritas if bom in England: andaccordingly ithath been so adjudgedin behalfofmerchants. But by seve

more modem statutes these restrictions are stillfarthertaken off: so thatallchildren,bom out of the kin

ligeance, whosefathers were natural-bom subjects, are now natural-bom subjects themselves, to allint

purposes, withoutany exception; unless theirsaidfathers were attainted, orbanishedbeyondsea, for

treason; orwere then in the service of aprince atenmity with GreatBritain." This use ofBlackstone gave

Great Britain claim over US Citizens, which lead to the war of 1812, when Britain went about impressing

American sailors into their navy because English law did not recognize the right ofour Founding Father's

naturalizing themselves into our new country. "Once an Englishman, always an Englishman," was the reason

the British used to impress our citizens into service for the Crown. This law and concept ofclaim to the subject

to the Crown, regardless of place ofbirth is still in effect in Great Britain, and had the effect of Congress

passing a law that required all the officers and three fourths ofthe seamen on a ship of the United States be

natural bom citizens. (Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States. Febmary 9, 1813) Further,

the Crown passed a law that made it treason for former British subjects, even though they were now American

citizens to participate on the side ofAmerica during the war of 1812. (Journal ofthe Senate ofthe United StateofAmerica. Febmary 23, 1813) to Ifthe Founding Fathers accepted Blackstone's definition of a natural bom

subject, then impressments ofAmerican-British citizens into the Royal Navy would not have been a casus belli

for the War of 1812. The fact that Madison included the impressments ofAmerican Citizens as a reason for a

state ofWar clearly indicates that they rejected Blackstone's definition of a natural-bom subject.

John Jay's letter to Washington address this dual and permanent loyalty to England that Blackstone

introduces. To George Washington, President of the Constitutional Convention, Jay writes "Per/n/7me to

hintwhetheritwouldnot he wise andseasonable to provide a strong checkto the admission offoreigner

- 2 -


51/64

' into the administration of ournationalgovernment; and to declare expressly thatthe commandin chief

' the American army shallnot be given to, nordevolve on any but a naturalborn citizen.''^ Jay not only kn

ofVattel, as can be seen from his correspondence with James Madison in 1780 during treaty negotiations

with Spain, but he was also a proponent of Vattel as well.

What further discredits Blackstone as being the author of the Natural Bom Citizen clause, is the first

immigration act passed by our First Congress in 1790. In chapter III we find direct references to VattePs

assertion that citizenship is derived from the father, in that citizenship was prohibited to children whose fathers

have never gave intent to permanently reside of the Untied States. Interestingly in this same act, we also find

the clarification of a Natural Bom Citizen, as being one "And the children of citizens ofthe United States, that

may be bom beyond sea, or out ofthe limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural bom citizens:

Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been a resident in

the United States:" Residency was defined in that same act as someone under oath declaring that they wished t

remain and live in the Untied States. It should be noted that the Supreme Court was tasked with defining severa

phrases in this law, and since Jay was the first ChiefJustice of the Supreme Court, and had reviewed the

immigration law of 1790. IfJay was in favor of Blackstone's definition, he remained silent.

To addfijrtherproofto the intent of the Founding Fathers literal meaning of Vattel's definition of a natural bom

citizen being bom oftwo citizens, and in the country itself, and wanting a natural bom citizen having no other

claim to his loyalty except that of the United States ofAmerica, in 1795 the Congress amended the

Naturalization Act of 1790. The Naturalization Act of 1795. which was also signed by George Washington,

recognized Blackstone's commentaries on English Common Law, making children bom overseas in the lands

under British mle, British Subjects. Even if their parents were American. This act removed the words natural

bom from children bom overseas ofAmerican parents, so that no other potentate could lay claim to this person

and thus establish "a presence of influence" in the Executive Branch. It was the intent ofour Founding Fathers

to "naturalize at birth" these children, but not give them the status "natural bom citizens." Also in this act of

1795, we see the importance of complete allegiance to the United States for all people naturalized, as this is the

first appearance of the oath of allegiance "to renounce forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince,

potentate, state, or sovereignty whereof such alien may at that time be a citizen or subject." This oath is still in

effect today.

Ifit was not Blackstone who they relied on for defining the term Natural Bom Citizen, then the only remaining

source is from Vattel. Many ofthese detraaors say we are reaching to extremes to use Vattel, as the source of a

Natural Bom Citizen clause. Some ofthere arguments are that the Law ofNations is a obscure mention to an

idea, found in Article I, Section 8. What they fail to mention that this phrase is capitalized, if it was an inferenc

to a general idea, it would not have been capitalized. School children know well the mies ofcapitalization, and

the use ofthe capitalized Law ofNations would indeed make it uses consistent with a title of a publication. Let

us take this and consider if indeed Vattel was a source ofinspiration for the Founding Fathers and the Framers

of our Constitution. The question we need to understand is were the founding fathers tmly influenced by Vatte

or not.

The answer to this lies with none other than Thomas Jefferson, who penned Virginia's Citizenship statue in

1779, ''Be itenactedby the GeneralAssembly, thatallwhitepersons born within the territory ofthis

commonwealth and all who have residedtherein twoyears nextbefore the passingofthis act, and all who

hereaftermigrate into the same; andshallbefore any courtofrecordgive satisfactory proofby theirown

oraffirmation, thatthey intendto reside therein, andmoreovershallgive assurance offidelityto the

commonwealth; and allinfants wheresoeverbom, whosefather, ifliving, orotherwise, whose motherw

citizen at the time oftheirbirth, or who migrate hither, their father, ifliving, orotherwise their mother

becominga citizen, or who migrate hitherwithout fatherormother, shallbe deemedcitizens ofthis

commonwealth, untilthey relinquish thatcharacterin manneras herein after expressed: And allothers

- 3 -


52/64

beingcitizens of any the UnitedStates of America, shallbe deemedaliens." As can be seen Jefferson is equ

citizenship of the child to that of the parents, and not the land.

For further proofon the question of Vattel's influence we only need to look at Benjamin Franklin. In 1775, he

observed, the importance of the Law of Nations, on the Founding Fathers and he then ordered 3 copies of the

latest editions. The Library Company of Philadelphia which holds one of the three copies, lists the 1775

reference to this book, as "Le droit des gens," from the publishing house ofChez E. van Harreveh in

Amsterdam, Holland, with a personal note to Franklin from the editor ofthis edition, C.G.F. Dumas. The fact

that this particular volume that Franklin ordered is in French is significant, for at that time French was

considered by the "family of nations" to be the diplomatic language, and the 1775 edition was considered the

most exact reference of Vattel's Law of Nations.

There is no doubt that the Founding Fathers did not exclusively use the English translation, but relied upon the

French original. On December 9"* of 1775, Franklin wrote to VatteFs editor, C.G.F, Dumas, "/am

much obligedby the kindpresentyou have made us ofyouredition of Vattel. Itcame to us in goodseas

H'hen the circumstances of a risingstate make itnecessary frequently to consultthe Law ofNations, has

been continually in the hands of the members of ourcongress, now sitting. Accordingly, thatcopy whi

kepthas been continually in the hands of the members of ourcongress, now sitting, who are much plea

with yournotes andpreface, andhave entertaineda high andJustesteem for theirauthor."

Samuel Adams in 1772 wrote, "Vattel tells us plainly and without hesitation, that "the supreme legislative

cannot change the constitution" Then in 1773 during a debate with th

scoal 2013-08-15 - mcinnish goode v chapman - rille amicus brief2

Documents