“I’ll suggest that looking into the backgrounds of the authors of these various Acts would be informative”
In 1780, John Adams drafted the Massachusetts constitution, in it he uses both terms “citizens of the Commonwealth” and “subjects of the Commonwealth” as as “citizen” and “subject”.
“And every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination of any sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law.”
“Art. XI. Every subject of the commonwealth ought to find a certain remedy, by having recourse to the laws, for all injuries or wrongs which he may receive in his person, property, or character.”
“Art. II. And in order to provide for a representation of the citizens of this commonwealth, founded upon the principle of equality, every corporate town containing one hundred and fifty ratable polls, may elect one representative”
“And, that the citizens of this commonwealth may be assured, from time to time, that the moneys remaining in the public treasury”
“Art. XIII. In criminal prosecutions, the verification of facts, in the vicinity where they happen, is one of the greatest securities of the life, liberty, and property of the citizen.”
“Art. XIV. Every subject has a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches and seizures of his person, his houses, his papers, and all his possessions.”
I’ll have to look up the 1780 Constitution of Massachussetts for context to see for certain, but it appears that the language shifts when specific refrence is made to (those) subject to the jurisdiction thereof.