[DiogenesLamp]

I pinged you because I found your name in this thread as either a sender or recipient. If you find this objectionable I apologize. I am soliciting your opinion on the following.

Jeff Winston wrote:
I simply repeated Dane's words. Dane was clearly of the opinion that Thomas Jefferson had indeed been made a naturalized citizen of France, and that that naturalized citizenship was real.

Jeff Winston has repeatedly claimed that Thomas Jefferson is a Naturalized Citizen of France based on his reading of Nathan Dane.

It is my position that Nathan Dane is incorrect about this, and that he was very likely duped by a false Claim made by the Albany Register during the Presidential election of 1808.

One of the pieces of evidential support for my position is below. (I have found other sources which claim this as well.) Here is another. And Another. And Another. And Another.

And from "Presidential Campaigns, Slogans, Issues, and Platforms":

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is the above sufficient to prove that Thomas Jefferson was NOT a citizen of France?

All I ask is a fair hearing of the evidence. A Yes or no answer would be appreciated.

[Cyber Liberty]

I dunno. It sounds like Jefferson was made a Citizen of France in the same sense that Anne Frank was made a Mormon.

[lonevoice]

I pinged you because I found your name in this thread as either a sender or recipient. If you find this objectionable I apologize.

Please leave me off next time. Thanks.

[Triple]

First of all - The burden of proof is the requirement of those that make unusual claims.

Without a decree signed by Jefferson indicating his intention to become a French citizen, you have gone well beyond any requirement.

Secondly, don’t waste too much time arguing with Fogblowers. Wasting your time and annoying you is their goal. (They will argue in circles, and call in comrades. It is in their playbook.)

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

Is the above sufficient to prove that Thomas Jefferson was NOT a citizen of France?

No, but it's sufficient to cast doubt on a claim that he was. It seems to me like there are three possibilities here:

1. Your sources are all wrong. It seems unlikely, but it's possible, especially if one of them is the source for all the other ones. One can't tell by looking at them.

2. Dane is wrong. It seems unlikely that he'd be so wrong about what sounds like a major issue in a campaign he'd lived through just 16 years earlier, but it's possible.

3. Dane is right that Jefferson was a naturalized citizen of France, but by some other means than what the Albany Register claimed. Your sources indicate that "the French Revolutionary Assembly conferred honorary citizenship on Washington and Hamilton as well as Madison, but not Jefferson," but that only proves he didn't become a French citizen that way, not that he couldn't have some other way. Unlikely, perhaps, but not disproven.

So on the Mythbusters scale, I guess the claim is still "plausible," not "busted." But IMO it's weakened enough that I wouldn't assert it as fact.

[Sloth]

I haven't followed the thread, so I'm not sure what the relevance is, but assuming those sources are solid then it sounds as if the answer to your question is 'No', Jefferson was not a citizen of France.

I hope this has not been raised in reference to the "natural born citizen" requirement, because that requirement did not apply to Jefferson (or the other three mentioned): "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." Since they were citizens when the Constitution was ratified, they met the criterion, and any other citizenship they had was irrelevent.

[Rides3]

Is the above sufficient to prove that Thomas Jefferson was NOT a citizen of France? All I ask is a fair hearing of the evidence. A Yes or no answer would be appreciated.

There has never been any hard evidence that TJ was ever made a citizen of France. There have only been allegations without proof.

I'll add this info:

"...Nearly two centuries before, Jefferson's foes spread the equally baseless rumour he had accepted French citizenship from Robespierre in person."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/out-of-america-a-jefferson-by-any-other-name-1433543.html

[noinfringers2]

My take would be that any of the persons that acknowledged/accepted the French action in a positive manner before 17 Sept.,1787, the date of signing of the Constitution, could be taken as accepting French citizenship. However, a date of 1793 indicates to me that the French were just looking for proselytes for their cause, not unusual for French governments to this day. Madison’s expression of gratitude and even devotion to a cause does not rise to acceptance of citizenship. I don’t know about this person Dane but it seems a stretch to to take a French action and turn it into a USA result. With such reasoning the honorary USA citizenship for Churchill makes him a citizen with all rights as such.

[SvenMagnussen]

Thomas Jefferson was in in the Virginia legislature from 1776 until his election as Governor in 1779. It was Jefferson that drafted the declaration of independence from Great Britain that passed in the Congress of Virginia, 1776. At the time of the declaration of independence, all laws on citizenship and immigration were codified by the individual states. In 1783, Jefferson was appointed to the Congress of the Confederation and went to France as a U.S. Diplomat.

France had been signing treaties with other nations on diplomacy for hundreds years prior to Jefferson arriving in France to represent the nation which just declared its independence from Great Britain. Jefferson enjoyed full diplomatic immunity. Any offers and acceptance of citizenship would have been honorary to encourage and affirm diplomatic relations.

In 1779, Jefferson wrote a bill on becoming a citizen of Virginia. Among the requirements to become a citizen were:

- 2 years of residency in Virginia prior to passing of the Citizenship Act.

- Statement of oath or affirmation on fealty to the Commonwealth of Virginia before a Court of competent jurisdiction to all those who migrate to the state.

- A certificate of citizenship is issued to all who take an oath

- All citizens remain citizens until an oath of renouncement is made in a Court of competent jurisdiction in the state.

Later, the various states with their individual laws and regulations united to form the united States of America. A citizen of each of those states, regardless of how they obtained citizenship in the state, became a citizen of the United States. Jefferson was qualified to be POTUS because he was a citizen of Virginia and the United States at time of the adoption of the U.S. Constitution.

The founding fathers placed more emphasis on citizenship of the state in which the person resided more than place of birth. Furthermore, the founding fathers placed more emphasis on ensuring a person had not renounced their citizenship after making an oath or affirmation of fealty to the state during their lifetime.

Place of birth is a modern day convenience to establish NBC status. Most native born persons are NBC, but not all. Since the founding of this country, citizens have had the freedom to renounce their citizenship during their lifetime. If so, NBC status is lost forever.

[Uncle Sham]

Doesn't matter. Jefferson falls under the grandfathered in clause of the eligibility requirements.

"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; neither shall 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.

[WhiskeyX]

The alleged granting of French citiznship to Thomsas Jefferson required the enactment of a public law by the French legislature, and there has been no evidence after more than 200 years of any such a public act or law by the French Government. The sole source of the allegation of such French citizenship has been attributed back to a newspaper article that published a hearsay rumor, and the author and publisher retracted the hearsay allegation after being confronted with the falsity of the hearsay rumor. In summary, there is no evidentiary basis and no primary document in evidence to support the retracted hearsay allegations and statements. If such a grant of citizenship had occurred, it would be evident in the French government records. In the absence of such a French Govermnet record, no such grant of citizenship is known to exist as a matter of official recordd or official authority.

[NJ_Tom]

Impossible to argue with the documentary evidence you have provided. Presidential campaigns have always included a heavy dose of “negative campaigning” based on falsehoods.