Skip to comments.Adams papers, Lee family papers to prove NBC in Constitution came from Vattel?
Posted on 10/15/2009 2:58:49 PM PDT by rxsid
Gorefan - My heritage includes the Adams of Massachusetts and the Herndons of Virginia. The Adams papers I am in possession of plainly state they looked to "Vattel's Law of Nations" for guidance in determining who might be qualified as a "natural born Citizen". (Yes, they capitalized "Citizen".) Do you actually believe there was no discussion of the topic by the Founding Fathers? Are you truly that ignorant of how well the Founding Fathers understood the law and its possible impact on future generations? It is very clear you haven't a clue how well educated and intelligent the Founding Fathers were. Most were conversant in Latin and Greek, plus Hebrew and Aramaic.
October 14, 10:48 PM
My family is in possession of over seven thousand files of Adams documents that have been passed from generation to generation. We know what our forebears intended, we are not guessing and jumping to conclusions. Every possible legal scenario was thoroughly discussed and carefully decided by the Founding Fathers. Contrary to prevailing opinion, they left NOTHING to chance. I will be sharing our documents with the best qualified attorneys working on the Obama eligibility cases. Get used to it, Obama is finished and he knows it. Obama is knowingly leading his blinded followers down the paths of deceit and directly into the darkened halls of shame.
October 14, 11:00 PM
My family also counts among our forebears King O'Leathlobhair (pronounced OWE LAL_OW_IR), who was ruler of all England in the third century A.D. The name O'Leathlobhair means "seeker of justice" and it is the original term from which the word "lawyer" was derived around the year 100 B.C. We've been well known as meticulous practitioners of the law since before the birth of Christ. In that time, I believe we have acquired a rather firm grasp of the basic ideas of how laws are to be properly formulated and administered. Obama shall not be allowed to continue to illegally retain the office of president.
October 14, 11:53 PM
The Adams papers I am in possession of plainly state they looked to "Vattel's Law of Nations" for guidance in determining who might be qualified as a "natural born Citizen"."
Joe - Please tell me you're kidding
October 15, 12:07 AM
John - This is an extremely serious matter, I do not "kid" about such issues.
October 15, 12:08 AM
My family and others have quietly observed and awaited the full winnowing of the wheat from the chaff in the legal matter of Obama's lack of eligibility. We are now preparing to act in unison to see that the law is enforced. The subject of "natural born Citizen" has never before been at issue during the term of a sitting president. The matter shall be decided fairly and equitably from information contained within very clear and meet and proper archived resources. The Lees of Virginia and other families also possess within their private archives a great deal of documentation regarding the intent of the Founding Fathers. Those who believe this issue was not debated and decided long ago haven't been previously afforded access to the existing documents.
October 15, 12:29 AM
Joe - I've been researching this subject for a year. Trust me, I know exactly how serious this is. I'd like to talk to you more but offline. If you're interested, email me at firstname.lastname@example.org
October 15, 12:46 AM
The trump cards are face-up on the table for all to see. The "natural born Citizen" issue is neither mysterious, nor undecided. Always remember : Only patience, wisdom, and forebearance bring justice, the law shall not be hastened to conclusion. I must now depart. At noon today, a real estate closing demands my attention. I bid you all a good evening and may God bless America.
October 15, 12:52 AM
John - I shall contact you later today. Thank you for researching the issue and rest assured many families hold information that will prove vitally important to serious practitioners of the law.
October 15, 12:57 AM
and are in descending order (by date/time). The most recent comment being at the bottom of the quotes.
Who knows (aside from "Joe") if this is true that such papers exist. It is, however, very plausible that many documents from the founders are not cataloged in the L.O.C. or elsewhere in public view.
Could be of huge significance...
Okay, lawyers: Who becomes president if Barack Obama or whatever his real name is, is found to be a usurper? Not Joseph Biden? He is complicit, as is Nancy Pelosi. Does Mr. McCain? Senator Byrd? WHO?!!
This would sure help slam the door on the After-birthers that the Law of Nations written in the US Constitution refers to de Vattel’s works.
Check on whereabouts of "HistorianDorisKearnsGoodwad."
Obama’s Achilles heel — Natural Born Citizenship
Examiner.com | 10-15-2009 | Dianna Cotter
Posted on 10/15/2009 2:13:26 PM PDT by Danae
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution.
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
That question is why I cannot see the SC going with the Vattel definition no matter how convincing the evidence for it. Of course, that assumes it ever gets to them and I’m sure they will be content with district and/or appellate courts finding a lack of standing.
I hope they guard those documents with their lives plus make 20 copies and mail them to a number of the bloggers working this issue.
This could be a very important find.
If this guy John has the what he says he does, it’s goodbye Obama.
If I remember correctly, after the speaker of the house, the executive authority would move on to Senator Byrd, then to serving members of the cabinet. The first would be Secretary of State, Hillary Rotten Clinton. The next would be Sec of Treasury, Sec of Defense, the Attorney General, Sec of Interior, Sec of Agriculture, Sec of Commerce, Sec of Labor, Sec of Health and Human Services, Sec of Urban Development, Sec of Transportation, Sec of Energy, Sec of Education, Sec of Veterans Affairs, Sec of Homeland Security and then to some guy in a bar named “Phil”.
Vattels Influence on the term
a Natural Born Citizen
What is a natural born 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 truth.
The term Natural born Citizen appears in our Constitution, in Article 1, Section 2, with these words, 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.
Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise the Law of Nations, written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19,
§ 212. Of the citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
“Please note that the correct title of Vattel’s Book I, Chapter 19, section 212, is Of the citizens and naturals. It is not Of citizens 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 to 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 born citizens” in the second sentence of section 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 born 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 modern day various alternative usages of that word. You must read it in the full context of sentence 2 of section 212 to fully understand what Vattel was defining from natural law, i.e., natural born citizenship of a country. Please see the photograph of the original French for Chapter 19, Section 212, here in the original French if you 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 quite clear he is not speaking of natives in this context as someone simply born in a country, but of natural 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 of that time period. Benjamin Franklin had ordered 3 copies of the French Edition of Le droit des gens, which the deferred to as the authoritative version as to what Vattel wrote and what Vattel meant and intended to elucidate.”.
This is a good point. Most of the pro-usurper agitation comes from people who can't even read French, much less Latin or Greek. Ignorance is at a pandemic stage here in 2009.
Please ping me to further information on these papers, rxsid.
But these are big books. Where's the evidence that the Founders agreed with Vattel on this specific topic? As a continental thinker Vattel's views on this matter may be different from those of the British tradition that was the foundation of our system of laws. To get closer to the truth on this you'd have to look at other occurrences of the term "natural born citizen" -- Blackstone's for example. They many not coincide with Vattel's.
When he says he's got the Adams papers does he mean the set that was put out by the Harvard University Press or are we supposed to believe he's got the original documents lying around the house? And when somebody says they trace their ancestry from a Celtic Irish king it's one of those red flags that they're probably not all there or all right in the head.
Adams hand comes from the grave to strike down an Islamic Communist. How fitting would that be.
They specified age and minimum term of residence within the US. Why would they leave the term “Natural born citizen”, that’s in the same paragraph, up for intrepretation? Because they didn’t.
I hope this is the truth.
Is it possible that a single family really has such important documents in their possession and the government doesn’t know?
Having spent a fair amount of time tracking down my own early paternal genealogy in England, and apparently before that, Ireland, I cannot say "BS" loudly enough to this.
Are there papers extant, in private hands, that could shed light upon this matter? I don't doubt that it's a possibility.
But then, the poster goes on to claim some sort of ancient hereditary state of lawyerliness through an Irish clan that he says is English, from which he could not possibly have proved himself to have descended. At most, it's the legendary origin of his surname, if Lawlor. Very, very weird.
Someone is prone to flights of fancy, and self-aggrandizement. This throws the other familial claims, rather grand in and of themselves but not stretching credulity quite so far, into question.
It's just another colmado_naranja scammer, imho.
Interesting ... ultimately, the truth will not be denied.
Vattel’s “Law of Nations”, Chaper 19, § 212. Of the citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children.”
October 14, 10:40 PM
Joe - which founding father and which set of papers are referring to?
October 14, 10:39 PM
John Jay’s letter to G. Washington - “New-York, 25th July, 1787.
Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.
I remain, dear sir,
Your faithful friend and servant,
October 14, 10:36 PM
“WE” have traced roots to William and are in The Doomsday Book. After/before that we have only a rough guess of where we may have ccme from. Most of us have dark blue eyes which origionated in north of Denmark, most likely Norse.
Before The Doomsday Book it was very difficult to trace parentage for more than a few generations. Going as far back as the 3rd century is a STRETCH!
...ok, OK. Sarah PALIN!
Blackstone took no view on 'Natural Born Citizen'. He wrote about Natural Born SUBJECT.
As far as ancient "warrior kings" of Ireland, my own surname has legendary origins with such a king, in Co. Wicklow. But, it's just that, legendary. No proven line. No way whatsoever to prove it.
Sounds like somebody's been watching too much The Seeker.
God...please let it be true! It’s time to remove the usurper and his band of commie thugs from their seats of power before they destroy this country utterly.
You kiddin me?
If this is true, he’s toast.
No judge in the country would dare throw out evidence from the founders.
He’d be hanging from a lampost by midnight.
On December 9th of 1775, Franklin wrote to Vattels editor, C.G.F. Dumas, I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the Law of Nations. has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting. Accordingly, that copy which I kept 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.
Can’t go in to a court of law and just shoot from the hip...
Thanks for the history ping. Somebody needs to hit the gas on the wheels of justice! MAKE the poseur in the WH show his cards.
Here you go:
The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States, ed. under direction of Congress by Wharton, II, 64
See the source at the bottom of page 266.
I wonder how much of the notes and private papers there are out there.
Not that it hasn't been tried...
I think the AFTER-birthers are in for a very bad next few weeks.
BLESSED BE THE NAME OF THE LORD.
LET ALL TRAITORS AND DESTOYERS FALL IN THEIR OWN PIT.
LET ALL SHAMEFUL TRAITORS AND DESTOYERS BEAR MAXIMUM PENALTY AND MAXIMUM SHAME.
LET ALL TRATITORS AND DESTROYERS BE NEUTERED IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE that they no longer plague decent people in the land of the living and those yearning for freedom and justice.
BLESSED BE THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS, KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
In my opinion, we are FROZEN in the time between the certification of electoral college votes by Congress and the "qualification" to Congress by the "President elect". This, unless there in fact has been a legitimate "qualification" which we the people have not been shown. If there has been no qualification to Congress, we do not have a legal President and the Congress would be commanded by the Constituion to follow the rules of Section three of the Twentieth amendment:
"3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
Whats quite interesting in this scenario is the fact that Congress would be admitting to the nation that THEY were complicit in allowing a usurper into the oval office by NOT following the instructions of section three when they were SUPPOSED to. Hang em all if this is the case.
ME! I am NBC and can prove it 10 ways to Sunday.
Plus I Love America, Christmas, Apple Pie, Coca Cola and Baseball.
I throw right hand and straight down the middle. It’s only 60 or so feet and then off to the hot dog stand.
Oh! No pants from Mom. She wouldn’t let me look like a dork anyway.
Kind of like Orly's famous Kenyan birth certificates? The Adams papers are owned by the Massachusetts Historical Society and are available for scholars. And in any case, John Adams played no part in the creation of the Constitution.
You keep telling yourself that.
If this guy has Adam’s once private papers that elucidates the NBC and the Law of Nations clauses as he says, your guy Obama is in big trouble...which he states below.
“John says: The Adams papers I am in possession of plainly state they looked to “Vattel’s Law of Nations” for guidance in determining who might be qualified as a “natural born Citizen”.”
Ahh Non-sequitur - the tr**l who cannot answer basic legal questions.
Great going Craw !
YEAH ! SO THERE !
If this is true, why are they not in a museum, and why have I never read about them (not that I was shut out or anything, I'm just a big history fan and thought I might have run across a mention)
The most oft-repeated phrase in birtherdom.
Good point. Adam’s (et. al) were not “wise [female] latinas”
They being what...the papers the guy (?) say's his family has (& the others)? Well, it's really not reasonable to think that the gov't or some museum has 100% of every single document written by the founders.
Have a look here for but one fairly recent example:
Letters of Delegates to Congress: Volume 25 March 1, 1788-December 31, 1789http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/hlaw:@field(DOCID+@lit(dg025422))
Secret Committee Contract
"MS (Privately owned original, 1993). In the hand of Roger Sherman.
1 A copy of a 60-page notebook in the hand of Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman was made available for use in this supplement by Mr. Joseph Rubenfine of West Palm Beach, Fla. It contains 24 pages of notes on Sherman's readings from Emmerich Vattel and the Bishop of Bristol, various personal expense accounts from 1781 to 1784, and copies of reports now in the PCC on Continental expenses and indebtedness, battle casualties, and the hospital establishment as of July 23, 1781, of which only the present notes do not duplicate information available elsewhere."
So yes, there very well could be many documents that remain in private collections and therefore out of the public realm.
If the docs do exist, it would be fascinating to have them (or some portion at least) be made available to the public.