“Get your facts straight.”
Hmmm...you claimed, “James McClure, who though having been born in South Carolina in 1785, was rejected as an American citizen by his government because his English father did not naturalize until two months AFTER he was born. “
Seems you ought to get your facts straight. He WAS held to be a US citizen. And no, having spent 5 minutes finding out you are wrong on that rather important point, I don’t plan on wading thru birther crappola on the internet.
Bottom Line: US citizen by birth. Sworn to by the US Government.
Maybe he doesn’t know Monroe is.
Good try. You don't plan on discussing this because you know it doesn't fit your theory. It is a "born on the soil" theory killer. This is the evidence we have long been looking for to prove that the meaning of "natural citizen" required a Father who was a citizen. This is the smoking gun.
The fact remains, The US Ambassador to France, General John Armstrong, Congressional Delegate and personal friend of George Washington said the man was NOT a US citizen just because he was born in South Carolina. Had YOUR theory been correct, the proper response would have been "Of COURSE he is a US Citizen." That did not happen. It took another year and some months for South Carolina officials to provide the legal underpinnings for his claim.
Bottom Line: US citizen by birth. Sworn to by the US Government.
Sworn to by the South Carolina Government, and passively accepted only as a result of it by the US Government. The US government failed to act prior to proof being provided by South Carolina.
The point remains, had YOUR theory been correct, Ambassador Armstrong would never have regarded him as a British Subject. Bottom Line: US citizen by birth. Sworn to by the US Government.