SCOAL 2013-08-15 - McInnish Goode v Chapman - Rille Amucus Brief Exhibits

7/27/2019 SCOAL 2013-08-15 - McInnish Goode v Chapman - Rille Amucus Brief Exhibits

1/51

[wQg* S c o t t R l l l el j S * , Spc 79l ^ l l l ^ 560 W Pleasant Ave.

Tulare, CA 93274-1873

F I L E O

MJ6 I 3 2013

S U P R E M E COUMr CTK,rch:.\h\

4k^iL^ i J ' ^ (n-^

IX-TX^ p-CL>-j, ffvus,, /?,G^- vwii.< -^^ A* - "! - ''^^""J ' S - * ' ^ J ' ^ ' - e * ! - ^ ^

^ < 2i i , 2 ^ ; : z i - ^ A J - ^ r -"^ / - . - v ^ ^ i w w ^ Y T

^ f ~ / t ^ j g ^rf^^-trf-^ S '-C=*-e-


2/51

The Law ofNatiom

\ \ \ I M I H I> t \ V t I i 1

Bdited xnA w t i h an Iniroducuon by Bcia Kopony and R kiu rd WIu HnoK

1lwxppaniKcinr7t1fof/>>v*f ,fr)u,or 7i V .tip^A!MMi*.cstabtnhcd its author, Eme

V a n d . a> a n u fo r authori ty o n n a t u r ^ i u r i i f m M l c n ^ . WMJ his boolt ^uiddy became th

i m m i m p o m m w o r i t o n i n i e n u i i o f u l l a w i n i h c c ^ tc c n th otntury. A phJoao^hct; puts

and dif ibunac, Vattet rn j i u r j l - h o r n tid/ens. arc IHOMT horn i n

ihc Lciuni r^ , i>f[ l i r t - iuv vsho -irr tu i / rns As ihc i c i v . . J n i i o i cx>M jntl

Lt DROIT

DES GENSlf;i Mll'ifllf-

1758NJG 132013

The Law of Nations. Ch. XIX. Emer de Vattel (1714-1767),First French Edition 1758, First English ASliSfiSfeptriudlJaalfonssen,General Editor, LIBERTYFUND, INC., 833S Allison Polnte Trail, Suite300, Indianapolis, Indiana 46250-1684 2008.

Natural bom citizen of the United States

From Wjkjpedia, the firee encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural born dtizen of the United States

There is no record of a debate on the "natural bom Citizen" qualification during the Constitutional Convention. This

dause was introduced by the drafting Committee of Eleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Convention as a

whole. One possible source of the clause can be traced to a July 25,1787 letter from John Jay to George Washington.presiding officer of the Convention. Jay wrote: "Permitme to hint, whetheritwouldbe wise andseasonable to p

strong checkto the admission ofForeigners into the administration ofournationalGovernment; and to dec

thatthe Commanderin Chiefofthe American army shallnot be given to nordevolve on, any but a naturalbom

John Jay (December 12,1745 - May 17,1829) was an American politician, statesman, revolutionary, diplomat, a

Founding Father of the United States, and the first Chief Justice of the United States (1789-95).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wlki/John Jay

"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 religion of the nation... Shallwe expectsome

transatlantic military giant, to step overthe ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! - All the armies of

Europe, Asia andAfrica combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their

military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or

make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a Thousandyears. Atwhatpoint, then, is the approach of

danger to be expected? Ianswer, if iteverreach us, itmustspring up amongst us. It cannot come

from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we mustourselves be its author andfinisher. As a nation of

freemen, we must live through alltime, or die bv suicide" - Abraham Lincoln, The Perpetuation of

Our Political Institutions

- 2 of 4 -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wlki/Johnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wlki/Johnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wlki/Johnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural


3/51

E X H I B I T S 1-9

ATTACHED TO

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

STATE OF ALABAMA

CASE NO. 1120465

ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA

CV 2012-1053

by SCOTT RILLE, Amicus curiae

AUGUST 4, 2013

Monsignor Charles F. W. Dumas

Chez E. van Harrevelt

Amsterdam

Dear Sir,

Philadelphia, 9 December, 1775.

I am muchobliged by the kind present you have made us ofyour edition ofVattel. It came t

us in good season, when circumstances of a rising state make it necessaryfrequentlyto consuh

the law ofnations. Accordingly, that copy, which I 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 ofthe members ofour 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

PLEASE SEE EXHIBIT 2

(COLOR PHOTOS AND TEXT IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT.)

Page 1 of4


4/51

The Law ofNations

i\\ 1 M 1 It D ) V V I J I 1Edited and wtih j n Introducrion by BcJa ICipony an d RkKard Vlui fnorc

l l K ^ j p e a r u K c i n Vfs'i L>rit4ngem. atThe LMw^l>UtUmi,vside Vatict. as a nujor auiborifv on rurural iuiii|>nidccc. and his book ([uJicUy became th

miMt impcnunt wurit nn tninnatwxval Uw in iK< t%htccntK ccntufy. A ph^MopKet. ) u m

a nd difdomai. Vatid (1714-1767) l o i ^ t i adapt th e h u m a n iH heritage of Swot p o i i i k t

th e m Jt i i n of a m o d e m ofiomy

C U A P T f R XIX

Of our .Wllivr (.outttry. anA icrfr,il Things

that retijttto it.

1 hf uti/tiis .IK- ihfriicnilHTv ot [he n\ il M>..icty:Kminil to this society (_ii.

hvicrt.iin iliirici jnd siih|c>.t tti i(( aiithofity, thc> ctju.illiparticipaicin

([ .ld ,uUJg -^ The njlivo, or tuturaliiorn titircns. arc iho-C horn in

ihc (.luiDlrv. lit patents who are mi/ens. As the ICIV L jnimi CtME jnd

Lt DSOET

DES GENS

tCt *\TVIIH I r.

J

1758

The Law of Nations. Ch. XIX, Emer de Vattel (1714-1767), First French Edition 1758, First English Edition 1760, Knud Haakonssen,

General Editor, LIBERTYFUND, INC., 8335 Allison Pointe Trait, Suite 300, Indianapolis, Indiana 46250-1684 2008.

Natural bom citizen of the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wiklped(a.org/wiki/Natural born citizen of the United States

There is no record of a debate on the "natural bom Citizen" qualification during the Constitutional Convention. This

clause was introduced by the drafting Committee ofEleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Convention as

whole. One possible source of the clause can be traced to a July 25,1787 tetter from John Jay to George Washington.presiding officer of the Convention. Jay wrote: "Permitme to hint, whetheritwouldbe wise andseasonable to p

strong checkto the admission ofForeigners into the administration ofournationalGovernment; and to dec

thatthe Commanderin Chiefofthe American army shallnot be given to nordevolve on, any but a naturalbom

John Jay (December 12,1745 - May 17,1829) was an American politician, statesman, revolutionary, diplomat, a

Founding Father of the United States, and the first ChiefJustice of the United States (1789-95).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John Jay

"Letreverence 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. Inshort, let reverence for the law become the political religion of the nation... Shallwe expectsome

transatlantic military giant, to step overthe ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! ~ All the armies of

Europe, Asia andAfrica combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their

military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or

make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a Thousand years. Atwhatpoint, then, is the approach of

danger to be expected? Ianswer, ifiteverreach us, itmustspring up amongst us. It cannot come

from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we mustourselves be its author andfinisher. As a nation of

freemen, we mustlive through alltime, or die bv suicide". - Abraham Lincoln, The Perpetuation of

OurPolitical Institution

- 2 o f 4 -
http://en.wiklped%28a.org/wiki/Naturalhttp://en.wiklped%28a.org/wiki/Naturalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnhttp://en.wiklped%28a.org/wiki/Natural


5/51

JOHN JAY'S LETTERTO fflS EX C ELLEN C Y GE NE RA L WASH INGT ON, NE W YOR K 25 JUL Y 1787

ON THIS D A T E GE OR GE WASH INGT ON WAS PRESIDING PRESIDENT OF

THE CONSTI TUTION AL CO NV EN TI ON AT PHILA DELPH IA 1787

/

- 3 of 4-


6/51

TRANSCRIPTION OF JOHN JAY'S LETTERTO HIS EXCELLENCY GENERAL WASHINGTON

NEW YORK 25 JULY 1787

#

IWii^ tKvj mcmux^ Kon rcii wUhyOw txcUctwy'} Tt vtJr o/

iirnty ihiiH nothv- ^i\e*\. tty, norl ic ioive*! o n , iK*\y hutit'mtCiuitti- Ctfl^civ ___

)oii4'fMthf,*l ft\6*\dtt eJ'V

- 4 o f 4 -


7/51

EXHIBIT 2

Asevidencedbelow,flierecan be no doubt whatsoever our Founding Fathere and Constitutional Framers reliedheavily on The L

Nations as they struggled with the weighty matter ofcreating oiu* Constitution and Constitutional Republic.

[ I.fHcrs of ilflcgaics in Congress, 1774-1784. Volume 2. Scptfmhcr 1 775-l)cccmbcr 1775 Pî-fI tif4

Drlrealn toConams . C^Mcn ofddtcalfs to Congress. 1774-1789, Volume2, Septcmtwr 1775-

Dtcembcr 1775licctronJc Ic\t (.'enter. liiivcn.ii> nf\'irj;ini.i I ihr;ir\

TabkofC ODlcDls for lh work

Al l OB-Une daufaa*w { Etem Center Homcyayc

Benjamin Franklin lo To: Charles William Frederic Dumas

IX-arSir.

PhilaJclphiJ. l)o:cmtx:r. 1775.

I rcccixcd >our scleral laM>rs. otMa> ISih. June 3i.Hh. and Jul\ Rih. by Mcs?irs \'atllant and IV^hard.

iJ i whom ifI could scr\c upon \out rL-cornmendaitun, it wnuld ÎM: mc jircai plcas.urc, 1 heir total want

ot linglish is at present an ohilruction lu their ycuiny cmphiymcni among us. but 1 hope they will

soon obuin some kw'^ledgc o! . This is ;i LIOOJ counirs tor anit'iccrs or tamicrs; hut gcnttctncn ol'

mere scietKC in les belles leures cannot so easilj subsist here, there K-mg linkdemand for their

assi'ii,vicc amoni; an industrious ptMple. \'^ho. ) ei. have milmuch leisure lor vtuJics of that kinj.

I am much obliged by the kind present \ ou ha\e made us ot"\otjr edition oJ \ altc!, It tame lo us In

^mnd sca)n. vvhen the cirvumstanecs of:! rising state make it necessary trequentK lo consult the law of

nation>. .\ci;ordinj;l\ thai topy, which I kept, (alter siept >>iting v>nc in v>ur own public librar> here, and

>endini; Ihc olhcr lo the College of Massachusetts Ha>, as j ou directed.) has been coniinually in the

hands ol'the mtmbei^ ofour Conj;icss. now sitting, %sh*i are much plc-iscU Âith\oiirnotes and preface,

and ha\e enterrained a h\^hand just esteem lor their author >'our manuscnpl "Idccsur le (.jou\ emcnicnl

et la Royaute" is also v cll relished, and may, m time. ha\e its cJlecC 1 thank >oii. iikewis*.-. tor the other

smaller pieces, v^hich accompanied Vattel. T c coun 1 \piise de ce qui s'esi passe entrc la C'our

Untanntque ct les Colonics." he hein^ a>. ery concise and clear statement ol tacts. v.ill be repnnted here

for the use ofour new friends in Canada The translations ot the prwecdings ofour Congress arc \er\

acceptable. I send xou herevîth what of them has been lanher published here, together with a few

newspapers, containing accounts i>fsome of the successes Providence has favored us v iih We are

threatened from (England svith a \.eyy p^nverful lorcc. to come ne\l scar against us.tZj V-e are makmit all

the provision in our power here to oppt>sc that force, and wc hope wc shall K' able to defend oufselv

But. as the ev cnt> of war are aiv*,a) s uncenatn. possibly,

after jrwiihcr campaign, we may find it necessarv to ask the aid ofsome loreign ptn er.

it gives us great plexsure to leam from vou, that toute I'lurope nous stiuhaite le plus heureux sueecs

ptmr le mainiien de nos libcnes. liut we vush lo know, whelher any one ot them, trom principles of

humanitv, is disp.ised magnanimtm-ilv to step in for ihe relicl ol an oppressed people, or whether, it', as

it seems likelv to happen, wc shi>ulii be obliged lo break off all conncvion with Hrilain. and declare

ourselves an indeperhJenl people, there is anv slate or p>wer in l--un()pe, who would he willing to enter

into an jlliancc with us for the K-netli ple increase most rapidiv.

Contidinji:, m\ dear frvend. m sour -îwiwUi to us and to our cause, and in >our sa.g.aciu and abiluics tot

business, ihe committee ot Congress , appomied IOTthe purpt>sc ol establishing arnl conduclmg a

htip: ctexi lib.Virginia edu eichia iiKcer-new II 'id"lX-lV"oHC \ml&images" images miê. . 11 1011

Paee 1 of6
http://oiir/http://oiir/http://piise/http://piise/http://oiir/


8/51

PHOTO IMAGES OF "A NUMERICAL CATALOGUE" AND "L E DROIT DES GENS" 1775 EDITION

USED B Y PERMISSION FROM THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA

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

of[he

Q L I A R I O

4' niia^eiuijia

PHOTO IMAGE OF TITLE PAGE OF "A NUMERICAL CATAL OGUE "

THE L O G BOOK FOR INCOMING BOOKS INTO THE LIB RARY C OM PA NY OF PHILADELPHIA

PHOTO USED BY PERMISSION FROM THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA

(PLEASE REFER ENCE PAGE 1 OF EXHIBIT 2.)

-2of6-


9/51

PAG E SHOWING E NT RY OF "L E DROIT DE S GENS for VATTEL" INTO

"A NUMERICAL CATA LOG UE"

SHO RTLY AF TE R BENJ AMI N FRA NK LI N DEPOSI TED FT AT TH E LI BRA RY IN 1775.


-3of 6-


10/51

DE VATTEL

DROIT DES GENS

LE DROIT DES GENS [1775]


- 4 of 6 -


11/51

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 MonsignorDumas (Charles F. W. Dum

PHOTOS USED BY PERMISSION FROM THE LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA

-5of 6-


12/51

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

The Law ofNations [1775], BOOKI. CHAPTERXIX. Page 115


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 citoyens

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

dans le pays, de parens citoyens.

-6of6-


13/51

EXHIBIT 3

FOUNDING FATHER JOHN JAY'S COMMAND OF THE FRENCH LANGUAGE

T tl K

L I F E

J O H N J A Y :

ifr

KKi.ecriOSS I ' B O M rilS CORRESrONDKNCE

MlfCCKLLlNKOIIM I 'APKHX

1( lit! ID IT,

W I L L I A M J A Y ,

IN T W O V O L U M E S

V O K I,

NEW -VORK:

rm^TTRu AM> ruBUSHfii BV J. J, tURrns,

/

Courtesy ofWESTCHESTER COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY

Elmsford, New York

Page 1 of7


14/51

lo urc orM i l JAV.

hii DOcW, Mr. Pr)ii I\K dunk*aa well

u ihg pleatnns ofdotnotjc life; while a rhcrrful regna>

t>M tA die wrRofProridenc, durinit many y*^r ofn-k-

OB H anl tuAerinf;, bar* wilnna to llw In.-x^h ofher reli-

giota Aith. So happily did ihenc variousdi*j>oitiMM har-

Monilo together, that Ihit nutijrart 'i f ihts RWRKHT often

dadaied, that he )md nrvnr, in a ^ttf^-. ijwtaHce, bnrd

eilhtr ofhisparenu uae lwaid the other an Kfi^y or

WBhisd word.

NotwilhKaiiding tb! cares of a\ainf: family, the moihrrdevotettmucli ofhertime lo th-. imlructitinnftl>e tw blind

eUdrCB aiw) of the ltllh> JnhiL To ^ fomwr thtread the

beM aDthOTi; to ihe latter laiiKht the nidimenti of

Sa^A, and tho l^arin frniransr. Wbcti between MIand

PVa jnetn o)d.hii lalher, w r i ^ about him lo ooe of the

tuaSfy, mnarted, * J


15/51

ijrc or JOMK JAV.

P. 12

He leemi to he pl"uJ uiili a voj-j' good rijncity, in

cry rcjcrvoi*, sod quite of hit \*milirfJUTIL-I'I dicfntrti'in

Tbr g d i a r ^ lie was iww cofMrniltd

WM H nalivr ofMwilzniiiMl, ;IIKI of orjil IHIJIL'. I ^ w n l

of llic VforM. f'j; muiIm

leA theiJiHlufWhtlfpivrrmitLTAuftuiiiîlf nitd li Mbo wl wj d

ki Ilia wift who w u a i penurious an W WM carlen. The

parionagc oiul every thing HIK.HH il MDS iitr>n.*l I'l tlecav,

and ifw boy.t wrm tmlrJ ilh liltlo fond a ri l liitieh twolil-

lag. IJule M lie wai, Jnhn .-jmirAt-J b jirpvrnt i(v RWW

from driAing uyOa hi* l>l. I>y closiiif; tfte brvki-n junea of

gtiM wiih jiiecai id" woinl. ' [ V rnitnil kt wi cn MKII

lod^jjigi and aaeh 'jvalinfiil ami thai to which \K wa i

acciiirtoRH'd al honx: ^-al iu>l piRistii);, hiit pnMhIy not

vitlioul i l l uses. The plain aiv\ tannii'. itirt Uiwhicii he

wainnnhnnrihil irt tluil iiHliA'ereiictilotlicQaahtyui liiifixxl

for uhich ihroufth !itc he wat miiatlLably (ttsttiiKiushcd,

wkiid h cimattditiiHi no d ui U deri viil addiUi^Hl lrt.l0h

and vigour from the hanWiii i " whidi wai riji osrd.

Hin hntlth w&s nJniM: and iii nftor-tiX' t usnJ to mrtitkiti

the ploanin) he at this lime enjoyrd in PMUIIIV ihrou^ ilw

Woods and (nthrriHg ruilx, wliit h I Kcarried Imiv in hii

ki n([, wliich be Hrippcd off ftir tlwj |ni r] -. The

inhabitîlii i4 tlw sjikjit: Wi n- dui-lly ileaoMMiiiiU of French

rtfu(!f,nwl Preuch wa spolcn hy th.m,Bwilla inifr

inmunaj^; aiul hf tluu aL-tûired, wttii hldu trouble, a lui.

fuagc ti r whit-h h-ir! ftflrnt'afi *> murh uae. IIa re-

ti ia innlai (Im MrJKtICIiR ) tjraiiplPir-d hii |>niirjtiini Iw coilcice.

King's (now ColuuihiJi} CUJtj{c w.is ibrn in its inlancv,

and had but few ntwleni*. TKs munW nx Ihis fault, l

rewlalcrtkl (o iueK wa li iw J > ' " ' 7 word,Utit be had anpiiied a conijiclc cxjiilrol of lii> VOK: ; ami

he tliM bewiiw an escelkiil P-nih:r. Wilh the tam eiKrjO"

be p om wl o l hi* iU- s ail esjK-rially atlrwhxl lo Eii^-

Hlh CMOpwitJoB. So iBlcol 00Has'hai when tiv

to write an K n ^ ^ fHirciw, he plmi-d a pKn- >f[rtptr

awl u ptiicil by hii It-d'tile, tlmi if. !afc m-Jilatiu^' w hi

Direct in tlw night, a valualth- iilra n>fUrrril In hilil, k-

njlbt make aune note of it, even ui the dark, that mi^t

n ^ M it ia the momiag.

B i i apfltcatitm aitd correct ilcportiniiil acquired for lw>i

Ihe tautm and friemiiiJap of tli^ piwidenl. Thi worthyBian reaigned hJa ofl'ice after Mr. Jay had le*n Ihre* yvaninconege,Bnd retired lo C


16/51

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

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

assisting in the Treaty of Paris negotiations; and 2"* Secretary of Foreign Affairs [May 7,178

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

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

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

a

/tJ X^/ltU-oU-Ai m*4itu*-fturn* "f/^ r*//a*. tt^U, 'iM'aa M c mtMml^Jnimn

.'s'(j"'\- ' f tittfiimtJK. ywwAA. ffAx-.

ha^iJ*MA^, JM.fmdmt ttm,fm*,

-4 of7-


17/51

V

A. ^ . a . i t MH lVii-T ^M-f.^^-^ ^ -

A y'*-^ V* ^ * ^f^^

Jif^^tt, la.^tAlr Jfay.W, ^^ ''"V^ *" *

^ M ^ . . . . X-i Ai.iV^/Cr ^

* .*,5t .W ^^ur* & - y*-jf

JOHN JAY'S TRANSLATION OF THE ABOVE FRENCH DOCUMENT INTO ENGLISH

"Trans, in JJ's hand". TRANSCRIPTION OF THE ORIGINAL FRENCH AND

TRANSCRIPTION OF JAY'S TRANSLATION BELOW.

Courtesy ofThe Papersof John Jay Project, Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Butler Library, Columbia University.

Etienne C l a v i e r e p ou r l a ' Societe des Amis des Noirs

to theNew York Manumission Society

[Paris, l e 29. A v r i l . 1788.

-5of7-


18/51

La Societe 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'Angleterre et d'Amerique, pour

operer I ' a b o l i t i o n de l a T r a i t e et de I' Esc la va ge des Negres;

a l a Soci ete e t a b l i e a New-Yorck, pour 1'Affran chissemen t des Esc lav es :

La conformite qui e x i s t e , entre les vues de notre So cie te, es l es vo tr es , nous

engage a vous informer que M. Jeau P i e r r e B r i s s o t de W a r v i l l e , qui a ete, jusqu'

a present, notre Se cr et ai re , et qui , par ses sentimens d'humanite, ses lumieres

et un zeie i n f a t i g u a b l e , a pr in cip al eme nt co nt ri bu e a 1'etabl isseme nt et aux

progres de notre Soc ie te , a e nt re pr i s un voyage dans I'Amerique S e p t e n t r i o n a l e ;

que dans l e cou rse de ce voyage, i l se propose se r e c u e i l l i r toutes les lumieres

p o s s i b l e s , sur le sort des Negres, dans c e t t e p a r t i e du monde; sur les mesures

p r i s e s s o i t pour l e s a f f r a n c h i r , s o i t pour mettre f i n a l e u r impor tatio n, sur les

r e s u l t a t s ac tu el s de ces mesures, tous par ra ppo rt a l a cu l tu re des t e r r e s , qu'au

caractere moral des Negres, et en general sur tout ce qui concerne c e t t e

malheureuse, mais inter essan te po rt ion de I'espece humaine, et pour s e r v i r a

determiner en sa faveur les Gouvernemens et le s In di vi du s: et comme l e succe s des

pour e t a b l i r entr e notre So ci et e et l a Vot re, une r e l a t i o n de f r a t e r n i t e , et de

Correspondance mut uel le: a quoi nous esperons que vous ne re fu se re z pas de

concourrir et nous vous prio ns d'ajouter ple in e et en ti er e f o i , a to ut ce que l a

d i t Sieur de Warville vous exposera, a ce su je t de notre pa rt .

En f o i de quo i nous avons f a i t apposer a cette L e t t r e , l e sceau de n ot re

Societe, et la sig nat ure de notre Pre sid en 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 , Presiden

-6of7- [ P a r i s , 29 Ap. 1788]


19/51

The Society established at P a r i s , l i k e those of England and America, to

promote the a b o l i t i o n of the Treatment^ and Slavery of Negroes

To the Society Established at New York f o r th e L i b e r a t i o n of Slaves

The C on for mit y which e x i s t s between the Views of our Society & of yours,

induces us to inform you that M' J ohn 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 Secretary; and who by h i s Se nti me nts of Humanity, h i s Talents and

his zeal unremitted Zeal, has p r i n c i p a l l y contributed to the I n s t i t u t i o n &

Progress of our Society, has undertaken a Voyage to North Am er ic a; That i n the

Course of t h i s Voyage he proposes to a cq ui re a l l the Information possible.

Credit to whateve r t he Said M^. de W a r v i l l e s h a l l communicate to you on t h i s

Subject on our Part^

In Witness whereof we have caused the Seal of our Society to be a f f i x e d to

t h i s Letter, eftd and also the Signature of our President

Done at Paris 29 Ap. 1788

(signed) E. Claviere, Presiden

LS, NNC (EJ: 7287) . Tran s, i n J J ' s hand (EJ : 7288). Endorsed : " T r a n s l a t i o n of

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". Enclosure, da te d 22 Ap r. 1788, i n

French and trans, i n J J ' s hand: " E x t r a i t des Registres de l a Societe etablie 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 Negres, " (EJ : 7286, 7289).

1. T r a i t e des Negres r e f e r s to the slave trade.

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 Ame ric a, see the e d i t o r i a l note "John

Jay, Anti-Slavery, and the New Yo rk Man umi ssi on S o c i e t y , " above [5 Feb. 1785].

-7 of 7-


20/51

EXfflBIT 4

FRENCH TO ENGLISH TRANSLATIONAND DICTIONARYEXCERPTS REVEAL NATURAL & NATIVE "BORN" ROOT MEANINGS

GOOGLE TRANSLATE:

FRENCH: naturels ENGLISH: natural

indigenes indigenous, natives

1758 First French Edition of Le Droit Des Gens:

. 212 Les Citoyens sont les nnembres de la Societe Civile: Lies a cette Societe par

Des ctioyens certains devoirs, & sounnis a son Autorite, ils participent avec egalite a ses advan

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

Citoyens.

1760 Edition ofThe Law ofNations, First English Translation:

.212. The citizens are the members ofthe civil society: boimd to this society by

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

zens and tages. The natives, or indigenes, are those bom in the countryofparents who a

natives. Citizens.

1787 Edition, The Law ofNations, English Translation:

C H A P . XIX.

(^tie Ctmtitrjy theftvtral TUngt that rtlmttte it.

i a>t. ' ~ r ^ H E wbok of 1 coDrtry poAcftd bf aimioa and

X UJbfcQ. to its bv t, (oim, at we b m drcidf laid,

i u terrinricsi md tl Kibe cominua coanUr gf lU tW iodi-

ndmb of iHc mtkia. We havefaeeno b l i ^ to anticipate

ibc ikfinitioo of tbe term tur tmmlrj(). i l l . ) beuufe

oar inbf led us to treat ofthe lore of om amaaj, a

virtoe estfcmelf cxcdknt lod BecdQjf in a ftate. Sap-

pofing thait ttitt ia "Hifequence of what owe*

to its own prefervatton; aad it b prcfumcd tba each

citizen, on entering into fociety, .eferves to tiU chtUren

ibe rigbt of tbeir becoming members. Tbe coutury of

tbe

Page 1 of6


21/51

1775 Edition, Le Droit des Gens, Livre I, Chapitre XIX 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 citoyens

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:

DearMrRille,

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 of France, not as French citizens.

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

Nafu'nl

[ OE. ncBt^ilF . naturalft. L , nattealiz, fr. nmura. Se Nature 1

1S28 Df finldoD

N A T U R A L , . [to be b o m or pfoduce d]

1. Pertaintfig to lutu re; produced or effected b y namre, or b y tlie \x^t of

gton^ih^foroation or motion ts^^ressed on bodies or b e t ^ dhin e

pcrsm^ Tb us we s peak of tbe nat ufi l groiAth o f animals or plants , the

natural motion of a gn>'itatin| body ; t ut u nl strength or dispositi on; ihs

natural beat o f tbe bod>'; natural colo r, natural beaut y. In sense, natural

is oppos ed to aniSct al or acquired

1!. Qkfitimate; bom out ofwedlock; as a natural soa

F.

naturel

to be

bom

bom out

of

wedlock

- 2 of 6-
http://www/http://1828-dictionarv.com/http://1828-dictionarv.com/http://www/


22/51

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

Merriam-Webster Dictionary

natural-bom adj

Oefmition of NATURAL-BORN | 3 . ^ -

: having a spBcifid status or charactftr by birth


23/51

Origin of NATURAL

Middle English, from Anglo-French mzuref, from Latin

nstunlis ofnature, from natura nature

Anglo-French naturel

First Known Use: I4th century

ReUted to NATURAL

born, congenitalSynonyms: born, congenital

Antonyms: nonnatural

: - : more

Synonym Discussion of NATURAL

\i,Tu^i.-^ :*.;^E\U0-JS, u\&D5--iST:caED, i.!^TLS5 mean free

from pretension or calculation. \ J . T u ^ & . implies lacking

artificiality and self-consciousness and having a

spontaneousness suggesting the natural rather than the man

-made world .

implies inability to disguise or conceal one's feelings or

intentions .

suggests lack ofworldly wisdom often connoting

credulousness and unchecked innocence .

1 a : existing at or dating from birth

Related to CONGENITAL

C O l l g e n i tal ^'l) adjective \ken-je-n3 e i , kan-\

Definition of CONGENITAL

Synonyms: born, natural born, natural

Antonyms: nonnatura

- 4 of6 -
http://ken-je-n3/http://ken-je-n3/http://ken-je-n3/


24/51

g 6 n 6 ^ noun > m - C e - j ^ n

Oefin. tron o f INDIGENE

Va r ia nts of INDIGENE

in*di-gn < also *i^i-gn 4

f xrantples of INDIGENE

Ofigin o f INDIGENE

Latin indigena

Latin ind>g^na

First Known Use. 1598

i n - d i g - e - n o u s ^ arf> m d. n=3

Definitton of INDIGENOUS B ^ ^ ^

1 : produced, growing, living, or occurring naturally in a

particular region or environment

n a t i v e ^l) adjective \n a tiv\

Definition of NATIVE Bl-i^

1 : iNBORNj INNATE

2 : belonging to a particular place by birth

3 archaic : closely related

4 : belonging to or associated with one by birth

5 : NATURAL, NORMAL

6 a : grown, produced, or originating in a particular place or in

the vicinity : LOCAL

b : living or growing naturally in a particular region :

INDIGENOUS

NATIVE

naturally

INBORN

INBORN

by birth

by birth

NATURAL

INDIGENOUS

- 5 of 6 -


25/51

Related to NJATIVE

Synonyms: aboriginal, autochthonous, born, domestic , born

endemic, indigenous indigenous

Synonym Discussion of \ATIVE

INDIGENOUS

NATIVE, INDIGENOUS, ENDEMIC, ABORIGINAL mean belonging to

a locality. NATIVE implies birth or origin in a place or region bjrth

and may suggest compatibility with it . INDIGENOUS applies to species or races and adds

to NATIVE the implication of not having been introduced from

elsewhere . ENDEMIC implies

JOHN JAY AND THE PHILADELPHIA CONVENTION [May 1787],fromVolume 4 of the

Selected Papers ofJohn Jay, Columbia University (impublished work in progress).

"Jay was undoubtedly the most influential proponent of constitutional 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 ofalmost as much weight as all the rest. That gentleman

had as much influence in the preparatory measures, indigesting 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 ofThe Papers ofJohn Jay Project, Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Butler Library, Columbia

University.

-6 of 6-
http://ative/http://ative/


26/51

EXHIBIT5

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.

In office December 7, 1778 - September 28, 1779.

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

In office December 10, 1778 - September 28, 1779.

Benjamin Franklin is the only Foimding 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. In 1775 he wrote:

Monsignor Charles F. W. Dumas

Chez E. van Harrevelt

Amsterdam

Dear Sir,

Philadelphia, 9 December, 1775.

I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your 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 ofMassachusetts 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 StatesMinister 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, orLa 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

built 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 of 5


27/51

To Gouvemeur M o r r i s

S . Ildefonso 28 Sep. 178

D"". Morris

My l a s t to you was of the 24^^. U l t . T r i p l i c a t e s have been sent I have

rec'^. none from you l a t e r than 10 July by Maj''. F r a n k s Yours of the 2'. Jan^. & 4

March never reached

me^ there i s Reason to believe that^^ the m i n i s t e r PRIME MINISTER HERE HAS THEM

T e l l me what you think of MY LETTER, TO the rrooidcnt ^CONGRESS^ OF THE [ ]

Instant ^OF THIS MONTH^ I was Peace does not appear v e r y nigh. THIS COURT AND THAT OF

FRANCE DO NOT DRAW p e r f e c t l y w e l l

EXCEPT A JEW, I CAN HEAR OF nothing so p e r f e c t l y

ODIOUS TO A Spaniard AS A FRENCHMAN. 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, CUNNING WITHOUT

roLiCY, AND NOBILITY WITHOUT HONOR I speake with c e r t a i n t y what WHAT NEW MEN may

' MIGHT' DO IS UNCERTMN YOUR BILLS HAVE DONE MUCH MISCHIEF THE KING MEANS WELL BUT KNOWS

nothing V A T T E L S LAW OF NATIONS^"^ WHICH I FOUND QUOTED I N a L e t t e r I rOG^

f r o m CONGRESS IS PROHIBITED HERE I confide i n your Prudence & Secrecy.

I hear so Seldom from & so l i t t l e of my Fathers Family, that you w i l l oblige me

greatly by mentioning from time to Time what you may know or hear ab* them

The Cypher I use i s N. 1. The only one I have as yet rec'* I hope, a

Duplicate of i t w i l l not be sent unless by a very safe opp^. I am very much yours

J J

remember us to our Friends at Ph^. you know who they are^'


28/51

. 4. Emmerich de Vattel 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 of the work on Jay and natural bom citizen being done for volume 4 of the Selected

Papers of John Jay, The Papers of John Jay Project, Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Butler Library,

Columbia University.

Minister to Spain John Jay's instnjctions from Congress to be conveyed to "his catholic Majesty"

Charles ffl. King of Spain [1759-1788].

From the President of Congress (Samuel Huntington)^

Jay's Instructions

P h i l a d e l p h i a Oct. 17. 178

S i r ,

Congress having i n t h e i r I n s t r u c t i o n s of the 4* . Inst.^ d i r e c t e d you to

adhere s t r i c t l y to t h e i r former I n s t r u c t i o n s r e l a t i n g to the boundaries of the

United States, to i n s i s t on the Navigation of the M i s s i s s i p p i f o r the C i t i z e n s of

the United States i nCommon with the Subjects of his Catholic Majesty, as a l s o on

a free Port or Ports below the Northern l i m i t of W e s t F l o r i d a and a c c e s s i b l eto

Merchant Ships, for the Use of the former and being sensible of the Influence

which these Claims on the Part of the United States may have on your Negotiations

with the Court of Madrid, have thought i t expedient to e x p l a i n the Reasons and

P r i n c i p l e s on which the same are founded, that you may be enabled to s a t i s f y that

Court of the Equity & J u s t i c e of t h e i r I n t e n t i o n s .

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

i s at Peace, andthis Duty comprehends troops equally with Individuals" i f


29/51

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

troops which are employedi 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 observations you w i l l r e a d i l y d i s c e r n are not communicated to be urged at

a l l Events and as they here st and i n Support of the Claims to which they r e l a t e .

They are in ten ded f o r your p r i v a t e i n f o r m a t i o n and use and are to be urged so f a r

and i n such for m only as w i l l best Suit the temper fi Sentiments of the Court at

which you reside and best f u l f i l l the o b j e c t of them.

By Order of Congress

(Signed) Sam. Huntington President^^

1. In a l e t t e r to BF of 28 Oct., James L o v e l l , chairman of the 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 that, on Oct. 6, Congress 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) to w r i t e a l e t t e r to J J and BF

that would " enfor ce" i t s i n s t r u c t i o n s to J J of 4 Oct. (above ). Congress accep ted

th e committee's d r a f t , i n the hand of James Madison, presented to i t on 16 Oct.

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

then attending Congress and that he had no secretary. He asked BF to transmit to

J J a l l the papers d i r e c t e d to J J that he received. See JCC, 18: 908, 935-47;

PBF, 33: 471-72.

P r i o r to submitting the d r a f t to Congress, Madison had discussed most of th

major points i t raised w i t h Marbois, who uniformly r e j e c t e d Madison's

contentions. For the intense pre ssu re both Marbois and Francisco Rendon exerted

on Congress to 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


30/51

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 observations you w i l l r e a d i l y d i s c e r n are not communicated to be urged at

a l l Events and as they here st and i n Support of the Claims to which they r e l a t e .

They are in ten ded f o r your p r i v a t e i n f o r m a t i o n and use and are to be urged so f a r

and i n such fo rm only as w i l l best S u i t the temper & Sentiments of the Court at

which you reside and best f u l f i l l the object of them.

By Order of Congress

(Signed) Sam. Huntington President^^

1. In a l e t t e r to BF of 28 Oct., James L o v e l l , chairman of the committee for

f o r e i g n a f f a i r s , explained that, on Oct. 6, Congress 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) to write a l e t t e r to J J and BF

that would "enforce " i t s i n s t r u c t i o n s to J J of 4 Oct. (above) . Congress accep ted

th e committee's d r a f t , i n the hand of James Madison, presented to i t on 16 Oct.

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

then attending Congress and that he had no secretary. He asked BF to transmit to

J J a l l the papers d i r e c t e d to J J that he received. See JCC, 18: 908, 935-47;

PBF, 33: 471-72.

P r i o r to submitting the d r a f t to Congress, Madison had discussed most of th

major points i t r a i s e d w i t h Marbois, who uniformly r e j e c t e d Madison's

contentions. For the intense pre ssu re both Marbois and Francisco Rendon exerted

on Congress to 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 navigation and boundary, see


31/51

EXHIBIT 6

Law of NationsEmmerich de Vattel

Law of Nations; or Principles of the Law of Nature: 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

of the 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 VatteFs 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://\vuw lonanu.com/exlibris/vattel/index html

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

its publication. ThefirstEnglish 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 with

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

Vattel was the most popular of all writers on the law of nations 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 Benjamin Franklin, John Adams,

James Wilson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay, and John Marshall. JohnAdams, the future

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

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

"The Idea ofM. de Vattel indeed, scowling andfi-owning,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 of the

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

1
http://vuw/http://vuw/


32/51

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 I 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 of The Law of Nations in

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

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 of

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

congress, now sitting . . . ."

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

fiandamentalrightsofthe people, with repeated requests for redress of grievances, which were refijsed.

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

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

independent ofthe British Crown, with the fiill powers ofa sovereign government, "to levy war, conclude

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

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. The

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

Jefferson, John Adams, Robert Livingston, and Roger Sherman. Jefi'erson 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 right

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

2


33/51

. "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 Union, 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 of America."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 of laws, 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, ifthey stayed within this legal framework which was essentially arbitrary.

Although Vattel praised the British constitution for providing a degree of freedom and lawfixlness not seen in

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

constitutional arrangements.

Consequently, the American colonists attacked the foundation of the 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.coni/focus/f-chat/2148Q74/posts

3
http://www.freerepublic.coni/focus/f-chat/2148Q74/postshttp://www.freerepublic.coni/focus/f-chat/2148Q74/posts


34/51

EXHIBIT 7

Forgotten Influences of the Founders

Our own Foimding Fathers were convinced, and history has proven them prescient, that they

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

world had failed to do: survive the effects of the maladies ofself-government and bequeath tothe subsequentgenerations of Americans a sound and stable republic ifthey could keep

it*

For the ingredients necessary to brew the right antidote to the poisons ofdemocracy and

tyranny, the Foimders drewfromseveral sources. From the recent past, there was the English

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

jury and due process; therewas the legacy ofancientGreece and Rome that citizens are and

byrightsshoidd be entrusted with the power ofself-determination; and there was the faculty of

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

blessingsand burdens better than any theoristsbefore or since. The Founders wisely chose from

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

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 Four Horsemen ofAmerican liberty is Emmerich de Vattel. Although last mthis 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 ofNations, or the Principles ofNaturalLaw as highly as similartreatises

Grotius and Pufendorf Further proof ofVattel's impression on the Founders is the fact that

Vattel's interpretations of the law ofnature 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-born Vattel learned to love God from his father, a pastor in the Refonned Church. It

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, 'Tt is ... the constitution ofa state which

detennines its progress and its aptitude to attain the ends of a society." These words were

Page 1 of2


35/51

- 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 if a country is to be successful then it must

begin as it means to continue, built upon an unshakeable foundation of natural law and

separated power.

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

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

Madison's warning in this regard is oft quoted; 'T believe there are more instances of the

abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those 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 of Wisdom

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

valuable for us, theirpolitical and philosophical heirs. We must vigilantly 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-Jnfluences

* 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 by/benjamin+franklin

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


36/51

EXHIBIT 8

VatteFs Influence on the term aNatural Bom Citizen

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, ''No perso

excepta naturalborn citizen, or a citizen of the UnitedStates, at the time of the adoption ofthis Constitu

shallbe eligible to the office ofPresident; neithershallanyperson be eligible to thatoffice who shallnoth

attainedto the age ofthirtyfive 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

of Nations.' written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19,

212. Of the citizens and natives

" The cillzefis are the members of ihe civil society; bound lo ihis sociely hy cerlain diilies, andsiibjecl lo ils

aiilhorily, ihey equally parlicipale ui ils advantages. The nalives, ornatural-horn citizens, are those horn in

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

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

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

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

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 ofdiscre

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

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

foreigner, itwillbe 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 "Ofthe citizens and naturals". It

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 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 feet when Vattel defines "natural born 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 fiill context ofsentence 2 ofsection 212 to fiiUy

understand what Vattel was defining from natural law, i.e., natural bom 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

Page 1 of5


37/51

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

bom citizens, those bom 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 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'swere

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, " The common law of England is not 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 bom 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, not

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 Bom

Citizen can become President. Under Blackstone's subjects only a very, very small subset ofNatural BomSubjects could rise to be King, the American Presidency is drawn from the largest class of citizens, the natural

bom. Like the analogy 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 confijsing on this issue. Blackstone also writes, ''To encourage alsoforeign commerce, it w

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

of the birth in allegiance to the king, andthe motherhadpassedthe seas by 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 king

ligeance, whosefatherswere natural-born subjects, are now natural-bom subjects themselves, to allinte

purposes, withoutany exception: unless their saidfatherswere attainted, orbanishedbeyondsea,farh

treason; orwere then in the service of aprince atenmity with GreatBritain."This use of Blackstone 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 of our 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 subjects

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 of the seamen on a ship of the United States be

natural bom citizens. (Joumal 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. Ooumal of the Senate of the United StatesofAmerica. February 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 ''''Permitme

hintwhetheritwouldnot be wise andseasonable to provide a strong checkto the admission offoreigners

-2-


38/51

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

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

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

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

Whatftirtherdiscredits 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 Vattel's

assertion that citizenship is derivedfi-omthe father, in that citizenship was prohibited to children whose fathers

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

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

may be bom beyond sea, or out ofthe limits ofthe 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 to

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

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

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

To addfiirtherproofto 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 bora citizen having no other

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

Naturalization Act of 1790. TheNaturalization 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 rule, British Subjects. Even if their parents were American, This act removed the words natural

bomfrom 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 ofthe 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.

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

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

Natural Bora Citizen clause. Some of there arguments are that the Law of Nations is a obscure mention to an

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

to a general idea, it would not have been capitalized. School children know well the mles of capitalization, and

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

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

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

or not.

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

1779, "5e itenactedby the GeneralAssembly, thatallwhitepersons born within the territory ofthis

commonwealth and all who have residedtherein two years nextbefore the passingofthis act, and all wh

hereaftermigrate into the same; andshallbefore any courtofrecordgive satisfactoryproofby theirown

oraffirmation, thatthey intendto reside therein, andmoreovershallgive assurance offidelity to the

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

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

becominga citizen, or who migrate hitherwithoutfatherormother, shallbe deemed citizens ofthis

commonwealth, untilthey relinquish thatcharacterin manneras herein afterexpressed: And allothers

- 3 -


39/51

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

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

For further proof on 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 Harrevelt 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 ofnations" 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 VattePs editor, C.G.F. Dumas, "/^m

much obligedby the kindpresentyou have made us ofyouredition ofVattel. Ftcame to us in goodseaso

when the circumstances of a risingstate make itnecessaryfrequently to consultthe Law ofNations, has

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

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

with yournotes andpreface, andhave entertaineda high andjustesteem fortheirauthor. '*

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 the Colonial Governor of Massachusetts,

John Adams quoted Vattel that the parliament does not have the power to change the constitution. John Adams

as so taken by the clear logic ofVattel that he wrote in his diary, "The IdeaofM.de Vattelindeed, scowlinga

frowning, hauntedme." These arguments were what inspired the clause that dictates how the Constitution is

amended. The Framers left no doubt as to who had the right to amend the constitution, the Nation, (that is the

individual States and the people) or Legislature (which is the federal government.)

In the Federalist Papers number 78, Alexander Hamilton also echoed Vattel, and both of the Adams, when he

wrote, ''fundamental principle ofrepublican government, which admits the rightofthe people to alteror

abolish the establishedConstitution, whenevertheyfinditinconsistentwith theirhappiness."

Then in 1784 Hamilton arguing for the defense in the case of Rutgers v. Waddington extensively used Vattel,

quoting proHfically from the Law of Nations. The Judge James Duane in his ruling described the importance of

the new republic abiding by the Law of Nations, and explained that the standard for the court would be Vattel.

He ruled that the Statues passed under the color of English Common Law, must be interpreted from the

standpoint of its consistency with the law of nations. This concept ofVattel lead to the creation of the Judiciary

branch ofour government to insure that Congress could never legislate away the provisions of the Constitution.

In 1794, then President Washington was faced with the first threat to his Neutrality Proclamation of that same

year by the Ambassador of France, Citizen Edmond-Charles Genet to honor their treaty and support France's

wars with England and Spain. In a very rare agreement both Jefferson and Hamilton using Vattel's Law of

Nations they were able to give Washington the international legitimacy not to commit the United States to war

in 1793. Genet wrote to Washington, ''you bringforward aphorisms ofVattel, tojustify orexcuse infraction

committedon positive treaties."

At this point there can be little doubt that the Framers ofour Constitution considered both Blackstone and

Vattel, and they choose Vattel over Blackstone. The Founding Fathers placed into Constitutional concept that

the loyalty ofa Natural Bom Citizen is a loyalty can never be claimed by any foreign political power. The only

- 4 -
http://ofm.de/http://ofm.de/http://ofm.de/


40/51

political power that can exclusively claim the loyalty ofa natural bom citizen is that power that governs of his

birth. Vattel by including the parents and place removes all doubt as to where the loyalties of the natural bom

citizen ought to lie, as Vattel's definition removes al! claims ofanother foreign power by blood or by soil, and is

the only definition that is in accord with Jay's letter to Washington.

F R O M A B O V E

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

observed, the importance of the Law ofNations, 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,"fi-omthe publishing house ofChez E. vanHarrevelt in

Amsterdam, Holland, with a personal note to Franklin from the editor of this 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 ofnations" to be the diplomatic language, and the 1775 edition was considered the

most exact reference of VattePs Law of Nations.

There is no doubt that the Foimding Fathers did not exclusively use the English translation, but

relied upon the French original. On December9 of 1775, Franklin wrote to Vattel's editor,

C.G.F. Dumas,

"/ am much obligedby the kindpresentyou have made us ofyouredition ofVattel

to us in goodseason, when the circumstances of a risingstate make itnecessary fr

consultthe Law ofNations, has been continually in the hands of the members of ou

congress, now sitting. Accordingly, thatcopy which Ikepthas been continually i

ofthe members ofour congress, now sitting, who are much pleasedwith yournote

preface, and have entertaineda high andJustesteem fortheirauthor.^"*

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

- 5 -
http://www.freedomproiect.com/latest/articles/66-foreotten-influenceshttp://www.freedomproiect.com/latest/articles/66-foreotten-influences


41/51

EXHIBIT 9

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htmi/historics/USSC CR 0088 0162 ZO.html

Minor v. Happersett () 100 U.S. 1

HTML version HTML version

PDF version PDF version

WAFTE, C J . , Opinion of the Court

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

88 U.S. 162

Minor v. Happersett

Argued: February 9, ! S7S Deck*ed: March 29,1875

The CHEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the court.

WAITE, C.J., Opinion of the Court

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

88 U.S. 162

Minor v. Happersett

Argued: February 9, 1875

Decided: March 29. 1875

The CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the court.

The question is presented in this case, whether, since the adoption of thefourteenth amendment, a woman, who is a dtizen of the United Statesand of the State of Missouri, is a voterin that State, notwithstanding theprovision of the constitution and laws of the State, which confine the

Paop 1 nf11
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htmi/historics/USSChttp://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htmi/historics/USSChttp://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htmi/historics/USSC


42/51

right ofsuffrage to men alone. We might, perhaps, dedde the case uponother grounds, but this question is fairly made. From the opinion we findthat it was the only one decided in the court below, and it is the only onewhich has been argued here. The case was undoubtedly brought to thiscourt for the sole purpose of having that question decided by us, and inview of the evident propriety there is of having i t settled, so far as it can

be by such a decision, we have concluded to waive all otherconsiderations and proceed at once to its determination.

It is contended that the provisions of the constitution and laws of theState ofMissouri which confine the right of suffrage and registrationtherefor to men, are in violation of the Constitution of the United States,and therefore void. The argument is, that as a woman, bom ornaturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, isa citizen of the United States and of the State in which she resides, shehas the right of suffrage as one of the privileges and immunities of herdtizenship, which the State cannot by its laws or constitution abridge.

There is no doubt that women may be dtizens. They are persons, and bythe fourteenth amendment "all persons bom or naturalized in the UnitedStates and subject to the jurisdiction thereof* are expressly declared tobe "dtizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."But, in ouropinion, it did not need this amendment to give them thatposition. Before its adoption the Constitution of the United States did notin terms prescribe who should be dtizens of the United States or of theseveral States, yet there were necessarily such dtizens without suchprovision. There cannot be a nation without a people. The very idea of apolitical community, such as a nation is, implies an [p166) assodation ofpersons for the promotion of their general welfare. Each one of the

persons assodated becomes a member of the nation formed by theassodation. He owes it allegiance and is entitled to its protection.Allegiance and protection are, in this connection, redprocal obligations.The one is a compensation for the other; allegiance for protection andprotection for allegiance.

Forconvenience It has been found necessary to give a name to thismembership. The object is to designate by a title the person and therelation he bears to the nation. Forthis purpose the words "subject,""inhabitant," and "dtizen" have been used, and the choice between themis sometimes made to depend upon the form of the govemment. Citizen is

now more commonly employed, however, and as it has been consideredbettersuited to the description of one living under a republicangovemment. It was adopted by nearly all of the States upon theirseparation from Great Britain, and was afterwards adopted In the ArticlesofConfederation and In the Constitution of the United States. When usedin this sense it is understood as conveying the idea of membership of anation, and nothing more.

2


43/51

To determine, then, who were dtizens of the United States before theadoption of the amendment it is necessary to ascertain what personsoriginally assodated themselves together to form the nation, and whatwere afterwards admitted to membership.

Looking at the Constitution itselfwe find that it was ordained andestablished by "the people of the United Sta te s, "^ and then goingfurther back, we find that these were the people of the several Statesthat had before dissolved the political bands which connected them withGreat Britain, and assumed a separate and equal station among the

powers of the e a r t h , a n d that had by Articles ofConfederation andPerpetual Union, in which they took the name of "the United States ofAmerica," entered into a firm league of [p167] friendship with each otherfortheircommon defence, the security of their liberties and their mutualand general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other against allforce offered to or attack made upon them, or any of them, on account ofreligion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretence whatever.^

Whoever, then, was one of the people of either ofthese States when theConstitution of the United States was adopted, became ipso facto adtizen -- a member of the nation created by its adoption. He was one ofthe persons assodating together to form the nation, and was,consequen

Documents

SCOAL 2013-08-15 - McInnish Goode v Chapman - Rille Amucus Brief Exhibits