I'll repost this since it seems there are a lot of you that need a grammer lesson. In 19th-century English, as is true today, a list of distinct items requires a coordinating conjunction (like and or or) before the final element. Senator Howard’s quote completely lacks one: "...who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of embassadors..." Because there is no "or," the words "foreigners" and "aliens" are functioning in apposition. Apposition is a grammatical construction where words are placed side-by-side to clarify, describe, or narrow down the same exact subject (for example: "My neighbor, the teacher, who lives next door..."). Howard was using "foreigners" and "aliens" as descriptive synonyms to specify the exact type of foreign citizens he was talking about: specifically those who belong to the families of foreign diplomats. If he had intended to exclude all foreigners, listing "foreigners" and "aliens" as separate categories would be completely redundant since they meant the same thing legally. Furthermore, it would make the final clause about ambassadors completely useless. I get you disagree with it and I honestly admire your passion for our country, but you are 1000% wrong on your interpretation vs the actual meaning here