Loading...
Menu
Ebooks   ➡  Nonfiction  ➡  Law  ➡  Judicial Power

Stratagem of Submission

 

STRATAGEM OF SUBMISSION

A War of Words

&

Test of Competency

 

 

Published by Humble O’Pinion at Shakespir.com

Copyright 2016 Humble O’Pinion

*

*

*

*

Shakespir Edition, License Notes.

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only, and is FREE at Shakespir.com Thank you.

*

 

[]Table of Contents

Chapter 1. CITIZENSHIP

Chapter 2. MARRIAGE CONTRACT

Chapter 3. CAR TITLES

Chapter 4. DICTIONARY

Chapter 5. COMMENT version

*

[]Chapter 1.CITIZENSHIP

U.S. Supreme Court (defining citizenship) …”the words “subject,” “inhabitant,” and “citizen” have been used, and the choice between them is sometimes made to depend upon the form of the government. Citizen is now more commonly employed, however, and as it has been considered better suited to the description of one living under a republican government, it was adopted by nearly all of the states upon their separation from Great Britain, and was afterwards adopted in the Articles of Confederation and in the Constitution of the United States. When used in this sense, it is understood as conveying the idea of membership of a nation, and nothing more.” Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 166 (1874).

*

Montana Code Annotated

1-1-402. Citizens defined. The citizens of the state are:

(1) all persons born in this state and residing within it, except the children of transient aliens (2) all persons born out of this state who are citizens of the United States and residing within this state.

History: En. Sec. 71, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 31, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 32, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 51; re-en. Sec. 32, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-302.

1-1-403. Allegiance. Allegiance is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which every citizen owes to the state.

History: En. Sec. 81, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 34, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 35, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 55; re-en. Sec. 35, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-402.

1-1-404. Allegiance -- how renounced. Allegiance may be renounced by a change of residence. History: En. Sec. 82, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 35, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 36, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 56; re-en. Sec. 36, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-403.

1-1-405. Persons not citizens. Persons in this state not its citizens are either:

(1) citizens of other states; or

(2) aliens

History: En. Sec. 83, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 36, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 37, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 57; re-en. Sec. 37, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-404.

Mont. Pol. C 1895 Title III Sec.

Persons in this State not its citizens are either:

(1) Citizens of other States; or

(2) Aliens [[compare the capitalization with the current version of 1-405 above]]

 

*

CITIZENS of a corporation.

A. Amendment XIV. The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified July 9, 1868 (in part). Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The United States of America is a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law.” Source Bouviers Law , 5th definiton of “United States”

“It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.”…

United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33 & James Trafficant. Speech.

 

*

B. BODY CORPORATE TERRITORY OF MONTANA. Revised Statutes of Montana 1879. Fifth Division- GENERAL LAWS

Sec. 335 [[PDF 504/1047]] That each organized county within this Territory shall be a body corporate and politic, and, as such, shall be empowered for the following purposes:

First. To sue and be sued.

Second. To purchase and hold real estate and personal estate for the use of the county, and lands sold for taxes, as provided by law.

Third. To sell and convey any real or personal estate owned by the county, to make such order respecting the same as may deemed conducive to the interests of the inhabitants.

Fourth. To make all contracts, and do all other acts in relation to the property and concerns necessary to the exercise of its corporate or administrative powers.

Fifth. To exercise other and further powers as may be especially conferred by law.

*

C. CAPITAL OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. U.S. Supreme Court. STOUTENBURGH v. HENNICK, 129 U.S. 141 (1889). STOUTENBURGH, Intendant of Washington Asylum, v. HENNICK. January 14, 1889 [[in part]]

Sections 1 and 18 of the act of congress of February 21, 1871, entitled ‘An act to provide a government for the District of Columbia,’ (16 St. 419,) are as follows: ‘Section 1. That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.’ ‘Sec. 18. That the legislative power of the District shall [129 U.S. 141, 144] extend to all rightful subjects of legislation within said District, consistent with the constitution of the United States and the provisions of this act, subject, nevertheless, to all the restrictions and limitations imposed upon states by the tenth section of the first article of the constitution of the United States; but all acts of the legislative assembly shall at all times be subject to repeal or modification by the congress of the United States, and nothing herein shall be construed to deprive congress of the power of legislation over said District in as ample manner as if this law had not been enacted.’ These sections are carried forward into the act of congress of June 22, 1874, entitled ‘An act to revise and consolidate the statutes of the United States, general and permanent in their nature, relating to the District of Columbia, in force on the first day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-three,’ as sections 2, 49, 50.

*

Expatriation. 15 Statutes At Large (Vol. 15) 40th Congress July 27, 1868. “the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people” (page 223). “That any declaration, instruction, opinion, order or decision of any officers of this government which denies, restricts, impairs or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principals of this government.” (page 224).

Statutes At Large (Vol. 16) 41st Congress Session III Ch. 61,62 1871. (page 419) “government by the name of District of Columbia, by which name is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purpose,” “exercise all the powers of a municipal corporation”.

Sec 7 (page 421) and be it further enacted that all male citizens of the United States, above the age of twenty one years, who shall have been actual residents of said District for three months prior to the passage of this act, except for such as are non-compos mentis and persons convicted of infamous crimes, shall be entitled to vote”

Sec 28 (page 425): “Provided That the powers of the corporation so created shall be limited to the District of Columbia”

 

*

D. 1.MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS. Source 1884 Constitution (Fisk Brothers print)

“The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of individuals ; it is a social compact by which the whole people covenant with each citizen and each citizen with the whole people, that all should be governed by certain laws for the common good.”

2.MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS. Source 1889 Constitution Full text of “Constitution of the State of Montana : as adopted by the Constitutional Convention August 17, 1889 ; ratified by the people October 1, 1889 ; amended through the 1966 general election. State admitted, November 8, 1889.”

3.MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS. Source. Constitutions 1884 & 1889 Constitution of Montana Article III Declaration of Rights. Sec. 4. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever hereafter be guaranteed, and no person shall be denied any civil or political right or privilege on account of his opinions concerning religion, but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, by bigamous or polygamous marriage, or otherwise, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace, or safety of the state, or opposed to the civil authority thereof, or of the United States. No person shall be required to attend any place of worship or support any ministry, religious sect, or denomination, against his consent ; nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship.

4. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS. Source MONTANA CONSTITUTION 1889, XII – 11

Sec. 7. The power to tax corporations or corporate property shall never be relinquished or suspended, and all corporations in this state, or doing business therein, shall be subject to taxation for state, county, school, municipal and other purposes, on real and personal property owned or used by them and not by this constitution exempted from taxation.

Sec. 8. Private property shall not be taken or sold for the corporate debts of public corporations, but the legislative assembly may provide by law for the funding thereof, and shall provide by law for the payment

thereof, including all funded debts and obligations, by assessment and taxation of all private property not exempt from taxation within the limits of the territory over which such corporations respectively have authority.

5. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS- Source CONSTITUTION 1889 XX- 10

Sec. 8. Parties who, at the time of the admission of the state into the Union, may be confined under lawful commitments, or otherwise lawfully held to answer for alleged violations of any of the criminal laws of the

territory of Montana, shall continue to be so confined or held until dis- charged therefrom by the proper courts of the state.

Sec. 9. All writs, processes, prosecutions, actions, causes of action, de-fenses, claims and rights of individuals, associations and bodies corporate existing at the time the state shall be admitted into the Union, shall con- tinue and be respectively executed, proceeded with, determined, enforced

and protected under the laws of the state.

Sec. 10. All undertakings, bonds, obligations and recognizances in force at the time the state shall be admitted into the Union, which were executed to the territory of Montana, or any officer thereof in his official capacity, or to any official board for the benefit of the territory of Mon-tana, are hereby respectively assigned and transferred to the state of Montana, to the state officer successor to said territorial officer, or to the official board successor to the aforesaid official board, for the use of the state, as the case may be, and shall be as valid and binding as if executed under state law to the state, or state officer in his official capacity, or official board, for the benefit of the state ; and all fines, taxes, penalties and forfeitures due or owing to the territory of Montana or to any county, school district, or municipality therein, at the time the state shall be admitted into the Union, are hereby respectively assigned and transferred,

and the same shall be payable to the state, county, school district or munici-pality, as the case may be, and payment thereof may be enforced under the laws of the state.

6. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS. Source Montana Political Code 1895 – Page xxxvii.

“CRIMINAL CASES- The federal courts have no jurisdiction of common law crimes; nor is there any abstract principle of the common law by virtue of they can take such jurisdiction. Pennsylvania v. Wheeling, etc., Bridge Co., 13 How. 563.”

“ the trial court properly noticed, sua sponte, question respecting it’s jurisdiction as to whether case was one arising under Constitution or laws of the United States. Bell v. Hood C.C.A.Cal.1945, 150 F2d.96, reversed on other grounds 66S.Ct. 773, 327 U.S. 678, 90 L.Ed.939”

“It is the duty of the trial court on its own motion to refrain from exercising jurisdiction in a case where no colorable federal question is stated. Columbus R., etc., Co. v. Columbus, D.C. Ohio, 1918, 253 F.499, affirmed 39 S.Ct. 349, 249U.S. 399, 63 Led. 669, 6 A.L.R.1648.”

*

E. Jurisdiction. Alfred Adask- AntiShyster magazine Vol. 5, No.3. “if a judge proceeds without jurisdiction he becomes personally liable for any damages inflicted on the defendant- but only if the defendant objects to the jurisdiction. If there is no objection, the judge can safely presume the defendant accepts the courts jurisdiction (and its consequences).”

Montana Rules of Civil Procedure 1995 Rule 12(h). “Whenever it appears by suggestion of the parties or otherwise that the court has no jurisdiction, the court shall dismiss the action.”

Dennis v. Sparks (Nov 17, 1980 decision). “judge is not immune when he acts in “clear absence of all jurisdiction.” Rankin v. Howard, 548 P.2d 613 (Mont.1976) pg. 844 “If a court lacks jurisdiction over a party, then it lacks all jurisdiction to adjudicate the parties’ rights, whether or not the subject matter is properly before it.” Back to top

*

*

[]Chapter 2. MARRIAGE CONTRACT

1997 Montana Code Annotated.

Identification of parties- statements of qualifications. 48-118.2 (in part). “No marriage license shall issue unless the application therefor is prescribed by the parties intending to intermarry”...... “age, nationality, color, residence and occupation”. History 1961.

Title 40- Family law. CHAPTER 2 HUSBAND AND WIFE.

Part 1 Joint interest, Obligations and Powers

Part 2 Individual Property

Part 3. Power of Married Persons to Contract

40-2-301 Husband and wife may contract. Either husband or wife may enter into any engagement or transaction with the other or any other person respecting property which either might, if unmarried, subject in transactions between themselves to the general rules which control the actions of persons occupying confidential relations with each other, as defined by the provisions of this code relative to trusts. History En. Sec 214, Civ. C. 1895 re-en 1907, 1921, 1947. Cross ref. Trust code title 72, Ch. 33-36.

*

Trust law in the 1997 Montana Code

Title 72 Chapter 30 MANAGEMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS

72-Chapter 31 MISCELLANEOUS FIDUCIARY

72 Chapter 32 RESERVED

72-Chapter 33. TRUST CODE GENERAL PROVISIONS.

72-Chapter 34. TRUST ADMINISTRATION

72-Chapter 35. JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS CONCERNING TRUSTS

72-Chapter 36. RIGHTS OF THIRD PERSONS

*

Title 72 Chapter 30 MANAGEMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS. Educational, religious, charitable, or other eleemosynary purposes or a government organization to the extent that it holds funds exclusively for any of these purposes.

72-30-102 Gift is will, deed, grant, conveyance, agreement, or other governing document under which property is transferred.

72-30-103 . Uniform Management of Institutional Funds Act. Uniformity of construction among those states that enact it.

72-31-223 construction of powers generally (power of atty.)

72-31-238 Uniformity “among states enacting it” (fiduciary attorney).

72-33-104 Nothing in Ch. 33-36 affects the law relating to constructive or resulting trusts. History 1989.

72-33-108 Trust can be private or charitable; also express trust “created or determined by judgement or decree”, Beneficiary is person with vested or contingent interest; trustee is the person holding the property in trust; trustor is the person who creates the trust. A ‘person’ is individual, corporation, organization or other legal entity. History 1989

Decree and Judgement. (FRCP 54a) and confession of judgement

Judgement P842. Confessed action with or w/o plea is a decree, and “voluntary submission to the court’s jurisdiction” is a decree.

72-33-108(4). A trust is either “resulting”, “constructive” or by decree of district judge; a trust not expressed is constructive.

72-33-208. Trust not valid unless any one of three: (1) signed by trustee; (2) signed by trustor, (3) by operation of law.

72-33-219. Constructive trust. A constructive trust arises when a person holding title to property is subject to an equitable duty to convey it to another on the ground that the person holding title would be unjustly enriched if he were permitted to retain it. History 1989.

72-33-220. Constructive trusts that arise by operation of law are valid.

Back to top

*

[]Chapter 3. CAR TITLES

1997 MCA Motor Vehicle chapter.

61-3-101 (in part) State department of Motor Vehicles records. The department shall file applications for registration received by it from the county treasurer and register the vehicle and the vehicle owners as follows: (a) under license number; (b) under name of owner; © under vehicle number; (d) another index of registration as the department considers expedient.

61-3-103 (Temporary-1997) (in part) “instrument that creates the security interest must be retained by the secured party”… “the department shall return the certificate of ownership to the county treasurer”….”The owner of the motor vehicle is the person entitled to operate and possess the motor vehicle”.

61-3-103(3) (Temporary-1997) Whenever a security interest or lien is filed against a motor vehicle that is subject to two security interests previously perfected under this section, the department shall endorse on the face of the certificate of ownership, “NOTICE. This motor vehicle is subject to additional security interests on file with the Department of Justice.”

61-3-103(3) [Effective 2000] Whenever a security interest or lien is filed against a motor vehicle that is subject to two security interests previously perfected under this section, the department shall endorse on the face of the certificate of ownership, “NOTICE. This motor vehicle is subject to additional security interests on file with the Department of Justice.” No other information regarding such additional security interests need be endorsed on the certificate.”

61-3-103 (in part). (4) lien release held by state 8 years. (5) a voluntary lien is perfected when lien notice and certificate of ownership or manufacturer’s statement of origin are delivered to county treasurer. Perfection under this section constitutes constructive notice to subsequent purchasers or encumbrancers.

Motor Vehicle title, Records of convictions chapter 11.

61-11-102 (3) DOJ to keep driver license applications and license, traffic accident reports; court records, court records to “motor vehicle administrators” in other states. (6) Computer storage device reproduction “is an original record”

61-11-105 (2) DOJ shall furnish licensee information to “any person”. (3) $4 fee must be paid for any requested copy, certified is $10 a copy; no charge for records to any state or federal agency.

61-3-103 (6) voluntary lien filings that do not require transfer of ownership are perfected on the date the lien notice and certificate of ownership or manufacturer’s statement of origin are received by the department…

61-3-221. 2015 MCA Involuntary transfer. (1) (a) An involuntary transfer of title to or any interest in a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, pole trailer, camper, motorboat, personal watercraft, sailboat, or snowmobile may occur by operation of law through inheritance, devise, bequest, order in bankruptcy or insolvency, execution sale, or repossession upon default in the performance of the terms of a lease, executory sales contract, or security agreement or in any other manner other than by voluntary act of the person whose title or interest is transferred. Upon the involuntary transfer, the executor, administrator, receiver, trustee, sheriff, secured party, or other representative or successor in interest of the person whose interest is transferred shall send to the department:

(i) An application for a certificate of title; and

(ii) A verified or certified statement of the transfer of interest or a transfer statement, as defined in 30-9A-619.

(b) The statement of transfer of interest must state the reason for the involuntary transfer, the interest transferred, the name of the person to whom the interest is to be transferred, the process or procedure creating the transfer, and other information requested by the department. A transfer statement submitted under this section must meet the requirements of 30-9A-619. Evidence and instruments that are required by law in order to effect a transfer of legal or equitable title to or an interest in chattels must be submitted with the statement.

© Except as provided in subsection (2), if the department determines that the transfer is regular and that all legal requirements have been complied with, the department shall send notice of the intended transfer to the owner, conditional sales vendor, lessor, mortgagee, and other lienholder, as shown in the department’s records. Deposit in the U.S. mail of the notice, postage prepaid, addressed to the person at the respective address shown in the department’s records satisfies the notice required by this section. Not less than 5 days after sending the notice, the department shall issue a new certificate of title to the transferee.

(2) (a) Except as provided in subsection (2)(b), if an interest in a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, pole trailer, camper, motorboat, personal watercraft, sailboat, or snowmobile that is not registered in this state is involuntarily transferred to a person in this state, the person to whom the interest is transferred shall follow the procedure provided in subsection (1).

(b) In lieu of the statement required in subsection (1), the department may accept an affidavit of repossession as executed by the person seeking the involuntary transfer.

(3) The department is not required to send notice for a transfer of interest occurring under subsection (2).

History: En. Sec. 10, Ch. 477, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 61, Ch. 542, L. 2005. Back to top

*

[]Chapter 4. DICTIONARY

Black’s Law Dictionary 6th edition (1990).

Agency B6P62- very long definition, obscuring something. Summary: one person acting for another, with or without his knowledge or authority.

Agency in fact – an expressed agreement

Agency by operation of law- an implied agreement.

Alien corporation. P72. A corporation operating under the laws of a foreign country, irrespective of where it operates.

Alien. P71. A foreign born person who has not qualified as a citizen of the country; but an alien is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause of U.S. Constitution to same extent as citizen. Galvan v Press 347 US 522. Any person not a citizen or national of the United States. 8 USCA 1101. *

Allegiance.(in part) P74. Obligation of fidelity and obedience to a government in consideration for the protection that government gives…In American law, the allegiance due from citizens of the United States to their native country, and also from naturalized citizens, and which cannot be renounced without permission of the government, to be declared by law.

Applicant P98 An applicant, as for letters of administration, is one who is entitled thereto, and who files a petition asking that letters be granted. For purposes of letters of credit, the customer in the credit transaction. Synonymous with “account party.”

Consent. P305 (in part) “is an act unclouded by fraud, duress or sometimes even mistake”.

As used in the law of rape, “consent” means of the will, and submission under the influence of fear or terror can not amount to real consent…(where) “resistance is overcome by force or violence, submission thereafter is not consent.

Implied consent. (in part) That manifested by signs, actions or facts, or by inaction or silence, which raise a presumption or inference that the consent was given

Constructive/implied conditions. P314. “Conditions or qualifications to a promise which arise from the very nature of the promise and which the law recognizes as conditioning the promise even though not expressly stated.”

Constructive notice. Black’s 6th P1062: Constructive notice is information or knowledge of a fact imputed by law to a person (although he may not actually have it), because he could have discovered the fact, by proper diligence, and his situation was such as to cast upon him the duty of inquiring into it. Every person who has actual notice of circumstances sufficient to put a prudent man upon inquiry as to a particular fact, has constructive notice of the fact itself in all cases in which, by prosecuting such inquiry, he might have learned such fact.

Constructive “notice” includes implied actual notice and inquiry notice. F.P. Baugh Inc v Littler Lake Lumber Co CA Cal 297 F2d 692, 696.

Constructive trust. P314. Trusts created by operation of law against one who by actual or constructive fraud, by duress or abuse of confidence, or by commission of wrong, or by any form of unconscionable conduct, or other questionable means, has obtained or holds legal title, to property which he should not, in equity and good conscious, hold and enjoy. Davis v. Howard 19 Or. App 310, 527 P2d 422, 424.

De son tort. P448 (in part) Of his own wrong

Equitable owner.. (in part) “in whom the legal title to real estate is vested, but who holds it in trust for the benefit of another, the latter being called the ‘equitable’ owner.”

Foreign.. P646, 647, 648 (in part) Foreign corporation. A corporation doing business in one state though chartered or incorporated in another is a foreign corporation to the first state…

Non-resident alien. P1057. One who is neither resident nor citizen of the United States. Citizenship is determined under the federal immigration and naturalization laws. (U.S Code Title 8)

Incompetency. P765. Lack of ability, knowledge, legal qualification or fitness to discharge the required duty or professional obligation. A relative term which may employed as meaning disqualification, inability or incapacity and it can be refer to lack of legal qualifications or fitness to discharge the required duty and to show want of physical or intellectual or moral fitness. County Bd. Of Ed. of Clarke County v Oliver, 270 Ala. 107. 116 S.2d, 566, 567. See Guardian; Incapacity; Insanity; Non compos mentis. Compare Competency.

Inter- Webster 1992 (in part) between | involving two or more.

Interloper. B6P815. Persons who interfere or intermeddle into business to which they have no right. Persons who enter a country or place to trade without license. One who meddles in the affairs which are none of his business and for which he has no responsibility; an intruder; an intermeddler. Encroachment on rights of others.

INTERMEDDLER. [[Sam Johnson dictionary 1756.]] [from intermeddle.] One that interposes officiously; one that thrusts himself into business to which he has no right. L’E?trange.

Intermeddle B6P815 – To interfere wrongly with business affairs officiously; or without right or title. See Interfere, Interloper.

Not a technical term, but sometimes used with reference the acts of an executor de son tort and negotiorum gestor

Licentious not in B6

Licentious. Webster 1992. Disregarding the laws of morality, esp. in sexual matters.

Negotiorum gestio. A doing of business; a species of spontaneous agency, or an interference by one in the affairs of another… without authority.

Negotiorum gestor. Manager of a business; a person voluntarily constituting himself as an agent for another, in his absence and in his interest, and without authority.

Officious (Not in B6; Curious omission?) Webster 1992- too zealously exercising authority; unofficial.

Meddle Webster 1992- (in part)- to concern or busy oneself imprudently or interferingly.

Liegeman. P922. He that oweth allegiance.

National P1024 contemplates activity with a nationwide scope.

Operation. P1092. Operation of law. The term expresses the manner in which rights, and sometimes liabilities, devolve upon a person by mere application to the particular transaction of the established rules of law, without the act or co-operation of the party himself.

Promise P1213 (in part) Commercial law. “An undertaking to pay and it must be more than an acknowledgment of an obligation. UCC 3-102(1)(c).” .. “Restatement. Second. Contracts.”; certain promise(s) “not enforceable at law”.

Promise implied on law. Promise implied in law is one in which neither words nor conduct of the party involved are promissory in form or justify inference of promise and term is used to indicate that the party is under legally enforceable duty as he would have been, if he had in fact made promise. Cooke v Adams, Miss 183 So,2d 925.

“Privity” P1199 (in part)- private knowledge; joint knowledge with another of private concern; cognizance implying a consent or concurrence. See Insider, Legal privity, Privy.

“Privity or knowledge” P1200 (in part) “must be actual and not merely constructive”… “The words import actual knowledge of the things causing or contributing to the loss”

Privy. – a person who is in privity with another.

Reside P1308 (in part). Live, dwell, abide, sojourn, stay, remain, lodge. Western -Knapp Engineering Co v. Gilbank, C.C.A.Cal 129 F2d 135, 136...a foreign business corporation, for venue purposes, “resides” in county where its registered office and registered agent are located.

Abide P6 to accept the consequences of; to rest satisfied with; to wait for. With reference to an order, judgement or decree of a court, to perform, to execute.

Residence. Sojourning applies to a temporary and a permanent residence.

A Stay is that which holds, restrains or supports. Suspending in time. A stopping.

Remain is not in Black’s 6th Ed..

A Lodger is a tenant who has “mere use, without actual, exclusive possession.”

Stranger. P1421 (In part)-in subrogation, one who can become liable for the debt

Strangers. By this term is intended third persons generally. In its general legal signification the term is opposed to the term “privy Those who are in no way parties to a covenant or transaction, nor bound by it, are said to be strangers to the covenant or transaction. See also Stranger.

Subrogation- the substitution of one person in the place of another; two kinds of subrogation- conventional (expressed) or legal (implied).

Stratagem. A deception by either words or action, in time of war, in order to obtain an advantage over an enemy.

Spontaneous Webster 1992. Arising from impulse, not from another and not premeditated.

*

Marriage license. P973. A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who

intend to intermarry, usually addressed to the minister or magistrate who is to perform the ceremony, or, in general terms, to anyone authorized to solemnize marriages. By statute in most jurisdictions, it is made an essential prerequisite to the lawful solemnization of the marriage.

Marriage promise. Betrothal; engagement to intermarry with another.

Solemnization. T P1392 o enter marriage publicly before witnesses in contrast to clandestine or common law marriages.

Solemnize. To enter marriage publicly before witnesses in contrast to clandestine or common law marriages.

Intermarry. P815 See Miscegenation.

Miscegenation. P999 Mixture of races. Term formerly applied to marriage between persons of different races. Statutes prohibiting marriage between persons of different races have been held to be invalid as contrary to equal protection clause of the Constitution. Loving v Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 87 S Ct. 1817, 18. L.Ed.2d 1010.

Submission. P1426 A yielding to authority; e.g. a citizen is bound to submit to the laws; a child to his parents.

A contract between two or more parties whereby they agree to refer the subject in dispute to others and to be bound by their award. District of Columbia v Bailey, 171 U.S. 161, 18 S.Ct 868, 872, 43 L.Ed. 118. See also Arbitration; Mediation.

*

*

The Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London.

Title: The United States Isn’t a Country – It’s a Corporation!

Source: [None]

URL Source: http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

Published: Jun 26, 2012

Author: Lisa Guliani

Post Date: 2012-06-26 10:22:36 by wudidiz :

In 1604, a group of leading politicians, businessmen, merchants, manufacturers and bankers, met in Greenwich, then in the English county of Kent, and formed a corporation called the Virginia Company in anticipation of the imminent influx of white Europeans, mostly British at first, into the North American continent. Its main stockholder was, King James I, and the original charter for the company was completed by April 10th 1606. This and later updates to the charter established the following:

The Virginia Company comprised of two branches, the London Company and the Plymouth or New England Company. The former was responsible for the first permanent colony in America at Jamestown on May 14th 1607 and the latter were the so-called ‘Pilgrim Fathers’ who arrived at Cape Cod in the ship the Mayflower, in November 1620, and went on to land in Plymouth Harbour on December 21st. The ‘Pilgrims’ of American historical myth were, in fact, members of the second Virginia Company branch called the New England Company.

The Virginia Company owned most of the land of what we now call the USA, and any lands up to 900 miles offshore. This included Bermuda and most of what is now known as the Caribbean Islands. The Virginia Company (the British Crown and the bloodline families) had rights to 50%, yes 50, of the ore of all gold and silver mined on its lands

[”the silver is mine and the gold is mine,” saith the Lord bible.cc/haggai/2-8.htm ], plus percentages of other minerals and raw materials, and 5% of all profits from other ventures. [ “The earth is the Lord’s and everything in it.” bible.cc/1_corinthians/10-26.htm ] These rights, the charters detailed, were to be passed on to all heirs of the owners of the Virginia Company and therefore continue to apply... forever! The controlling members of the Virginia Company who were to enjoy these rights became known as the Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London. Back to top

*

[]Chapter 5. COMMENT version

Stratagem of Submission

A War of Words

Government Gone Wild: X-rated Tyranny or a Competency Test for citizens/both.

[[COMMENT VERSION- Created Jany 2016 by suggestion. Some of the research is here is 20 years old.

Read the first 10 pages above without clinking the links. I created this/other documents for my study purposes. It helps me to lay it out on paper, to better get my arms around it (symbolism). Paper is not the enemy; it is our tool. Digital is even better.

~

1.Do I have the right to live in Montana peacefully, and be free of government? My ancestor’s said “yes”. And the statutes, orders and case laws agree, so long as the party in question is competent and lawful.]]

CITIZENSHIP

U.S. Supreme Court (defining citizenship) …”the words “subject,” “inhabitant,” and “citizen” have been used, and the choice between them is sometimes made to depend upon the form of the government. Citizen is now more commonly employed, however, and as it has been considered better suited to the description of one living under a republican government, it was adopted by nearly all of the states upon their separation from Great Britain, and was afterwards adopted in the Articles of Confederation and in the Constitution of the United States. When used in this sense, it is understood as conveying the idea of membership of a nation, and nothing more.” Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 166 (1874).

[[2.Does “nothing more” include: a constructive trust on any marriage contract; or an expressed and implied second notice of lien upon ‘my’ automobile title; or an expressed and implied ‘notice of property tax lien’ on land that I own; or the ongoing claim of some obligation upon me to be the “account party” for some hidden, public debt that I do not owe; or maybe it is just the overall conduct of a Company of Adventurers waging a war of commerce against the New World, calling its citizens their “enemy”?

Is that whatch ya mean by “membership of a nation, and nothing more”?

I take notice of your Stratagem of Submission.

3.What is a citizen?]]

Montana Code Annotated. [[The State corporation rules, since 1895]]

*

1-1-402. Citizens defined. The citizens of the state are:

(1) all persons born in this state and residing within it, except the children of transient aliens; [[I was not born within MONTANA, nor do I RESIDE within]].

(2) All persons born out of this state who are citizens of the United States and residing within this state. [[I am an inhabitant of the land between the Yellowstone and Bitterroot rivers, not a citizen of the United States; My first Notice of standing (1995) was never refuted]]

History: En. Sec. 71, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 31, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 32, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 51; re-en. Sec. 32, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-302.

1-1-403. Allegiance. Allegiance is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which every citizen owes to the state. [[I am not a citizen’, I owe ‘allegiance’ to no organized group of men]]

History: En. Sec. 81, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 34, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 35, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 55; re-en. Sec. 35, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-402.

1-1-404. Allegiance -- how renounced. Allegiance may be renounced by a change of residence. [[I don’t need to renounce anything, I was here before you and will be here long after you are gone. This is My land, My range and My country. My Claim can not be refuted]]

History: En. Sec. 82, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 35, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 36, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 56; re-en. Sec. 36, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-403.

1-1-405. Persons not citizens. Persons in this state not its citizens are either:

(1) citizens of other states; or

(2) aliens

History: En. Sec. 83, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 36, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 37, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 57; re-en. Sec. 37, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 83-404.

. *

[[OK. By your definition, I am an alien to your corporation. Can aliens to your corporation walk down the street in Bozeman and buy a fan belt? My pickup needs a belt. Can aliens go camping on the public forests? Can aliens work for some other man and get paid for the labor completed? Is that OK with your corporation or its agents?

How does your corporation treat an alien that has lived near your town longer than you have, times two? If I am an alien to your corporation, what is the corporation to the People living on the land between the Yellowstone and the Bitterroot rivers, continuously since before your were born? Is the Corporation an alien to our republic?

I was not born in the State of Montana and I am not required to tell you where I was born. Call me an alien if you want to, but the fact is that YOUR CORPORATION IS the real alien, not me.]]

 

*

CITIZENS of a corporation.

A. Amendment XIV. The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified July 9, 1868. (in part) [[Other sources say the 14th amendment was ratified July 28, 1868. This is a significant error on the part of the online compilers of the constitution and “amendments”. The error hides the expatriation clause, which actually passed the day before the 14th amendment was ratified. While the citizenship concept had been tossed around since at least 1866, no one EVER talks about the expatriation clause, until now]].

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.[[born and under the jurisdiction of the U.S.? What puts man under the jurisdiction of the U.S.?]].

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[[The Bill of Rights uses the word ‘rights’, but the 14th amendment does not. Instead, it says “privileges”.

Federal citizenship was created by the Fourteenth amendment on July 28, 1868. However, the day before the amendment was ratified, the federal congress offered an exemption from federal citizenship.- called the “expatriation clause”]]

The United States of America is a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law.” Source Bouviers Law , 5th definiton of “United States”

“It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.”…

United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33 & James Trafficant. Speech.

B. Body corporate. Revised Statutes 1889. Territory of Montana. Fifth division- GENERAL LAWS

Sec. 335 [[PDF 504/1047]] That each organized county within this Territory shall be a body corporate and politic, and, as such, shall be empowered for the following purposes:

First. To sue and be sued.

Second. To purchase and hold real estate and personal estate for the use of the county, and lands sold for taxes, as provided by law.

Third. To sell and convey any real or personal estate owned by the county, to make such order respecting the same as may deemed conducive to the interests of the inhabitants.

Fourth. To make all contracts, and do all other acts in relation to the property and concerns necessary to the exercise of its corporate or administrative powers.

Fifth. To exercise other and further powers as may be especially conferred by law. [[Body Corporate v body politic. What you have just read in Sec 335 outlines the body corporate quite well. But it says nothing about the rules for the body politic, because the government only has control of its ‘citizens’, and by their consent. The body politic is controlled by its inhabitants, known as ‘the People’.

Sec. 335 is early legislation explaining the concept of a private corporation body and a public political body both being vested in the county commission. The writers express their powers in corporate law, and give that power to the county commission. But they confer no rights or duties to the body politic here.

Were the early law writers concerned with the pursuit of happiness or fair justice to all Montana people? No.

The number one concern of these law writers was the ability of the corporate county “To sue and be sued” and then to “hold” land and tax it. More on feudalism in the next report.

Lawsuits can be the province of the ‘king’s courts of chancery’, or they can be heard in the local county court. Lawsuits are always waged by consent of the parties, and the parties choose their own venue and their own law.

The court of chancery being offered here was known as the “the district court of the Territory of Montana.” Any such disputes concerning the “body corporate” or one of its agencies, employees or citizens- could be heard by that district court. All other civil disputes and matters of serious crime can be handled in the local county court, sometimes known as the ‘common law’ court. Common law courts were present in Montana before the land was known as “Montana’.

The common law county court was also available to all lawful inhabitants of Gallatin county. This court functioned from 1864 to 1889, as a court of civil and criminal law. The county court could hear all lawsuits properly before it, if it had possession of “the thing” in dispute; and the county court heard all matters of serious criminal law, in which the court has possession of the accused man.

It is possible for a case to have civil and criminal elements involved, and the county court could adjudicate both classes of wrong-doing.

The physical boundary of the “district” just happens to be in the same place as the physical boundary of the county, but they are two separate things, two separate courts.

The district court is for suits of chancery within the district (a private corporation legal boundary), but the chancery court has no jurisdiction in matters of serious criminal law within the county.

The county court offers jurisdiction for general civil suits and for general criminal offenses for/against the public body politic- the People.

The county court then, is the true body politic and is the court of, by and for the people of Gallatin county. As the reader might imagine, the county court and the district court are not compatible; one is for the People and the other for the Corporation. In our example, the corporation is private.

It was always the intention of the Founding Fathers that there should be a body corporate for the government itself. But the original intention was that of a public corporation, meaning that the general people of the nation might have a say in that government. Any such public corporation is more accurately called a public trust and its actions should always favor the greatest number of inhabitants within its physical boundaries.

After the Civil War the public corporation was reorganized as a private corporation, as seen in the federal legislation of 2-21-1871, copied twice into this report.

All private ‘for profit’ corporations are self-motivated. They want to grow larger and can, because our body politic can not limit them. Self-expansion is the only mission-statement of private corporations, power and profit their only goals.

The Civil War crushed the ‘state’s rights’ proponents, and the victors continued their war on the common law courts of the states.

The new U.S. Corporation put a lid on the Montana county court system with statehood, and according to the universal law of NOTICE.

FAIR NOTICE #1. In 1879 the federalist victors of the Civil War warned all U.S. states that the county court/grand jury system must be eliminated. Source RSM 1879 FORTY-THIRD CONGRESS, SESSION I. CHAPTER 80. [PDF page 53/1047] -- An act concerning the practice in Territorial courts, and appeals therefrom.

FAIR NOTICE #2. In 1884 the Montana legislature warned the People in that the county court and grand jury system must end. Source 1884 Montana Constitution Art. VI “Sec. 1. The Judicial powers of the State, as to matters of law and equity, except as in this Constitution otherwise provided, shall be vested in a Supreme Court, in district courts, county courts, justices of the peace, and such other courts as may be created by law for cities and incorporated towns. But the Legislative Assembly may provide for the abolition of county courts and the transfer of their probate and other jurisdiction to the district courts, and in such case may provide that such dis-trict courts shall be always open for the transaction of business, except on legal holidays and non-judicial days.”

COURT ELIMINATED. In 1889 the Montana law writers simply deleted the ancient county court and replaced it with the corporate district court. The private body corporate conquered the public body politic from then onward.

The Montana Supreme Court would verify this elimination many times over the next 30 years, to a point where most people have never heard of a Montana county court or a Montana grand jury. Source STATE V BRETT 16 Mont. 360, 364 (1895) Montana Reports Volume 16 [PDF 385/667], etc.

From 1889 onward, the Montana district court could then hear all matters at chancery and criminal law, arising within its district.

In the corporate district court system the judge is king; he decides all matters and can do no wrong; he is immune from lawsuit in almost every complaint, and there is no citizen review of his decisions, no body politic overview.

In the county court system the jurors said all matters of law, fact, procedure and punishment. And with its companion grand jury court, every man accused of a serious crime faced at least thirty-six jurors. The county court system was truly a government by the people and for them, a body politic, and now it has been buried under a Paper Cape.]]

C.. CAPITAL OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. U.S. Supreme Court. STOUTENBURGH v. HENNICK, 129 U.S. 141 (1889). STOUTENBURGH, Intendant of Washington Asylum, v. HENNICK. January 14, 1889 [[in part]]

Sections 1 and 18 of the act of congress of February 21, 1871, entitled ‘An act to provide a government for the District of Columbia,’ (16 St. 419,) are as follows: ‘Section 1. That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.’ ‘Sec. 18. That the legislative power of the District shall [129 U.S. 141, 144] extend to all rightful subjects of legislation within said District, consistent with the constitution of the United States and the provisions of this act, subject, nevertheless, to all the restrictions and limitations imposed upon states by the tenth section of the first article of the constitution of the United States; but all acts of the legislative assembly shall at all times be subject to repeal or modification by the congress of the United States, and nothing herein shall be construed to deprive congress of the power of legislation over said District in as ample manner as if this law had not been enacted.’ These sections are carried forward into the act of congress of June 22, 1874, entitled ‘An act to revise and consolidate the statutes of the United States, general and permanent in their nature, relating to the District of Columbia, in force on the first day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-three,’ as sections 2, 49, 50. [[The U.S. is a private municipal corporation (“body corporate”) by the name of “the District of Columbia”; it “may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation”. (Joel-insert ‘private law’ here somewhere)]].

*

Expatriation. 15 Statutes At Large (Vol. 15) 40th Congress July 27, 1868. “the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people” (page 223). “That any declaration, instruction, opinion, order or decision of any officers of this government which denies, restricts, impairs or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principals of this government.” (page 224).

Statutes At Large (Vol. 16) 41st Congress Session III Ch. 61,62 1871. (page 419) “government by the name of District of Columbia, by which name is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purpose,” “exercise all the powers of a municipal corporation”.

Sec 7 (page 421) and be it further enacted that all male citizens of the United States, above the age of twenty one years, who shall have been actual residents of said District for three months prior to the passage of this act, except for such as are non-compos mentis and persons convicted of infamous crimes, shall be entitled to vote”

Sec 28 (page 425): “Provided That the powers of the corporation so created shall be limited to the District of Columbia”. [[Limited to Washington, D.C.? Is Montana a federal district within the District of Columbia? Are its citizens “actual residents”?

Montana recently had a single federal judge overturn a popular initiative on Montana marriages. How does that stay inside the “Ten miles Square” known as the District of Columbia? There are a hundred other officious transgressions by the federal corporation into state affairs; which one do you want to discuss?]]

 

*

D. 1. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS Source 1884 Constitution (Fisk Brothers print)

“The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of individuals ; it is a social compact by which the whole people covenant with each citizen and each citizen with the whole people, that all should be governed by certain laws for the common good.” [[People (created by a man & a woman) can ‘covenant’ or contract with other lawful people; citizens (fictitious federal creations of 1868) can ‘contract’ with other citizens. This is a dubious joining of thoughts by the use of words – where the People become ‘Citizens’ and ‘persons’ and later become ‘US citizens’ and ‘US persons’.]]

2. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS Montana Constitution 1889

Full text of “Constitution of the State of Montana : as adopted by the Constitutional Convention August 17, 1889 ; ratified by the people October 1, 1889 ; amended through the 1966 general election. State admitted, November 8, 1889.”

2. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS Source 1889 Constitution

Full text of “Constitution of the State of Montana : as adopted by the Constitutional Convention August 17, 1889 ; ratified by the people October 1, 1889 ; amended through the 1966 general election. State admitted, November 8, 1889”

[[ Notes in 1889 Constitution: ‘people’ mentioned 37 times, all in text; ‘People’ mentioned 3 times, all in titles; ‘PEOPLE’ mentioned 2 times, all in titles; ‘inhabitant’ mentioned 2 times, all in text; citizen (s) mentioned 11 times, all in text]]

[[OTHERWISE. “of licentiousness, by bigamous or polygamous marriage”, or otherwise,. What does otherwise mean here? Could it mean interracial sex (1889)?

Was it ever unlawful for a Negro man to sleep in the same building as Caucasian woman? I don’t think so…But was it unlawful for the same man to have “sexual relations” with the woman? Yep. Interracial marriage was unlawful and illegal, as seen in this 1889 constitution]]

3. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS Source constitutions.1884 & 1889 Constitution of Montana Article III Declaration of Rights. Sec. 4. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever hereafter be guaranteed, and no person shall be denied any civil or political right or privilege on account of his opinions concerning religion, but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness, by bigamous or polygamous marriage, or otherwise, or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace, or safety of the state, or opposed to the civil authority thereof, or of the United States. No person shall be required to attend any place of worship or support any ministry, religious sect, or denomination, against his consent ; nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship. [[These are just moral ‘show words’, meant to impress someone, but followed by no one. Your freedom of thought is hereby “secured”, but you can not excuse homosexual fornication or interracial marriage (that will come later). These are truly just words, of no value to dishonest men.]]

4. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS source CONSTITUTION 1889, XII – 11

Sec. 7. The power to tax corporations or corporate property shall never be relinquished or suspended, and all corporations in this state, or doing business therein, shall be subject to taxation for state, county, school, municipal and other purposes, on real and personal property owned or used by them and not by this constitution exempted from taxation. [[The 1889 constitution has disposed of the phrase “body corporate” and “body politic”. It does however, use the general phrase “bodies corporate”.

Since a certain private corporation has taken over the public body politic in 1889, there exists no need to further explain this concept, embarrassing as it might be. But the new corporation retained its “power to tax corporations”. Now all we have to do is figure out just who the agents for the corporations might be.]]

Sec. 8. Private property shall not be taken or sold for the corporate debts of public corporations, but the legislative assembly may provide by law for the funding thereof, and shall provide by law for the payment

thereof, including all funded debts and obligations, by assessment and taxation of all private property not exempt from taxation within the limits of the territory over which such corporations respectively have authority. [[A “public corporation” is controlled- at least somewhat- by the public. The State of Montana is controlled completely by the private “District of Columbia” corporation, not the public. There are many examples of D.C. control of Montana. How is this possible if Montana is a public corporation for Montanans?

Secondly, Sec. 8 here mentions “ the limits of the territory over which such corporations respectively have authority”. Montana became a state corporation in 1889. It is no longer a territory, by common definition. However, by statue definition, Montana is a territory of the United States back in 1889 and even today, in 2016.]] Back to COMMENT

5. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS- Source CONSTITUTION 1889 XX- 10

Sec. 8. Parties who, at the time of the admission of the state into the Union, may be confined under lawful commitments, or otherwise lawfully held to answer for alleged violations of any of the criminal laws of the

territory of Montana, shall continue to be so confined or held until dis- charged therefrom by the proper courts of the state.

Sec. 9. All writs, processes, prosecutions, actions, causes of action, de-fenses, claims and rights of individuals, associations and bodies corporate existing at the time the state shall be admitted into the Union, shall con- tinue and be respectively executed, proceeded with, determined, enforced

and protected under the laws of the state. [[the subject here is corporations and their agents, and nothing else. “Body corporate” is converted to “bodies corporate”. This is strong evidence that Montana is a private corporation.]]

Sec. 10. All undertakings, bonds, obligations and recognizances in force at the time the state shall be admitted into the Union, which were executed to the territory of Montana, or any officer thereof in his official capacity, or to any official board for the benefit of the territory of Mon-tana, are hereby respectively assigned and transferred to the state of Montana, to the state officer successor to said territorial officer, or to the official board successor to the aforesaid official board, for the use of the state, as the case may be, and shall be as valid and binding as if executed under state law to the state, or state officer in his official capacity, or official board, for the benefit of the state ; and all fines, taxes, penalties and forfeitures due or owing to the territory of Montana or to any county, school district, or municipality therein, at the time the state shall be admitted into the Union, are hereby respectively assigned and transferred,

and the same shall be payable to the state, county, school district or munici- pality, as the case may be, and payment thereof may be enforced under the laws of the state. [[The State of Montana is the same corporation as the Territory of Montana, but under a new name. The jurisdiction of the courts is also the same, with federal supremacy under Article IV- Territorial jurisdiction ]].

6. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS. Source Montana Political Code 1895 – Page xxxvii.

“CRIMINAL CASES- The federal courts have no jurisdiction of common law crimes; nor is there any abstract principle of the common law by virtue of they can take such jurisdiction. Pennsylvania v. Wheeling, etc., Bridge Co., 13 How. 563.”

“ the trial court properly noticed, sua sponte, question respecting it’s jurisdiction as to whether case was one arising under Constitution or laws of the United States. Bell v. Hood C.C.A.Cal.1945, 150 F2d.96, reversed on other grounds 66S.Ct. 773, 327 U.S. 678, 90 L.Ed.939”

“It is the duty of the trial court on its own motion to refrain from exercising jurisdiction in a case where no colorable federal question is stated. Columbus R., etc., Co. v. Columbus, D.C. Ohio, 1918, 253 F.499, affirmed 39 S.Ct. 349, 249U.S. 399, 63 Led. 669, 6 A.L.R.1648.”

E. Jurisdiction. Alfred Adask- AntiShyster magazine Vol. 5, No.3. “if a judge proceeds without jurisdiction he becomes personally liable for any damages inflicted on the defendant- but only if the defendant objects to the jurisdiction. If there is no objection, the judge can safely presume the defendant accepts the courts jurisdiction (and its consequences).”

MRCP 1995 Rule 12(h). “Whenever it appears by suggestion of the parties or otherwise that the court has no jurisdiction, the court shall dismiss the action.”

Dennis v. Sparks (Nov 17, 1980 decision). “ judge is not immune when he acts in ‘clear absence of all jurisdiction.’ “

Rankin v. Howard, 548 P.2d 613 (Mont.1976) pg. 844 “ ‘If a court lacks jurisdiction over a party, then it lacks all jurisdiction to adjudicate the parties’ rights, whether or not the subject matter is properly before it.”

16. MONTANA STATE DOCUMENTS. Source Montana Political Code 1895 895 Montana Code – Political. Page xxxvii:

“CRIMINAL CASES- The federal courts have no jurisdiction of common law crimes; nor is there any abstract principle of the common law by virtue of they can take such jurisdiction. Pennsylvania v. Wheeling, etc., Bridge Co., 13 How. 563.”

[[In the foregoing use of the phrase ‘common law’- the meaning is ‘unwritten law’]]

[[12-12-1998 General Pinochet of Chile is wheeled into a British court and declares that he does not recognize the jurisdiction of the English court.]] Back to COMMENT

~

[[Federal jurisdiction of the court. The U.S. District court can not hear cases arising under the Constitution. If the moving party ‘casts his action’ with a Constitutional question on the face of the complaint, the proper venue would be the District Court of the United States, sitting under Article III jurisdiction (please note exact phrase and letter case). The U.S. District court can hear cases involving US law if properly before it under Article IV territorial jurisdiction.

USCA Title 28- Montana is listed under “territorial jurisdiction” of the court. (entire volume is jurisdiction, sec 1292 through 1331 is 493 pages of fine print, all S. Ct. annotations- 1964 edition). 1331.Note #9 Limitations on jurisdiction]]

“Jurisdiction conferred on federal district courts to entertain suits arising under the constitution and the laws of the United States is narrowly limited. Giancana v. Johnson C.A.Ill.1964, 335 F2d 366, certiorari denied 85 S.Ct. 718, 379 U.S. 1001, 13 l.Ed.2d 702.” Note #10 Exclusive jurisdiction

“Federal court does not have exclusive jurisdiction of controversy arising Constitution. Taylor v. DeHart, D.C.Mo. 1926, 22 F.2d 206.” Note #14Waiver of jurisdictional defects “Jurisdictional requirements that matter in controversy must exceed $3,000, and arise under Federal Constitution or laws may not be waived. Matthews v. Rogers, Miss1932, 52 S.Ct. 217, 284 U.S.521, 76 L.Ed.447.”

[[Researchers believe that the U.S. Supreme Court pays close attention to words, spelling and the use of capitalization of letters. In the last three case citations we have three different references to ‘constitution’. “ The constitution”; “ arising Constitution”; and “ arise under Federal Constitution”. Are these references to the same constitution? Note #15 Lack of jurisdiction, court’s duty to notice]]

“ the trial court properly noticed, sua sponte, question respecting it’s jurisdiction as to whether case was one arising under Constitution or laws of the United States. Bell v. Hood C.C.A.Cal.1945, 150 F2d.96, reversed on other grounds 66S.Ct. 773, 327 U.S. 678, 90 L.Ed.939”

“It is the duty of the trial court on its own motion to refrain from exercising jurisdiction in a case where no colorable federal question is stated. Columbus R., etc., Co. v. Columbus, D.C. Ohio, 1918, 253 F.499, affirmed 39 S.Ct. 349, 249U.S. 399, 63 Led. 669, 6 A.L.R.1648.”

[[Chapter 85, Note 45 summary. The questions involved on the face of the complaint (supported by affidavit if Constitutional) determine if the federal court has jurisdiction.]].

Back to COMMENT

*

THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT * [[Nowadays marriage is governmental permission for an interracial marriage contract (an act of licentiousness) for citizens; the contract is registered and entered into a constructive trust under the State.

The Body Politic. In days of old, the marriage covenant for lawful inhabitants- was the exclusive jurisdiction of church law, or local common law.

The Body Corporate. The STATE now claims marriage authority for themselves, as “actors” in the Theatre at Law. In that Theatre, the State does indeed have jurisdiction over consensual marriage contracts, but NEVER over the lawful marriage covenant under Body Politic.]]

*

48-118.2 Identification of parties- statements of qualifications. “No marriage license shall issue unless the application therefor is prescribed by the parties intending to intermarry”...... “age, nationality, color, residence and occupation”. History 1961.

1997 MCA Title 40- Family law. CHAPTER 2 HUSBAND AND WIFE.

Part 1 Joint interest, Obligations and Powers

Part 2 Individual Property

Part 3. Power of Married Persons to Contract

40-2-301 Husband and wife may contract. Either husband or wife may enter into any engagement or transaction with the other or any other person respecting property which either might, if unmarried, subject in transactions between themselves to the general rules which control the actions of persons occupying confidential relations with each other, as defined by the provisions of this code relative to trusts. History En Sec 214, Civ. C. 1895 re-en 1907, 1921, 1947. Cross ref. Trust code title 72, Ch. 33-36.

*

Trust law in the 1997 Montana Code

Title 72 Chapter 30 MANAGEMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS

72-Chapter 31 MISCELLANEOUS FIDUCIARY

72 Chapter 32 RESERVED

72-Chapter 33. TRUST CODE GENERAL PROVISIONS.

72-Chapter 34. TRUST ADMINISTRATION

72-Chapter 35. JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS CONCERNING TRUSTS

72-Chapter 36. RIGHTS OF THIRD PERSONS

*

Title 72 Chapter 30 MANAGEMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS. (educational, religious, charitable, or other eleemosynary purposes or a government organization to the extent that it holds funds exclusively for any of these purposes. [[What government organization holds funds exclusively for an eleemosynary purpose? Would the social security program fit this definition?]].

72-30-102 Gift is will, deed, grant, conveyance, agreement, or other governing document under which property is transferred. [[Is a car title a ‘gift’?]].

72-30-103 Uniformity of construction among those states that enact it. [[Shows federal supremacy]].

72-31-223 construction of powers generally (power of atty.)

72-31-238 Uniformity “among states enacting it” (fiduciary attorney). [[Shows federal supremacy]].

72-33-104 Nothing in Ch. 33-36 affects the law relating to constructive or resulting trusts. History 1989.

72-33-108 Trust can be private or charitable; also express trust “created or determined by judgement or decree”, Beneficiary is person with vested or contingent interest; trustee is the person holding the property in trust; trustor is the person who creates the trust. A ‘person’ is individual, corporation, organization or other legal entity. History 1989 [[notice the exclusion of ‘natural person’. The person here is a corporation only. A judgement or decree is a declaration, sentence or order from the court and “determining the rights of the parties”, a “judgement is merely a contract acknowledged in open court”.

Black’s 6th on Decree and Judgement. (FRCP 54a) and confession of judgement Black’s 6thP842 (Judgement): confessed action with or w/o plea is a decree, and “voluntary submission to the court’s jurisdiction” is a decree. [[Voluntary submission to the court is a contract, therefore a decree and a trust; such applicant party becomes a trust party (beneficiary or benefactor) or “account party”; the State is the trustee/administrator]]

72-33-108(4) A trust is either “resulting”, “constructive” or by decree of district judge; a trust not expressed is constructive.

72-33-208 Trust not valid unless any one of three: (1) signed by trustee; (2) signed by trustor, (3) by operation of law.

72-33-219. Constructive trust. A constructive trust arises when a person holding title to property is subject to an equitable duty to convey it to another on the ground that the person holding title would be unjustly enriched if he were permitted to retain it. History 1989.

72-33-220 Constructive trusts that arise by operation of law are valid. Back to COMMENT

*

[[ANTENNAS UP, WAY UP! PERISCOPE UP! This is the core of Tyranny. Judicial proxy controls a ceremonial marriage, and the contract is placed in a National Trust that most people have never even heard of. Read on.]]

*

Black’s Law Dictionary 6th Ed (1990) P314. Constructive trust. Trusts created by operation of law against one who by actual or constructive fraud, by duress or abuse of confidence, or by commission of wrong, or by any form of unconscionable conduct, or other questionable means, has obtained or holds legal title, to property which he should not, in equity and good conscious, hold and enjoy. Davis v. Howard 19 Or. App 310, 527 P2d 422, 424.

*

[[ It took me many years to comprehend the above concept. What does all that mean?

Trusts created by statutes (etc) against one who by constructive fraud, commission of wrong, or by any form of bad conduct, has obtained or holds LEGAL title to property which he should not, in good conscious, hold and enjoy.

The first question here is: what sort of trust is created against someone that commits a wrong? I thought trusts were created for the ‘trustor’ (benefactor) and for the beneficiary. What party has ‘a trust’ created against him? People of bad conduct? People incompetent in law? Minors? Citizens? Is a traffic ticket a “commission of wrong”?

“or other questionable means”. Isn’t every action questionable? Who decides what is questionable? This definition could fit almost every human being on the planet.

If the last sentence is true then almost no one can hold a legal title. Legal title is the true owner, such as the king, while almost everyone else on the planet are merely equitable title holders.

Secondly, and of utmost importance in trust law: these fellows just told you that they place you in a constructive trust, and take notice of the implied lien, on any sort of wrong-doing such as a traffic ticket or an intermarriage.

The lien is perfected when you sign any document and submit that document to the State. The lien is valid and in effect once registered, whether you know about it or not, because you should have known about it. The king still owns all property- either real or personal, and all citizen-subjects within his conquered territory.]] Back to COMMENT

*

CAR TITLES

[[You submit voluntary app to county clerk for registration, plates and cert of title. The county forwards to State; the State takes constructive notice of lien upon ‘your’ car. You seal the deal with a sig-nature and a check, they promise not to arrest you for another year.

The actual ownership paper for a pickup truck is called the ‘Manufacturers Statement of Origin’. Let’s unpack this body of information.]]

61-3-101 State department of Motor Vehicles records. The department shall file applications for registration received by it from the county treasurer and register the vehicle and the vehicle owners as follows: (a) under license number; (b) under name of owner; © under vehicle number; (d) another index of registration as the department considers expedient.

[[What is going on here? Categories a, b and c already provide a list(s) of the vehicle numbers. What is this unnamed category “d” for, anyway? Perhaps this is the “constructive trust” (implied) lien-holder category, naming the secured interest parties in some hidden location. Category d is a secret register of the intermeddlers, aka the other “secured” parties.

The department of M.V. can destroy any records older than 4 years, if no active lien. All records open to inspection and copies made for a price, provided that owner has not requested non-disclosure. History 1917, amended many times. Requested “non-disclosure?” Now who has the power to bury that secret?]]

61-3-103 (Temporary- 1997) [[lengthy explanation of security interests and liens. Department may not file lien unless accompanied by application for certificate of title. When the application/ lien is transmitted to the department the instrument that creates the security interest must be retained by the secured party.

Security interest = lien; secured party = lender {Black’s 6th; UCC 1-201 (37), 9-102}; the lien paper is held by the bank. The department mails “certificate of ownership” to name/address on middle of the certificate, unless the lender has paid the fees for transfer. If so, “the department shall return the certificate of ownership to the county treasurer”….” The owner of the motor vehicle is the person entitled to operate and possess the motor vehicle”.

O’Pinion: This is a clear definition of ‘equitable ownership’ of a vehicle. The certificate entitles the person to operate his business and hold it’s equipment, according to law. This language is what common people call ‘lawyer gibberish’; they call it ‘Terms of Art’.

Certain liens perfected through title 30, Chap 9 Montana Code. (UCC Secured Transactions), Antennas, Periscopes UP!:]]

*

[temporary] 61-3-103(3) Whenever a security interest or lien is filed against a motor vehicle that is subject to two security interests previously perfected under this section, the department shall endorse on the face of the certificate of ownership, “NOTICE. This motor vehicle is subject to additional security interests on file with the Department of Justice.” Other information regarding additional security interests need not be endorsed on the certificate

[[wowzer!! They conceal the truth in your face: Other persons not listed hold a lien on your truck.! Now view the replacement in 2000:]]

*

[Effective 2000] 61-3-103(3) Whenever a security interest or lien is filed against a motor vehicle that is subject to two security interests previously perfected under this section, the department shall endorse on the face of the certificate of ownership, “NOTICE. This motor vehicle is subject to additional security interests on file with the Department of Justice.” No other information regarding such additional security interests need be endorsed on the certificate.

*

[[Constructive notice. Words in other sections are added or changed between the temporary and the effective versions from the 1997 code 61-3-103(3). The updated version underlines the word ‘NOTICE.’ How come? The word is already in caps on the earlier version. Is this word doubly important?

Please read the first part of 103 (3) again. If the certificate of title has less than one lien, can the above NOTICE be printed on the face of the certificate of ownership? The answer is NO, according to statute.

Take a look at your truck title, or any other. Are the words ‘additional security interests’ upon its face?]] Back to COMMENT

*

1997 MCA Motor Vehicle chapter. 61-3-103 (4) lien release held by state 8 years. (5) a voluntary lien is perfected when lien notice and certificate of ownership or manufacturer’s statement of origin are delivered to county treasurer. Perfection under this section constitutes constructive notice to subsequent purchasers or encumbrancers.

Motor Vehicle title, Records of convictions chapter 11.

61-11-102 (3) DOJ to keep driver license applications and license, traffic accident reports; court records, court records to “motor vehicle administrators” in other states. (6) Computer storage device reproduction “is an original record”. [[Is this a good idea? If all other records are lost or not possessed according to law, is the “original record” as just stated, the controlling record? If the answer is ‘yes’, can we copy that digital record and distribute it as an original? Any problem here?]]

61-11-105 (2) DOJ shall furnish licensee information to “any person”. (3) $4 fee must be paid for any requested copy, certified is $10 a copy; no charge for records to any state or federal agency. [[This is strong evidence of a “Federal Area” overlay. See the Story of the Buck Act, by Richard McDonald (Buck Act 1940)]]

*Constructive notice. Black’s 6th P1062: Constructive notice is information or knowledge of a fact imputed by law to a person (although he may not actually have it), because he could have discovered the fact, by proper diligence, and his situation was such as to cast upon him the duty of inquiring into it. Every person who has actual notice of circumstances sufficient to put a prudent man upon inquiry as to a particular fact, has constructive notice of the fact itself in all cases in which, by prosecuting such inquiry, he might have learned such fact.

Constructive “notice” includes implied actual notice and inquiry notice. F.P. Baugh Inc v Littler Lake Lumber Co CA Cal 297 F2d 692, 696.

1997 MCA 61-3-103 (6) voluntary lien filings that do not require transfer of ownership are perfected on the date the lien notice and certificate of ownership or manufacturer’s statement of origin are received by the department…[[ What filings do not require transfer of ownership? Maybe a registration renewal or a license plate replacement…This might be a filing that does not require a transfer of ownership. If true, does somebody have a voluntary lien affirmed by this filing?

All applications are voluntary, and all contracts are voluntary. If the equitable owner of a registered Plymouth fails to perform or pay his duties, his contract is terminated and the secured interest parties are notified. Any such filings would be done with or without the consent of the equitable owner, therefore involuntary.]]

*

2015 MCA 61-3-221. Involuntary transfer. (1) (a) An involuntary transfer of title to or any interest in a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, pole trailer, camper, motorboat, personal watercraft, sailboat, or snowmobile may occur by operation of law through inheritance, devise, bequest, order in bankruptcy or insolvency, execution sale, or repossession upon default in the performance of the terms of a lease, executory sales contract, or security agreement or in any other manner other than by voluntary act of the person whose title or interest is transferred. Upon the involuntary transfer, the executor, administrator, receiver, trustee, sheriff, secured party, or other representative or successor in interest of the person whose interest is transferred shall send to the department:

(i) An application for a certificate of title; and

(ii) A verified or certified statement of the transfer of interest or a transfer statement, as defined in 30-9A-619.

(b) The statement of transfer of interest must state the reason for the involuntary transfer, the interest transferred, the name of the person to whom the interest is to be transferred, the process or procedure creating the transfer, and other information requested by the department. A transfer statement submitted under this section must meet the requirements of 30-9A-619. Evidence and instruments that are required by law in order to effect a transfer of legal or equitable title to or an interest in chattels must be submitted with the statement.

© Except as provided in subsection (2), if the department determines that the transfer is regular and that all legal requirements have been complied with, the department shall send notice of the intended transfer to the owner, conditional sales vendor, lessor, mortgagee, and other lienholder, as shown in the department’s records. Deposit in the U.S. mail of the notice, postage prepaid, addressed to the person at the respective address shown in the department’s records satisfies the notice required by this section. Not less than 5 days after sending the notice, the department shall issue a new certificate of title to the transferee.

[[Here again we have constructive notice. The State only has to drop the letter into the US mail, and Notice is given. The implied notice is valid under the imaginary agency called “operation of law”.]]

(2) (a) Except as provided in subsection (2)(b), if an interest in a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, pole trailer, camper, motorboat, personal watercraft, sailboat, or snowmobile that is not registered in this state is involuntarily transferred to a person in this state, the person to whom the interest is transferred shall follow the procedure provided in subsection (1).

[[The Montana legislature is going crazy again! What does the following mean: “an interest in a motor vehicle”... “that is not registered in this state is involuntarily transferred to a person in this state” ???

Lets say, for instance, City Bank of New York has an implied lien on my dump truck. The lien stems from a New York man who bought the truck through City Bank some 30 years ago. The man paid the truck off before he moved to Montana, and all he knew about the lien was that the loan was paid off. He sold the dump truck to me for $200, cash. I parked it for later use.

My dump truck is not registered or licensed in Montana, but sits out in the back 40, with pipes in the bed, where it has been for 11 years. My truck sits idle, but the bank claims an active lien. Should I attempt to ‘drive’ this storage box, the State of Montana (and its creditors) will claim an obligation upon me to perform with fidelity and by their definition, in ANY portion of ‘citizenship’ that they see fit to put upon me. The State calls this “a free country”, I call it a “Certificate of Tyranny”. One of us is way wrong]]

(b) In lieu of the statement required in subsection (1), the department may accept an affidavit of repossession as executed by the person seeking the involuntary transfer.

(3) The department is not required to send notice for a transfer of interest occurring under subsection (2).

History: En. Sec. 10, Ch. 477, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 61, Ch. 542, L. 2005.

*

*

[[Liens. There exists an implied lien on every contract. But the implied lien is not perfected until it is filed and recorded with the county treasurer, on paper.

A lien notice is a document or statement that makes a demand for payment. The notice must reach the attention of the party that failed to pay or perform.

After the notice is served to the adverse party, the moving party must identify the adverse party’s property that is to be used to settle the claim. The lien is a claim encumbering that property.

The property identification document and the notice document are then filed with the county clerk and recorder. The lien is now perfected.

Any attempts to sell or transfer said property would find the title clouded with a lien. Should a dispute now arise before the district court, the court will examine the records and perhaps settle the dispute. The first lien holder has the strongest claim.

The lien notice can be written on the face of a car title, but does not have to be written on its face to be valid, as per 61-3-103(3) [effective 2000].

A lien is valid as actual or implied, written or not written as long as it is eventually written and recorded.

My “duty of inquiring into it” (the registration application) itself creates the lien as per the rules of constructive notice; and along with said notice I add the application for certificate of ownership or submit the MSO and a filing fee. Put the package together and file it with the clerk. The lien package becomes perfected at the time of filing.

What you have just read is complicated fraud on the part of the legislature, the courts and the governor. Now that you are aware of it, constructive notice is taken.

*

I paid cash for a new Yamaha snowmobile in 1985. The CERIFICATE OF TITLE sent to me contained the usual information and little else.

At the bottom of the title were the following words in very tiny print, almost too small to read:

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that an application for certificate of title has been made for the vehicle described heron, pursuant to the provisions of the Motor Vehicle laws of this State, and the applicant named on the face hereof has been duly recorded as lawful owner of said vehicle.

I further certify that the vehicle is subject to the security interests shown heron, in witness whereof I have hereunto affixed my signature to the great seal of the State of Montana

Daryll E. Schoen {hand signed}]]

*

DICTIONARY

Black’s Law Dictionary 6th edition (1990): [[I also have B3, B6, B8, Webster 1928, 1992 and others. My words are mingled into the dictionary portion of this report, according to context for summary. If the reader wants the entire definition of a word, I ENCOURAGE him to look up the word himself- thanks Daniel E. Petersen! You have suffered a Long Train of Abuses]]

Alien corporation. P72. A corporation operating under the laws of a foreign country, irrespective of where it operates.

Alien. P71. A foreign born person who has not qualified as a citizen of the country; [[the writers could say ‘a man or woman born’. Instead they chose the word ‘person’; there are a hundred cases before supreme courts saying that ‘person’- if not preceded by “natural”- means “a corporation”. The cases are too many to cite, the latest being Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 50 (2010), saying a corporation is a person for the meaning of a contribution]]

but an alien is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause of U.S. Constitution to same extent as citizen. Galvan v Press 347 US 522. Any person not a citizen or national of the United States. 8 USCA 1101.

[[This is confusion by design: 1.an alien is a foreign born person not a citizen; 2.an alien is a person of the US Constitution (14th Amend US persons) same as a citizen; 3.and an alien is any person not a citizen or national. A national is one active within a nationwide scope. Can you be a national and not a citizen?.

Alien, citizen, and person all mean ‘corporation’, according to the above gibberish. If you sign your real name as representative of the fictitious corporation, you become its citizen agent, or “US person”, or STATE OF citizen or all of the above]]

Allegiance.(in part) P74. Obligation of fidelity and obedience to a government in consideration for the protection that government gives…In American law, the allegiance due from citizens of the United States to their native country, and also from naturalized citizens, and which cannot be renounced without permission of the government, to be declared by law.

[[If allegiance is mandatory and not revocable, it is nothing more than slavery. Force by terrorism, either real or imagined, is still a violation of Law.

The definition here is pure hypnosis. It is an imagined threat brought to life when you support it, and it takes you over.

But the definition of ‘Allegiance’ can not stand up to the scrutiny of a competent and curious man.

Were the 55,000 U.S citizens that died in Vietnam protected by the government, or murdered by them? Did the government protect the 92 people that died in Waco, Texas on 4-19-1993, or murder them?

In the second part of the definition above, the sentence defies proper structure. While I knew instinctively that the structure was wrong, I had to pull out the dictionary to explain it in words.

The word “due” in this sense is an adjective and should modify the noun “allegiance”, if the remaining words are connected by a conjunctive verb.

That verb should be the word ‘is’, placed before “due”, but the word does not exist. The definition makes no sense because it is faulty in form. The sentence does not say to what or whom the allegiance is due, and it has two choices to ponder: “native country” or “the United States”

When the average man reads this definition he should see the confusion here, but then what? Is a dictionary ever wrong? Would the government ever cheat you? Believing, pledging, bowing, kneeling or taking your shoes off to board a plane…Are we subject to all this?]]

Applicant P98 An applicant, as for letters of administration, is one who is entitled thereto, and who files a petition asking that letters be granted. For purposes of letters of credit, the customer in the credit transaction. Synonymous with “account party.”

Constructive notice. Black’s 6th P1062: Constructive notice is information or knowledge of a fact imputed by law to a person (although he may not actually have it), because he could have discovered the fact, by proper diligence, and his situation was such as to cast upon him the duty of inquiring into it. Every person who has actual notice of circumstances sufficient to put a prudent man upon inquiry as to a particular fact, has constructive notice of the fact itself in all cases in which, by prosecuting such inquiry, he might have learned such fact.

Constructive “notice” includes implied actual notice and inquiry notice. F.P. Baugh Inc v Littler Lake Lumber Co CA Cal 297 F2d 692, 696.

[[you have to be joking here, please! Read this one again. If you are a “prudent” man, it is your “duty” to inquire about the words on your car title. And whether you inquire or not, they government assumes you did, and assumes you agreed to the notice of lien. If you buy into all this, God help you.]]

Liegeman. P922. He that oweth allegiance.

National P1024 contemplates activity with a nationwide scope

Operation. P1092. Operation of law. The term expresses the manner in which rights, and sometimes liabilities, devolve upon a person by mere application to the particular transaction of the established rules of law, without the act or co-operation of the party himself. [[This twisted mess simply means: you are under our implied laws, whether you want it or not]]

Foreign.. P646, 647, 648 (in part) [[lots of entries here; this important word could be summarized in corporation as follows]] Foreign corporation. A corporation doing business in one state though chartered or incorporated in another is a foreign corporation to the first state…[[Microsoft, Inc. of Washington is foreign to the State of Montana. If you are an employee of Microsoft doing business in Montana, you are a resident-alien of that foreign corporation, residing within the State of Montana]]

Non-resident alien. P1057. One who is neither resident nor citizen of the United States. Citizenship is determined under the federal immigration and naturalization laws. (U.S Code Title 8)

Reside P1308 (in part). Live, dwell, abide, sojourn, stay, remain, lodge. Western -Knapp Engineering Co v. Gilbank, C.C.A.Cal 129 F2d 135, 136...a foreign business corporation, for venue purposes, “resides” in county where its registered office and registered agent are located. [[are you a registered voter?]]

Abide P6 to accept the consequences of; to rest satisfied with; to wait for. With reference to an order, judgement or decree of a court, to perform, to execute. [[It’s slavery by consent if you “accept the consequences”]]

P305 Consent. (in part) “is an act unclouded by fraud, duress or sometimes even mistake”.

As used in the law of rape, “consent” means of the will, and submission under the influence of fear or terror can not amount to real consent…(where) “resistance is overcome by force or violence, submission thereafter is not consent. [[does the same apply to a woman that has been violated by some foreign corporation?]]

Implied consent. (in part) That manifested by signs, actions or facts, or by inaction or silence, which raise a presumption or inference that the consent was given. [[If you take notice of my actions or inaction and my facts or my silence, with or without my knowledge, what the Hell do you need me for?]]

Residence. Sojourning applies to a temporary and a permanent residence.

A Stay is that which holds, restrains or supports. Suspending in time. A stopping.

[[If someone is restraining or supporting you at the station, you may be a resident until you escape and quit taking the benefits; if you are in court before a judge, you are Prisoner of Court]]

Remain is not in Black’s 6th Ed..

A Lodger is a tenant who has “mere use, without actual, exclusive possession.”

Construction. [[There are six columns on ‘construction’ in B6. The following gives you the general idea:]]

P314. Constructive/implied conditions. “Conditions or qualifications to a promise which arise from the very nature of the promise and which the law recognizes as conditioning the promise even though not expressly stated.”

[[No court would touch the above definition- no citation given here. It took me several readings to realize that these lawyers have twisted this definition into a pretzel. It makes no sense, and we know that the writers are hiding something here. They are tricking us, in an attempt to convince us that we have given our consent, even if we haven’t given our consent. These lawyer folks are thick headed- so you must YELL at them: I do NOT consent AND yet I am capable of giving consent; I am competent in law! This is a competency test given to you, to see if you are a competent beneficiary in the trust by consent or an incompetent beneficiary of the trust, needing a guardian trustee.]]

Promise P1213 (in part) Commercial law. “An undertaking to pay and it must be more than an acknowledgment of an obligation. UCC 3-102(1)(c).” .. “Restatement. Second. Contracts.”; certain promise(s) “not enforceable at law”.

Promise implied on law. Promise implied in law is one in which neither words nor conduct of the party involved are promissory in form or justify inference of promise and term is used to indicate that the party is under legally enforceable duty as he would have been, if he had in fact made promise. Cooke v Adams, Miss 183 So,2d 925.

[[No US supreme court citation? How come? . The citation just read is a harsh example of another ‘competency test’. To sum it up- a promise is a promise even if it is not a promise.

If you are OK with that statement, you passed the test and your citizenship is granted, noticed and your obligation is registered with the U.S. Bureau of Vital Statistics, Department of Commerce; The government certifies that you were born, schooled, married, employed and registered and takes implied notice that you agree.

With every signature or implied signature you confirm the obligation. The lien on the fictitious account that you signed for is then filed and perfected.

The lien or ‘security interest’ is promised to the international bankers that have intermeddled as officious trustors of the Emergency Banking Act of 1933]]

Incompetency. P765. Lack of ability, knowledge, legal qualification or fitness to discharge the required duty or professional obligation. [[”legal qualification” = competency AT law; “required duty” = implied citizenship obligation; “professional obligation” = contract performance]]

A relative term which may employed as meaning disqualification, inability or incapacity and it can be refer to lack of legal qualifications or fitness to discharge the required duty and to show want of physical or intellectual or moral fitness. County Bd. Of Ed. of Clarke County v Oliver, 270 Ala. 107. 116 S.2d, 566, 567. See Guardian; Incapacity; Insanity; Non compos mentis. Compare Competency.

“Privity” P1199 (in part)- private knowledge; joint knowledge with another of private concern; cognizance implying a consent or concurrence. See Insider, Legal privity, Privy.

“Privity or knowledge” P1200 (in part) “must be actual and not merely constructive”… “The words import actual knowledge of the things causing or contributing to the loss”

[[ Privity alone means knowledge of implied consent; ‘privity or knowledge’ means knowledge of actual consent]]

Privy. – a person who is in privity with another.

P1421 Stranger. (In part)-in subrogation, one who can become liable for the debt

P1421 Strangers. By this term is intended third persons generally. In its general legal signification the term is opposed to the term “privy” [[implied consent]]. Those who are in no way parties to a covenant or transaction, nor bound by it, are said to be stranger to the covenant or transaction. See also Stranger.

[[fraud again! “Stranger” makes one liable; “Strangers” are not liable parties. How often do you see a reversal in meaning by adding an ‘s’ to the end of the word?]]

Subrogation- the substitution of one person in the place of another; two kinds of subrogation- conventional (expressed) or legal (implied).

Stratagem. A deception by either words or action, in time of war, in order to obtain an advantage over an enemy.

[[’Meddle’ is not in Black’s 6th Ed.]]

Meddle Webster 1992- (in part)- to concern or busy oneself imprudently or interferingly.

Inter- Webster 1992 (in part) between | involving two or more.

Interloper. B6P815. Persons who interfere or intermeddle into business to which they have no right. Persons who enter a country or place to trade without license. One who meddles in the affairs which are none of his business and for which he has no responsibility; an intruder; an intermeddler. Encroachment on rights of others. [[meddle = non-commercial, intermeddle = commercial. Both terms are part of ‘interloper’]]

INTERMEDDLER. [[Sam Johnson dictionary 1756.]] [from intermeddle.] One that interposes officiously; one that thrusts himself into business to which he has no right. L’E?trange.

[[’Intermeddle ‘is not in Webster 1992]]

Intermeddle B6P815 – To interfere wrongly with business affairs officiously; or without right or title. See Interfere, Interloper.

Not a technical term, but sometimes used with reference the acts of an executor de son tort and negotiorum gestor. [[The facts says otherwise! Intermeddle IS a technical, legal term only, not found in Webster’s dictionary. Meddle is common and a small concern; intermeddle is commercial only, and much more serious. ]]

De son tort. P448 (in part) Of his own wrong

Owner. Equitable owner . Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Ed. pages1105-6 Owner: there are 12 definitions for the word ‘owner’. Two are significant.

The Equitable owner has an interest in the property owned because he has the benefit of its use. The Legal owner is recognized at law “in whom the legal title to real estate is vested, but who holds it in trust for the benefit of another, the latter being called the ‘equitable’ owner.”

Black’s Law dictionary has explained the legal/equitable ownership of real estate (land and fixed structures) in a way that most citizens can understand. The citizen comprehends the relationship of the landlord to the renter. If the renter fails to pay his rent, the renter is booted out and the owner reoccupies the property.

If you ask the renter if he owned the home, he will say ‘no, just renting’, unaware that he is the equitable owner. Legal owner = the state of Montana; equitable owner = citizen named on middle of face of certificate of title.

Licentious not in B6.

Licentious. Webster 1992. Disregarding the laws of morality, esp. in sexual matters.

negotiorum gestio. A doing of business; a species of spontaneous agency, or an interference by one in the affairs of another… without authority.

negotiorum gestor. Manager of a business; a person voluntarily constituting himself as an agent for another, in his absence and in his interest, and without authority.

Officious (Not in Black’s 6th) Webster 1992- too zealously exercising authority; unofficial.

Spontaneous Webster 1992. Arising from impulse, not from another and not premeditated.

Agency B6P62- very long def. Obscuring something. Summary: one person acting for another, with or without his knowledge or authority.

Agency in fact – an expressed agreement

Agency by operation of law- an implied agreement.

*

Marriage license. P973. A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who

intend to intermarry, usually addressed to the minister or magistrate who is to perform the ceremony, or, in general terms, to anyone authorized to solemnize marriages. By statute in most jurisdictions, it is made an essential prerequisite to the lawful solemnization of the marriage.

Marriage promise. Betrothal; engagement to intermarry with another.

P1392 Solemnization. To enter marriage publicly before witnesses in contrast to clandestine or common law marriages.

Solemnize. To enter marriage publicly before witnesses in contrast to clandestine or common law marriages.

P815 Intermarry. See Miscegenation.

P999 Miscegenation. Mixture of races. Term formerly applied to marriage between persons of different races. Statutes prohibiting marriage between persons of different races have been held to be invalid as contrary to equal protection clause of the Constitution. Loving v Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 87 S Ct. 1817, 18. L.Ed.2d 1010.

~

“formerly applied”? What does the word mean nowadays? If interracial marriage was licentious in the old days, why does the modern marriage license form REQUIRE information on “nationality” and “color”? Perhaps the old law never dies. The Bible is opposed to interracial marriage and will remain so until the authors change the words.

Why do the lawyers use the word ‘intermarried’ instead of just plain ‘married’? Are they trying to fool us again? Are we interracial marriage contractors or incompetent beneficiaries of some hidden trust?

The State of Montana has a big problem here, explaining what status the marriage applicants might be. My guess is that they assume that you are a interracial parties of the trust, until you prove that you are an incompetent beneficiary(s).

A divorce case appeal before the Montana Supreme Court from the district court in Bozeman, Montana: Story v Black 1883 40/665 The word “intermarriage” is in the divorce document of Rosa Black & Madison M Black. This is a famous Bozeman pioneer/founder family. Black Avenue is named for the family. Rosa and MM Black are Caucasians. This is not ‘intermarriage’ by definition, yet they signed the documents with their lawyers looking on.

I have seen out of State divorce papers that refer to ‘intermarriage’ of two Caucasians. One was in 1953 California, another from Oregon; and many others from Montana- see Montana Supreme Court case records 1864 to date. The State of Montana has offered a commercial marriage contract to its citizens, in which the State is the overall trustee, and the husband and wife merely contractors.

*

The word “intermeddle” seems to add a commercial element to “meddle” and makes intermeddling a crime. My Word 97 spell-checker recognizes “intermeddle”, as does Sam Johnson in 1756.

*

Enemy of the State. Researcher Lynne Merideth and others discovered that the 1917 War Powers Act/Trading with the Enemy was amended in 1933 to INCLUDE American citizens in the definition of ‘enemy’. Let me repeat that: Americans are the enemy! As outrageous as this may sound, this new definition is found in 12 USCS Sec. 95a-amended. Mar.9, 1933.

This Act originally excluded citizens of the United States, but in the Act of March 9, 1933, Section 2 amended this to include “any person within the United States or any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. The revision is legal, so long as the U.S. and its “persons” are corporations.

Submission. P1426 A yielding to authority; e.g. a citizen is bound to submit to the laws; a child to his parents.

A contract between two or more parties whereby they agree to refer the subject in dispute to others and to be bound by their award. District of Columbia v Bailey, 171 U.S. 161, 18 S.Ct 868, 872, 43 L.Ed. 118. See also Arbitration; Mediation. [[any document submitted to any agency is evidence of submission]]

 

*

The United States of America is a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law.”

Bouviers Law , 5th definiton of United States”

“It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.”…

United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33 [[ thanks Jim Trafficant, for lifting the Paper Cape. ]]

The Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London.

[[Internet Source:]]

Title: The United States Isn’t a Country – It’s a Corporation!

Source: [None]

URL Source: http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

Published: Jun 26, 2012

Author: Lisa Guliani

Post Date: 2012-06-26 10:22:36 by wudidiz :

In 1604, a group of leading politicians, businessmen, merchants, manufacturers and bankers, met in Greenwich, then in the English county of Kent, and formed a corporation called the Virginia Company in anticipation of the imminent influx of white Europeans, mostly British at first, into the North American continent. Its main stockholder was, King James I, and the original charter for the company was completed by April 10th 1606. This and later updates to the charter established the following:

The Virginia Company comprised of two branches, the London Company and the Plymouth or New England Company. The former was responsible for the first permanent colony in America at Jamestown on May 14th 1607 and the latter were the so-called ‘Pilgrim Fathers’ who arrived at Cape Cod in the ship the Mayflower, in November 1620, and went on to land in Plymouth Harbour on December 21st. The ‘Pilgrims’ of American historical myth were, in fact, members of the second Virginia Company branch called the New England Company.

The Virginia Company owned most of the land of what we now call the USA, and any lands up to 900 miles offshore. This included Bermuda and most of what is now known as the Caribbean Islands. The Virginia Company (the British Crown and the bloodline families) had rights to 50%, yes 50, of the ore of all gold and silver mined on its lands

[”the silver is mine and the gold is mine,” saith the Lord bible.cc/haggai/2-8.htm ], plus percentages of other minerals and raw materials, and 5% of all profits from other ventures. [ “The earth is the Lord’s and everything in it.” bible.cc/1_corinthians/10-26.htm ] These rights, the charters detailed, were to be passed on to all heirs of the owners of the Virginia Company and therefore continue to apply... forever! The controlling members of the Virginia Company who were to enjoy these rights became known as the Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London.

*

[[For your consideration-

A man from Ireland was fishing on the Gallatin River near the mouth of the Canyon. Two teenage boys assaulted the Irishman and vandalized his truck.

Does the sheriff have any responsibility to the Irishman? Should the sheriff protect him when possible and assist him in resolving the crime, at least the reporting thereof?

Do the courts have any responsibility to the Irishman? Should they pursue and punish the offenders, if found guilty?

What about the Irishman’s pickup truck? Does he have the right to recover damages from the convicted teenagers? What if the teens have no money, should their parents be forced to pay? Imagine…

Whew! Hey, kids- good thing the guy was an Irishman, so we don’t have to pay for your folly, and his teeth. Be sure to pick on an Irishman, or maybe a China-man.

Sorry readers, My common law does not work that way. Severe crimes and civil crimes don’t respect citizenship. Criminals usually respect opportunity over politics and citizenship, and risk to reward ratio verses any grief over the poor (and stupid) victim.

The Irish victim has a right to happiness, even if he is from another planet, and has lived here for 50 years, or for 10 minutes. Justice should not care about the citizenship of the victims located within our county. We offer fair justice to ALL people within our county, irrespective of race, creed, color or place of birth, etc.

And if we would give such justice to a non-citizen from Ireland, would we give the same justice to a non-citizen from the mountains just outside of Bozeman? I would….

*

I have an inherited right to pursue happiness and live in peace upon the land known as ‘America’, the land located between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, the land south of Canada and north of Mexico, or so

I live on and enjoy the land between the Yellowstone and Bitterroot rivers, or so, outside the town of Bozeman, Montana country, that place being my ancestral home range.

I have taken notice of a certain company of “Adventurers” that have conspired to meddle with, and interrupt my pursuit of happiness. The foregoing report gives evidence of that conspiracy.

Having read and comprehended this report, take notice of my standing in Law here, and my Declaration known as “To Whom it May Concern”; composed in January of 2016.]]

*

Notes.

U.S. Supreme Court

Johnson & Graham’s Lessee v. M’Intosh

21 U.S. 543 (1823) [[in part]]…

1st. That on 23 May, 1609, James I, King of England, by his letters patent of that date, under the great seal of England, did erect, form, and establish Robert, Earl of Salisbury, and others, his associates, in the letters patent named and their successors into a body corporate and politic by the name and style of “The Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London for the first Colony in Virginia,” with perpetual succession and power to make, have, and use a common seal, and did give, grant, and confirm unto this company, and their successors,

Page 21 U. S. 544

under certain reservations and limitations in the letters patent expressed, “All the lands, countries, and territories situate, lying, and being in that part of North America called Virginia, from the point of land called Cape or Point Comfort all along the seacoast to the northward two hundred miles, and from the said Cape or Point Comfort all along the seacoast to the southward two hundred miles, and all that space and circuit of land lying from the seacoast of the precinct aforesaid up into the land throughout from the sea, west and northwest, and also all the islands lying within one hundred miles along the coast of both seas of the precinct aforesaid, with all the soil, grounds, rights, privileges, and appurtenances to these territories belonging and in the letters patent particularly enumerated, “and did grant to this corporation and their successors various powers of government in the letters patent particularly expressed.

[[PBS series” The Supreme Court”. The word “meddle” is used twice in this PBS documentary, in the relationship between the court, legislature and the executive. It also suggests that FDR was so popular that he threatened the Supreme Court to go along with his federal expansion or else, and the court obeyed.

The court allowed the federal government to regulate commerce in 1937.

One of several narrators of the documentary is Howard Gillman of the University of Southern California. Gillman comments on the battle between Supreme Court justice John Marshall and President Andrew Jackson

Marshall issued a ruling in the Cherokee Nation v Georgia case, in favor of the Cherokee Nation; Jackson favored Georgia, and refused to comply with the court order.

Jackson responded by saying that C. J. Marshall had his decision, “now let him enforce it.”

Gillman on PBS:]]

~

“the power of the court is merely the power to persuade, unless the courts’ decisions are brought to life by the rest of the political system, they’re just words.”

*

*

END OF REPORT- Humble O’Pinion Back to top * Back to COMMENT

 


Stratagem of Submission

  • ISBN: 9781311281647
  • Author: Humble O'Pinion
  • Published: 2016-02-01 21:20:10
  • Words: 18673
Stratagem of Submission Stratagem of Submission