Articles
Cases
Donate
Please consider supporting the lifetime research of Lee Brobst with a charitable donation. Thank you. |
Written by Lee Brobst
lee.eagleeye.brobst@gmail.com
Updated August 7, 2010
THE PREMABLE, ARTICLE VI—LAND PATENTS AND ALLODIAL TITLES
The following writing is of the greatest importance because it deals with the very
heart and soul of United States of America, the landed estates.
The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution reads:
“We the People in order to form a more perfect Union . . . .”, under public law.
The term “People” as used in the Preamble does not mean or include a strawman; a
14th amendment citizen subject and beneficiary to the public debt. Nor does the term
“People” mean “other property” as noted in O’Donoghue v. United States 289 US 516
(1933).
Strawman as a fictitious person, specifically one that is weak or flawed. . .
.. A third party used in some transactions as a temporary transferee to allow the
principal to accomplish something that is otherwise impossible. Compare with
Dummy. From Blacks Law Dict. 8th edition at p. 1461. [Bold underline emphasis
added].
My Comments: It was not the intent in the letter and strict meaning of the Constitution
under Article I Section 10 under public law to have the People in the Union of states
go bankrupt; and have a third party such as private world bankers come in and
reinsure what is now a federation of states; and not a Union of states. Beneficiaries
to the public debt have allowed the impossible to happen.
Article VI to the U.S. Constitution to wit:
- “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made
in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under
the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and
the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the
Constitution or Laws of an State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” [Bold
underline emphasis added]
things.
More on Treaties are covered later in the writing. The next word to deal with is
“Thing”.
- Things. “The object of dominion or property as contradistinguished from
(persons). The object of a right; i.e., whatever is treated by the law as the
object over which one person exercises a right, and with reference to which
another person lies under a duty.” Black’s Law Dict. 5th ed. [Court decisions
omitted]
Things. “Such permanent objects, not being persons, as are sensible, or
perceptible through the senses. Things are distributed into three kinds: (1)
things real or immovable, comprehending land, tenements, and hereditaments;
(2) things personal or movable, comprehending goods and chattels; and (3)
things mixed, partaking of the characteristics of the two former, as a title-deed,
a term for years. The civil law divided things into corporeal and incorporeal.”
Black’s Law Dict. 5th ed.
My Comments: As a non beneficiary to the public trust, that person has a right to
exercise his or her absolute ownership and control over his or her property, both
movables and immovable‟s and all things that are capable of ownership without
government interference.
“Corporeal—A term descriptive of such things as have an objective, material
existence; … There is a distinction between „corporeal‟ and „corporal.‟ The former
term means 'possessing a body,' that is, tangible, physical, material; … Corporeal
denotes the nature or physical existence of a body, i.e., the Constitution of U.S.,
and allodial land and Land Patents; corporal denotes its exterior or the co-
ordination of it with some other body, i.e., public policies unincorporated
association of “persons”, with no Charter of incorporation; a debt res;
strawman; 14th amendment citizens of the public trust. Hence we speak of
„corporeal hereditaments,‟ … . “Hereditaments—Things capable of being inherited,
be it corporeal or incorporeal, real, personal, or mixed; … .” “Incorporeal
Hereditaments—Anything, the subject of property, which is inheritable and not
tangible or visible. A right issuing out of a thing corporate (whether real or personal)
or concerning or annexed to or exercisable within the same. A right growing out of, or
concerning, or annexed to, a corporeal thing, but not the substance of the thing.”
Black’s Law Dict. 5th ed. [Italics emphasis added] Rights are intangible and not
visible that issue out of a thing, the corporate Charter called the
Constitution of United States that has its headquarters in Washington D.C.
Blue print is my comments.
Through Treaties, one sovereign, the United States, purchased territory from
another sovereign such as the Louisiana Purchase from Spain. Because the
privileges and immunities of Life, Liberty, and Property stem from the allodial land
and Land Patents as granted by the People are inheritable from one generation to
another. In other words, the People granted themselves privileges and immunities
growing out of the corporate Union of states that includes all the Constitutional Rights
without Government interference. All those rights stemmed from the landed estates
of the Union of states as incorporated into the U.S. Constitution through Treaties
from the People as sovereign individuals, the supreme law of the land. This is
why in the past, only land owners could vote. Those who did not have land, still
enjoyed the same privileges and immunities as land owners.
What you have just read you will not find on so called patriot websites. They are like
parrots, they mimic each other when they read something the other guy wrote, then
say to themselves, Oh! that sounds good so I‟ll use it. They read words they have
absolutely no comprehension as to what those words mean, then the illusions of their
mind comes into play, then they form their own conclusions as to what those words
mean. In other words, they become the judge, jury, and executer as to what it says.
Their attitude is, there is no need to delve into the history where and how the
Constitution was put together or what the words really mean, after all, they have all
the answers in that the Constitution is absolute garbage and doesn‟t apply to them.
They do the same thing with the Bible and never bother to study Strong‟s
Concordance then go to a law dictionary and other such educational materials such
as, “Dictionary of Word Origins” by Joseph T. Shipley, 1945,1995, Barnes and Noble
books or other books to find answers. As regards the Bible, It‟s always been my
contention that the Bible is a history book of the law.
The patriots with their brand of Gobbledygook are representative of a “Nation of
Men” that want to force their brand of religious hocus-pocus on everybody else. In
fact and in law that is exactly what is happening to the nation of 14th amendment
citizens. They are being controlled by the elect, and only the elect can make a profit
on the backs of their reprobate debtor slaves serving time for a debt that can never
be paid that becomes more oppressive every day. The oppression stems from the
interest on the debt/credit (compelled performance) on something that never existed
in the first place. Said interest keeps growing every day. Tom Jefferson said, if a
group of private bankers start issuing our money, it will take mankind 2000 years to
throw off such tyranny. See The Big Wall Street Banks Have Found A New Way To
Strangle The American People: Predatory Property Tax Collection
"First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did
not speak out
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not
one of them, so I did not speak out;
Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoller, 1892-1984
To compel a person to “discharge” a debt in lieu of “payment” carries with that
discharge a future obligation to an unincorporated association that operates outside
the protection of the United States Constitution.
- There is a distinction between a “debt discharged” and a “debt paid.” When
discharged the debt still exists though divested of its character as a legal
obligation during the operation of the discharge. Something of the original
vitality of the debt continues to exist which may be transferred, even though
the transferee takes it subject to its disability incident to the discharge. The
fact that it carries something which may be a consideration for a new promise
to pay, so as to make an otherwise worthless promise a legal obligation, makes
it the subject of transfer by assignment. Stanek v. White, 172 Minn. 390, 215 N.
W. 784.
Forced and prohibited associations. Membership in a group cannot be
conditioned on the individual's acceptance of the group's philosophy.
Otherwise, First Amendment rights are required to be exchanged for the
group's attitude, philosophy, or politics. I do not see how that is permissible
under the Constitution. Since neither Congress nor the state legislatures can
abridge those rights, they cannot grant the power to private groups to abridge
them. As I read the First Amendment, it forbids any abridgment by government
whether directly or indirectly. Justice Douglas concurring majority in
International Association of Machinists v. Street 367 U.S. 740 (1961).
That said elect are lunatics that have control of the unincorporated association called
public policy that are blinded by mind manipulation that compels consumption of their
materialism under corporate communism; that is contrary to a person who looks
inwardly to a new dimension to solve problems instead of looking outwardly to
something or somebody.
At the signing of the “Declaration of Independence” in 1776, the colonists abolished
the feudal land titles of the King of England, and established the allodial land titles as
noted in Wallace v. Harmstad 44 Pa 492, (1863). Those land titles were eventually to
become the heart and soul of the corporate U.S. of America in Washington D.C. as
noted by the Supreme Court to wit:
- The following is very important to understand and is why Red letter underling is
used as emphasis on what the Court said.
“In the District clause, unlike the territorial clause, there is no mere
linking of the legislative processes to the disposal and regulation of the
public domain-the landed estates of the sovereign-within which
transitory governments to tide over the periods of pupilage may be con-[289
US 516, 539] stituted, but an unqualified grant of permanent legislative power
over a selected area set apart for the enduring purposes of the general
government, to which the administration of purely local affairs is obviously
subordinate and incidental. The District is not an 'ephemeral'
subdivision of the 'outlying dominion of the United States,' but the
capital-the very heart-of the Union itself, to be maintained as the
'permanent' abiding place of all its supreme departments, and within which
the immense powers of the general government were destined to be
exercised for the great and expanding population of forty-eight states, and for
a future immeasurable beyond the prophetic vision of those who designed and
created it.” O'Donoghue v. United States 289 US 516, 539, (1933). [bold red
underline emphasis added].
For a more detailed explanation in law, of the “territorial clause”, see the expanded
version of O’Donoghue as detailed in “Dose of Reality”, or “Are You Subject To”. The
“legislative processes” of the “District clause” cannot invade those persons who
live under the corporate Charter called the Constitution of United States. The
corporate Government in Washington D.C. cannot attack its creator, the People. It is
absolutely impossible under a “nation of laws”, not of men.
The “public domain-the landed estates of the sovereign” refers to the “People”
that created the Land Patents and allodial land titles that are to remain “permanent”.
The “People” of the “Union” of states with their Treaty powers created the landed
estates of the Municipal Corporate territory called Washington, District of Columbia.
Said corporate powers shall remain “permanent” as it relates to the “general
government,” under public law, i.e., enumerated powers under Article I.
- “. . . we can be at no loss to comprehend the intention of the framers of the
Constitution in using all these words, "treaty," "compact," "agreement." The
word "agreement," does not necessarily import any direct and express
stipulation; nor is it necessary that it should be in writing. If there is a verbal
understanding to which both parties have assented and upon which both are
acting, it is an "agreement." And the use of all of these terms, "treaty,"
"agreement," "compact," show that it was the intention of the framers of the
Constitution to use the broadest and most comprehensive terms.” Holmes v.
Jennison, 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 540 (1840).
members of an unincorporated association.
Concerning the phrase, “The District is not an 'ephemeral' subdivision of the
outlying dominion of the United States.” According to “The American Heritage
Dictionary”, Ephemeral. “Lasting for a brief time, fleeting.” So the Union does not
exist as “a territory” in a fleeting moment of the spirit of the Constitution located in
Baltimore Maryland; but as a permanent landed estate in “the territory” of 10 square
miles in Washington, D.C. under the letter and strict meaning of the Constitution, i.e.,
public law. For more information on Baltimore Maryland, See “Dose of Reality” at www.
truthinlaw.net
Regarding the term “local affairs” we go to the milestone decision of Erie RR v.
Tompkins 304 US 64, (1938); that overruled the era of Swift v. Tyson 16 Peters 1,
(1842-1938). First of all, you must take note of the years these court decisions were
decided. During the era of Swift the People issued their own money that came from
their landed estates. In other words, the People extracted the gold and silver from
their grounded property, and gave the substance to the U. S. Mint where the mint
minted that gold and silver into coins. In that process the Government guaranteed
the weight and fineness, then the people spent those coins into circulation. That
money was public money for private debt. There were no third parties involved. The
People had a free enterprise system of trade. In other words, there was no compelled
performance to the federal or state governments. The People were sovereign in their
own right. For a more detailed explanation on the money, see “Are You Subject To”
at www.truthinlaw.net. The Erie decision was based upon the fact that the People
gave up their public money for public debt on June 5, 1933 with HJR 192, because
the People signed contracts for future delivery for the payment of gold than there
was gold in the U.S. Treasury. In other words, the nation went bankrupt. The result of
the bankruptcy caused international bankers to come in and reinsure the debt that
was now being created. As a result of the bankruptcy, with HJR 192, the era of Swift
with its general commercial common law was set aside as noted and declared by
Erie, to wit:
“Experience in applying the doctrine of Swift v. Tyson had revealed its defects,
political and social, and the benefits expected to flow from the rule did not accrue.
Persistence of state courts in their own opinions on questions of common law
prevented uniformity; and the impossibility of discovering a satisfactory line of
demarcation between the province of general law and that of local law developed a
new well of uncertainties.
In other words, the term “political and social” means there was a change from
public money for private debt to private money for public debt. The nation was now
officially bankrupt passing debt and credit as money that has stolen all your liberties
and freedoms; NOT under the general powers of government as incorporated in the
Union of states under Article IV Sec. 3 cl.1 of the master Charter called the
Constitution of United States with its letter and strict meaning; but under local law as
espoused under the unincorporated association under Article IV Sec. 3 cl.2 with its
spirit of the law interpretation. In other words, there is the public law side and the
private law side of the Constitution.
On the other hand, the mischievous results of the state doctrine had become
apparent. Swift v. Tyson Diversity of citizenship jurisdiction was conferred in order to
prevent apprehended discrimination in state courts against those not citizens of
introduced grave discrimination by noncitizens against citizens. It made rights
enjoyed under the unwritten "general law" vary according to whether enforcement
was sought in the state [304 U.S. 75] or in the federal court, and the privilege of
selecting the court in which the right should be determined was conferred upon the
noncitizen. Thus, the [Swift] doctrine rendered impossible equal protection of the
law. [See 14th amendment] In attempting to promote uniformity of law throughout
the United States, [federated states] the [Swift] doctrine had prevented uniformity
in the administration of the law of the State.”
Under local law or “a territory”; as opposed to what was termed “the territory”.
“Uniformity of law” means dividing the wealth equally.
It was Marshall, in McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat (US) 316, (1816) who said:
- “The power of creating a corporation, though appertaining to sovereignty, is
not, like the power of making war, or levying taxes, or of regulating
commerce, a great substantive and independent power which cannot
be implied as incidental to other powers, or used as a means of
executing them. It is never the end for which other powers are
exercised, but a means by which other objects are accomplished.”
Quoted in Luxton v. North River Bridge Co., 153 US 525, 529, upholding a
Congressional corporation of a bridge company to build a bridge over the
North River between New York and New Jersey.
commerce”, a great substantive and independent power which cannot be
implied as incidental to other powers, or used as a means of executing
them.”
That statement by Justice Marshall was made under the letter and strict meaning of
the Constitution. How much simpler does a person need to understand what has
been said by the Court? The “People” owe absolutely nothing to the government,
state or federal unless you have volunteered. Eternal vengeance is the price of
freedom.
The so called patriots are absolutely lying through their teeth when they tell you the
corporate United States is the enemy. The next time you hear one of those gurus
espouse such lies, you be sure to tell them to produce a memorandum of law in
support of their statements. All you will receive from them is silence. You cannot let
these people get away with such lies. Their destroying a lot of peoples‟ lives with
such garbage.
The 13 original colonies derived their allodial titles from the People who fought the
Revolution to establish the fact that the People were in fact and in law the supreme
rulers of themselves, and the Treaties they the people created for themselves. It was
not the U.S. Constitution or the state Constitutions that created the Treaty powers. It
was the People who did so long before those documents ever existed. After the
formation of the federal Government, the nation started to expand with the purchase
of new territories. As a result of the purchases of the new land, Congress passed the
Act of June 19, 1834 to pass those allodial titles to the territories through a physical
document called a “Land Patent” that made the new landed territory allodial. The
person who had that Land Patent issued to him by the federal Government was the
complete and total owner absolute with no overlords as noted in Wallace v.
Harmstad, 44 Pa 492.
- What Pennsylvanian ever obtained his lands by "Openly and-humbly kneeling
before his lord, being un-grit, uncovered, and holding up his hands together
between those of the lord, who sat before him, and there professing that he
did become his man from that day forth, for life and limb, and earthly honor,
and then receiving a kiss from his lord? - This was the oath of fealty which was,
according to Sir Marlin Wright, the essential feudal bond so necessary to the
very notion of a feud.”
v. Jackson 36 US 498 (1839).
- “We hold the true principle to be this -- that whenever the question in any
court, state or federal, is whether a title to land which had once been the
property of the United States has passed, that question must be resolved by
the laws of the United States; but that whenever, according to those laws, the
title shall have passed, then that property, like all other property in the state, is
subject to state legislation so far as that legislation is consistent with the
admission that the title passed and vested according to the laws of the United
States.”
Not only does Article VI pertain to the issue of immovable‟s such as land, it also
includes movables such as your person as noted:
- The inhabitants of the [34 U.S. 235] ceded territory shall be incorporated in the
Union of the United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the
principles of the federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights,
advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States, and in the
meantime they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their
liberty, property, and the religion which they profess. New Orleans v. De
Armas, 34 U.S. (9 Pet.) 224 (1835).
citizens of the other Union of states that includes his or her name and title.
- Name. It is the distinctive characterization in word by which one is known and
distinguished from another, and description, or abbreviation, is not the
equivalent of a “name”. Black’s Law Dict. 5th ed.
Title. A mark, style, or designation; a distinctive appellation; the name by which
anything is known. Thus, in the law of persons, a title is an appellation of
dignity or distinction, a name denoting the social rank of the person bearing it;
as “Duke” or “count”. Black’s Law Dict. 5th ed.
that designates your social rank as a fictitious “person”. Said “person” being a
member of an unincorporated association enjoying limited liability for the payment of
debt residing in “a territory” under the spirit of the law; as opposed to having the
protection of the letter and strict meaning of the Constitution with all its privileges and
immunities under the name of John Harvey Doe.
In other words, the People of the Union of states that created the Congress was
bound by the Treaty powers (contract) under Article VI to give out a number of acres
of land to any person who was willing to take on the newly acquired territories. Said
Territories were granted by Treaty and have the same land status as the 13 original
colonists. The Louisiana Purchase was a Treaty or contract made by the People of
the Union of states that was made permanent as noted in O’Donoghue v. United
States 289 US 516 (1933). That Treaty or contract superseded the laws of the state
and the U.S. Constitution to reflect that the People are the supreme power and
cannot be changed by lunatics on patriot websites that scream, show me where the
people signed anything that enacted the Constitution. Facts in the law prove those
patriot websites are spewing out nothing but garbage. If those idiots behind those
websites had their way, the whole nation would be a nation of men and not of laws
that was the very cause of the American Revolution. What is bizarre about the so
called patriot community is, they would not be able to own land and the freedoms and
liberties they could have, and yet they hate the Treaties, the very thing that gave
those idiots what they have or are able of acquiring. One thing is for certain, if it
wouldn't be for the Treaties, they would be a serf under a corporate monster headed
up by the likes of the greedy convicted criminal, Ken Lay of Enron fame. That
corporate monster with no government as watch dog is knocking on the door, but you
do have a choice. A person must rid themselves of all their illusions the way you think
things are, or the way they things should be.
- “The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a
government of laws and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high
appellation if the laws furnish no remedy for the violation of a vested legal
right.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803).
minute the people would have signed anything concerning the establishment of the
state or U.S. Constitutions, the state and federal governments would automatically
have jurisdiction over them. The People created the Charter termed the corporate
United States to be established in the 10 mile square area under Article I Sec. 8. Said
Charter contains the powers of Government. If it‟s not listed there, Government does
not have the power. There is no better example than the issue of taxes, state or
federal whereby those people who signed any tax forms, in the past or present that
created a contract with said governments, not on the public law side; but the private
law side under the 14th amendment. Otherwise, there is absolutely nowhere in the
federal or state constitutions that compels the people to perform to either the state or
federal governments. That performance does not exist unless that person has
volunteered by signing some kind of government form, to receive a benefit or
privilege. If a Person finds that the state or federal Government has violated the said
constitutions, it is their duty to do something about it.
- “It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into
error….it is the function of the people to keep the government from falling into
error”. American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 US 382 at 442,
443, 444). (1950).
Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 USC 1602-1611.
©
ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN IN THIS WORLD, YOU‟RE GOING
TO GET WHAT YOU ARE WILLING TO PUT UP WITH.
Lee Brobst truthinlaw.net
