allcreatorsgifts
Home


Message #106      Next      Previous
The Famous Credit River decision decreeing Fed notes fraud
  -  STATE OF MINNESOTA


COUNTY OF SCOTT
TOWNSHIP OF CREDIT RIVER

JUSTICE MARTIN V. MAHONEY

First National Bank of Montgomery,
Plaintiff
vs

Jerome Daly
Defendant

JUDGMENT AND DECREE

The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7,1968 at 10:00 am. Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel R. Mellby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf.

A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and sworn to try the issues in the Case. Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf.

Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19 Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8,1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time foreclosure proceedings were started.

Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8,1964 and alleged failure of the consideration for the Mortgage Deed and alleged that the Sheriffs sale passed no title to plaintiff.

The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.

Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private Bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this. Plaintiff further claimed that Defendant by using the ledger book created credit and by paying on the Note and Mortgage waived any right to complain about the Consideration and that the Defendant was estopped from doing so.

At 12:15 on December 7,1968 the Jury returned a unanimous verdict for the Defendant.

Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution of United States and the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1. That the Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.
2. That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8,1964 are null and void.
3. That the Sheriffs sale of the above described premises held on June 26,1967 is null and void, of no effect.
4. That the Plaintiff has no right title or interest in said premises or lien thereon as is above described.
5. That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute binding the jurisdiction of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the united States and to the Bill of Rights of the Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has jurisdiction to render complete Justice in this Cause.
6. That the Defendant is awarded costs in the sum of $75.00 and excecution is hereby issued therefore.
7. A 10 day stay is granted.
8. The following memorandum and any supplementary memorandum made and
filed by this Court in support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by
reference.

Dated December 9,1968
BY THE COURT
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
Justice of the Peace
Credit River Township
Scott County, Minnesota

MEMORANDUM

The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute of the facts for the Jury to resolve.

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8,1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing Company v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 NW. 558. The Jury found that there was no consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing.

Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this is no defense to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am Jur 2nd 'Actions' on page 584 - "no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party.

Plaintiffs act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful right can be built.

Nothing in the Constitution of the United States limits the jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law action. Minnesota cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit.

No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was direct and clear for the Jury. Their Verdict could not reasonably been otherwise. Justice was rendered
completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court of December 7,1968.

December 9,1968

BY THE COURT
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
Justice of the Peace
Credit River Township
Scott County, Minnesota.

Note: It has never been doubted that a Note given on a Consideration which is prohibited by law is void. It has been determined, independent of Acts of Congress, that sailing under the license of an enemy is illegal. The emission of Bills of Credit upon the books of these private Corporations for the purpose of private gain is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States and is unlawful. See Craig v. Mo. 4 Peters Reports 912. This Court can tread only that path which is marked out by duty. M.V.M.

FORWARD: The above Judgment was entered by the Court on Decemebr 9, 1968. The issue there was simple - Nothing is the law gave the Banks the right to create money on their books. The Bank filed a Notice of Appeal within 10 days. The Appeals statutes must be strictly followed, otherwise the District Court does not acquire Jurisdiction upon Appeal. To effect the Appeal the Bank had to deposit $2.00 with the Clerk within 10 days for payment to the Justice of the Peace when he made his return to the District Court. The Bank deposited two $1.00 Federal Reserve Notes. The Justice refused the Notes and refused to allow the Appeal upon the grounds that the Notes were unlawful and void for any purpose. The Decision is addressed to the legality of these Notes and the Federal Reserve System. The Cases of Edwards v. Kearnzey and Craig vs Missouriset out in the decision should be studied very carefully as they bear on the inviolability of Contracts. This is the Crux of the whole issue. Jerome Daly Jerome Daly
28 East Minnesota Street
Savage, Minn. 55378
February 7, 1969
INTRODUCTION
1.
On May 8, 1964 the writer executed a Note and Mortgage to the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota, which it a member of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Both Banks are private owned and are a part of the Federal Reserve Banking System.
In the Spring of 1967 the writer was in arrears $47.00 in the payments on this Note and Mortgage. The Note was secured by a mortgage on real property in Spring Lake Township in Scott County, Minnesota. The Bank foreclosed by advertisement and bought the property in at a Sheriff's Sale held on June 26, 1967. The writer made no further payments after June 26, 1967 and did not redeem within the 12-month period of time allotted by law after the Sheriff's Sale.
The Bank brought an action to recover the possession to the property in the justice of the Peace Court at Savage, Minnesota. The first 2 Justices were disqualified by Affidavit of Prejudice. The first by the writer and the Second by the Bank. A third one refused to handle the case. It was then sent, pursuant to law, to Martin V. Mahoney, Justice of the Peace, Credit River Township, Scott County, Minnesota, who presided at a Jury trial on December 7, 1968. The Jury found the Note and Mortgage to be void for failure of a lawful consideration and refused to give any validity to the Sheriff's Sale. Verdict was for the writer with costs in the amount d $75.00.
The president of the Bank admitted that the Bank created the money and credit upon its own books by which it acquired or gave as consideration for the Note; that this was standard banking practice, that the credit first came into existence when they created it; that he knew of no United States Statutes which gave them the right to do this. This is the universal practice of these Banks. The Justice who heard the case handed down the opinion attached and included herein. Its reasoning is sound. It will withstand the test of time. This is the first time the question has been passed upon in the United States. I predict that this decision will go into the History Books as one of the great Documents of American History. It is a huge cornerstone wrenched from the temple of Imperialism and planted as one of the solid foundation stones of Liberty.
JEROME DALY
SAVAGE, MINNESOTA
2.
The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 A.M. Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel Theodore R. Melby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf.
A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and sworn to try the issues in this Case. Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf.
Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8, 1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time foreclosure proceedings were started.
Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged that the Sheriff's Sale passed no title to Plaintiff.
The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.
Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this. Plaintiff further claimed that the defendant by using the ledger book created credit and by paying on the note and mortgage waived any right to complain about the consideration and that defendant was estopped from doing so.
At 12:15 on December 7, 1968 the jury returned a unanimous verdict for the defendant.
Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1. That Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach. Scott County, Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.
2. That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8, 1964 are null and void.
3. That the Sheriff's sale of the above-described premises held on June 26. 1967 is null and void, of no effect
4. That Plaintiff has no right, title or interest in said promises or lien thereon, as is above described.
5. That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute limiting the Jurisdiction of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and to the Bill of Rights of the Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has jurisdiction to render complete Justice in this Cause.
6. That Defendant is awarded costs in the sum of $75.00 and execution is hereby issued therefore.
7. A 10-day stay is granted.
8. The following memorandum and any supplemental memorandum made and filed by this Court in support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by reference.
MEMORANDUM
The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute or the facts for the Jury to resolve.
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated Mary 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See
Anheuser-Busch Brewing Co. v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found there was no lawful consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing.
Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this no defense to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am fur 2d "Actions" on page 584 -"no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party.
Plaintiff's act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful rights can be built.
Nothing in the constitution of the United States limits the Jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction with right of trial by jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law Action. Minnesota cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so is re1mgnant to the Constitution of the United States and void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court waS raised by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts and law to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit.
No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was made direct and clew for the Jury. Their Verdict could not reasonably have been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without dental, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court on December 7, 1968.
BY THE COURT
December 9, 1968 MARTIN V. MAHONEY
Justice of the Peace
Credit River Township
Scott County, Minnesota
Note: It has never been doubted that a Note given on a Consideration which in prohibited by law is void. It has been determined, independent of Acts of Congress, that sailing
under the License of an enemy is illegal. The emission of Bills of Credit upon the books of these private Corporations for the purposes of private gain is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States and is unlawful. See Craig v. Mo. 4 Peters Reports 912. This Court can tread only that path which is marked out by duty. M.V.M
FORWARD: The above Judgment was entered by the Court on December 9,1968. The issue there was simple. Nothing in the law gave the Banks the right to create money upon their books. The Bank filed a Notice of Appeal, within 10 days. The Appeals statutes must be strictly followed, otherwise, the District Court does not have acquired jurisdiction upon Appeal. To effect the Appeal the Bank had to deposit $2.00 with the clerk within 10 days for payment to the Justice of the Peace when he made his return to the District Court. The Bank deposited two, $1.00 Federal Reserve Notes. The Justice refused the Notes and refused to allow the Appeal upon the grounds that the Notes were unlawful and void for any purpose. The Decision is addressed to the legality of these Notes and the Federal Reserve System. The Cases of Edwards's v Kearnzey and Craig vs. Missouri set out in the decision should be studied very carefully as they bear upon the inviolability of Contracts. This is the Crux of the whole issue.
Jerome Daly
December 27, 1968
3.
Mr. Patrick Foley
United States Attorney for Minnesota
United States Court House Bldg.
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Sir:
Re: First National Bank of Montgomery
VS.
Jerome Daly
As you are on my mailing list, at your request, attached kindly find 2 copies of a decision rendered at Credit River Twp. Justice of the Peace Court on December 9, 1968 by Justice Martin V. Mahoney, who by occupation is a dirt farmer and a carpenter and who is not dependent upon the fraudulent Federal Reserve Mob for his sustenance; thus he was able to view the whole fraud, which is Global in scope, with a mind in the settled calmness of impartiality, disinterestedness, and fairness, in keeping with his oath and with a completely friendly feeling toward the Constitution of the United States of America.
In truth and in fact the Justice of the Peace Court is the highest Court in the land as it is the closest to the People. Every Judge who is dependent upon this fraudulent Federal Reserve, National and State Banking System for his sole support is disqualified because of self interest and has no jurisdiction to sit in review of this Judgment. If any Appellate Court, including the Supreme Court of the United States, in the review of this Judgment, perpetrates a fraud upon the People by defying the Constitutional Law of the United States Mahoney has resolved that he will convene another Jury in Credit River Township to try the issue of the Fraud on the part of any State or Federal Judge, and in an action on my part to recover the possession if the Jury decides in my favor, the Constable and the Citizens Militia of Credit River Township will, pursuant to the law,
deliver me back into possession. So you see this Justice of the Peace can keep the peace in Scott County, Minnesota, not with the help of these State and Federal Judges who have fled reality, but in spite of them. Thus Thomas Jefferson's prophesy with reference to Chattel Slavery once again rings true; "God's Justice will not sleep forever.".
One wonders sometimes what the United States, and its leaders, including the Shylock usury element, did to bring on a Pearl Harbor attack on December 7, 1941 with such suddenness and devestation. It could be the Judgment of a Just God giving vent to a stored wrath in retaliation to the money changers. It is ironic in deed that the Jury should return its verdict on the same day 27 years later and the National and International Banking and Oil Mob shudder in their back rooms where they have cornered the money of the World and where they sit pulling the strings; fostering, conniving and perpetrating War with profit to themselves paid for by the blood, sweat, tears and toil of the farmer, the mechanic, the laborer and the humbler members of society; and well they might tremble, for, as they listen they can hear, with ever increasing distinctness, the sound of the waves at low tide as they wash across the lonely decks of the U.S.S. Arizona with over 2,500 men entombed in her hold, with oil still seeping therefrom to the surface.
It is better to be charitable than miserly, honest than dishonest direct than indirect, upright than underhanded, intelligent than unintelligent, to have courage than be a coward, to be free than slave, in body and in mind.
I remain,
Quite Independently Yours,
P.S. Give my best wishes for a New Year to the Boys in the Back Room.
J.D.
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN JUSTICE COURT
COUNTY OF SCOTT TOWNSHIP OF CREDIT RIVER
JUSTICE:
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
First National Bank of Montgomery,
Plaintiff,
--vs-- FINDINGS OF FACT
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Jerome Daly, AND JUDGMENT
Defendant,
The above-entitled action came on before the Court on January 22, 1969 at 7:00 P.M., pursuant to Motion and Notice of Motion and order to Show Cause, as follows:
To: Plaintiff above named and to its Attorney Theodore R. Melby
Sirs:
You will please take notice that the Defendant, Jerome Daly, will move the above named Court at the Credit River Township Village Hall, Scott County, Minnesota before Justice Martin V. Mahoney at 7:00 P.M. on Wednesday, January 22, 1969 to make Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and order and Judgment refusing to allow Appeal on the grounds that the two One Dollar Federal Reserve Notes are unlawful and void and are not a deposit of Two Dollars in lawful money of the United States to perfect the Appeal, and to make the Court's refusal to allow appeal absolute.
/s/ Jerome Daly
Jerome Daly
Attorney for himself
28 East Minnesota Street
Savage, Minnesota
2. ORDER
On application of Defendant Jerome Daly, it appearing that an exigency exists because this Court is ordered to show cause at Glencoe, Minnesota on January 24, 1969 why this Court should not allow the Appeal herein, therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff appear before this Court on January 22, 1969 at 7:00 P.M. at the Credit River Town Hall, Scott County, Minnesota, and Show Cause why this Court should not, at a hearing to be held at the time when both sides will be given the opportunity to present evidence, grant the Motion and relief requested by Defendant, Jerome Daly, and why this Court's Notice of Refusal to Allow Appeal herein should not be made absolute.
Service of the above order shall be made upon Defendant, its Attorney or Agents.
BY THE COURT
/s/ Martin V. Mahoney
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
January 20, 1969
An action for the recovery of the possession of Real Property was brought before this Court for trial on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 A.M., by Jury. The decision of this Court was as follows:
JUDGMENT AND DECREE
The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 A.M. Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel Theodore R. Melby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf.
A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and sworn to try the issues in this Case. Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf.
Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8, 1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time foreclosure proceedings were started.
Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged that the Sheriff's Sale passed no title to Plaintiff.
The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.
Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this.
4
Bank of Minneapolis, another private bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this.
Plaintiff's act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eves of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful rights can be built.
Nothing in the Constitution of the United States limits the Jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law Action. Minnesota cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota, which attempt to do so are repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and are void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts and law to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit.
Plaintiff further claimed that the defendant by using the ledger book created credit and by paying on the note and mortgage waived any right to complain about the consideration and that defendant was estopped from doing so.
At 12:15 on December 7, 1968 the jury returned a unanimous verdict for the defendant.
5.
Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1. That Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach. Scott County, Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.
2. That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8, 1964 are null and void.
3. That the Sheriff's sale of the above-described premises held on June 26. 1967 is null and void, of no effect
4. That Plaintiff has no right, title or interest in said promises or lien thereon, as is above described.
5. That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute limiting the Jurisdiction of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and to the Bill of Rights of the Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has jurisdiction to render complete Justice in this Cause.
6. That Defendant is awarded costs in the sum of $75.00 and execution is hereby issued therefore.
7. A 10-day stay is granted.
6.
8. The following memorandum and any supplemental memorandum made and filed by this Court in support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by reference.
MEMORANDUM
The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute or the facts for the Jury to resolve.
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated Mary 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See
7.
Anheuser-Busch Brewing Co. v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found there was no lawful consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing.
Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this no defense to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am fur 2d "Actions" on page 584 -"no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party.
No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was made direct and clew for the Jury. Their Verdict could not reasonably have been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without dental, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court on December 7, 1968.
/s/ Martin V. Mahoney
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
December 9, 1968.
Note: It has never been doubted that a Note given on a Consideration which in prohibited by law is void. It has been determined, independent of Acts of Congress, that sailing
under the
8.
License of an enemy is illegal. The emission of Bills of Credit upon the books of these private Corporations for the purposes of private gain is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States and is unlawful. See Craig v. Mo. 4 Peters Reports 912. This Court can tread only that path which is marked out by duty. M.V.M
On January 6, 1969 this Court filed a Notice of Refusal to Allow Appeal with the Clerk of the District Court, Hugo L. Hentges, for the County of Scott and State of Minnesota, which Is as follows;
NOTICE OF RFFUSAL TO ALLOW APPEAL
TO: Hugo L. Hentges, Clerk of District Court, Plaintiff, First National Bank of Montgomery and Defendant Jerome Daly:
You will Please take Notice that the undersigned Justice of the Peace, Martin V. Mahoney, hereby, pursuant to law, refuses to allow the Appeal in the above entitled action, and refuses to make an entry of such allowance in the undersigned's Docket. The undersigned also refuses-to file in the office of the clerk of the District Court in and for Scott County, Minnesota, a transcript of all the entries made in my Docket, together with all process and other papers relating to the action and filed with me as Justice of the Peace.
The undersigned concludes and determines that M.S.A. 532.38 was not complied with within 10 days after entry of judgment in my Justice of the
9.
Peace Court. Subdivision 4 thereof requires that $2.00 shall he paid within 10 days to the Clerk of the District Court, for the use of the Justice before whom the cause was tried.
Two so-called "One Dollar" Federal Reserve Notes issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco L1278283C and Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Serial No. I80410697A were deposited with the Clerk of the District Court to be tendered to me.
These Federal Reserve Notes are not lawful money within the contemplation of the Constitution of the United States and are null and void. Further the Notes on their face are not redeemable in Gold or Silver Coin nor is there a fund set aside anywhere for the redemption of said Notes.
However, this is a determination of a question of Law and Fact by the undersigned pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota. Plaintiff is entitled to be accorded full due process of Law before the Court in this present determination not to allow the Appeal.
If Plaintiff will file a brief on the Law and the Facts with this Court within 10 days, or if Plaintiff will file an application for a full and Complete hearing before this Court on the determination, a promise at hearing will be set and if plaintiff can satisfy this Court that said Notes are lawful money issued in pursuance of and under the authority of the Constitution of the United States of America
10.
the undersigned will stand ready and willing to reverse himself in this determination.
TAKE NOTICE AND GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY.
BY THE COURT
/s/ Martin V. Mahoney
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Dated January 6, 1969
MEMO
I am bound by oath to support the Constitution of the United States and laws passed pursuant thereto and the Constitution and Laws of Minnesota not in conflict therewith. This is an important Case to both parties and involves issues, apparently, not previously decided before. It is also important to the public. The Clerk of the District Court is an officer of the Judicial Branch of the State of Minnesota. His act is the Act of the State. U. S. Constitution Article 1 Section 10 provides "No State Shall make any thing but Gold and Silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts."
The tender of the two Federal Reserve Notes runs counter to the fundamental Law of the land, the Constitution of the United States of America. It appears on the face of it that the Notes are ineffectual for any purpose and that I am not justified in taking any steps toward the allowance of an Anneal in this case.
11.
It is, however, the Order of this Court that the parties are entitled to a full hearing before this Court, and, if requested a full hearing will be granted.
Isl Martin V. Mahoney
Martin V. Mahoney
Justice of the Peace
Credit River Township
Scott County, Minnesota
January 6, 1969
Minnesota Statutes Annotated 532.38 reauired that the Appellant, First National Bank of Montgomerv deposit with the Clerk of the District Court within ten (10)days, Two ($2.00) Dollars (lawful money of the United States) for payment to the Justice of the Peace before whom the cause was tried. This is one of the conditions for the allowance of an appeal.
Two One ($1.00) Dollar Federal Reserve Notes were deposited with the Clerk of the District Court. One was issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, bearing Serial No. L12782836 and the other on deposit was issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis bearing Serial No. 1804.10697A A specimen, for illustrative purposes, is as follows:
page eleven is missing, two dollars etc
12.two dollars pictured here
13.
This Court determined that said Notes on their face were contrary to Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution of the United States and also, based upon the evidence deduced at the hearing on December 7, 1968, the Notes were without any lawful consideration and therefore were void; however, this Court indicated it would give the Plaintiff, First National Bank of Montgomery, a full and complete hearing with reference to this issue.
No hearing was requested by Plaintiff, First National Bank. This Court was ordered to show cause before the District Court. The Order to Show Cause is as follows
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF SCOTT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota,
Plaintiff,
Vs ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Jerome Daly,
Defendant.
On reading the application for an Order attached hereto, and on Motion and Affidavit of Theodore R. Mellby, Attorney for Plaintiff, due showing having been made that an exigency exists.
IT IS ORDERED, that Martin V. Mahoney, Justice of the Peace, Credit River Township, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, appear in person before the above Court at 10:00 A. M., Friday, January 17, 1969, at the Special Term of Court to be held in the Court House in the City of Shakopee, County of
14.
Scott, State of Minnesota, or as soon thereafter as counsel can he heard, to show cause why he should not file in the office of the Clerk of District Court, First Judicial District, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, a transcript of all the entries made in his docket, together with all process and other papers relating to the above identified cause of action in his possession or the possession of any other Justice of the Peace of the State of Minnesota.
LET THIS ORDER, APPLICATION FOR ORDER, AFFIDAVIT, all heretofore attached, be served on Martin V. Mahoney by leaving with him copies of the same and exhibiting this original ORDER with the signature of the Judge of District Court hereto affixed, service to be made forthwith.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Harold E. Flynn
Judge of District Court
Dated at Shakopee, Minnesota this 8th day of January, 1969
Therefore, upon Motion of Defendant Jerome Daly, this Court ordered a hearing before this Court on January 22, 1969 for the purposes of making Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Pursuant thereto, the above-entitled action came on for hearing before this Court on January 22, 1969 at 7-00 P. M. The First National Bank of Montgomery made no appearance although service of the Motion and Order was served, upon
15.
Ralph Hendrickson, its Cashier, on, January 20, 1969. No continuance was requested by Plaintiff or its Attorney.
The Defendant appeared by and on behalf of himself.
After waiting for one hour for the Bank or its representative to appear the Court received the testimony of Defendant bearing upon the issue of the validity of the Federal Reserve Notes.
Now, Therefore, based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein, and the evidence offered, this Court makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgment and Determination with reference to the allowance of an appeal
FINDINGS OP FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
JUDGMENT AND DETERMINATION
1. That the Federal Reserve Banking Corporation is a United States Corporation with twelve (12) hanks throughout the United States, including New York, Minneapolis and San Francisco. That the First National Bank of Montgomery is also a United States Corporation, incorporated and existing under the laws of the United States and is a member of the Federal Reserve System, and more specifically, of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
2. That because of the interlocking control activities, transactions and practices, the Federal Reserve Banks and the National Banks are for all practical purposes, in the law, one and the same bank.
16.
As is evidenced from the book "The Federal Reserve System: Its Purposes and functions, pages 74 to 78 and 177 and 180, put out by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, D. C., 1963, and from other evidence adduced herein, the said Federal Reserve Banks and National Banks create money and credit upon their books and exercise the ultimate Prerogative of expanding and reducing the supply of money or credit in the united states. The actual pages of the Federal Reserve Manual are reproduced herein on page 38 to 46,__ See especially page 75 of the Manual..This creation of money or credit upon the books of the Banks constitutes the creation of fiat money by bookkeeping entry.
Ninety percent or more Of the credit never leaves the books of the banks so they need produce no specie as backing
When the Federal Reserve Banks and National Banks acquire United States Bonds and Securities, mortgages on private real property and mortgages on private personal property, the said banks create the money and credit upon their books by bookkeeping entry. The first time that the money comes into existence is when they create it on their bank books by bookkeeping entry. The banks create it out of nothing. No substantial fund of gold or silver is back of it or any fund at all.
17.
The mechanics followed in the acquisition of United States Bonds are as follows: The Federal Reserve Bank places its name on a United States Bond and goes to its banking books and credits the United States Government for an equal amount of the face value of the bonds. The money or credit first comes into existence when they create it on the books of the bank. National Banks do the same except they must have One ($1.00) Dollar in Credit on hand for every Four ($4.00) Dollars they create.
The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis obtains Federal Reserve Notes in denominations of one ($1.00) Dollar, Five, Ten; Twenty, Fifty, one Hundred, Five Hundred, one Thousand, Ten Thousand, and One Hundred Thousand Dollars for the cost of the printing of each note, which is less than one cent. The Federal Reserve Bank must deposit with the Treasurer of the United States a like amount of Bonds for the Notes it receives The Bonds are without lawful consideration, as the Federal Reserve Bank created the money and credit upon their books by which they acquired the Bond. With their bookkeeping created credit, National Banks obtain these notes from the Federal Reserve Banks.
The net effect of the entire transaction is that the Federal Reserve Bank and the National Banks obtain Federal Reserve Notes comparable to the ones they placed on file with the Clerk of District Court, and a specimen of which is above, for the cost of printing only. Title 31 U.S.C., Section 462 attempts to make Federal Reserve Notes a legal
18.
tender for all debts, public and private. See page 72. From 1913 down to date, the Federal Reserve Bank and the National banks are privately owned. As of March 18,1968, all gold backing is removed from the said Federal Reserve Notes. No Gold or silver backs up these notes.
The Federal Reserve Notes in question in this case are unlawful and void upon the following grounds:
A. Said Notes are fiat money, not redeemable in cold or silver coin upon their face, not backed by gold or silver, and the notes are in want of some real or substantial fund being provided for their payment in redemption. There is no mode provided, for enforcing the payment of the same. There is no mode 1provided for the enforcement of the payment of the Notes in anything of value.
B. The Notes are obviously not gold or silver coin.
C. The sole consideration paid for the One Dollar Federal Reserve Notes is in the neighborhood of nine-tenths of one cent, and therefore, there is no lawful consideration behind said Notes.
D. That said Federal Reserve Notes do not conform to Title 12, United States Code, Sections 411 and 418. Title 31 USC, Section 462, insofar as it attempts to make Federal Reserve Notes and circulating Notes of Federal Reserve Banks and National Banking Associations a legal tender for all debts, public and private, it is unconstitutional and void, being contrary to Article 1, Section 10, of the Constitution of the
19.
United States, which prohibits any State from making anything but gold and silver coin a tender, or impairing the obligation of contracts.
Now, therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution of the United States of America and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota,
It is hereby DETERMINED, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, that the Appeals Statutes of the State of Minnesota for Civil Appeals from this Court to the District Court is not complied with within 10 days After entry of Judgment. Therefore the Appeal is not allowed by this Court and my docket so shows.
BY THE COURT
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Dated: February 5, 1969
MEMORANDUM
The applicable parts of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution are as follows:
20. 66. THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
July 4, 1776
(F. N. Thorpe, ed. Federal and State Constitution, Vol. 1, p. 3 ff. The text is taken from the version in the Revised Statutes of the United States, 1878 ed., and has been collated with the facsimile of the original as printed in the original journal of the old Congress.)
On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia introduced three resolutions, one of which stated that the "colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States." On the 10th a committee was appointed to prepare a declaration of independence; the committee consisted of Jefferson, John Adams, Franklin, Sherman and R. R. Livingston. This committee brought in its craft on the 25th of June, and on the 2nd of July, a resolution declaring independence was adopted. July 4th, the Declaration of Independence was agreed to, engrossed, signed by Hancock, and sent to the Legislatures of the States. The engrossed copy of the Declaration was signed by all but one signer on August 2. On The Declaration, see C. L Becker, The Declaration of Independence, esp. ch. v with its analysis of Jefferson's draft; II Friedenwald, The Declaration of Independence; J.H. Hazelton, Declaration of Independence; J. Sanderson, lives of the Signers to the Declaration; R. Frothingham, Rise of the Republic, ch. xi.; C.H. Van Tyne, The War of Independence, American Phase.
In Congress, July 4, 1776,
THE UNANIMOUS DECLARATION OF THE
THIRTEEN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
When, in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected
Them with one another, an to assume among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitled them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their power from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and or powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness, Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be Changed for light and transient causes, and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves, by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpation's, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it
THE DECLARATION of INDEPENDANCE
21.
is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. -Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To Prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws of Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands,
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers
He has made judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislature.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us, to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their acts of pretended legislation.
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighboring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislature, and declaring themselves invested with Power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our Seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to compleat the works of Death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy, scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
22.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions we have petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free People.
Nor have We been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpation's, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We therefore the Representatives of the untied States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the
Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemn publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
JOHN HANCOCK.
THE CONSTITUTION
OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
WE, THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, IN ORDER TO FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION, ESTABLISH JUSTICE, INSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILLITY, PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENCE, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE, AND SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY, DO ORDAIN AND ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
23. ARTICLE I
SECTION I
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States which shall consist of a Senate and a House Representatives.
SECTION 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the debt; and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout tilt United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States:
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regular the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and 011coccs against the Law of Nations:
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years,
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
24.
To exercise exclusive Legislating in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Office thereof.
SECTION 10
No State shall enter into any treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make any Thing but gold and silver coin; Tender in Payment of debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto law, or Law impairing the Obligations of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
ARTICLE III
SECTION I
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in office.
SECTION 2
The judicial Power shall extend to 211 Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States, between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the Other Cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to LAW and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
25. ARTICLE VI
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, under the Confederation.
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 judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Tests all ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
AMENDMENTS
ARTICLE I
[THE FIRST TEN ARTICLES PROPOSED 25 SEPTEMBER 1789; DECLARED IN FORCE 15 DECEMBER 1791]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress grievances.
ARTICLE V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on 2 presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, LIBEERTY, OR PROPERTY Without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
ARTICLE VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
ARTICLE IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained the people.
ARTICLE X
26.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
ARTICLE XIII
[PROPOSED I FEBRUARY 1865; DECLARED RATIFIED 18 DECFMBER 1865]
SECTION I
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
SECTION 2
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
ARTICLE XIV
[PROPOSED 16 JUNE 1865; DECLARED RATIFIED 28 JULY 1865]
SECTION I
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 division and separation of the three great powers of government, the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial, and the principle that these powers should-be forever kept separate and distinct is of vital importance to the maintenance and establishment of a free government, without which this Republic cannot possibly survive.
The particular wording of the Declaration of Independence which set up an absolute cut off with the British form of Government is contained in the first two paragraphs thereof.
Thereafter the Constitution was ordained and established as a law for the government by the People of the United States.
All legislative powers granted are vested in the Congress of the United States
27.
consisting of a House of Representatives and a Senate elected as representatives of all the people.
"Judicial power" is defined in Blacks Law Dictionary as the authority vested by Courts and Judges, as distinguished from the Executive and Legislative power.
"Cases and Controversies" is defined in Blacks' Law Dictionary "This term as used in the Constitution of the United States embraces claims or contentions of litigants brought before the Court for adjudication by regular proceedings for. the protection or enforcement of rights, or the prevention, redress, or punishment of wrongs; and whenever the claim or contention of a party takes such a form that the Judicial Power is capable of acting upon it, it has become a case or controversy. See Interstate Commerce Commission Vs. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 14 Sup. Crt. li25-, 38 Law Ed. 1047;
Smith vs. Adams 130 U.S. 1679 Supreme Court 566 32 L Ed. 895.
Under our form of government every American, individually or by representation is the high and supreme sovereign authority. The authority of each of the three departments of government is defined and established.
It is entirely fitting and proper to observe that in all instances between the states and the United States and the people, there is no such thing as the idea of a compact between the people on one side and the government on the other. The compact is that of the people with each other to produce and constitute a government.
To suppose that any government can be a party to a compact with the whole people, is supposing it to have an existence before it can have a right to exist.
28.
The only instance in which a compact can take place between the people and those who exercise the government, is that the people shall pay them, while they choose to employ them.
A Constitution is the property of the' nation and more specifically of the individual, and not those who exercise the government. All the Constitutions of America are d




allcreatorsgifts
Home