The Informer Documents
Writings by the Informer
BANKING
Gold and How it is Manipulated
IS THIS WHAT MAKES YOU SUBJECT TO INCOME TAX?
So You Think the U.S. Still Has a Treasury
The Entire Patriot Community is Deficient in Knowledge
GOVERNMENT
HISTORY Not Now Taught in Public Schools The Cover Up of the Truth
What the Pope thought about his corporation in 1891
The Vatican Controls America and YOU
Cannon law in America Applies to all Citizens
America's Real History Not Taught
Government Fraud A Short Synopsis
CITIZENSHIP BY TREATY
The Bill of Rights Fraud Part two
WHY DOES THE STATE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER ME?
The Bill of Rights Fraud Part I
JURISDICTION & THE FIRST JUDICIARY ACT
WAS WASHINGTON, D.C. A STATE THEN? IS WASHINGTON, D.C. A STATE NOW?
OATHS OF OFFICE
1868 Inaugural Speech of Governor Worth
When was State Sovereignty Lost?
The Informer Addendum
Congress has no jurisdiction to levy an income tax
Congress ultimate administrator of the courts
AN END TO THE DEBATE ON THE 16TH?
WOW- The real 1930 Geneva Convention Books
Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States - 1930
Common man never created the constitution
The myth of the term Law of the Land
State, United States. Includes
This is not conjecture, this is not myth, etc
PHONE TAX
COMMON SENSE
HISTORY of the BRITISH SUBJECTS
IF YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND THIS YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS PROTESTING GOVERNMENT
SO YOU REALLY WANT A REPUBLIC?
How the government got you in its clutches, slave
YOU WANTED TO BE A CITIZEN - SO WHY COMPLAIN?
Black's Law Dictionary is a "Specialty" Dictionary
How you are controlled by private corporations
Merry Go Round
Are you a member of a community?
TAXES
Sometimes Criminals Speak Truth
THE 1913 INCOME TAX FRAUD
WHAT DOES FEDERAL REALLY MEAN
True Nature of Withholding Tax 1942 Revenue Act
What To Present Administratively That You Have No Income
Why All States Depend on Federal Determination to Tax You
The why's and wherefore's of the tax system
Tax Series #8-IRS not authorized to file Fed Tax Liens
Tax Series #9-Security and Money
1998 List of IRS sections affected
Person
Person Pollock v Farmers Loan and Trust
WAR/EMERGENCY POWERS
The genesis of the emergency / war powers ACT
War Powers in America today
The question is why?
SOCIAL SECURITY
Congress is the Beneficiary of the SS
When is a Social Security Number not a Social Security Number AND Will the real Beneficiary please stand up
The Liability Statute Imposing the SS Tax
The History of the American Bar
The Bar in America - Part I
Introductory - Law Without Lawyers - Part II
Lawyers in the Seventeenth Century - Part III
The Colonial Bar of Virginia and Maryland - Chapter II
Colonial Massachusetts Bar -Chapter III
Colonial New York, Pennsylvania & New Jersy Bar - Chapter IV
Colonial Southern Bar - Chapter V
New England Colonial Bar - Chapter VI
The Law & Lawyers in England in the Eighteenth Century-Chapter VII
Early American Barristers, & Bar Associations - Chapter IX
Part II - Federal Bar -Chapter X
The Federal Bar and Law, 1789-1815-Chapter XI
The Federal Bar & the Law, 1815-1830-Chapter XV
The Federal Bar & Law - 1830-1860 - Chapter XVI
The Progress of the Law - 1830-1860 - Chapter XVII
The Rise of Railroad & Corporation Law - Chapter XVIII
Admiralty
Addendum to "The New History of America"
Padleford Case & Standing
Admiralty Rules
Admiralty in Tax Cases
1868 Inaugural Speech of Governor Worth
The Informer
The below is each page as scanned in of the 1868 Inaugural Speech of Governor Worth who was appointed by the PresidentBalthough he says elected in his speech, thereby ousting the then elected present north carolina governor. Worth was a straight military man. Please note the passage where Worth says the Congress gives us rights. He does not say God or unalienable rights. Sincerely, ****************** INAUGURAL Gentlemen of the Senate and of the House of Commons: Doc. No. 25 |
When was State Sovereignty Lost?
The Informer
Prelude I must start out with this prelude after writing the article below on sovereignty loss. I realized that people have not understanding of sovereignty and others that still control this land and people. This is similar to the Wizard of Oz after the curtain was lifted to just who the Wizard was. The curtain has not been lifted enought for the people of America to see. To be absolutely correct on sovereignty, the people of 1776 to the present, have never been sovereign, period. Because the United States is a controlled corporation of the Crown, the people could never have been sovereign. All the people did, after the so-called revolutionary war, was trade the Corporation of England to be controlled by the Corporation of the States. These were plantation colonies of the Crown in corporate structure before the planned war. Those agents of the Crown, the founding father lawyers, controlled by the middle and inner temples of the Crown, took control of the states (colonies) in the 1787 contract/covenant/constitution. So technically and legally, and even lawfully, the common people like yu and I have never been sovereign. Think about it and reflect on what I say. When Governor Caswell of north carolina immediately eliminated the quitrent tax of the Crown and laid a property tax on the people and land, after becoming the first Governor, how on earth were the people sovereign? If they were sovereign there would be no way to lay a property tax and take that property if the people did not pay this tax. This happened in every state at that time, proving people were still controlled and were not sovereign. The article below was written with the mindset that all people have an understanding that the myth of sovereignty existed in this country for the common people. When was State Sovereignty Lost? The real beginnings of the demise of State sovereignty was 1787 with the erection of the US Constitution. The 1791 debacle of Washington was the second attack and the third started in earnest circa 1819 with the Bank case of McCulloch v Maryland. You have to know that Justice Marshall was a major stock holder in that bank with 7700 shares and was declared a Aforeign stockholder." Yes, he was a Federal US judge and "citizen" of the U.S., but the bank was the foreign controlled Exchequer of England. That's why he was deemed a Aforeign stockholder." To rule contrary to his decision would have put his stock in peril. Money rules, correct? It does today and it did then. Eastern and Northern States almost unanimously praised the decision of McCulloch. "A deadly blow has been struck at the Sovereignty of the States, and from a quarter so far removed from the people as to be hardly accessible to public opinion ....We are awfully impressed with a conviction that the welfare of the Union has received a more dangerous wound than fifty Hartford Conventions, hateful as that assemblage was, could inflict . . . and which may be wielded to destroy the whole revenues and so do away with the Sovereignties of the States." The Richmond Enquirer said: "If such a spirit as breathes on this opinion is forever to preside over the judiciary, then indeed it is high time for the State to tremble; that all their great rights may be swept away one by one, that those sovereign States may dwindle into paltry and contemptible corporations." Please note above that the states were corporations, not that they were going to be. They were corporations of the Crown in the newly formed King's government named the States and United States. They were absorbed under the U.S. Constitution and became members of the Motherland corporation. This goes with exactly what was stated in James Montgomery's works on the Crown controlling. Wizard, if you so wish to see after the curtain raising. In 1821, the great question of State Sovereignty was again the important subject before the Court; and on March 3-5 Marshall rendered his opinion in Cohens v. Virginia (6 Wheaton, 264), reaffirming the supreme power of the Court to review decisions of the State courts in criminal as well as civil proceedings. Philip P. Barbour I and Alexander Smythe appeared for the State of Virginia, and William Pinkney and David B. Ogden for the plaintiff. Niles' Register said, March 17, 1821: On July 7, 1821, Niles' Register said: Of the criticism on the case, Marshall wrote to Story, Corruption of the courts ran rampant then as it does now, only not quite as bad as now; see the next case. You can also see that Washington was a corporation then, as it always has been via the Crown's control. This just bears out what James has and I have, on the corporate structure, via our researched documents. Jefferson's views of the opinion were vigorously expressed by him two years later in a letter to Judge William Johnson, June 12, 1823: The most alarming effect of the opposition to the strong centralizing tendency of the Supreme Court opinions was the steady increase of propositions to limit the powers of that Court by legislation or constitutional amendment. Those who favored such measures pointed to the fact that between 1809 and 1822 the Court had exercised its power to declare unconstitutional, in whole or in part, nine statutes in eight States (Georgia, New Jersey, Virginia, New Hampshire, New York, Maryland, Louisiana and Pennsylvania). Jefferson wrote, January 19, 1821: On September 2, 1821, he wrote: "To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions, is very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is 'boni judices est amplifcare jurisdictionem,' and their power the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible as the other functionaries are to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots." Well, this is a revelation for those of you that just love the Supreme Court in all it's corruption. We researchers have known this for a long time and they have become despots as have all other bar member judges. On December 25, 1820, Jefferson had written to Thomas Ritchie: And again, on March 4, 1823, he wrote: "There is no danger I apprehend so much as the consolidation of our government, by the noiseless and therefore unalarming instrumentality of the Supreme Court." Already in 1807-1809, soon after the Burr trial, attempts had been made in each branch of Congress to amend the Constitution so that all judges should hold office for a term of years and be removable by the President on address by two-thirds of both Houses. This proposition was supported by resolves of the Legislatures of Pennsylvania and Vermont, as well as by the actions of the House of Delegates in Virginia and one branch of the legislature of Tennessee.. Well there you have it, the board of directors of the corporations of Washington and States are just doing what corporate officers want. Now comes the proof as to why you all are part of these corporations that James and I have stated over and over - - that citizenship is the bane of man, whether state or United States. Go ahead and vote . But, as Lysander Spooner said, it is a vote thrown to the winds and also snares you into their corporation as you vote for the CEO of that corporation as a "stockholder." If you don't believe me read on and you make the decision because corporate citizenship did not start with the 14th amendment, much to your surprise. One other decision of the United States Supreme Court during this period had immense effect on the growth of modern corporate commerce. Now remember people, the states and United States are corporations as stated above. An inhabitant is a resident -- is a citizen of that corporation and deemed an artificial character. Just look at the case of the United States v Penelope , Fed. Case 27 no. 16024 in my book The New History of America, page 69. "Inhabitant" and "resident" mean the same thing so said the court. Now you ask how did I become an artificial? By joint venture. This is also found in my New History at pages 10, 11, 21, 31,46, 47, 56, 69, 70, 75 and 90 because it is the lynchpin to your problems. Pull the N.C. Supreme court case 207 N.C. 831; 178 S.E. 587. In here is the explanation as to why they can tax you. In 1853, in Marshall v. Baltimore and Ohio R. R. (16 Howard, 314) it was held that there was a conclusive presumption of law that all the shareholders were citizens of the State of incorporation; and this was further strengthened by a decision in 1857, in Covington Drawbridge Co. v. Shepherd (20 Howard, 227) that parties were to be held estopped from denying such citizenship. Although talking about railroad the same principle applies to states. As stated above, irrefutably, Washington is a corporation and has citizens. States are corporations and have citizens. Are you a citizen of either? Are you then in a "joint venture"? Do you claim to be a "resident" or "inhabitant?" Are you then a "person" by association with either corporation? Is this word in the definition of 26 U.S.C. 7701 (a) (1)? Therefore, under this rinciple a "U.S. citizen" is a citizen of the incorporating United States and that is why in 26 U.S.C 7701 (a) 39 it states what it does. Are you starting to get the picture? Not quite? Well read this as printed in my book. Under "joint-venture" principle all people who are "citizens of the State" are United States citizens, and are in contract with the State in its corporate capacity. Therefore, if and when they buy property privately from the United States it does revert back to the State. They are only holding the property of the State in a fiduciary capacity paying rent in the form of an ad valorem tax. This is where the government has conned us again. It is a vicious cycle. Therefore, the U.S. can tax the fiduciary holding State property because they are citizens, or joint-venturers, with the State in its corporate capacity. This is because the states are nothing more than "Districts" of the U.S. [as stated in my book when quoting the 1868 Inaugural address of Governor Holden of north carolina at page 10] and due to the War Powers Act they are also "agents of the federal government." This was discovered by Dr. Eugene Schroder in the "Health and Human Service Acts" of the states. This allows the U.S. to seek out and tax its subjects, people claiming "citizenship" of the state, for they are also U.S. citizens by congress' definition of "individual," See 5 USC 552a A 2. Definition of Joint venture found in N.C. Supreme court case 207 N.C. 831; 178 S.E. 587 "In order to constitute a joint venture, a joint enterprise, or common purpose there must be an agreement [your claim of citizenship and/or registering to vote for the CEO] to enter into an undertaking in respect of which the parties have a community of interest and a common purpose for its performance. [don't all citizens have a common interest?] * * * End of quoting my book at page 10 and 11. These decisions not only opened the door wide to interstate commerce by corporations, but they were of vast importance in breaking down the barriers sought to be erected by the political supporters of the narrow States' Rights doctrines, and in increasing the strength of the Federal power. For interesting articles on this subject see A Legal Fiction with its Wings Clipped, by S. E. Baldwin, in Amer. Law Review, Vol. XLI (1907). Abrogation of Federal Jurisdiction, by Alfred Russell, Harv. Law Review, Vol. VII (1892). Corporate Citizenship a Legal Fiction, by R. M. Benjamin, Albany Law Journal, Vol. LXIX (1907). Well that's about enough for you to absorb and please check this out as I am not perfect. Sincerely, |
Subcategories
Banking Article Count: 8
Government Article Count: 46
Geneva Convention Article Count: 14
Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States - 1930
Phone Tax Article Count: 2
COMMON SENSE Article Count: 18
Taxes Article Count: 20
WAR/EMERGENCY POWERS Article Count: 3
Social Security Article Count: 3
The History of the American Bar Article Count: 16
Admiralty Article Count: 4
Page 7 of 60