"Those who say it cannot be done
should not interfere with those of us who are doing it"© - S.
Hickman

Home

Against the
Grain Press
Loss of Liberty Revealed

Working
Tommy
C.

Livid
Leigh

Boilin'
Ed

D. Tom

The
Informer

Knowledge is
Freedom

Privacy

Links

Court
Case

Contact Us

© 1994 - 2009
Against
the Grain

Knowledge is Freedom

COMMON LAW
VS.CONQUEST

Chapter
5

The forefathers that represented the states (colonies) at the
beginning of this country acted primarily for their interest, this
is brought out by Lysander Spooner, in his paper on "The
Constitution of no Authority". They represented the states,
formally the colonies, which were created by the king of England, by
his Charters and his established Cestui Que Trust. The 1783 Peace
Treaty ceded the land above ground to the states, while reserving
through Article 6 of the 1783 Treaty his corporation, and the
corporations of his British subjects. As I have said before, if you
will look at other charters you will see the king is very specific
when he gives land by grant, or charter to his subjects. If the king
had meant to give the minerals to the states he would have said so
very clearly in the 1783 Peace Treaty. The 1783 Peace Treaty is void
of any such grant. The king did not relinquish his claim for his
heirs and successors, nor could he; his tax was to continue forever,
for his expenditure in starting America Inc. This condition does tie
together with what happened post Civil War, the king's interest,
continued to be observed and a tax collected.

In a few of the below quotes you will see Lysander Spooner will
answer a synopsis on how the common law is supposed to work, but at
the same time, his arguments are flawed. Not that he is wrong, but
he fails to take into account, Charters, Treaties and Conquest. To
show a comparison between Lysander Spooner's view on how the law is
supposed to work, I am including after his quotes, quotes from the
Attorney General during the time of the Reconstruction Acts were
issued. The Attorney General defines the Reconstruction Acts, giving
his complete read to their meaning. You will be astounded at his
candor and blatant disregard for the 1787 Constitution, and Anglo
Saxon common law, so ably expounded upon by the quotes of Lysander
Spooner.

"The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no
authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and
man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract
between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a
contract between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be
supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had
already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make
reasonable and obligatory contracts.

Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even
of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked,
or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any
formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent
formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty,
fifty, sixty, or seventy years. AND THE CONSTITUTION, SO FAR AS IT
WAS THEIR CONTRACT, DIED WITH THEM. They had no natural power or
right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only
plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they COULD bind
their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is
to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between
any body but "the people" THEN existing; nor does it, either
expressly or impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on
their part, to bind anybody but themselves. Let us see. Its language
is: No Treason:" (The Constitution of No Authority", which was
written in 1869, Lysander Spooner)

"THE CONSTITUTION NOT ONLY BINDS NOBODY NOW, BUT IT NEVER DID BIND
ANYBODY. It never bound anybody, because it was never agreed to by
anybody in such a manner as to make it, on general principles of law
and reason, binding upon him.

It is a general principle of law and reason, that a WRITTEN
instrument binds no one until he has signed it. (The Informer asked
me to inject here: that in Title 12 it is your signature that binds
you to the debt, and or the lack of a signature that makes you an
involuntary contributor.) This principle is so inflexible a one,
that even though a man is unable to write his name, he must still
"make his mark," before he is bound by a written contract. This
custom was established ages ago, when few men could write their
names; when a clerk -- that is, a man who could write -- was so rare
and valuable a person, that even if he were guilty of high crimes,
he was entitled to pardon, on the ground that the public could not
afford to lose his services. Even at that time, a written contract
must be signed; and men who could not write, either "made their
mark," or signed their contracts by stamping their seals upon wax
affixed to the parchment on which their contracts were written.
Hence the custom of affixing seals, that has continued to this
time."(The Constitution of No Authority", which was written in 1869,
Lysander Spooner)

"The very men who drafted it, never signed it in any way to bind
themselves by it, AS A CONTRACT. And not one of them probably ever
would have signed it in any way to bind himself by it, AS A
CONTRACT."(The Constitution of No Authority", which was written in
1869, Lysander Spooner)

"....And yet we have what purports, or professes, or is claimed, to
be a contract -- the Constitution -- made eighty years ago, by men
who are now all dead, and who never had any power to bind US, but
which (it is claimed) has nevertheless bound three generations of
men, consisting of many millions, and which (it is claimed) will be
binding upon all the millions that are to come; but which nobody
ever signed, sealed, delivered, witnessed, or acknowledged; and
which few persons, compared with the whole number that are claimed
to be bound by it, have ever read, or even seen, or ever will read,
or see. And of those who ever have read it, or ever will read it,
scarcely any two, perhaps no two, have ever agreed, or ever will
agree, as to what it means."(The Constitution of No Authority",
which was written in 1869, Lysander Spooner)

"If, then, those who established the Constitution, had no power to
bind, and did not attempt to bind, their posterity, the question
arises, whether their posterity have bound themselves. If they have
done so, they can have done so in only one or both of these two
ways, viz., by voting, and paying taxes."(The Constitution of No
Authority", which was written in 1869, Lysander
Spooner)

"3. It cannot be said that, by voting, a man pledges himself to
support the Constitution, unless the act of voting be a perfectly
voluntary one on his part. Yet the act of voting cannot properly be
called a voluntary one on the part of any very large number of those
who do vote. It is rather a measure of necessity imposed upon them
by others, than one of their own choice. On this point I repeat what
was said in a former number, viz.:

"In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is not to
be taken as proof of consent, EVEN FOR THE TIME BEING. On the
contrary, it is to be considered that, without his consent having
even been asked a man finds himself environed by a government that
he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render
service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights,
under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men
practice this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees
further, that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some
chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by
subjecting them to his own. In short, he finds himself, without his
consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he may become a
master; if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no
other alternative than these two. In self- defence, he attempts the
former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced
into battle, where he must either kill others, or be killed himself.
Because, to save his own life in battle, a man takes the lives of
his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is one of
his own choosing. Neither in contests with the ballot -- which is a
mere substitute for a bullet -- because, as his only chance of self-
preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to be inferred that the
contest is one into which he voluntarily entered; that he
voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, as a stake against
those of others, to be lost or won by the mere power of numbers. On
the contrary, it is to be considered that, in an exigency into which
he had been forced by others, and in which no other means of
self-defence offered, he, as a matter of necessity, used the only
one that was left to him."(The Constitution of No Authority", which
was written in 1869, Lysander Spooner)

Again, in the perfect world, not ruled or controlled by Conquest,
Military necessity or public policy, and assuming you had honorable
judges and informed juries; you may be relieved of liability for
voting. However, since the end of the Civil War, the Conqueror has
used voting or your mere presence in the state for proof of
residence, as your tacit admission and agreement for whatever action
Congress takes, whereby they levy a tax.

The following
quote is very true. I have been warning this is the condition of our
country, and that the government controls this country contrary to
the 1787 U.S. Constitution, at least since March 4 1791 and for sure
since March 2, 1867, when an Act of Congress destroyed they 1787
Constitution.

"Go to A_____ B_____, and say to him that "the government" has need
of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property. If
he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect
him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that
is our business, and not his; that we CHOOSE to protect him, whether
he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for
protecting him. If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who
have thus taken upon themselves the title of "the government," and
who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his
having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too,
is our business, and not his; that we do not CHOOSE to make
ourselves INDIVIDUALLY known to him; that we have secretly (by
secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our
demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a
receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the
present year. If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his
property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and
trouble beside. If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon
the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be
members of our band.) If, in defending his property, he should kill
any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards;
charge him (in one of our courts) with murder; convict him, and hang
him. If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like
him, may be disposed to resist our demands, andthey should come in
large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels
and traitors; that "our country" is in danger; call upon the
commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion
and "save the country," cost what it may. Tell him to kill all who
resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike
terror into all others similarly disposed. See that the work of
murder is thoroughly done; that we may have no further trouble of
this kind hereafter. When these traitors shall have thus been taught
our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens
for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a
wherefore."(The Constitution of No Authority", which was written in
1869, Lysander Spooner)

REMEMBER
WACO!

Spooner's below
statement is true accept for the reality of Conquest.

"These facts are all so vital and so self-evident, that it cannot
reasonably be supposed that any one will voluntarily pay money to a
"government," for the purpose of securing its protection, unless he
first make an explicit and purely voluntary contract with it for
that purpose.

It is perfectly evident, therefore, that neither such voting, nor
such payment of taxes, as actually takes place, proves anybody's
consent, or obligation, to support the Constitution. Consequently we
have no evidence at all that the Constitution is binding upon
anybody, or that anybody is under any contract or obligation
whatever to support it. And nobody is under any obligation to
support it."(The Constitution of No Authority", which was written in
1869, Lysander Spooner)

Remember in a previous post where you were shown the Judge Advocate
General's authority over the districts was given to the Attorney
General, now you know why certain things have taken place in our
government. I include it here for you.

"If a question of martial law is to be determined by the law
officers of government, it will now belong to the Attorney General,
or to this Department of Justice. It will not belong to the Judge
Advocate General of the Army. He will not be called upon for any
opinion relating to martial law or military law except as to that
portion of the administration of military law which relates to
military justice." Congressman Lawrence

The below quotes are from Attorney General Henry Stanbery, June 12,
1867. He defines the Reconstruction Acts, as the head law
enforcement officer of the United States government.

"The 3d section declares, "that it shall be the duty of each
officer, assigned as aforesaid, to protect all persons in their
rights of person and property, to suppress insurrection, disorder,
and violence, and to punish, or cause to be punished, all disturbers
of the public peace and criminals, and to this end he may allow
local civil tribunals to take jurisdiction of and try offenders, or,
when in his judgment it may be necessary for the trial of offenders,
he shall have power to organize military commissions or tribunals
for that purpose; and all interference, under color of State
authority; with the exercise of military authority under this act,
shall be null and void." Attorney General's Office, June 12,
1867

"The 5th section declares the qualification of voters in all
elections, as well to frame the new constitution for each State, as
in the elections to be held under the provisional government, until
the new State constitution is ratified by Congress, and also fixes
the qualifications of the delegates to frame the new constitution."
Attorney General's Office, June 12, 1867

Are you listening America, a new Constitution, meaning the old one
was done away with; I have said this many, many times. Was I right
about the state governments being done away with, and provisional
governments put in their place? Yes. I have said this affected all
states, the government says this condition of Conquest was for a
short time and did not affect all of the states. Wrong. Why was the
emergency declared? Because the southern states refused to ratify
the 14th Amendment. Let me ask you this, is the 14th Amendment
regional or national? Does it not affect the whole country? Is it
not still enforce? Ask yourself, what would happen if the states
removed the 14th Amendment? The Military would again take
to the streets, the state governments would again become
provisional, until the necessary changes were made to appease the
Conquering government.

Read
on.

"The 6th section provides, "That until the people of said rebel
States shall be by law admitted to representation in the Congress of
the United States, any civil governments which may exist therein
shall be deemed provisional only, and in all respects subject to the
paramount authority of the United States at any time to abolish,
modify, control, or supersede the same; and in all elections to any
office under such provisional governments all persons shall be
entitled to vote, and none others, who are entitled to vote under
the provisions of the 5th section of this act; and no person shall
be eligible to any office under any such provisional governments who
would not be disqualified from holding office under the provisions
of the third article of said constitutional amendment." Attorney
General's Office, June 12,1867

"We see clearly enough that this act contemplates two distinct
governments in each of these ten States: the one military, the other
civil. The civil government is recognized as existing at the date of
the act. The military government is created by the act." Attorney
General's Office, June 12, 1867.

"Both are provisional, and both are to continue until the new State
constitution is framed and the State is admitted to representation
in Congress. When that event takes place, both these provisional
governments are to cease. In contemplation of this act, this
military authority and this civil authority are to be carried on
together. The people in these States are made subject to both, and
must obey both, in their respective jurisdictions." Attorney
General's Office, June 12, 1867.

"It had all the characteristics and powers of a State
government--legislative, judicial, and executive -- and was in the
full and lawful exercise of all these powers, except only that it
was not entitled to representation as a State of the Union.
"Attorney General's Office, June 12, 1867.

Excuse me Roger Rabbit, where in the 1787 Constitution was Congress
given the authority to deny any state government representation in
Congress? Add to this the southern states were admitted Republican
forms of government, not to mention this Military occupation and
Conquest took place during a time of admitted peace? Come on
America, WAKE THE HELL UP, cut your television's off, it is late in
the day, start studying, time is short.

"Congress was not satisfied with the organic law or constitution
under which this civil government was established. That constitution
was to be changed in only one particular to make it acceptable to
Congress, and that was in the matter of the elective franchise. The
purpose, the sole object of this act, is to effect that change, and
to effect it by the agency of the people of the State, or such of
them as are made voters by means of elections provided for in the
act, and in the meantime to preserve order and to punish offenders,
if found necessary, by military commissions." Attorney General's
Office, June 12, 1867.

"Whatever power is not given to the military remains with the civil
government." Attorney General's Office, June 12, 1867

Wow, did you hear that America? What did they do? Now instead of our
co-equal reservation of rights under the 10th Amendment
we have only what the Conquering government allows us to have, in
case you have forgotten what the 10th Amendment is, I'll use a quote
from Jefferson here, and I quote:

"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this
ground; That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to
the States or to the people."

"To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn
around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless
field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition." February
15, 1791 (Thomas Jefferson)

"We see, first of all, that each of these States is "made subject to
the military authority of the United States" -- not to the military
authority altogether, but with this express limitation -- "as
hereinafter prescribed." Attorney General's Office, June 12,
1867

"It appears that some of the military commanders have understood
this grant of power as all comprehensive, conferring on them the
power to remove the executive and judicial officers of the State,
and to appoint other officers in their places; to suspend the
legislative power of the State; to take under their control, by
officers appointed by themselves, the collection and disbursement of
the revenues of the State; to prohibit the execution of the laws in
matters affecting purely civil and private rights; to suspend or
enjoin the execution of the judgments and decrees of the established
State courts; to interfere in the ordinary administration of justice
in the State courts, by prescribing new qualifications for jurors,
and to change, upon the ground of expedience, the existing relations
of the parties to contracts, giving protection to one party by
violating the rights of the other party." Attorney General's Office,
June 12, 1867.

"There can be no doubt as to the rule of construction according to
which we must interpret this grant of power. It is a grant of power
to military authority, over civil rights and citizens, in time of
peace. It is a new jurisdiction, never granted before, by which, in
certain particulars and for certain purposes, the established
principle that the military shall be subordinate to the civil
authority is reversed." Attorney General's Office, June 12,
1867.

"The concluding paragraph of this order, No. 10, is in these words,
"Any law or ordinance heretofore in force in North Carolina or South
Carolina, inconsistent with the provisions of this general order,
are hereby suspended and declared inoperative." Thus announcing, not
only a power to suspend the laws, but to declare them generally
inoperative, and assuming full powers of legislative by the military
authority." Attorney General's Office, June 12, 1867.

"The ground upon which these extraordinary powers are based is thus
set forth in military order, No. 1, issued in this district: "The
civil government now existing in North Carolina and South Carolina
is provisional only, and in all respects subject to the paramount
authority of the United [*196] States, at any time to abolish,
modify, control, or supersede the same." Thus far the provisions of
the act of Congress are well recited. What follows is in these
words: "Local laws and municipal regulations, not inconsistent with
the Constitution and laws of the United States, or the proclamations
of the President, or with such regulations as are or may be
prescribed in the orders of the commanding general, are hereby
declared to be in force; and, in conformity therewith, civil
officers are hereby authorized to continue the exercise of their
proper functions, and will be respected and obeyed by the
inhabitants." Attorney General's Office, June 12,
1867.

"This construction of his powers, under the act of Congress, places
the military commander on the same footing as the Congress of the
United States. It assumes that "the paramount authority of the
United States at any time to abolish, modify, control, or
supersede," is vested in him as fully as it is reserved to Congress.
He deems himself a representative of that paramount authority. He
puts himself upon an equality with the law-making power of the
Union; the only paramount authority in our government, so far, at
least, as the enactment of laws is concerned." Attorney General's
Office, June 12, 1867.

"He places himself on higher ground than the President, who is
simply an executive officer. He assumes, directly or indirectly, all
authority of the State, legislative, executive, and judicial, and in
effect declares, "I am the State." Attorney General's Office, June
12, 1867.

The following are excerpts from the Senate Report, 93rd
Congress, November 19, 1973, Special Committee On The Termination Of
The National Emergency United States Senate. They were going to
terminate all emergency powers, but they found out they did not have
the power to do this so guess which one stayed in, the Emergency Act
of 1933, the Trading with the Enemy Act October 6, 1917 as amended
in March 9, 1933.

"Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of
declared national emergency....Under the powers delegated by these
statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control
the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces
abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation
and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise;
restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the
lives of all American citizens."

"A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of
their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years, freedoms and
governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in
varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states
of national emergency....from, at least, the CIVIL WAR in important
ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national
emergency." Senate Report, 93rd Congress, November 19,
1973.

I'll let this soak in.

August 9,
1998
James

\