Additional
Titles

Other
Ryter
Articles:

"Men in Black" The Cult of The Judges

State Dept. Still Promoting Islam

George's CIA Filly

NWV
Store

Books

DVDs

Merchandise

Writers

Advertise

Submit
Story

Contact
NWV

Donate to
NWV

About
NWV

NWV Home

More Ryter
Articles:

THE THREE 13TH AMENDMENTS
PART 2 of
2

By Jon Christian
Ryter
December 17,
2009
NewsWithViews.com

It
should be noted here that on Sept. 25, 1789, Congress enacted a House
Joint Resolution to create an 11th Amendment dealing with congressional
salaries. It was finally ratified—on May 2, 1992 as the 27th Amendment. It
declares: "No law varying the compensation for the services of
Senators and Representatives shall take effect until an election of
Representatives shall have intervened." It only took 74,003 days to
ratify it. Again, there is no reason that the States cannot ratify the
Joint Resolution submitted on Mar. 2, 1861 and get the federal government
out of their hair once and for all because it is a certainty that the
federal government would not, today, send to the States a constitutional
amendment that would limit their power. Not after the fraud and subtrafuge
they used in 1913 to get it. Again, to date, only two States have ratified
Buchanan's proposed 13th Amendment. (Source for this information, US
Congress, House Doc. 102-188, 102nd Congress, 2nd Session, 1992.)
Buchanan was the first president to ever sign a constitutional amendment
resolution, which he did on Mar. 2, 1861.

Liberal
historians still try to paint the Buchanan States' Right amendment as one
that would guarantee the "slavery status quo" during the 19th century so
they could label as "racist" any State that would try to ratify it. In
point of fact, the 11 States which seceded from the United States of
America did so not over the issue of slavery, but over the issue of States
rights and the sovereignty of the States over the federal government.

It will
not bode well for the globalists who, today, appear to be within months of
collapsing the United States into a puppet state of a global Union to see
the States resurrect this amendment as they did the 27th Amendment.
Buchanan's 13th amendment, overnight, would radically alter the status
quo. In fact, had Buchanan's 13th Amendment been ratified, the JP
Morgan-Rockefeller-Rothschild bankers would not have been able to submit
joint resolutions to enact the 16th and 17th Amendments, nor create the
Federal Reserve System. And Barack Obama would not have been able to take
over the US banking institution or the auto industry. Nor would he have
been able to fire the CEO of GM.

The May 1, 1810 13th
Amendment

In light
of the potential ramifications of the Mar. 2, 1861 constitutional
amendment resolution, the May 1, 1810 proposed amendment rightly resembles
the attention given to afterbirth in a porcelain pail on the floor in the
delivery room as everyone oogles the newborn baby. Particularly since the
proposed May 1, 1810 Amendment was already part of Article 1 § 9 of the
Constitution (minus the penalty). Article 1 § 9, in part, declares:
"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no
Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them shall, without the
consent of Congress, accept of any present, emolument, Office or Title of
any kind whatsoever, from any King, Prince or foreign State." The
Articles of Confederation contained a similar provision as did Article 1 §
10.

The
purpose of the three clauses was to clearly establish that, in the United
States, there would be only one class of people: common citizens. The
granting of titles of nobility created what can be construed as a European
superior class of citizens. The United States was formed, and prospered,
on the principles that all men are created equal. Yet some member of the
new American society disagreed with that philosophy because their families
were already more equal than the working class. They were the wealthy
aristocracy whose ancestors came to America not with dreams of breaking
the shackles that bound them to the royals of Europe, but with vast land
grants bequeathed to them by those same crown heads.

Among
them were the ancestors of John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and the
descendants of George Calvert, William Clairbourne, Robert Livingston,
Frederick Philipse, Johannes Schulyer, Stephen Van Cortlandt and the other
"lords of the manors" who came to America with vast land grants from the
Dutch and English thrones that authorized them to create colonies of tenet
farmers. They were the Lords of the Manor.

When
they came to the American colonies, the families of the manor born
possessed liberal land grants that gave them absolute autonomy to write
the laws, create the courts and appoint the judges in the colonies they
created and controlled as microcosmic kings. But, unlike the tenets of the
"patroons" who fell under Dutch rule, the tenets of the English manor
lords were deemed, first and foremost, to be subjects of the King of
England. Because of that, the Manor Lords could not enact any law that
violated or contradicted British law. Thus the tenets of the Manor Lords
were better protected from eviction-or incarceration-than the tenets of
the patroons. Under the thumbs of the Manor Lords, tenet farmers or tenet
storekeepers lived in virtual miniature cultures—some the size of
counties, some the size of States—within the American society.

In order
to protect their land grants when the Revolutionary War was fought, the
sons of the manor born were made to join both Armies. The eldest son was
allowed to choose which Army he would join. The next eldest son joined the
other side. That way, regardless who prevailed in the war, the land grants
of the manor born would be protected. Most of the American patroons and
Lords of the Manor signed the Declaration of Independence. Many
of them served at State level as legislators or governors or in the
central government as Congressmen or Senators. They were, after all, born
to rule.

That's
why Alexander Hamilton—who epitomized the aristocracy in America—tried,
when the Constitution was penned, to insert a class clause into the
document which reserved the vote for the aristocracy by mandating that
only land owners could vote in the general elections. Since most of the
new citizens of the new nation were tenet farmers who rented the lands
upon which they built their homes, planted their crops, and raised their
families, most would have been ineligible to vote had that clause been
inserted in the Constitution. That clause would have assured that the
manor born and not the common wage-earner would control precisely who
represented them in the legislature. (Which is what happens today with
powerful industrialists, merchant princes, bankers and their special
interest groups picking the candidates and funding those candidates with
enough money to overwhelm any opposing candidate.) Whether they were
called patroons, Lords of the Manor, or simply tycoons, the Manor Born of
America enjoyed an elevated status in the communities which they owned.
Like the Lords and Earls of Europe, they were the law—and, like America's
first families of today—they were above the law.

Advertisement

They
used both slaves and indentured bond servants to amass their wealth. They
were aristocrats by birth. They were born to privilege and title and bred
to rule. Because it was the form of governance under which they were born,
it was natural for the Dutch patroons and the English Lords of the Manor
to perpetuate the feudal caste system of Europe in the American colonies
in order to perpetuate the beneficial privileges of their
aristocracy.

When the
Constitution was penned, most of the Founding Fathers intended to create a
nation of equals. Aristocrats like Jay and Hamilton opposed the concept.
As Jams Madison, Edmund Randolph and Alexander Hamilton met in Annapolis
on May 29, 1789 to hammer out the structure of the Constitution, they
settled on what was called "the Virginia Plan" to create a national
government with three coequal branches: executive, legislative and
judicial. The concept was based on John Locke's Treatises of
Government. The legislative system, like the British Parliament,
would consist of two branches: a House of Representatives (the People's
house) and a Senate (representing the aristocracy). Because the upper
chamber of the US Congress was considered the American House of Lords in
which the Senators would represent the gentry, Thomas Jefferson—after the
primary author of the Declaration of Independence was added to
the group—felt there was an imperative need to concentrate power in the
lower chamber. Constitutionally, all revenue legislation must originate in
the House of Representatives. The Senate may propose amendments to the
money bills which originate in the House, but the Senate may not originate
revenue legislation. To further equalize the Representatives in the lower
chamber, the Nobility clause was inserted in Article 1 § 9 and, again, in
Article 1 § 10, reiterating "...No State shall...grant any Title of
Nobility."

When the
American people began to criticize the aristocratic arrogance of President
John Adams in 1797, the Federalists in Congress enacted the Aliens and
Sedition Act of 1798 which made it a crime for any citizen to
criticize the Chief Executive. Ten US citizens were charged under the
Alien and Sedition Act of 1798. All were found guilty by the US
Supreme Court which tried them (giving them no right to appeal), had their
property seized and were each imprisoned for four months.

As the
Federalists lost favor with the voters between 1804 and 1810 Congress
responded to Adam's 1797 aristocratic arrogance by enacting the 13
Amendment Resolution on May 10, 1810 which attempted to reinforce Article
1 Sections 9 and 10. The original form of the amendment read: "If any
citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain any
title of nobility or honor, or shall, without the consent of Congress,
accept or retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind
whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person
shall cease to be a citizen of the United States and shall be incapable of
holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of
them."

Those
who tout the Nobility version of the 13th Amendment as the one and only
legitimate 13th Amendment claim that it was duly and legally ratified and
ripped out of the Constitution because it banned lawyers and the
descendants of the manor born from serving in Congress. Volumes of
Internet articles written the various authors claim their version of the
13th Amendment was ratified in 1812 or, at the latest, in 1819. While
there is evidence that there was an attempt to ratify it in 1811, it was
not ratified that year. Keep in mind there was no time limit on passage.
It could be ratified today if enough States voted to do so. A
constitutional amendment on congressional pay was proposed as the 11th
Amendment on Sept. 25, 1789. Seventy-four thousand and three days later,
on May 2, 1992, the States ratified that resolution as the 27th
Amendment.

To be
ratified, three-fourths of the States in existence at the time of the
ratification need to vote in favor of ratification. Advocates of the
legitimacy of the Nobility Title amendment claim it was ratified in 1810.
However, in 1810 there were 17 States. Thirteen needed to ratify the
proposed amendment. Only 10 had by 1812 when war broke out. In 1812 there
were 18 States. Fourteen were needed to ratify the treaty. Only 12 States
ratified it.

During
the War of 1812, the British army sacked the newly created District of
Columbia and burned the Capitol, the Library of Congress, and the Chief
Executive's residence. Advocates of the Nobility Title amendment insist
that destroyed in those fires was the ratification certificate of Virginia
which would have legally made the Nobility Title resolution the 13th
Amendment to the Constitution—if it was received in 1812. It appears that
Journals from the State of Virginia indicate that State ratified the
Nobility amendment in 1819. At that time, there were 22 States. Seventeen
were needed to ratify the Amendment. Only 12 had done. And, although the
Nobility advocates insist their amendment had been ratified prior to that
date, on Dec. 31, 1817, the House of Representatives asked President James
Monroe to report on the status of the amendment.

On Feb.
6, 1818 Monroe instructed Secretary of State John Quincy Adams to write to
the governors of Virginia, South Carolina and New York and advise them the
proposed amendment had been ratified by 12 States and rejected by New York
and Rhode Island. Adams was to ask those States for their official
position on the Amendment. On Fed. 18, 1818 Adams reported back to Monroe
that the amendment had not been officially ratified. On March 10, 1819,
the Virginia legislature passed Act 280, which codified the Nobility
amendment in the Virginia Civl Code, effective March 12, 1819. Had
Virginia done this in 1811 when 13 States were needed to ratify the
amendment, the 13th Amendment would have legally barred lawyers from
serving in the United States government. However, in 1819 there were 22
States in the Union. Seventeen were needed to ratify the amendment. Only
13 States ever ratified it. Since there is no time limit on this
amendment, the ratification of 25 States are still needed to send every
lawyer in America, with amici briefs in hand, to the lawyers in the US
Supreme Court who, themselves, would be searching for any loophole to
invalidate what would then be the 28th or 29th Amendments since it would
end their careers on the high court.

Today,
there are 27 Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Four of
them were fraudulently ratified. We know the 16th and 17th Amendments were
wrongly declared ratified. Only those who have studied the fraudulent
ratifications of those amendments realize that the 14th and 15th
Amendments, which the 11 Confederate States were forced to ratify in order
to be readmitted to the Union, were also fraudulently declared ratified.
All of the returning States were obligated to ratify the 13th, 14th and
15th Amendments as a condition of their reinstatement into the Union. All
of them deliiberately altered the wording and punctuation of the
amendments they certified as ratified, knowing that under the rule of law,
the resolutions they ratified must be exact in word and puncuation to the
same resolutions approved by all other States. If not, those 11 States
would be ratifying a different amendment, and their ratification
certifications would legally have to be rejected as "nay"
votes.

William
Seward, who remained Andrew Johnson's Secretary of State as Johnson served
the balance of Lincoln's second term, chose to ignore the multitiude of
errors in the 14th and 15th amendment resolutions. Several of the
Confederate States substituted completely different words. One State,
certified as ratifying the 15th Amendment, substituted a completely
different amendment.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews
Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail
Address:

Just as
Seward casually dismissed the errors the Confederate States made in the
14th and 15th Amendment resolutions, Reuben Clark justified the errors
most of the States made in the 16th and 17th Amendments by mitigating them
with the errors excused by Seward. Clark said: "It will be observed
that there were many substantial errors in wording in the resolutions of
the State legislatures upon which the Secretary of State acted in issuing
his declaration announcing the adoption and ratification by the States of
the 14th Amendment."

The
government decided that two wrongs do make a right. For part one click
below.

Click here for part
----->1,

© 2009 Jon C. Ryter - All Rights
Reserved

[Order, Jon C. Ryter's book, "Whatever
Happened to America?" It's out of print, and supply is
limited.]

E-mail This
Page

Sign Up For Free E-Mail
Alerts
E-Mails are used
strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

Jon Christian Ryter is the pseudonym of a former
newspaper reporter with the Parkersburg, WV Sentinel. He authored a
syndicated newspaper column, Answers From The Bible, from the mid-1970s
until 1985. Answers From The Bible was read weekly in many suburban
markets in the United States.

Today, Jon is an advertising executive
with the Washington Times. His website, http://www.jonchristianryter.com/
has helped him establish a network of mid-to senior-level Washington
insiders who now provide him with a steady stream of material for use both
in his books and in the investigative reports that are found on his
website.

E-Mail: [email-masked]

Home

The
US Congress submits a constitutional resolution to strip you of your
power. You will no longer elect the Senators. You will no longer control
them. Nor will you control the President of the United States since you
will no longer have any power in Washington, DC.