InfoTelesys Lawsuit: I. CLAIMS UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED /
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS VIOLATED
Thirty Sixth Claim For
Relief Fraud - Banking
PLAINTIFFS:
Clive Boustred
DEFENDANTS:
ALLAN GREENSPAN/Allan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Bank and the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
SHAREHOLDERS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK/ Shareholders of the Federal
Reserve Bank
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
Wells Fargo Bank/Wells Fargo Home Mortgage/ Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
CHASE CARD SERVICES OF WILMINGTON DELAWARE/Chase Card Services of
Wilmington Delaware.
Discover Financial Services
American Express
Bank of America
Chase Card Services
RBS
CitiBiusiness Card
Capital One Bank
Jon Doe’s, 1 to n.
CONSTRUCT
If I owned a bank in your
town and you came to me to borrow money to buy a home and I went down to
the local toy store and purchased a Monopoly® board game and tricked you
into believing that the paper money from the board game was real and you
tricked the seller of the home that the paper Monopoly® money you had
borrowed from my bank was real so you bought the home and transferred
title into your name with a lean to my bank on the home. Then say you
defaulted on paying me back (with money you had to earn with real labor
or in exchange for real assets while I wildly manipulated interest rates
so as to repeatedly crash the market through boom-bust cycles and major
wars every couple of decades), so I took you to court and had the home
transferred into my name, it would be no different to what the banks are
doing with Federal Reserve Bank “Monopoly” money the Federal Reserve
Bank owners create out of nothing.
And if I managed to quietly sneak through Congress
a National Federal Reserve Bank Act that simply said that my banks
monopoly money was ‘legal tender’ during Christmas recess when most of
Congress is not there to even vote, it would not change anything because
that Act would be utterly lawless and void on it’s face because it not
only violates the legal Tender requirements of the U.S. Constitution it
is flat out fraud.
And if I murdered anyone who challenged my bank, it
would still not make it right or legal. And if I hired presidents,
congressmen and paid of judges and purchased all the mainstream media
and book producers to prevent my fraud from getting any publicity, I
bought the military industrial complex and the prison industrial complex
and most major corporations, and if I sprayed the people with atomized
metals to keep them docile, and I funded and implemented socialism
around the world to put my governments as head of family and created
police states to oppress the people into servitude, it still would not
make my bank and money lawful, it would still be flat our fraud,
conspiracy and one of the worlds most astonishing criminal acts ever.
And this is exactly what the Federal Reserve Bank owners have done.

The
above chart shows how the Federal Reserve Bank has printed their
monopoly money the next chart shows the increase in the money supply and
consistent repeated depressions in the U.S.:

On March 23, 2006, the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System announced that they will cease publication of the
M3 monetary aggregate. The Board will also cease publishing the
following components: large-denomination time deposits, repurchase
agreements (RPs), and Eurodollars. http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/discm3.htm
The Federal Reserve Bank is printing money at such an extraordinary rate
they do not want the public to track them.
The
following chart shows the fluctuation of interest rates the Federal
Reserve Bank has used to destabilize the market:

If
we overlay the Interest rates irrefutable evidence emerges regarding the
blatant conspiracy of that private bank to initiate and cause
depressions. By accelerating the printing of money at an exponential
level in the 1980’s the bank has disguised what is really going on in
the nation. The Bank owners are literally taking over the U.S. with
money they create out of nothing:
VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS & ULTIMATE FACTS
On multiple dates including and before December 15,
29 and 30 of 2007, in the above named Judicial District, the crime of
FRAUD, in violation of the Constitution of The United States of America
Article 1 and 9th Amendment, was committed by DEFENDANT/S
listed above, who did willfully and unlawfully commit FRAUD against
PLAINTIFF by loaning PLAINTIFF illegal Tender that was created
fraudulently out of nothing by co-conspirators the Federal Reserve Bank
who’s owners are part of a grand New World Order conspiracy. Said
crimes have caused inflated and unrealistic prices on goods, services,
and assets in the United States, replacing the real value of said goods,
services and assets with imaginary figures that effectively transfer
ownership of said goods, services and assets to the conspirators who own
the Federal Reserve Bank.
Said Federal Reserve Bank Notes failing to meet
Constitutionally mandated legal Tender having been fraudulently sold and
loaned to PLAINTIFFS under the claim that they were Legal Tender, when
in fact said Note originated from a grand conspiracy initiated by Mayer
Amschel Bauer of Frankfurt, Germany, who changed his name to Mayer
Amschel Rothschild and who formalized said conspiracy when Adam
Whitehouse who was retained by Rothschild to revitalize Zionism
completed said conspiracy plan on May 1, 1776.
In November, 1910, agents of the conspirators met on Jekyll Island,
Georgia to formalize the enactment of said conspiracy in the final form
of the Federal Reserve Bank Act which was fraudulently passed during
Christmas recess in 1913.
Said conspiracy literally handed exclusive money
making rights to the privately held Federal Reserve Bank, granting the
owners of that bank the so-called right to create out of thin air as
many dollars as they want. This ability to make money out of thin air,
gave the conspirators the ability to purchase anything they wanted,
including all the major media channels, the military industrial complex,
many major corporations in addition to buying off many of our government
officials.
The illegal Tender DEFENDANTS listed above loaned
to PLAINTIFFS is in fact ‘fiat currency’, that is the Federal Reserve
Bank is not obligated to give in exchange to the holder of a note gold,
silver, or any specific tangible property. In other words the Note and
Tender DEFENDANTS loaned PLAINTIFFS, is based on and backed by nothing.
The Tender loaned by DEFENDANTS was invented and created out of thin air
to defraud PLAINTIFFS of real property. Said fraud having created
artificially inflated prices on goods, services and real property which
in turn forced PLAINTIFFS to borrow said illegal Tender in order to be
able to afford what normally would have cost a fraction of the price
PLAINTIFFS were forced to pay as a consequence of the conspirator’s
fraud. Said conspirators have thus defrauded PLAINTIFFS through
deceptively implying that their Notes were legal Tender, claiming on
their Notes “THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE” and baring the signature and seal of the Treasurer of the
United States and Secretary of the Treasury of the United States
Government, “The United States of America” and images of past Presidents
of the United States of America with most ironically “We the People” on
certain Notes.
In fact DEFENDANTS have loaned PLAINTIFF nothing
other than Tender invented from stale air, Tender that is factually
worthless other than through continued deception and fraud. DEFENDANTS
having forced PLAINTIFFS to purchase fraudulent Federal Reserve Notes in
order to pay DEFENDANTS, thus forcing PLAINTIFFS to exchange real
services, real goods, assets and property to purchase said fraudulent
and factually worthless Notes of illegal Tender.
Let the JURY NOTE: The images of Past Presidents on
said Federal Reserve Bank Notes are Presidents who adamantly and
vehemently opposed any private ownership of National Banks such as the
Federal Reserve Bank Act and persons whom evidence strongly suggests
that said bankers agents attempted to or did assassinate
(except an agent of the Rothschild’s, Hamilton who was not a President).
As a proximate consequence of the willful and
malicious actions of DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF’S have sustained
extraordinary damage in a sum to be determined per proof, including
severe and extreme emotional stress and anguish, parental alienation,
lost time, lost business investments, lost business and prosperity,
damaged reputation including both slander and libel, interference with
the pursuit of happiness, loss of domestic tranquility, loss of general
welfare, and the loss of basic liberties such as enjoying life with
one’s own children!
Damages incurred by Plaintiffs as a direct or
indirect consequence to the above mentioned and referenced actions by
DEFENDANTS are also incorporated herein as listed in the “K DAMAGES”
section of this Complaint.
The above listed DEFENDANTS Fraud stems as the root
cause of PLAINTIFFS damages through said conspiracy which has
implemented socialism, taken control of the government and said
DEFENDANTS are ultimately responsible for the crimes committed as a
consequence of said banking Fraud in the United States Of America and
internationally. Said
damages include the sum certain amounts of $66,016,803,250.00 and
$3,001,000.00 from the prior lawsuits filed by PLAINTIFFS in this court.
PLAINTIFFS seek additional punitive damages in the sum certain amount of
one point four trillion dollars against DEFENDANTS (The amount this
criminal government has spent so far in invading and assaulting the
Nation of Iraq, however, perhaps six trillion dollars in punitive
damages is more appropriate as this figure reflects the amount of money
these insane criminals have spend on their efforts to develop atomic
weapons and other weapons of mass destruction – PLAINTIFFS will apply
said funds to the development of global education systems which focus on
exactly the opposite goals, to make the world a better place and not to
build weapons of mass destruction and oppress people around the world).
AUTHORITIES
AUTHORITIES in section “K. COMMON AUTHORITIES” are
incorporated herein by reference in addition to the following
AUTHORITIES:
“The Congress shall have the Power.....To coin
Money, regulate the Value thereof,” – Constitution of the United States
of America, Article 1, section 8. Congress has no authority to delegate
this responsibility to third parties such as the Federal Reserve Bank.
“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 a Tender in
Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law
impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or
Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary
for executing it's inspection Laws; and the net Produce of all Duties
and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the
Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be
subject to the Revision and Controul of Congress.” - Constitution of
the United States of America, Article 1, Section. 10. Only gold and
silver Coin are permissible as Tender in Payment of Debts.
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain
rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by
the people.” Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment
IX. The Federal Government has no right to assume rights over the
people.
“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.” Constitution of the United
States of America, Amendment IX. The Federal Government is limited
government it is not entitled to any more power than the narrow
definition of powers delegated by the Constitution.
"I sincerely believe the banking institutions
having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than
standing armies" - Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson. NOTE: As a
consequence of the Federal Reserve Banking Act handing issuing power of
money to a private banking institution, the Federal Reserve Bank, we
have been thrust into multiple wars and have build the worlds largest
standing army ever which actively and illegally invades other nations
and murders millions of innocent people while causing the worlds worst
ecological disasters ever.
"If the American people ever allow the banks to
control the issuance of their currency.. the banks and corporations that
will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until
their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered.” - Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson. NOTE: This is
exactly what has happened, the Federal Reserve Bank’s fiat currency has
driven home values through the roof, mandating that in order to purchase
a home, citizens are forced to borrow the money the Federal Reserve Bank
creates out of nothing for which they exchange the ownership of the
majority of the home. The Federal Reserve Bank literally gains
ownership of homes throughout the U.S. by making money out of nothing.
Jefferson’s prediction has now taken place; we are waking up homeless on
the continent our forefathers conquered. Ironically, the number of
individuals who own the majority of shares in Federal Reserve Bank is
probably somewhere between one hundred and a thousand or less
individuals. Every person employed by the bank is subject to the same
servitude and fraud as the rest of us. We are all working for the
benefit of those who fraudulently took ownership of the nation’s
currency. Is it not strange how vehemently some of these employees of
the banksters fight so violently to uphold the fraud and crime?
"[A Private National Bank is] condemned by the
silence of the constitution" - James Madison (Note Madison’s statement
in relation to the limitation provided by the Tenth Amendment)
"The bank, is trying to kill me, but I will kill
it!" "You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out,
and by the eternal God I will rout you out." - President Andrew
Jackson. NOTE: Considering President Jackson’s position, is it not
ironic how the Federal Reserve Bank places his face on the $20?
“I sincerely believe the banking institutions
having the issuing power of money, are more dangerous to liberty than
standing armies.” - President Andrew Jackson (Mirroring Jefferson’s
warning)
“Paper is poverty… it is only the ghost of money,
and not money itself.” - President Andrew Jackson
“If the American people ever allow the banks to
control the issuance of their currency… the banks and corporations that
will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until
their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered.” - President Andrew Jackson (Mirroring Jefferson’s warning)
"The bold effort the present bank had made to
control the government are but premonitions of the fate that await the
American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this
institution or the establishment of another like it." - President Andrew
Jackson. NOTE: This is exactly what has occurred with the Federal
Reserve Bank who now not only controls our government; they also control
our military, our media and our schools.
Congressional Bills to establish a new national
bank were twice vetoed by President Tyler in 1841.
President James A. Garfield was inaugurated in
1881, he said "Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is
absolute master of all industry and commerce". On July 2, 1881 Garfield
was shot, he dies on September 19.
In exchange for financial support for his
presidential campaign, Woodrow Wilson's agreed that if elected, he would
sign the Federal Reserve Act. In December 1913, while many members of
Congress were home for Christmas, the Federal Reserve Act was rammed
through Congress and signed by President Wilson. Regarding his actions
Wilson later admitted. "I have unwittingly ruined my country".
PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON: "A great industrial
Nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is
concentrated. The growth of the Nation and all our activities are in the
hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of
the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world -
no longer a Government of free opinion no longer a Government by
conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and
duress of small groups of dominant men". (Just before he died,
Wilson is reported to have stated to friends that he had been "deceived"
and that "I have betrayed my Country".
On June 4, 1963, President Kennedy signed a
Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110. This order virtually
stripped the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the
United States Government at interest. President Kennedy declared the
privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business.
This order gave the Treasury Department the authority to issue silver
certificates against any silver in the treasury. This executive order
still stands today. In less than five months after signing that
executive order President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22,
1963. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, whom evidence suggests was
involved in the assassination of Kennedy repealed Kennedy’s order,
shortly afterwards Johnson would lie to the American public and claim
that Vietnamese gunboats had attacked a U.S. Warship. LBJ’s False Flag
pulled the U.S. into the disastrous (for the U.S.) Vietnam War.
However, the Vietnam War brought fortunes to the owners of the Federal
Reserve Bank and their co-conspirators in the military industrial
complex. When LBJ attempted another False Flag operation and had
Israeli fighter plains attack the U.S.S. Liberty and LBJ ordered a
nearby U.S. Aircraft carrier to not go to the aid of the U.S.S. Liberty,
stating that he wanted the ship with its sacrificial crew to go to the
bottom of the ocean, it was only the presence of Russian spy ships that
forced LBJ to call off that False Flag operation.
Nine American Presidents have been the targets of
assassination: - Andrew Jackson in 1835 (opposed a private national
bank), Abraham Lincoln in 1865 (opposed a private national bank), James
Garfield in 1881 (opposed a private national bank), William McKinley in
1901, Harry S. Truman in 1950, John F. Kennedy in 1963 (opposed a
private national bank), Richard Nixon in 1974, Gerald Ford twice in
1975, and Ronald Reagan in 1981 (opposed a private national bank)
"Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of
the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the
Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter
called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United
States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay
the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost
enough money to pay the National debt several times over. .... This evil
institution has impoverished and ruined the people of these United
States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our
Government. It has done this through the defects of the law under which
it operates, through the maladministration of that law by the Fed and
through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it. "
- Congressman McFadden on the Federal Reserve Corporation Remarks in
Congress, 1934 Floor of the House of Representatives by the Honorable
Louis T. McFadden of Pennsylvania. Mr. McFadden served as Chairman of
the Banking and Currency Committee for more than 10 years. There were
two assassination attempts against McFadden.
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not
understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe
there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning" – Industrialist
Henry Ford
"Why did we give a monopoly of creating money
out of thin air to a private corporation? The result is exactly the
same as if someone was picking your pocket every year, because that is
exactly what they [the Federal Reserve Bank] are doing." Franklin
Sunders, Author, Tax Honesty.
"Whether money is metal, paper or digital, is not
the issue, the issue is interest. The function of currency is to
provide a trading mechanism for the barter of real assets and services.
There can be no interest charged for the mere provision of a mechanism
to barter. A service fee, yes, but interest, absolutely not." - Clive
Boustred, Founder, Chairman & CEO InfoTelesys & Chairman of Liberty For
Life Association- InfoTelesys was building a next generation Internet
that would incorporate interest free currency accessible anywhere in the
world through the satellite network the company was building. The
InfoTelesys team consisted of numerous extraordinarily qualified
individuals including many top banking technology and satellite
experts. While working for Sun Microsystems, Clive provided the systems
architecture for one of the world’s largest banking systems and
consulted to many of the top banks around the world. There have been
three assassination attempts on PLAINTIFF Clive Boustred.
"Our misunderstanding is the belief that money is a
real asset, to the extent where we have allowed this deception to become
reality. Money, cash, currency is only a tool, a Note that represents
real assets or services in a transaction. The ability to manufacture
money, whether the note is printed on metal, paper or digitally is
something that must be in the free domain. Just as corporations are
free to offer notes representing the ownership or stock of a
corporation. If we give any person or entity the exclusive right to
control the representation or production of notes representing assets
and services, we give that person complete control of everything, unless
we specifically dictate that the note may bare no interest and the
valuation of assets and services remain free and dynamic. Our lack of
understanding of money has resulted in centuries of servitude and the
last hundred years of violent wars." – Clive Boustred, Chairman
InfoTelesys, Inc.
"We shall have World Government, whether or not we
like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved
by conquest or consent." - Paul Warburg, Council on Foreign Relations
and Architect of the Federal Reserve System: Feb 17, 1950 in an address
to the U.S. Senate.
"Who controls money controls the word”. – Henry
Kissinger Counsel on Foreign Relations
"Let me issue and control a nation's money, and I
care not who writes its laws" - Meyer Amchel Rothschild
FEDERAL
RESERVE NOTES DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL
NULL AND VOID BY THE COURT
MARTIN V.
MAHONEY JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
http://www.theawaregroup.com/federalreservenotes.htm
http://www.pushhamburger.com/fed_reserve.htm
On January 6, 1969
this Court filed a Notice of Refusal to Allow Appeal with the Clerk at
the District Court, Hugo L. Hentges, for the County of Scott and the
State of Minnesota, which is as follows:
NOTICE OF REFUSAL 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 Peace Court Subdivision 4 thereof requires
that $2.00 shall be 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 at San Francisco L1278283C and Federal Reserve Bank of
Minneapolis Serial No. 18041C697A 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 prompt 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 the undersigned will stand ready and
willing to reverse himself in this determination.
TAKE NOTICE AND GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY.
Dated January 6, 1969
BY THE COURT
/s/ Martin V. Mahoney
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
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 I, 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 Appeal in this case.
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.
Dated January 6, 1969
BY THE COURT
/s/ Martin V. Mahoney
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Minnesota Statutes
Annotated 532.38 required that the Appellant, First National Bank of
Montgomery 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.
180410697A.
This Court determined
that said Notes on their face were contrary to Article I, 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:
IN DISTRICT COURT STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF SCOTT
FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota, Plaintiff,
vs.
Jerome Daly, Defendant.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
On reading the
application for an Order attached hereto, and on Motion and Affidavit of
Theodore R. Melby, 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 of
Scott, State of Minnesota or as soon thereafter as counsel can be 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.
Dated at Shakopee, Minnesota this 8th day of January, 1969.
BY THE COURT /s/
Harold E. Flynn Judge of District Court, Therefore, upon Motion of
Defendant Jerome Daly, this Court ordered a 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 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 OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, JUDGMENT
AND DETERMINATION.
That the Federal
Reserve Banking Corporation, is a United States Corporation with twelve
(12) banks 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.
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.
As is evidenced from
the book: "The Federal Reserve System; Its Purposes and Functions,";
(1st Ed.) 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. 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 per cent or
more of the credit never leaves the books of the Banks as the Banks
produce no specie as backing.
When the Federal
Reserve Banks and National Banks acquire United States Bonds and
Securities, State Bonds and Securities, State Subdivision 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.
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 (392)
attempts to make Federal Reserve Notes a legal tender for all debts,
public and private. See page 72. From 1913 down to date, the Federal
Reserve Banks 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.
Said Notes are fiat
money, not redeemable in gold 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
provided for the enforcement of the payment of the Notes in anything of
value.
The Notes are obviously not gold or silver
coin.
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.
That said Federal
Reserve Notes do not conform to Title 12, United States Code, Sections
411 and 418. Title 31 USC, Section 462 (392), 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 I, Section 10, of the Constitution of the 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 the Court to the District Court is
not complied with within 10 days after entry of Judgement. Therefore the
Appeal is not allowed by this Court and my docket so shows.
Dated February 5, 1969
BY THE COURT
/s/ Martin V. Mahoney
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
MEMORANDUM
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 as 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 obsolete 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
consisting of a House of Representatives and a Senate elected as
representatives of all the people.
"Judicial Power" is
defined in Black's 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 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.
1125, 38 Law Ed. 1047; Smith vs. Adams, 130 U.S. 1679, 32 L.Ed.. 895.
Under our form of
government every American, individually or by representation, is the
high and supreme sovereign authority. The authority at 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.
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
declared to be established in the authority of the people.
The authority of the
Constitution is grounded upon the absolute, God-given free agency of
each individual, and this is the basis of all powers granted, reserved
or withheld in the authorization of every word, phrase, clause or
paragraph of the Constitution. Any attempt by Congress, the President or
the Courts to limit, change or enlarge even the most claimed
insignificant provision is therefore ultra vires and void ab initio.
When considering the
United States Constitution, one must absolutely and completely clear his
mind of all British, monarchical, papal, clergical, continental,
financial, or other alien influences or conceptions of government the
rights of the individual and what is Constitutional.
Our Constitution
stands absolute and alone.
It must be read in
the light of all engagements entered into before its adoption including
the Declaration of Independence and the privileges and immunities
secured by Common Law confirmed by Magna Charta and other English
Charters, excepting therefrom all clerical, papel and monarchical
nonsense.
No one applying the
Constitution to any situation has any business, right or duty to look in
any direction for sovereignty but toward the people. Any attempt or
inclination to do so is a violation of one's oath and continuing duty to
uphold, maintain and support the Constitution of the United States of
America.
See Waring vs. Mayor
of Savannah, 60 Georgia, Page 93, where it is quoted as follows:
"In this State as
well as in all republics, it is not the Legislature, however
transcendent its powers, who are supreme - but the people - and to
suppose that they may violate the fundamental law, is, as has been most
eloquently expressed, to affirm that the deputy is greater than his
principal; that the servant is above his master, that the
representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves;
that men acting by virtue of delegated power may do not only what their
powers do not authorize, but what they forbid."
The law is made by
the Legislature, but applied by the Courts.
See generally Mr.
Justice Story's commentaries on the Constitution found in Story on the
Constitution, Vol. 1, Section 198 through 280 on the History of the
Revolution and the Confederation, origin of the Confederation, analysis
of the Articles of the Confederation and the Decline and Fall of the
Confederation including the reasons for it, which in chief was a
debasement of our money and currency by the banks, similar to what is
taking place in the United States today.
For authority to
support the proposition that an Act of Congress in violation of the
Constitution confers no rights or privileges see 16 Am. Jur. 2d
"Constitutional Law,"; Sections 177 thru 179
Article I, Section 10
of the United States Constitution provides that no State shall make any
Thing but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts.
The act of the Clerk
of the District Court is the act of the State. The Clerk of the District
Court is the agent of the Judicial Branch of the Government of the State
of Minnesota. See Briscoe et al vs. The Bank of the Commonwealth of
Kentucky, 11 Peters Reports at Page 319, "A State can act only through
its agents; and it would be absurd to say that any act was not done by a
State which was done by its authorized agents."
For the Justice Fees
the bank deposited with the Clerk of District Court the two Federal
Reserve Notes. The Clerk tendered the Notes to me. My sworn duty
compelled me to refuse the tender. This is contrary to the Constitution
of the United States. The States have no power to make bank notes a
legal tender. See 35 Amer. Jur. on Money, Section 13. Only gold and
silver coin is a lawful tender.
See also 36 Am. Jur.
on Money, Section 9. Bank Notes are a good tender on money unless
specifically objected to. Their consent and usage is based upon the
convertibility of such notes to coin at the pleasure of the holder upon
presentation to the bank for redemption. When the inability of a bank to
redeem its notes is openly avowed they instantly lose their character as
money and their circulation as currency ceases.
There is also no
lawful consideration for these notes to circulate as money. The banks
actually obtained these notes for the cost of the printing. There is no
lawful consideration for said Notes.
A lawful
consideration must exist for these Notes to circulate as money. The
banks actually obtained these notes for the cost of the printing. There
is no lawful consideration for said Notes.
A lawful
consideration must exist for a Note. See 17 Amer. Jur. 2d on Contracts,
Section 85 and also Sections 215, 216 and 217 of 11 Amer. Jur. 2nd on
Bills and Notes. As a matter of fact, the "Notes"; are not Notes at all
as they contain no promise to pay.
The activity of the
Federal Reserve Banks of Minneapolis, San Francisco and the First
National Bank of Montgomery is contrary to public policy and the
Constitution of the United States and constitutes an unlawful creation
of money and credit is not warranted by the Constitution of the United
States.
The Federal Reserve
and National Banks exercise an exclusive monopoly and privilege of
creating credit and issuing their Notes at the expense of the public,
which does not receive a fair equivalent. This scheme is obliquely
designed for the benefit of an idle monopoly to rob, blackmail and
oppress the producers of wealth.
The Federal Reserve
Act and the National Bank Act is in its operation and effect contrary to
the whole letter and spirit of the Constitution of the United States,
confers an unlawful and unnecessary power on private parties; holds all
of our fellow citizens in dependence; is subversive to the rights and
liberties of the people. It has defied the lawfully constituted
Government of the United States. The Federal Reserve and National
Banking Acts and Sec. 462 (392) of Title 31, U.S.C. are not necessary
and proper for carrying into execution the legislative powers granted to
Congress or any other powers vested in the Government of the United
States, but, on the contrary, are subversive to the rights of the People
in their rights to life, liberty and Property. The aforementioned acts
of Congress are unconstitutional and void and I so hold.
The meaning of the
Constitutional provision "No State Shall make any Thing but Gold and
Silver Coin a tender in payment of debts" is direct, clear, unambiguous
and without any qualification. This Court is without authority to
interpolate any exception. My duty is simple to execute it, as written,
and to pronounce the legal result. From an examination of the case of
Edwards v. Kearzev, 96 U.S. 595, the Federal Reserve Notes (fiat money),
which are attempted to be made a legal tender, are exactly what the
authors of the Constitution of the United States intended to prohibit.
No State can make these Notes a legal tender, are exactly what the
authors of the Constitution of the United States intended to prohibit.
No State can make these Notes a legal tender. Congress is incompetent to
authorize a State to make the Notes a legal tender. For the effect of
binding Constitutional provisions see Cooke v. Iverson, 108 M. 388 and
State v. Sutton, 63 M. 147. This fraudulent Federal Reserve System and
National Banking System has impaired the obligation of Contract,
promoted disrespect for the Constitution and Law and has shaken society
to its foundations.
The Court is at a
loss, because of the non-appearance of Plaintiff to determine upon what
legal theory Plaintiff could possibly claim that the Notes in question
are a legal tender. If they have any validity it must come from the
Constitution of the United States and laws passed pursuant thereto.
Inquiry was made of Mr. Daly as to what laws these Notes could be
possibly based upon to sustain their validity. To aid the Court he
presented the following: Section 411, 412, 417, 418, 420 of USC Title 12
and Title 31, USC Sec. 462 (392).
On the one hand
Section 411 holds and states that the Notes are to be used for the
purpose of making advances to Federal Reserve Banks through Federal
Reserve Agents and for no other purposes. Then Title 31, Section 462
(392) states: "All Federal Reserve Notes and circulating Notes of
Federal Reserve Banks and National Banking Associations heretofore or
hereafter issued, shall be legal tender for all debts public and
private."
The Constitution
states, "No State shall make any Thing but Gold and Silver Coin a legal
tender in payment of debts." The above referred to enactments of
Congress state that the Notes are a legal tender. There is a direct
conflict between the Constitution and the Acts of Congress. If the
Constitution is not controlling then Congress is above and has superior
authority from the Constitution and the People who ordained and
established it.
Title 31 USC, Section
462 (392) is in direct conflict with the Constitution insofar at least,
that it attempts to make Federal Reserve Notes a Legal Tender, the
Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Sec. 462 (392) is not a law
which is made in pursuance of the U.S. Constitution. It is
unconstitutional and void and I so hold. Therefore, the two Federal
Reserve Notes are null and void for any lawful purpose so far as this
case is concerned and are not a valid deposit of $2.00 with the Clerk of
the District Court. I hold that the case has not been lawfully removed
from the Court and jurisdiction thereof is still vested in the Court.
However; there is a
second ground of invalidity of these Federal Reserve Notes previously
discussed and that is the Notes are invalid because on no theory are
they based upon a valid, adequate or lawful consideration.
At the hearing
scheduled for January 22, 1969 at 7:00 p.m., Mr. Morgan, nor anyone else
from or representing the Bank, attended to aid the Court in making a
correct determination.
Mr. Morgan appeared
at the trial on December 7, 1969 and appeared as a witness to be candid,
open, direct, experienced and truthful. He testified to 20 years of
experience with the Bank of America in Los Angeles, the Marquette
National Bank of Minneapolis and the Plaintiff in this case. He seemed
to be familiar with the operations of the Federal Reserve System. He
freely admitted that his Bank created all of the money or credit upon
its books with which it acquired the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964.
The credit first came into existence when the Bank created it upon its
books. Further he freely admitted that no United States Law gave the
bank the authority to do this. There was obviously no lawful
consideration for the Note. The Bank parted with absolutely nothing
except a little ink. In this case the evidence was on January 22, 1969
that the Federal Reserve Banks obtain the Notes for the cost of the
printing only. This seems to be confirmed by Title 12 USC, Section 420.
The cost is about 9/10ths of a cent per Note, regardless of the amount
of the Note. The Federal Reserve Banks create all of the Money and
Credit upon their books by bookkeeping entry by which they acquire
United States and State Securities. The collateral required to obtain
the Notes is, by Section 412, USC, Title 12, a deposit of a like amount
of Bonds, Bonds which the Banks acquired by creating money and credit by
bookkeeping entry.
No rights can be
acquired by fraud. The Federal Reserve Notes are acquired through the
use of unconstitutional statutes and fraud.
The Common Law
requires a lawful consideration for any Contract or Note. These Notes
are void for failure of a lawful consideration at Common Law, entirely
apart from any Constitutional Considerations upon this ground the Notes
are ineffectual for any purpose. This seems to be the principal
objection to paper fiat money and the cause of its depreciation and
failure down through the ages. If allowed to continue Federal Reserve
Notes will meet the same fate. From the evidence introduced on January
22, 1969, this Court finds that as of March 18, 1968 all Gold and Silver
backing is removed from Federal Reserve Notes.
The law leaves
wrongdoers where it finds them. See 1 Amer. Jur. 2nd on Actions,
Sections 50, 51 and 52.
This Court further
observes that the jurisdiction of the Court is conferred by Article 6,
Sec. 1 of the Minnesota Constitution. "Sec. 1. The judicial power of the
state is hereby vested in a Supreme Court, a District Court, a Probate
Court and such other Courts, minor judicial officers and commissioners
with jurisdiction inferior to the District Court as the legislative may
establish." Pursuant thereto an Act of the legislature credited this
Court.
Nothing on the
Constitution or laws of the United States limits the jurisdiction of
this Court. The Constitution of Minnesota does not limit the
jurisdiction of this Court. It therefore has complete Jurisdiction to
render justice in this cause in accordance with and agreeable to the
Supreme Law of the Land. See 16 Am. Jur. 2d on Constitutional Law
Sections 210 thru 222.
"When a Court is
created by Act of the Legislature the Judicial Power is conferred by the
Constitution and not by the Act creating the Court. If its Jurisdiction
is to be limited it must be limited by the Constitution." See Minn,
Const. "Bill of Rights."; In any event the Banks has not raised any
question as to the jurisdiction of this Court.
Slavery and all its
incidents including Peonage thralldom and debt created by fraud is
universally prohibited in the United States. This case represents but
another refined form of Slavery by the Bankers. Their position is not
supported by the Constitution of the United States. The People have
spoken their will in terms which cannot be misunderstood. It is
indispensable to the preservation of the Union and independence and
liberties of the people that his Court adhere only to the mandates of
the Constitution and administer it as written. I therefore hold the
Notes in question void and not effectual for any purpose.
January 30, 1969
BY THE COURT
/s/ Martin V. Mahoney
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RE:
First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly
IN THE JUSTICE
COURT
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 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 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 me 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 Sheriff's 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.
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.
BY THE COURT
Dated December 9,
1968
Justice MARTIN V.
MAHONEY
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 into 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 be
tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing Company v.
Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 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."
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 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.
BY THE COURT
December 9, 1968
Justice Martin V.
Mahoney
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.
JEROME DALY had his
own information to reveal about this case, which establishes that
between his own revealed information and the fact that Justice Martin V.
Mahoney was murdered 6 months after he entered the Credit River Decision
on the books of the Court, why the case was never legally overturned,
nor can it be
|