A Great Fraud

7/31/2019 A Great Fraud

1/38

Page 1 of 38 A Great Fraud exposed

A Great Fraud

ExposedUnited States"

is not the same as

"united states of America""If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, itexpects what never was and never will be."

- Thomas Jefferson

The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 created a municipal

corporation to govern the District. If one considers the fact that themunicipal government was actually incorporated in 1808, an organic

act (original) using the phrase municipal corporation in 1871 can

only refer to a private corporation owned by the municipalityU.S.Corp, if you will. It trademarked the name, United States

Government referring to it, or themselves. This act placed Congress in

control as a Board of Directors of the corporation whose purpose is toact as a governing body over the municipality. This facilitated directingbusiness under martial law and permitted corporate abilities where theConstitution prohibited such activity. Congress could then pass any law

to apply jurisdictionally within the ten square miles of the District ofColumbia.

Next, this act called for the adoption (taking ownership of somethingthat does not belong to the taker) of a constitution (U.S. Corps)

curiously identical the Constitution of the United States of America less


2/38


the original 13th amendment (titles of nobility); then renumbering the14th, 15th and 16th as 13, 14, and 15 respectively. Now attorneys couldrun government since they were prohibited under the original 13th

amendment, how convenient! Notice how under corporate rules policy

is simply dictated, not ratified.

All this was done under the fog of the Civil War, aided and abetteddirectly by Lincoln (dishonest Abe) and sealed as de facto with thefraudulent insertion of the 14th Amendment (which was not to giveblacks equal rights but rather to declare ALL Americans, identifiednow as American citizens, to be EQUALLY chattel and subjects to

the presumptions of Washington (which through martial law enacted byLincoln simultaneously usurped the de jure sovereignty of the Several

States into a homologous corporate entity as political subdivisions, a

term you will find throughout US Code citations).

The issues as to whether there are different meanings for the term"United States", and whether there are three different "United States"operating within the same geographical area, and one "United States"operating outside the Constitution over its own territory (in which it hascitizens belonging to said "United States"), were settled in 1901 by theSupreme Court in the cases of De Lima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1 andDownes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244. In Downes supra, Justice Harlandissented as follows:

The idea prevails with some -- indeed, it found expression in argumentsat the bar -- that we have in this country substantially or practically twonational governments; one, to be maintained under the Constitution,with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outsideand independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers asother nations of the earth are accustomed to exercise.

[Downes supra, page 380, emphasis added]

He went on to say, on page 382:

It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of agovernment outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in


3/38


our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this courtthan to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles ofthe Constitution.

[Downes supra, page 382, emphasis added]

Quoting Fourteen Diamond Rings v. United States, 183 U.S. 176; cf. DeLima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1; Dooley v. United States, 182 U.S. 222;Faber v. United States, 221 U.S. 649; cf. Huus v. New York & P.R.S.S.Co., 182 U.S. 392; Gonzales v. Williams, 192 U.S. 1; West India Oil Co.

v. Domenech, 311 U.S. 20.

The Court, in Hooven supra, indicated that this was the last time itwould address the issue; it would just be judicially noticed.

1. See Langdell, "The Status of our New Territories," 12 HarvardLaw Review 365, 371; see also Thayer, "Our New Possessions," 12Harvard Law Review 464; Thayer, "The Insular Tariff Cases in theSupreme Court," 15 Harvard Law Review 164; Littlefield, "TheInsular Cases," 15 Harvard Law Review 169, 281.

"Act of Congress"

I found this revelation in 28 U.S.C. Rule 54(c),Application of Terms:

"As used in these rules the following terms have thedesignated meanings. 'Act of Congress' includes any act ofCongress locally applicable to and in force in the District

of Columbia, in Puerto Rico, in a territory or in an insularpossession."


4/38


TITLE 2-- CHAPTER 14 Sec. 431. Definitions

(12) The term ``State'' means a State of the United States, theDistrict of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a territoryor possession of the United States.

From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access[www.gpoaccess.gov][Laws in effect as of January 3, 2007][CITE: 1USC2]

The U.S. does not have any employees because there is no longer a

United States. No more reorganizations. After 200 years of bankruptcyit is finally over. Executive Order 12803

There are NO Judicial Courts in America and have not been since 1789.

'Judges do NOT enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administratorsenforce Statutes and Codes. FRC v. GE, 281 U.S. 464 Keller v. PotomacElec. Co., 261 U.S. 428 1 Stat. 138-178

There have NOT been any 'Judges in America since 1789. There have


5/38


only been Administrators. FRC v. GE, 281 U.S. 464 Keller v. PotomacElec. Co., 261 U.S. 428 1 Stat. 138-178

A 1040 Form is for Tribute paid to Britain. IRS Publication 6209

TITLE 1--GENERAL PROVISIONS

CHAPTER 1--RULES OF CONSTRUCTION

Sec. 2. ``County'' as including ``parish'', and so forth

The word ``county'' includes a parish, or any other equivalentsubdivision of a State or Territory of the United States.

(July 30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 633.)

"The US Government Incorporated as a for-profit commercialenterprise in the legislative act of February 21st of 1871; 41st Congress

Session 3, Chapter 62 page 419 and charted a federal company entitled'United States, i.e. United States AKA US Incorporated, a commercialagency originally designated as Washington D.C.; in accordance withthe so-called 14th Amendment, which the records indicate was neverratified. The iron-fist government is a foreign corporation with respectto the state."

The corporate United States

THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT(founded on February 211871). The final act of incorporation was passed on June 11, 1878 atchapter 180, 20 statutes at large, page 102. Where the corporation was

renamed United States Government and then quit claimed tothe international monetary fund (under title 22 US code section 286) in1944.


6/38


Volume 20: Corpus Juris Sec. Section 1785: "The United StatesGovernment is a foreign corporation with respect to a state" NY re:

Merriam 36 N.E. 505 141 S.Ct.1973, 41 L.Ed.287

Corpus Juris Sec. Section 1785:

"The United States Government is a foreign corporation with

respect to a state" NY re:

Merriam 36 N.E. 505 141 S.Ct.1973, 41 L.Ed.287

C.J.S. Section 1786 states:

"A corporation created by or under an act of a territorial legislature

is not a federal corporation but a corporation of the territory and ithas the status of a foreign corporation in every other state and

territory."

The most significant Foreign Corporation, created under the

United States' powers of territorial legislation, is a Corporation,

foreign to the 50 states, named "The United States Government"!

The words are capitalized because as a corporation, it is a "proper

noun." This Government is foreign to the 50 states and operates

under legislative absolutism. Here, the [National] United States

Government is Sovereign and its citizens are "subject" to its

jurisdiction. The government for the 50 states is a small "g"

government where the People are Sovereign and our government

may only assume such powers as we specifically delegate to it, for

the purpose of our securing our general wellbeing, our happiness,


7/38


liberty, property and other Rights. We may also take away those

powers if our government abuses them.

It is noticeable that Possessions of the United States2 andsovereign states of the United States3 of America are NOT joined

under the title of "United States." The president represents the

sovereign United States1 in foreign affairs through treaties,

Congress represents the sovereign United States2 in Territories and

Possessions with Rules and Regulations, and the state citizens are

the sovereignty of the United States3 united by and under the

Constitution .... After becoming familiar with these historical facts,

it becomes clear that in the Internal Revenue Code, Section7701(a)(9), the term "United States2" is defined in the second of

these senses as stated by the Supreme Court: it designates the

territory over which the sovereignty of the United States2 extends.

The federal zone over which the sovereignty of the United

States2 extends is the District of Columbia, the territories and

possessions belonging to Congress, and a limited amount of land

within the States of the Union, called federal "enclaves".

"All codes, rules and regulations are applicable to the government

authorities only, not human/creators in accordance with God's

laws. All codes, rules and regulations are unconstitutional and

lacking in due process...."

Rodrigues v. United States Secretary of Labor, 769 F.2d

1344 (9th Cir. 08/26/1985)

Each of the 50 states is foreign to the other. That is why gambling is

legal in Nevada, but not in Utah. It is also why, if a criminal commits


8/38


a felony in one state and flees to another, he or she must be

extradited back to the state where the crime was committed. That is the

only state that has jurisdiction over that person. Just as a state has

a particular territory over which it may exercise it exclusive

jurisdictional authority, the [District] United States also has aparticular territory, over which it exercises its exclusive

jurisdiction.

This territory was previously defined in Article I Section 8, Clause 17

of the Constitution. THIS TERRITORY DOES NOT INCLUDE THE 50

STATES.

When referring to this [District] United States, the Internal Revenue

Code uses the term "WITHIN" the United States. When referring to the 50

sovereign states, the Internal Revenue Code uses the term, "WITHOUT"the United States.

The [District] United States, according to CJS Section 2, is not a

place but a "body politic" and "body corporate."

"When the United States enters into commercial business, it abandons

its sovereign capacity and is to be treated like any other corporation."

Title 28 United States Code3002, section 15, subparagraph A shows that United States is a Federal

corporation.

http://cfr.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI_20_176_30_A.h

tml

"Control over the possession and sale of any item within the states is not a

power possessed by Congress. This was so held in United States v. DeWitt,

76 U.S. 41, 45 (1870), which tested the constitutionality of a federal revenue

act making it illegal to sell illuminating oil of a certain flammability. Here,

the Court held Congress did not have the power to penalize these sales: "As

a police regulation, relating exclusively to the internal trade of the States, it

can only have effect where the legislative authority of Congress excludes,

territorially, all state legislation, as, for example, in the District of Columbia.

Within state limits, it can have no constitutional operation."
http://cfr.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI_20_176_30_A.htmlhttp://cfr.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI_20_176_30_A.htmlhttp://cfr.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI_20_176_30_A.htmlhttp://cfr.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI_20_176_30_A.htmlhttp://cfr.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/usc_sup_01_28_10_VI_20_176_30_A.html


9/38


Balzac v. People of Porto Rico, 258 U.S. 298 (1922) This Supreme Court

opinion by Chief Justice William Howard Taft identifies United States

district courts as territorial courts. Any federal court calling itself aUnited States District Court will be a court that is limited to federalterritory and federal property.

Foley Brothers, Inc. v. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281 (1949). (U.S. regulationsapply only within the U.S. territories and the District of Columbia. It is awell established principle of law that all federal regulation applies only

within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States unless a contraryintent appears.)

Caha v. US, 152 U.S. 211 (1894) (U.S. regulations apply only within theU.S. territories and the District of Columbia. The laws of Congress inrespect to those matters [outside of Constitutionally delegated powers] do

not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the

District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusivejurisdiction of the national government.)

- U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222. (U.S. regulations apply onlywithin the U.S. territories and the District of Columbia. There is acanon of legislative construction which teaches Congress that, unless

a contrary intent appears [legislation] is meant to apply only within

the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.)

- Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901). (Purportedly decided ifthe constitution applies to U.S. territories. In actuality, unleashed the

great fraud of unlimited statutory power misapplied throughout the

continental united States of America. Dissenting opinion of Justice


10/38


Marshall Harlan. two national governments, one to be maintainedunder the Constitution, with all its restrictions, the other to be

maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument,

by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are

accustomed toa radical and mischievous change in our system ofgovernment will resultWe will, in that event, pass from the era of

constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution

into an era of legislative absolutismIt will be an evil day for

American liberty if the theory of a government outside the supreme

law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence.

In other words, a genuine de jure united States of America congress is

always bound to enact laws within the jurisdiction of the constitution.

He held to the obvious truth that congress does not exist, let alone

have powers, outside the constitution. Harlan said, "This nation is

under the control of a written constitution, the supreme law of the landand the only source of the powers which our government, or any

branch or officer of it, may exert at any time or at any place.")

The Citizens of the 50 states have no more duty to obey the Federal"United States Government" and legislation created for citizens subject to

its jurisdiction than they have for obeying the laws of the AfricanGovernment!

_________________________________________________

Constitution for the united states; Article I Section 8, Clause17:

"The Congress shall have the power? To exercise exclusive legislativeaction, in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten Miles

square) as may, by cession of particular states and the acceptance of

Congress, become the seat of the Government of the United States, [District

of Columbia] and to exercise like authority over all places [federal enclaves]

purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same

shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock yards and


11/38


other needful Buildings; And? To make all laws which shall be necessaryand proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers"

Constitution for the united states; Article IV Section 3, Clause

2:"The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules

and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the

United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to

Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State."

The jurisdictional area of this United States is limited only to the District of

Columbia (not exceeding a ten mile square) and the Possessions and

Territories (i.e., Guam, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, etc.) belonging to

and under the exclusive Sovereignty of the United States. This United Statesdoes NOT include the 50 states, except for lands which were specifically

ceded to the United States for purposes such as setting up military bases,

federal buildings, etc. The 50 sovereign states DO NOT belong to the United

States. [The 50 states belong to the Sovereign PEOPLE]. In the territorial

States (but NOT in the 50 states) the United States is Sovereign and

exercises exclusive and absolute legislative authority. This "other" United

States is a corporate entity with the deceptive "trade names" of "The United

States" and the "U.S." This information will refer to this "other" United

States as the [District] United States.

Following are areas which are under territorial United Statesjurisdiction:

1. The District of Columbia

2. Puerto Rico

3. U.S. Virgin Islands

4. Guam

5. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

6. America Samoa7. Northern Mariana Islands

Also belonging to the United States, are enclaves, which are portions of

land, which the 50 states have ceded to the federal government for the

"erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards and other needful


12/38


buildings" (ie. military bases within the 50 states) and instrumentalities(agencies and organizations) of the federal Government.

(1) The National United States Government [which is foreign to the 50

sovereign states] legislates for these Territories and Possessions withoutConstitutional restrictions.

(2) The federal government legislates for the 50 states BUT ONLY in those

matters The People have specifically delegated to it in our Constitution! It is

imperative to distinguish between the National Government and the federal

government, otherwise the Citizens of the 50 sovereign states may

unwittingly acquiesce to legislation that is not applicable to them. There is

some confusion, however, because the National United States, misleadingly,uses the word "Federal" in the title of many of its "national" agencies.

The Government by becoming a corporator (See: 28 USC

3002(15)(A)(B)(C), 22 USCA 286(e) lays down its sovereignty and

takes on that of a private citizen, it can exercise no power which is not

derived from the corporate charter. (See: The Bank of the United

States vs. Planters Bank of Georgia. 6 L Ed.(Wheat)

244; U.S. vs. Burr. 309 U.S. 242). The REAL PARTY IN INTEREST is

not the de jure "United States of America" or "State", but "The Bank" and

"The Fund". (22 USCA 286, et seq.). The acts committed under fraud,

force and seizure are many times done under "Letters of Marque and .

Reprisal" i.e. "recapture." (See: 31 USCA 5323). such principles as

"Fraud and Justice never dwell together. Wingate's Maxims, 680. and,


13/38


"A right of action cannot arise out of fraud."

"In exercising its constitutional power to make all needful regulations

respecting territory belonging to the United States, Congress [under Article ISection 8 Clause 17 and Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 of the Constitution

for the united states of America] is not subject to the same constitutional

limitations as when it is legislating for the united states [the 50 states]."

Hooven and Allisons Co. v. Evatt, 324, U.S. 652

This decision affirmed that the United States did, indeed have two (2)

distinctly different United States with two opposite forms of governmentsand opposite legal systems, legislated by one Congress. This ruling is

responsible for (explaining) the mass inconsistencies and confusion that

exists in our current American legal system.

"These united states of America" consists of the 50 sovereign states in

America, united under one Constitution. The original "united States" was

and is not a Title but a descriptive phrase.

The very different "United States" definition to which the Hooven decision

referred, does not include the 50 states but is a "term" for a "Territorial"United States. In the Constitution, the federal government was given the

power to set up a "seat of government," over which it exercised "exclusive

jurisdiction in all cases whatsoever." This Territory was created and limited

by Article I Section 8. Clause 17 and Article IV Section 3. Clause 2 of our

Constitution. Pay close attention to where the exclusive jurisdiction of this

"Territorial" United States ends.

The Constitution of the (u)nited States of America uses the term: "the

several states."This means the territorial government and its Article Iecclesiastical or legislative courts. Under Article IV, Section 4, theConstitution uses the term "states in this union." "States in this union"isdifferent from "the several states"as used in Article I of the Constitution.

Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution guarantees the republican form of


14/38


government. "States in this union"is referring to public municipal law ofthe Republican states for private purposes while "the several states"refersto private law for making public policy, i.e., trust law including the

Uniform Commercial Code.

On March 9, 1933 President Roosevelt called for the passing of The WAR

POWERS ACT TITLE 12 USC. Section 95 (a) and 95 (b). This act declared

all United States Citizens to be the enemy of the United States Government,

and placed U.S. Citizens under permanent Emergency Rule, bypassing

Constitutional constraints on government.

With the Erie R.R. v Tompkins case of 1938, the Supreme Court confirmed

their success. The U.S. now in an international private commercialjurisdiction in colorable admiralty-maritime under the Law Merchant.

U.S. citizens have been made slaves, i.e. permanent debtors, bankrupt, in

legal incapacity, rendered commercial "persons," "residents," and corporate

franchisees known as "citizens of the United States"

Since 1933 what is called the "United States Government" is a privately

owned corporation of the Federal Reserve/International Monetary Fund.

It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government hasbeen dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat.1,Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankruptand insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - JointResolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The GoldClause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the

official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers,and Departments and is further evidence that the United States FederalGovernment exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the InternationalBankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the InternationalMonetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments


15/38


are now operating within a de facto status in name only underEmergency War Powers.With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved,the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of

government for the United States. This new form of government isknown as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist orderunder a new governor for America. This act was instituted andestablished by transferring and/or placing the Officeof the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the InternationalMonetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in

part:"The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation forrepresenting the United States."

U.S. citizens are enemies of the State.

Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 &Amended in 1933 (People declared

the Enemy) Oct. 6, 1917, under the Trading with the Enemy Act, Section 2

subdivision ( c ) Chapter 106Enemy defined other than citizens of the

United States March 9, 1933, Chapter 106, Section 5, subdivision (b) of

the Trading with the Enemy Act of Oct. 6, 1917 (40 Stat. L. 411) amended

as follows:any person within the United States. See H.R.1491 Public

No.1

U.S. citizens are slaves and own absolutely, nothing not even what we think

are our children (Tillman v. Roberts 108 So. 62, Van Koten v. Van Koten

154 N.E. 146, Senate Document 43 & 73rd Congress 1 Session,

Wynehammer v. People 13 N.R. REP 378, 481)

_______Military Dictator George Washington divided up theStates (Estates) into Districts. Messages and Papers of the

Presidents, Volume 1 page 99 1828 Dictionary definition of'Estate ________________________________________

December 26th 1933 49 Statute 3097 Treaty Series 881

(Convention on Rights and Duties of States) stated


16/38


CONGRESS replaced STATUTES with international law,placing all States under international law.

December 9th 1945 International Organization

Immunities Act relinquished every public office of the UnitedStates to the United Nations.

22 CFR 92.12-92.31 FR Heading Foreign Relationship

states that an oath is required to take office.

Title 8 USC 1481 stated once an oath of office is taken

citizenship is relinquished, thus you become a foreign entity,

agency, or state. That means every public office is a foreignstate, including all political subdivisions. (i.e. every single courtis considered a separate foreign entity) Title 22 USC (Foreign Relations and Intercourse)

Chapter 11 identifies all public officials as foreign agents.__________________________________________________________-

The FCC,CIA,FBI,NASA and all of the other alphabet gangs werenever part of the United States government. Even though the US

Government held shares of stock in the various Agencies.U.S. v Strang,254 US 491, Lewis v.US,680 F.2d,1239

The Framers of the Constitution of September 17, 1787 met in secretsessions beginning on May 25, 1787 to fabricate a written scheme tocreate a corporation belonging to the United States of America thatwould administer the lands and other property belonging to the UnitedStates of America. The means by which these men accomplished their

plot was the creation of three distinct and separate Presidents.

The President of the United States is the first of these Presidents. He isthe President who will be the executive officer of the corporation thatadministers the lands and other property belonging to the United Statesof America. He will administer those lands and properties by exercising


17/38


the duties imposed on the President of the United States in Article ISection 7 of the Constitution of September 17, 1787.

The second President is the President of the United States of America,

an office, which requires no oath to be taken.

The third President would occupy the Office of President if ever aPresident Elect would take the Article VI oath to support this

Constitution.There is no evidence that any President has ever held this office.

It is NOT the 'duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protectTHE CORPORATION and arrest Code Breakers. Sapp v. Tallahassee,348 So.2nd. 363 Reiff v. City of Philla., 477 F.Supp. 1262 Lynch v. NC

Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E.2nd. 247The United States SupremeCourt declares that the Sovereignty remains

with the people...Yick Wo vs Hopkins and Wo Lee vs Hopkins (118 U.S.S.Ct. 356)

Sovereignty itself is, of course not subject to law, for it is the author and

source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the

agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom

and for whom all government exists and acts.Yick Wo vs Hopkins and WoLee vs Hopkins (118 U.S. S.Ct. 356)

There can be no limitations on the power of the people, of the United States

of America; by their Authority the State Constitutions are made and by their

authority the Constitution for the United States was

established...Hauenstein vs Lynham (100 U.S. 483)

No action can be taken against a sovereign in the non-constitutional courts

of either the United States or the State courts and any such actions is

considered the crime of Barratry. Barratry is an offense at common law.

State vs Boston, 17 S.E. 2D 511, 512, 513.

The Michigan Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Courtconcurred and made it perfectly clearthe term person does not include the

sovereign and that for a sovereign to be bound by statute the sovereign

must be specifically named. Will vs. Michigan State Police (1938 105 L.Ed.2Nd45).

Acts of Congress are not applicable to sovereigns in the 50 States. 18U.S.C. Rule 54 C Positive Law enacted Titles of the United States Code.


18/38


It is the doctrine of the Common Law that the sovereign cannot be sued in hisown court without his consent. The Siren, 74 U.S. (7Wall.) 152 (1869)

United States vs Fox (94 U.S. 315) states... in common usage, the term

person does not include the sovereign. Statutes employing the phrase areordinarily construed to exclude it.

"FRAUD vitiates the most solemn Contracts, documents and even

judgments."

[U.S. vs. Throckmorton,98 US 61, at pg. 65 ]

A state retains complete and exclusive political jurisdictionover land purchased by the United States without the consentof the state or where political jurisdiction has not beenotherwise ceded to the United States by the state. (US v. San

Francisco Bridge Co., D.C.Cal. 1898, 88 F. 891).

When United States acquires property by purchase,

consent of state must be secured before United States

has complete jurisdiction over property. (Hayes v. US,C.A.Kan. 1966, 367 F.2d 216).

Constitution prescribes the only mode by which the

United States can acquire land as a sovereign power,

and, therefore, they hold only as an individual whenthey obtain it in any other manner. (US v. Penn,

C.C.Va. 1880, 48 F. 669).

When land or other property is acquired by United

States by purchase or condemnation without consent ofstate legislature, it would not be entitled to exercise

exclusive jurisdiction over property, as state has
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=98&page=61http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=98&page=61http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=98&page=61http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=98&page=61


19/38


retained right to exercise its general police powers.

(McEachin v. US, D.C.App. 1981, 432 A.2d 1212).

Quotes

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of

fighting a foreign enemy."

James Madison (1751-1836), 4th U.S. President and author of the U.S.

Constitution

"The educated differ from the uneducated as muchas the living from the dead." --Aristotle

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.

That is easy. All you have to do is tell them thwy are being attackedand denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the

country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Herman Goering at the neuremburg trials

"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government

owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To

destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between

corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship oftoday."

US President Theodore Roosevelt,1906


20/38


"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to

tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and

an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the

country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of

the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is

destroyed." -- U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864 (letter to Col.

William F. Elkins) Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw

(Macmillan, 1950, NY)

H.L. Mencken wrote:

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and henceclamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins,

all of them imaginary."

"The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy somonstrous he cannot believe it exists." J. Edgar Hoover

Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States, 1919, speaking before

his death: "These International Bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oilinterests control the majority of newspapers [and in fact the major

schoolbook publishers] and the columns of these papers to club into

submission or drive out of public office officials who refuse to do the

bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible

government."

John Hylan Mayor of New York expanding on Roosevelt's statement in 1922:

"The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real

menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant

octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in itslong and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies,

our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the

public protection... To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at

the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a

small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the

international Bankers. The little coterie of powerful international Bankers


21/38


virtually run the United States Government for their own selfish purposes.

They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make

catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and

resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only

such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big

business... These international Bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oilinterests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country."

William Colby former Director of the CIA braggingly said (...and the Zionist

corporate/banking plutocracy owns everyone of any significance in the

Central Intelligence Agency): The Central Intelligence Agency owns

everyone of any significance in the major media. When asked in a 1976

interview whether the CIA had ever told its media agents what to write,

William Colby replied, "Oh, sure, all the time." William Colby (76) was found

dead in April 1996 Rocky Pt. MD, supposedly drowned in a canoeing

accident. Guess he talked too much and was planning to talk more!

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the

American public believes is false." William Casey, CIA Director, from notes

taken in a 1981 CIA staff meeting, that wasn't intended to be heard or

repeated outside the room.If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of

their currency, first buy inflation, then by deflation, the banks andcorporations which grow up around them will deprive people of all

property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent, theirfathers conquered.The issuing power should be taken from the banksand restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. ThomasJefferson

Lincoln printed 400 million dollars worth of Greenbacks (the exact amountbeing $449,338,902), money that he delegated to be created, a debt-freeand interest-free money to finance the War. It served as legal tender for alldebts, public and private. He printed it, paid it to the soldiers, to the U.S.Civil Service employees, and bought supplies for war.

In response to Lincoln issuing his own money the {Moneychangers} wrote in the London times::

"If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the NorthAmerican Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then thatGovernment will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debtsand be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its


22/38


commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history ofthe civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of allcountries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, orit will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of allindustry and commerce. And when we realize that the entire system is very

easily controlled, one way or another, by a few very powerful men at the top, youwill nothave to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.

U.S. President James Garfield. A few weeks after making this statement, hewas assassinated on July 12, 1818.

I am concerned for the security of our great nation, not so much because ofanythreat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within.

General Douglas MacArthur.

Suppose the government borrows $10 million. It only costs the bankers afew hundred dollars to actually produce the funds, and a little more to dothe book-keeping. Do you think it is fair that our citizens should struggle tokeep their homes and families together, while the bankers grow fat onthese profits?

Credit created by a Government-owned bank is better than credit created byprivate banks, because there is no need to recover the money from people byway of taxes, and there is no interest attached to inflate the cost. The public workcompleted with the credit by the Government bank is the asset that replaces themoney created when the work is finished.

None of our problems will disappear until we correct the creation, supplyand circulation of money. Once the money problem is solved, everythingelse will fall into place.

But if you wish to remain slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let

them create money.

Joshua Stamp, Director, Bank of England, 1928

Franklin Delano RooseveltU.S. PresidentThe real truth of the matter is, as you and I know that a financial element in the largecenters has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson. 1933

Felix frankfurterUS Supreme Court Justice


23/38


The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes.

1952

"It is the function of the CIA to keep the world unstable, and to

propagandize and teach the American people to hate, so we will let the

Establishment spend any amount of money on arms."--

John Stockwell, former CIA official and author

I know ofabsolute certainty that the division of the United States into twofederations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high

financial powers of Europe.

These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained as one

block and were to develop as one nation would attain economic and

financial independence, which would upset the Domination of Europe

over the world.---1876, Otto Von Bismarck, chancellor of Germany

Journal of the bar association of the District of Columbia, 1947, item notes:

v. 14,p.150

I fear that foreign bankers with their torture tricks will entirely control theexuberant riches of America and use it systematically too corrupt modern

civilization.

They will not hesitate to plunge the whole world into wars and chaos in

order that the earth should become their inheritance.

Otto Von Bismarck Chancellor of Germany

Federal Jurisdiction within a State

The ultimate goal of this document is to identify true jurisdictional authority

of the Federal Government,examine how the powers of individual States are usurped by federal

agencies, and examine how the

health, safety, and welfare of the citizens within the State are undermined: as

well as, provide a positive

and equitable solution.


24/38


Soon after declaring independence from the British Crown, the original

Colonies established themselves as

sovereign and separate nations. In fact, so independent were they it caused

an unforeseen rift between

the states in terms of interstate activity and commerce. In an attempt to link

the several states, the Articles of Confederation of November 17, 1777,emerged.

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and everyPower, Jurisdiction and right,

which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States,

in Congress assembled. 1

It became abundantly clear a more cohesive and functional link between the

states needed to bedeveloped. The First Constitutional Congress of1787, eleven years after theDeclaration of Independence

convened; from which emerged a legal contract between the states and the

people, called the UnitedStates Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution delegates, describes and limits the powers of each of

the three branches of

government; they are Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the

United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of

Representatives. 2

The subsequent sections of Article I and paragraphs grant enumerated

responsibilities to the central

government. The Framers intended that those were the only powers ceded to

the central government but a

condition of ratification for many states was a Bill of Rights, whichbecame the first ten amendments.

The 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights reaffirmed that any power not

explicitly granted to the central government was explicitly withheld fromthe central government.


25/38


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution notprohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the

people.3

1 Article 2, Articles of Confederation

2 United States Constitution Article 1 1

3 10th Amendment, Bill of Rights

The principal purpose was not the distribution of power between the central

government and the states but

rather a reservation to the States, or people of all powers not explicitly

granted.

POWER OVER LAND

The Constitution explicitly identifies geographic concerns as well as

imposing limits on Congress authority

and jurisdiction; to exercise exclusiveLegislation in all cases whatsoever,

over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by Cession of

particular States, and the Acceptance of congress, become the Seat of the

Government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all

places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the State in which the

same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and

other needful buildings.4

The Court established a principle that federal jurisdiction extends only

over the areas wherein it possesses the power ofexclusive legislation, and

this is a principle incorporated into all subsequent decisions regarding the

extent of federal jurisdiction. To hold otherwise would destroy the purpose,

intent and meaning of the entire U.S. Constitution.5

The State of Oregon consented to the federal government the acquisition of

land for federal buildings and

granted exclusive jurisdiction for needful public buildings 6 ; the same

applied to Fort Stevens 7, and Oregon


26/38


City canal 8. However, the State only granted concurrentjurisdiction overland acquired for national

forests. 9

The State of Oregon retains a concurrent jurisdiction with the UnitedStates in and over lands so acquired; So that civil processes in all cases, and

such criminal processes as may issue under the authority of this state

against any person charged with the commission of any crime without or

within such jurisdiction, may be executed theron in like manner as if this

consent had not been granted. 10

Concurrent jurisdiction does not reference perceived federal police powers

but rather the states ability tofile the case in either state or federal court.

4 United States Constitution, Article 1 8 c.17

5 United States v. Bevans 16 U.S. (3Wheat.) 366 (1818)

6 Oregon Revised Statute 272.030



9 Oregon Revised Statute 272.040 (2)

10 Oregon Revised Statute

In a dispute over federal jurisdiction of title to real property, the court held;

We think a proper examination of this subject will show that the UnitedStates never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in

and to the territory, of which Alabama or any of the new States were

formed, .

Because, the United States have no constitutional capacity to exercisemunicipal jurisdiction, sovereignty, or eminent domain, with the limits of a

State or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted,

Alabama is therefore entitled to the sovereignty and jurisdiction over allthe territory within her limits, subject to the common law, 11


27/38


The Constitution further grants Congress with the power, To make all lawswhich shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the

foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the

government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.12

Nowhere in these Articles is Congress granted a GENERAL legislativepower. Accordingly, the 10thAmendment reserved those powers to the States. This Article does notdelegate a new and independent specific power but rather a provision for

making effective the powers theretofore mentioned.

MISSION CREEP

A term often used in military circles called mission creep seems to be a

repetitive phenomenon thatoccurs within most organizations as well as governments, throughout

history. Over the many years, our

system of government seemingly has fallen victim to this dilemma.

This methodology is often engaged to usurp limiting or prohibitive factors or

to fill voids where deemed

necessary; as seen with the advent of, and continued efforts by the United

States Forest Service, Bureau of

Land Management, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of

Environmental Quality, Fish and

Game, and many other federal regulatory organizations.

According to enumerated powers of Congress expressed in Article 1, and

subsequent paragraphs, the only

exceptions enabling Congress power over an individual State is often

referred to as the InterstateCommerce Clause, which states: To regulate commerce with foreignnations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. 13

11 Pollard v. Hagan, 44 U.S. (3 How.) 212 (1845)




28/38


In careful reading of the paragraphs contained in Article 1, the onlyother

exception is the federal governments authority to coin money, declare war,

raise revenue, andcertain felonies such as counterfeiting, piracy, espionage.

The largest volume of violations to the Constitution is under color of the

Commerce Clause. In manycases, the issues assume the form of a recommendation, guideline, or federal

regulation of which the

States are often forced into compliance through threatening a loss of federal

funding.

The United States Department of Agriculture and Department ofInterior, specifically the United States Forest Service and Bureau ofLand Management identifies their source of authority to: The Congressshall have power todispose of andmake all needful Rules and Regulations

respecting the Territoryor other Property belonging to the United States;and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construedas to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

14

Their claims of authority, however, do prejudice the claims and powers ofindividual states.

The 10th Amendment, which was seemingly adopted with a precognitive

insight that our central government

would eventually overstep their authority; by disclosing the widespread fear

that the central government

might, under pressure of a supposed general welfare, attempt to exercise

powers which had not been

granted. With equal determination, the Constitutional framers intended that

no such assumption should

ever find justification; and if in the future, it were determined suchadditional powers seemed necessary -

only the people should grant them, in the proper manner prescribe for

amending those acts.

The second claim of federal jurisdiction purportedly emanates from an

interpretation describing their power


29/38


as without limitation referencing the Supremacy Clause. (see Kleppe v.New Mexico) 15

A study conducted (1956-1957) referred to as the Eisenhower Document

examined the federal authority

within a State. It was determined local law enforcement overlooked duties

within the lands held in trust by

the federal government and the federal agencies were not engaged in such

actions. What emerged from

this study were four levels of jurisdiction. They are (1) exclusive, (2)

concurrent, (3) partial, and (4)propriatorial. Most lands fit into the propriatorial level of jurisdiction,unless specifically stated otherwise.

The United States Constitution was signed September 17, 1787; thisdocument stood on its own for well

over 100 years; with a clear understanding of content and meaning. The

public lands (out West) were

considered by many as the problem lands. Accordingly, these lands werefor disposal and open for

purchase. The reason for selling these lands was to repay the National debt

incurred by the Civil War.

Moreover, to open the lands for expansion, exploration, occupancy, and

production by settlers.

When the actual shift in paradigm occurred is open for debate, but many of

these public lands held in trustseemingly became more desirable to retain, rather than for disposal.Whenever that actually started, newly formed federal regulatory agencies

worked their way into existence, each taking an increasingly

expanding role (enter mission creep).

14 U.S. Constitution, Article IV 3 c.2 (AKA Property Clause)15 Kleppe v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529, 542-543 (1976)


30/38


Instead of reading the Constitution in the matter of which it was designed

pari materia (all together), it becomes easier to distort or usurp the

original meaning of the U.S. Constitution. The courts have stated

repeatedly that laws relating to the same subject (such as land disposal

laws) must be read in pari material(all together). In other words, Federal

Land Plan Management Act (FLPMA) or any other land disposal actcannot

be read as if it stands alone. 16 Thereby, allowing these federal

regulatory entities to come up with their own agenda driven rules, which not

surprisingly often benefits the special interest groups agendas.

Examples of the continuation of mission creep are demonstrated in illegalroad closures of Revised

Statutes 2477 (RS2477) roads, which only meet the qualifications of

consideration for Wild Landsdesignation if they are 5,000 acres, or more, and roadless. These road and

trail closures by

decommissioning or destruction have been occurring for years.

In 1964, the U.S.G.S. redefined categories of roads to meet with their new

agendaroad closures for

qualifying as Wild Lands.

The Bureau of Land Management under the U.S. Department of Interior

issued a letter dated June 1, 2011

from Mr. Salazar (Secretary of Interior) stating the BLM will not designate

any lands a Wild Lands; but

directs Deputy David Hays to develop management of public lands with

Wilderness characteristics and to

solicit members of Congress, state and local officials, tribes and federal land

managers to identify BLM

lands that may be appropriate candidates for Congressional protection under

the Wilderness Act.

The USFS recently sent out a communication dated July 15, 2011 titled

Federal Register publication of Final Proposed Rules 262,261 and 212;purportedly to clarify and expand their authority.


31/38


Representatives of the USFS failed to defend their position from a legalstandpoint, submitting no legal analysis that justified their position. Instead,

they simply ruled that they did not recognize the validity of the Countys

assertion to the road. 17

It is no wonder everyone is confused with various federal entities writing

their own rules and regulations,

which serve only to confuse the public and often contradict each other.

These many federal agencies often

fail to follow their own rules and regulations; examples being mining laws,

clean water, timber harvest,

grazing, travel management acts such as FLPMA, and so on. This manner of

business has turned into a

900-pound gorilla and needs to be addressed at the highest levels.

16 Congressional Record, October 23, 2000 E1883, Hon. Jim Gibbons of

Nevada in the House of Representatives.

17 Congressional Record, October 23, 2000 E1884, Hon Jim Gibbons of


POLICE POWERS

Getting back to the original issue of the federal government bodies engaging

in police powers within the Statesone of the more important cases, the

court ruled that forest reserves were not federal enclavessubject to the

doctrine of exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the United States.

Local peace officers wereto exercise civil and criminal process over theselands. Forest Service rangers were not lawenforcement officers unless

designated as such by state authority.

The USFS had no general grant of lawenforcement authority within a

sovereign State. 18

Road closures, for example, are critical to our public health welfare, and

safety. As the chief law

enforcement authority, saddled with those responsibilities, I must assert my

lawful authority to use any road

deemed essential in this regard to conduct law enforcement operations

including crime prevention, crime


32/38


response, fire suppression, emergency medical response, assistance to

federal agents, search and rescue

operations, drug cartel and illicit drug eradication, and related operations.

The closure of roads and

harassment by federal agents upon miners has prompted my actions.

LEGAL FOUNDATION FOR POLICE POWER

Recently, there has been a movement by the Supreme Courts in rendering

decisions relative to the clear meaning and intent of our Constitution. A

recent Court reviewed many of the clear attempts on the part of

Congress to usurp authority it did not have.

The Court stated But law in the sense in which courts speak of it today doesnot exist without some definite authority behind it. The common law so far

as it is enforced in

a State, whether called common law or not, is not the common law generally

but the law of that State existing by the authority of that State without regard

to what it may have been in England or anywhere else.

The authority and only authority is the State, and if that be so, the voiceadopted by the State as its own (whether it be of its Legislature or of its

Supreme Court) should utter the last word. Thus the doctrine

of Swift v. Tyson is, as Mr. Justice Holmes said,

an unconstitutional assumption of powers by the Courts of the UnitedStates which no lapse of time or respectable array of opinion should make

us hesitate to correct. In disapproving that doctrine, we do not hold [304

U.S. 64, 80] unconstitutional section of 34 of the Federal Judiciary Act of

1789 or any other act of Congress. We merely declare that in applying the

doctrine this Court and the lower courts have invaded rights which in our

opinion are reserved by the Constitution to the several states.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Thomas stated; the exchanges during theratification campaign reveal the relatively limited reach of the Commerce

Clause and of federal power generally. The Founding Fathers confirmed

that most areas of life (even many matters that would have substantial

effects on commerce) would remain outside the reach of the Federal

Government. Such affairs would continue to be under the


33/38


exclusive control of the States.

18 Congressional Record, October 23, 2000 E1886, Hon Jim Gibbons of


We have said that Congress may regulate not only Commerceamong

the several states, U.S. Const., Art. I, 8, cl.3, but also anything that has asubstantial effect on such commerce. This test, if taken to its logical

extreme, would give congress a policepower over all aspects of American

life. Unfortunately, we have never come to grips with this implication of our

substantial effects formula. Although we have

supposedly applied the substantial effects test for the past 60 years, we

always have rejected readings of the Commerce Clause and the scope of

federal power that would permit Congress to exercise a policepower; ourcases are quite clear that there are real limits to federal powerIndeed, onthe crucial point, the majority and Justice Breyer agree in principle: the

Federal Government has nothing approaching a police power.

The Constitution mandates this uncertainty by withholding from Congress

a plenary police power that would authorize enactment of every type of

legislation. 19

In another case, the Court claimed the federal government had no

jurisdiction over crimes committed within

the 50 States.20

In the United States of America, there are two separate and distinct

jurisdictions, such being the jurisdiction of the states within their own state

boundaries, and the other being federal jurisdiction (central government),

which is limited to the District of Columbia, the U.S. territories, and federal

enclaves within the states, under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17. The

article which describes the judicial power of the United States is not

intended for the cession of territory or of general jurisdiction Congresshas power to

exercise exclusive jurisdiction over this district, and over all places

purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same

shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other

needful buildings.21


34/38


Special provision is made in the Constitution for the cession of jurisdictionfrom the States over places where the federal government shall establish

forts or other military works. And it is only in these places, or in the

territories of the United States, where it can exercise a general

jurisdiction.22

19 United States v. Lopez, 115 S.Ct. 1624 (1995)

20 United States v. Morrison, 169 F.3d 820 (1999)

21 United States v. Bevans, 16 (3 Wheat.) 336 (1818)

22 New Orleans v. United States, 35 U.S. (10 Pet.) 662, 737 (1836)

USES OF PUBLIC LAND

There seems to be more and more regulations coming forth that violate

property rights and grants to the

people by our Constitution; such as, the Executive order creating Humboldt

National Forest, Where the Road resides and relevant Congressional acts

contain a savings clause protecting preexisting rights. The Presidential

Executive Order which created the Humboldt National Forest contained a

savings clause, protecting all existing rights and excluding all land more

valuable for agriculture and mining. 23

Public Lands are lands open to sale or other dispositions under general

laws, lands to which no claim or rights of others have attached TheUnited States Supreme Court has stated: It is well settled that all land towhich any claim or rights of others has attached does not fall with the

designation of public lands.FLPMA defines public lands to mean any land and interest in land

owned by the United States with the several states and administered by the

Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management.24


35/38


Public land that is disposed by claims under the act of 1872 is PublicDomain. The locators of all mining locations made on any mineral vein,lode, or ledge, situated on the public domain, their heirs and assigns, where

no adverse claim existed on the 10th day of May 1872 so long as they

comply with the laws of the United States, and with State, territorial, and

local regulations not in conflict with the laws of the United States governing

their possessory title, shall have the exclusive right of possession and

enjoyment of all the surface included within the lines of their locations. 25

The mechanics of what happens to the public land once found to bemineral in character is expressly

evidenced in the Organic Act of 1897, that any public lands embracedwithin the limits of any forest

reservation which shall be found better adapted for mining or foragricultural purposes than for forest usage, may be restored to the public

domain. By private settlement under various land disposal laws of the

United States, such as the Mining Law of 1872, public land is restored to

the public domain.

The federal agencies have management authority only over public land,not privately settled public

domain. The act of location restores the land to public domain and the

mining law provides the locator of

such segregation shall have the exclusive right of possession and enjoymentof all the surface included within the lines of their locations 26

23 Congressional Record October 23, 2000 E1885 Hon. Jim Gibbons of

Nevada in the House of Representatives

24 Congressional Record October 23, 2000 E1885-E1886 Jim Gibbons of

Nevada

25 30 USC 26

26 R.S. 2332 derived from act May 10, 1872 ch. 152, 3, 17 Stat. 91


36/38


Federal mining claims are private property 27

butso long as he complies with the provisions of the mining laws his

possessory right, for all practical purposes of ownership, is as good as

though secured by patent. 28

All mining claims, whether quartz or placer, are real estate. The owner ofthe possessory right thereto has a legal estate therein with the meaning of

ORS 105.005 29

Setting the required boundaries of a mining claim literally sets a boundary

describing land separate and

distinct from agency authority placing the land under the exclusive authority

and jurisdiction of the locator.

This interest is also stated as case law and Forest Service Manual details. 30

By clear and identical language, Congress has stated in the Organic Act ofJune 4, 1897, the Eastern

Forests (Weeks) Act of 1911, and the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, that

there was no intention to retain

federal jurisdiction over private interests within national forests. The courts

have consistently upheld the

ruling in Kansas v. Colorado since 1907.

No section of the FLPMA and, therefore, no Forest Service authority may

impair or amend locators rights

under the act of 1872. 31Further that, no provision of this section or anyother section of this Act (FLPMA) shall in any way amend the Mining Law

of 1872 or impair the rights of any locators or claims under that Act,

including, but not limited to, rights of ingress and egress

One final point, where rights secured by the constitution are involved,

there can be no legislation or rulemaking that would abrogate them 32

27 Freese v. United States, 639 F.2d 754, 757, 226 Ct.Cl. 252 cert. denied,

454 U.S. 827, 102 S.Ct. 119, 70 L.Ed.2d103 (1981): Oil Shale Corp. v. Morton, 370 F. Supp. 108, 124 (D.Colo.

1973)

28 Wilbur v. U.S. ex rel. Krushnic, 1930, 50 S.Ct. 103, 280 U.S. 306, 74

L.Ed. 445

29 Oregon Revised Statute 517.080 Mining claims as realty.

30 Forest Service Manual 2813rights and obligations of claimants


37/38


31 43 USC 1732 (b)

32 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 p. 491

CONCLUSION

In summation, the Supreme Court has declared the federal government has

no authority or jurisdiction over individuals or issues not involving interstate

commerce or issues not involving federal territory. Neither Congress, nor the

President, can pass laws that govern life or activities within the boundaries

of the several States.

Police powers are not explicitly granted to the central (federal)government and thereby fall within the purview of the 10th Amendment

Clause of the Bill of Rights.

The points addressed in this document are not all that require redress, butrather presented to identify violations and disjointed (often overbearing)

management of our public lands.

The lack of federal Coordination and the inaccurate scientific studies tomention two, must also be addressed, as the federal agencies seem to

blatantly ignore.

At the beginning of this document, reference was made proposing a possible

solution. To that end, I would begin with a point made in the Congressional

Record referred to several times from Hon. Jim Gibbons of Nevada, to wit:

forest reserves were not federal enclaves subject to the doctrine of

exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the United States. Local peace officers

were to exercise civil and criminal process over these lands. Forest Service

rangers were not law enforcement officers unless designated as such by state

authority.33

Put police enforcement back where it belongs, within the several States, or

political subdivisions. In these tough economic times, it would put our

citizens back to work; by sub-contracting to local authorities for Law

Enforcement services it would most certainly provide a cost savings benefit

to the federal government; and places the protection of our forests andnatural resources with those having a real stake in the safety,

health, and welfare of the community they serve.

It is my hope; this letter will serve as a starting point of discussion.

Respectfully,

Gil Gilbertson, Sheriff

Josephine County, Oregon


38/38

33 Congressional Record October 23, 2000 E1886 Hon. Jim Gibbons of

Nevada in the House of Representatives, and

U.S. Supreme Court May 19, 1907 Kansas v. Colorado

A Great Fraud

Documents

Transcript of A Great Fraud