Description
NOTICE
NOTICE OF MEMORANDUM OF LAW-Points and Authorities in Support of International Bill of Exchange
“Those who constitute an association nationwide of private, unincorporated persons engaged in the business of banking to issue notes against these obligations of the United States due them; whose private property is at risk to collateralize the government’s debt and currency, by legal definitions, a “national banking association”; such notes, issued against these obligations of the United States to that part of the public debt due its Principals and Sureties are required by law to be accepted as “legal tender” of payment for all debts public and private, and are defined in law as “obligations of the United States”, on the same par and category with Federal reserve notes and other currency and legal tender obligations.”
RE: Item tendered for Discharge of Debt.
The instrument tendered to the bank and negotiated to the United States Treasury for settlement is an “Obligation of THE UNITED STATES,” under Title 18USC Sect.8, representing as the definition provides a “certificate of indebtedness ….drawn upon an authorized officer of the United States,” (in this case the Secretary of the Treasury)”issued under an Act of Congress” (in this case public law 73-10, HJR-192 of 1933 and Title 31 USC 3123, and 31 USC 5103) and by treaty (in this case the UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND INTERNATIONAL PROMISSORY NOTES (UNCITRAL) and the Universal Postal Union headquartered in Bern, Switzerland).
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > Sec. 1. > Sec. 8.
Sec. 8. – Obligation or other security of the United States defined
The term ”obligation or other security of the United States” includes all bonds, certificates of indebtedness, national bank currency, Federal Reserve notes, Federal Reserve bank notes, coupons, United States notes, Treasury notes, gold certificates, silver certificates, fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or upon authorized officers of the United States, stamps and other representatives of value, of whatever denomination, issued under any Act of Congress, and canceled United States stamps.
The International Bill of Exchange is legal tender as a national bank note, or note of a National Banking Association, by legal and/or statutory definition (UCC 4-105, 12CFRSec. 229.2, 210.2, 12 USC 1813), issued under Authority of the United States Code 31 USC 392, 5103, which officially defines this as a statutory legal tender
obligation of THE UNTIED STATES, and is issued in accordance with 31 USC 3123 and HJR-192 (1933) which establish and provide for its issuance as “Public Policy” in remedy for discharge of equity interest recovery on that portion of the public debt to its Principals, and Sureties bearing the Obligation of THE UNITED STATES.
This is a statutory remedy for equity interest recovery due the principles and sureties of the United States for discharge of lawful debts in commerce in conjunction with US obligations to that portion of the public debt it is intended to reduce.
During the financial crisis of the depression, in 1933 substance of gold, silver and real money was removed as a foundation for our financial system.
In it s place the substance of the American citizenry: their real property, wealth, assets and productivity that belongs to them was, in effect, ‘pledged’ by the government and placed at risk as the collateral for US debt, credit and currency for commerce to function.
This is well documented in the actions of Congress and the President at that time and in the Congressional debates that preceded the adoption of the reorganizational measures:
Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session, stated,
“Under the new law the money is issued to the banks in return for Government obligations, bills of exchange, drafts, notes, trade acceptances, and banker’s acceptances. The money will be worth 100 cents on the dollar, because it is backed by the credit of the nation. It will represent a mortgage on all the homes and other property of all the people in the Nation.” (Which lawfully belongs to these private citizens.)
The National Debt is defined as “mortgages on the wealth and income of the people of a country.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1959.)
Their wealth, …. their income.
The reorganization is evidenced by:
The Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933,
House Joint Resolution 192, June 5, 1933 (public law 73-10)
And the Series of Executive Orders that surrounded them:
6073- Reopening of Banks. Embargo on Gold Payments and Exports, and Limitations on Foreign Exchange Transactions. March 10, 1933
6111-Transactions in foreign exchange are permitted under Governmental Supervision. April 20, 1933
6102 – Forbidding the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion and gold certificates. April 5,
On December 23, 1913, Congress had passed “An Act to provide for the establishment of Federal reserve banks, to furnish an elastic currency, to afford a means of rediscounting commercial paper, to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United
States, and for other purposes”. The Act is commonly known as the “Federal Reserve Act”.
One fo the purposes for enacting the Federal Reserve Act was:
(3) to authorize “hypothecation” of obligations including “United States bonds or other securities which Federal reserve Banks are authorized to hold” under Section 14(a); 12 USC; ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251 Sect 14(a)
The term “hypothecation” as stated in Section 14(a) of the Act is defined:
“1. Banking. Offer of stocks, bonds, or other assets owned by a party other than the borrower as collateral for a loan, without transferring title. If the borrower turns the property over to the lender who holds it for safekeeping, the action is referred to as a pledge. If the borrower retains possession, but gives the lender the right to sell the property in event of default, it is a true hypothecation.
2. Securities. The pledging of negotiable securities to collateralize a broker’s margin loan. The broker pledges the same securities to a bank as collateral for a broker’s loan, the process is referred to as rehypothecation.”
[Dictionary Of Banking Terms, Fitch, pg. 228 (1997)] As seen from the definitions, in hypothecation there is equitable risk to the actual owner.
Section 16 of the current Federal Reserve Act, which is codified at 12 USC 411, declares that “Federal Reserve Notes” are “obligations of the United States”.
So we see the “full faith and credit” of the United States: which is the substance of the American citizenry: their real property, wealth, assets and productivity that belongs to them, is thereby hypothecated and rehypothecated by the United States to its obligations as well as to the Federal Reserve for the issuance and backing of Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender “for all taxes, customs, and other public dues”.
TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 3 > SUBCHAPTER XII > Sec. 411.
Sec. 411. – Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption
Federal Reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues.
The commerce and credit of the nation continues on today under financial reorganization (Bankruptcy) as it has since 1933, still backed by the assets and wealth of the American citizenry: at risk for the government’s obligations and currency.
Under the 14th amendment and numerous Supreme Court precedents, as well as in equity, Private property can not be taken or pledged for public use without just compensation, or due process of law . The United States can not pledge or risk the property and wealth of its private citizens, for any government purpose without legally providing them remedy to recover what is due them on their risk.
This principle is so well established in English common law and in the history of American jurisprudence. The 14th amendment provides: “no person shall be deprived of…property without due process of law”.
And Courts have long ruled to have one’s property legally held as collateral or surety for a debt even when he still owns it and still has it is to deprive him of it since it is at risk and could be lost for the debt at any time.
The United States Supreme Court said, in United States v. Russell [13 Wall, 623, 627] “Private property, the Constitution provides, shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.”
“The right of subrogation is not founded on contract. It is a creature of equity; is enforced solely for the purpose of accomplishing the ends of substantial justice; and is independent of any contractual relations between the parties.” Memphis & L. R. R. Co. v. Dow, 120 U.S. 287, 301-302 (1887).
The rights of a surety to recovery on his risk or loss when standing for the debts of another was reaffirmed again as late as 1962 in Pearlman v. Reliance Ins.Co., 371 U.S. 132 when the Court said:
…”sureties compelled to pay debts for their principal have been deemed entitled to reimbursement, even without a contractual promise …And probably there are few doctrines better established……”
Black’s Law Dictionary , 5th edition, defines “surety”:
“One who undertakes to pay or to do any other act in event that his principal fails therein. Everyone who incurs a liability in person or estate for the benefit of another, without sharing in the consideration, stands in the position of a “surety.”
Constitutionally and in the laws of equity, the United States could not borrow or pledge the property and wealth of its private citizens, put at risk as collateral for its currency and credit without legally providing them equitable remedy for recovery of what is due them.
The United States government, of course, did not violate the law or the Constitution in this way, in order to collateralize its financial reorganization, but did, in fact, provide
such a legal remedy so that it has been able to continue on since 1933 to hypothecate the private wealth and assets of those classes of persons by whom it is owned, at risk backing the government’s obligations and currency, by their implied consent, through the government having provided such remedy, as defined and codified above, for recovery of what is due them on their assets and wealth at risk.
The provisions for this are found in the same act of “Public Policy” HJR-192, public law 73-10 that suspended the gold standard for our currency, abrogated the right to demand payment in gold, and made Federal Reserve notes for the first time legal tender, “backed by the substance or “credit of the nation”.
All US currency since that time is only credit against the real property, wealth and assets belonging to the private soverign American people, taken and/or ‘pledged’ by THE UNITED STATES to its secondary creditors as security for its obligations. Consequently, those backing the nation’s credit and currency could not recover what was due them by anything drawn on Federal Reserve notes without expanding their risk and obligation to themselves. Any recovery payments backed by this currency would only increase the public debt its citizens were collateral for, which an equitable remedy was intended to reduce, and in equity would not satisfy anything.
And there was no longer actual money of substance to pay anybody.
There are other serious limitations on our present system. Since the institution of these events, for practical purposes of commercial exchange, there has been no actual money in circulation by which debt owed from one party to another can actually be repaid.
Federal Reserve Notes, although made legal tender for all debts public and private in the reorganization, can only discharge a debt. Debt must be “paid” with value or substance (i.e. gold, silver, barter, labor, or a commodity). For this reason HJR-192
(1933), which established the “public policy” of our current monetary system, repeatedly uses the technical term of “discharge” in conjunction with “payment” in laying out public policy for the new system. A debt currency system cannot pay debt.
So from that time to the present, commerce in the corporate UNITED STATES and among sub-corporate subject entities has had only debt note instruments by which debt can be discharged and transferred in different forms. The unpaid debt, created and/or expanded by the plan now carries a public liability for collection in that when