|
Providing Affordable On-Shore Tax Advantaged Asset Protection
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT COMMON LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.
WHAT IS COMMON LAW? Answer
In order to understand the **PURE TRUST and its basis under the Constitution one should become familiar with the definition of Common Law.
COMMON LAW. As distinguished from law created by the enactment of legislatures, the common law comprises the body of these principles and rules of action, relating to the government and security of persons and property, which derive their authority solely from usage's and customs of immemorial antiquity, or from the judgments and decrees of the courts recognizing, affirming, and enforcing such usage's and customs; and, in this sense, particularly the ancient unwritten law of England. The "common law" is all the statutory and case law background of England and the American colonies before the American revolution. People v. Rehman, 253 C.A. 2d 119, 61 Cal. Rptr. 65, 85. "Common law" consists of those principles, usage and rules of action applicable to government and security of persons and property which do not rest for their authority upon any express and positive declaration of the will of the legislature. Bishop v. U.S., D.C. Tex., 334, F. Supp. 415, 418.
As distinguished from ecclesiastical law, it is the system of jurisprudence administered by the purely secular tribunals.
Calif. Civil Code, Section 22.2, provides that the "common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State."
In a broad sense, "common law" may designate all that part of the positive law, juristic theory, and ancient custom of any state or nation which is of general and universal application, thus marking off special or local rules or customs.
As a compound adjective "common-law" is understood as contrasted with or opposed to "statutory", and sometimes also to "equitable" or to "criminal".
Source: Black's Law Dictionary
IS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A COMMON LAW DOCUMENT?
YES! The Constitution of and for the United States of America is a Common Law document and cannot be understood, interpreted and applied except at the Common Law;
"It is never to be forgotten that in the construction of the language of the Constitution, we are to place ourselves as nearly as possible in the condition of the men who framed that instrument."
Ex Parte Bain., 12 U.S. 1., 7S. Ct.781.
"We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted."
Mattos Vs. U.S. 156 U.S. 237 at 243.
"It must be interpreted in the light of Common Law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution. The language of the Constitution could not be understood without reference to the Common Law."
U.S. Vs. Won Kim Ark.. 169 U.S. 649., 18 S. Ct. 456.
"In this, as in other respects, (constitutional provision) must be interpreted in the light of the Common Law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution."
Minor Vs. Happersett., 21 Wall. 162.
IS THE CONSTITUTION THE SUPREME LAW?
YES. The Constitution of the United States of America is not only the Supreme Law of the Land in and under the Common Law, the very term, "Law of the Land" itself means the Common Law.
"Law of the Land" means the "Common Law."
State Vs. Simon., 2 Spears 761, 767 (1884) Justice O'Neal.
"Law of the Land" means "The Common Law."
Taylor Vs. Porter., 4 Hill. 140, 146 (1843) Justice Bronson.
Webster's definition of "Law of the Land" at Dartmouth., 4 Wheat. 518, 581.
YES. State constitutions and State laws MUST be in compliance with, and in conformity to, the Constitution of the United States of America to be acceptable as one of the sovereign states of the union of the United States of America;
"Provided, the Constitution to be formed in virtue of the authority herein given, shall be republican, and consistent with the Constitution of the United States; that it shall contain the fundamental principles of civil and religious Liberty; conformable to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States."
Enabling Act of Congress., Feb.20. 1811. c.21., 2 U.S. Statute 641.
The three branches of government and their bureaucratic departments, agencies, and agents, must confine themselves to acting in and under the Constitution of and for the United States of America and its boundaries, restraints, limitations, and prohibitions it imposes upon them;
"That the people have an original right to establish, for future government, such principles as, in their opinion, shall most conduce to their own happiness, is the basis, on which the whole American fabric has been erected. The exercise of this original right is a very great exertion, nor can it, nor ought it to be frequently repeated. The principles, therefore, so established, are deemed fundamental. And as the authority, from which they proceed, is supreme, and can seldom act, they are designed to be permanent."
"This original and supreme will organizes the government, and assigns, to different departments, their respective powers. It may either stop here, or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those departments."
"Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The Constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it."
Marbury Vs. Madison., 2 Cranch. (5 U.S.) 137, 176, 177 (1803).
"...because, the United States have no constitutional capacity to exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty, or eminent domain, with the limits of a State or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted."
Pollard's Lessee Vs. Hagan., 44 U.S. 212 at 223. Article 1, Sec. 8, Clause 17.,U.S. Constitution.
"That the Legislative, Executive and Judicial departments are each formed in a separate and independent manner; and that the ultimate basis of each is the Constitution only within the limits of which each department can alone justify any act of authority jurisdiction."
Hayburn's Case., 2 Dali. (2 U.S.) 409.
"Neither the Legislative, Executive nor the Judicial departments of the Federal Government can lawfully exercise any authority beyond the limits marked out by the Constitution."
Dred Scott Vs. Sanford., 19 How, 393.
"The United States is entirely a creature of the Federal Constitution, its power and authority has no other source and it can only act in accordance with all the limitations imposed by the Constitution.
Reid Vs. Covert., 354 U.S. 1 (1957), 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148.
IS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES SUPERIOR TO ADMINISTRATIVE LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS?
YES. The Constitution of the United States of America is not only a Common Law document, the Supreme Law/Common Law of the Land, and the actual government of the United States, but is also superior to all administrative laws, rules and regulations and their administrative law, rules and regulations must be in compliance with and in conformity to the Constitution of and for the United States of America;
"Where rights are secured by Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which will abrogate them."
Miranda Vs. Ariz. 384 U.S. 436 at 491(1966).
"...A regulation which is inconsistent with law is invalid."
Title 5 USC., Sec. 301.
"...because a statute may not operate in derogation of the Constitution."
Title 5 USC., Sec. 559, Sentence 2.
"Congress may not, by any definition it may adopt, conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution."
Eisner Vs. McComber., 252 U.S. 189 at 207.
"Such rules shall not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right and shall preserve the right of trial by jury as at Common Law and as declared by the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution."
Title 28 USC., Sec. 2072 at Clause #2.
CAN THE STATE GOVERNMENTS GRANT OR TAKE AWAY INDIVIDUALS' RIGHTS?
NO. Individuals have God endowed/given unalienable/inalienable rights (Declaration of Independence, Paragraph 2) and these same rights are secured in and under the Preamble and the Constitution of the United States of America, and in and under the Preamble and the Bill of Rights at the first ten (10) Articles of Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America existed long antecedent to the organization of the State and can be taken from them by Constitutional due process of law that is in compliance with, and in conformity to, the Constitution of the United States of America.
"The Individual may stand upon his Constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property."
"His rights are such as existed by the Law of the Land (Common Law) long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution."
"Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under warrant of the law." "He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights."
"Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the State. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the State and the limitations of its charter."
"Its powers are limited by law. It can make no contract not authorized by its charter. Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its charter."
Hale Vs. Henkel., 201 U.S. 43 at 74 (1906). Pinkerton Vs. Verberg., 78 MIFC. 573, 584.
DO INDIVIDUALS HAVE COMMON LAW RIGHTS TO LABOR?
YES. Individuals have a God endowed/given unalienable/inalienable right At Law/Common Law to labor, and to the fruits of that labor and that right is a natural right and a constitutional right to be protected from unlawful interference from government encroachment.
"A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right secured by the Federal Constitution."
Murdock Vs. Pennsy., 319 U.S. 105.
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."
Miranda Vs. Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 at 491 (1966).
** Some of the names you will also hear used for Constitutional Pure Trusts are "Pure Trust", "Pure Trust Organization", "PTO", "Common Law Trust", "Contract Trust", or "Constitutional Trust".
SITE LINKS
[ HOME ][ Why FFA? ][ Free Report ][ Asset Protection 101 ][ "Timing is everything" ][ "Probate" ][ Do It Yourself? ][ Owning "Stuff" ][ Conference call ][ Inquiry to IRS on PTO's ][ Scanned IRS response ][Talking to the Pros][ Common Law ][ Case Law ][ Frequently Asked Questions][ Become an FFA Rep?][ Upcoming Events]
Copyright(c)2003 Financial Fortress Associates
Last Update: