sign in sign up
<<
Home , Federal Reserve Note

TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP, PAYMENT AND DISCHARGMENT OF A DEBT. WHAT PAYS A DEBT IN THE UNITED STATES?

By The Handyman September 2011

This is not a scholarly written article but it will strain the mentality of Joe Sixpact and all persons in the don’t give a damn educated ass-holes society asserting their pseudo intelligence by obtaining some worthless bureaucratic degree and privileged position. These ass-holes will enforce and comply with anything government says out of fear/ignorance and try to impose their unjustified fear on you. They freely give unwanted bad advice and lack complete understanding of most patriot issues. Payment is one of those issues. This article is may contain some error as most of mine always does but it is written to stimulate others with more ability to develop the premise or respond. The don’t give a damn society fails to understand that in order to pay a debt there must be something to exchange that pays a debt. That something is usually . But if there is no money circulating anything can be a tender and if accepted the debt is discharged. There is no limit as to what can be tendered but there are popular tenders such as Notes, cash, checks, money orders, promissory notes and drafts. There is a term call . Some things are declared to be a statutory legal tender by congress to force acceptance of substitute money; such is a paper tender. After passage of a statutory legal tender act the courts decide that such act is constitutional and based upon this BS we are supposed to accept their findings. Before moving forward let’s understand that:

Notes are money:

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 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.

See 36 American Jurisprudence on Money, Section 9.

There must also be a 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. For a note to be a note it must have a promise to pay. Notes that lack a promise are not notes. Federal Reserve Notes do not contain a promise. They lack consideration and a promise. See 17 American Jurisprudence 2d on Contracts, section 85 and also section 215, 216 and 217 of 11 Amer. Jur. 2nd on Bills and Notes. No rights can be acquired by fraud. The Federal Reserve Notes are acquired through the application of unconstitutional statutes and fraud. If you tender a personal promissory note to pay a debt that contains consideration (your labor) and a promise, you have tendered money. All societies must have a tender or money that you must accept in order to do business. The only problem is that if the creditor wants payment, legal tender will not satisfy this demand, as legal tender does not pay a debt; it discharges an obligation unless the tender is redeemable in gold or silver coin. Whether a debt is paid, discharged, or dissolved is insignificant to many as the debt is extinguished. Federal Reserve Notes have been declared a legal tender but these note are not dollars even it though it says “dollar” on them. If a creditor demands dollars a legal question is presented. I.e. what is a dollar?

Pursuant to the there is no lawful money in circulation to demand and use for paying a debt.

It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress in session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The and Abrogate The Gold Clause 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 Federal Government exists today in name only. Having no money in our possession and having no ability to obtain any presents a legal problem of constitutional magnitude. I.e. is the government now obligated to pay, discharge or dissolve any and all our bills (debts) that we incur in daily life because of the 1933 Bankruptcy? Until the question is answered all we can do is tender a note….a note of our choice. Not a note of government’s choice as government is not a party to our contracts and we can contract for “anything” that is legal. We are now a nation that exists by a created money substitute called Federal Reserve Notes. A is backed by nothing but confidence that it will spend. A personal promissory note is backed by ones labor. All notes must be redeemable in some substance upon presentment or via another note because there is no money to demand or tender. Federal Reserve Notes are not money; they are a money substitute. A promissory note is not money it is a tender. If you are unable pay a debt due to no money in circulation what is your remedy? You can only tender the debt…and the debt is extinguished whether accepted or not. You cannot force one to accept cash, a check, money order or note. You can only make the tender and hope it is accepted. But if rejected the item being purchased can be retained by the seller. If the seller relinquishes possession of the item and issues credit or an open account the seller’s only recourse is litigation to collect money, which we no longer have. Without consent or a mortgage the seller cannot take the item back for debt settlement as ownership has passed by operations of law. The item’s ownership is passed even though the debt is not paid or discharged.

CHAPTER 4. HOW THE CONTRACT OF SALE IS TO BE PERFECTED

Louisiana Civil Code Art. 2456. Transfer of ownership Ownership is transferred between the parties as soon as there is agreement on the thing and the price is fixed, even though the thing sold is not yet delivered nor the price paid. Acts 1993, No. 841, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1995.

Example: You accept an offer to purchase a television for $500.00 and sign an agreement to pay according to terms of a credit card or open account. If you don’t pay the account when due the seller can only sue under the terms of the agreement for the amount of the debt but he can’t get the television back. If you tender the debt with a note he legally cannot sue because you performed with all that is available: a tender. He may not be satisfied with the tender and want something else he considers payment but payment is no longer obtainable under our phony unredeemable monetary system and that something else was not a term in the original agreement. He may try demanding or suing for something else (specific performance) but your defense will stop his suit if you tendered the debt. Generally lawyers sue for $, an unidentified substance. The sign has no meaning in law. A suit for $500.00 is vague and should be dismissed. A suit for 500 dollars is also vague as there are no dollars regulated and circulated by congress. The creditor is suing for something that does not exist. Today we are all monetary slaves, as we have no money that pays a debt. We are forced to use unredeemable, cash, Federal Reserve Notes, bank checks and negotiable instruments as we no longer have any gold and silver to rely upon as a lawful tender. Why don’t we have a lawful money system? Your congress and the courts have stolen our lawful money system, converting us into industrial monetary slaves, and replaced it with a worthless credit system that benefits the entire banking system that is holding us in debt bondage with no way to pay a debt. Federal Reserve notes are now considered the only way to discharge an obligation, as they cannot be refused as payment for a debt except for an exactment under color of state law. To understand an exactment we must understand what is a legal tender in a state exaction. Taxes, fines, judgments and order are exactions made under state law and Hagar v, Land Reclamation District. #108, 111 U.S. 701. Held:

“Acts of congress making the notes of the United States a legal tender do not apply to EXACTIONS made under state law.”

So it appears that the court cannot demand payment in $, dollars, or legal tender for an EXACTION in a STATE court? Why? Because Article 1, Section 10 is a bar for a state to make paper a tender in payment of debt.

Article 1, section 10 of the Constitution of the United States says:

“No state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debt.”

Just what anything means to our judicial system is not clear. You may not be able to refuse Federal Reserve notes as payment in some cases involving business debt but the real question is: Can one be forced to tender FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES to pay a debt when FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES do not pay a debt and what is a $? I’m not the brightest guy in the world but I do enjoy testing new theories and analyzing those that did not fly. As I look back at all the failures I find the main reason was that it was a learning process with clever men in black robes fighting us every inch of the way. The secondary reason was that the pro se presenting the issue did not have courtroom savvy concerning money and he threw the whole 9 yards at the court when all that was necessary was to zero in on one fact. We are all guilty of complicating things. But the simple approach, when you get an order, judgment or a fine from a judge, is to challenge the vagueness of the order/judgment/fine so that you are able to carry out the order. If the order is not within your ability to perform you cannot be held in contempt. If you have inability to pay a fine that inability cannot be converted into time or work. See Tate v Short (1971) 28 L Ed 2d 130. 401 US 395, 91 S Ct 668. Indigents may not be ordered to serve time if they cannot pay the fine. See Lockhart, Constitutional Law, 5th Edition, 1980, page 1474. And Williams v Illinois (1970) 26 L Ed 2d 586, 399 US 235, 90 S Ct 2018. Indigent cannot be ordered to “work off” a fine if the imprisonment will extend the imprisonment beyond the maximum sentence. 90% of the time a lawyer will sue on a delinquent debt and use only the symbol $ to establish the amount alleged. So the real question is: what is a $? The same will apply to an order or judgment. Do not go into court foaming at the mouth with Article 1, Section 10, the Coinage Acts, HJR-192, etc. Simply move or request clarification or a more definite order. Always say you are ready, willing and perhaps able to pay once the order/judgment/fine is clarified. I have studied the money issue for 32 years and there simply is no meaning to the symbol $. While in prison I came across Professor Florian Cajori book: A history of Mathematical Notations and little did I know that it had the history of the symbol $. Professor Cajori was not a jurist but he was a very precise researcher of many symbols. He devoted 15 pages to the symbol $ and it is obvious that the sign/symbol $ has no meaning in law and cannot support an action in a court of law. Now if you are the type that says don’t try that in Texas, Arkansas, or Oklahoma because such won’t work, it won’t. But if you isolate the symbol from all the other money BS you at least have a chance that the judge will change the order to dollars, especially in view of the fact that such is required in all states. Most states have a money of account statute. The feds had one but in 1986 congress deleted 31 USC 371 to stop us from using the Public Office Money Certificate, which we called a POMC (poor mac).

Section 20 of the stated: And be if further enacted, That the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars, or units, dimes or tenths, cents or hundredths, and the milles or thousandths, a dime being the tenth part of a dollar, a cent the hundredth part of a dollar, a mille the thousandth part of a dollar, and that all accounts in the public offices and all proceedings in the courts of the United States shall be kept and had in conformity to this regulation.” Is not an order/judgment or fine a proceeding in a court? If the order/judgment or fine is only expressed in the symbol $, is not that expression outside the law and vague? Professor Cajori says it is and he claims that a judgment expressed only in the $ cannot support an action in a court. Will the system admit such? Most probably not (unless you catch a judge on his death bed) but they may change the order to comply with the law and insert “dollars”. Then you have the opportunity to load the record with the money issue starting with what is a dollar? If the court says a dollar is the legal tender of the United States that raises another issue. What is legal tender in a state exaction. Taxes, fines, judgments and order are exactions made under state law and Hagar v, Land Reclamation District. #108, 111 U.S. 701. Held: “Acts of congress making the notes of the United States a legal tender do not apply to EXACTIONS made under state law.” So it appears that the court cannot demand payment in $, dollars or legal tender for an EXACTION in a STATE court? Why? Because Article 1, Section 10 is a bar for a state to make paper a tender in payment of debt. Now at first blush many will say it won’t work and it won’t if you don’t try? I have used such many times and the case is usually taken under advisement and never heard from again. Is that a win? Not exactly! but it is as close as we can expect. It is a Mexican standoff. I waited two years and sent a bill for court cost to defend an action and collect 5 times. In each case the cost fell on the attorney representing the credit card company. He rather pay than expose his failure and lose future business or explain reasons for not receiving a final judgment. In Hagar v. Reclamation Dist. No. 108,111 U.S. 701 (1884), the Supreme Court held that, while Congress has the power to declare currency a legal tender in payment of taxes, Congress had not exercised its power. After the Hagar decision, Congress amended the statutory description of legal tender ( not the constitutional mandate) to correct the challenged defect, and enacted a predecessor version to 31 U.S.C. 5103, the "Legal Tender Statute." 31 U.S.C. § 5103 currently states: United States coins and currency (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts. However, there is no Federal statute, which mandates that, private businesses must accept cash as a form of payment. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. Some say that Congress exercised its power to coin money and regulate its value by delegating those functions to the Federal Reserve through the in 1913. Since then, the Federal Reserve System is supposed to be legal under the U.S. Constitution. Although the Constitution does not explicitly set forth authority to create a , this authority is erroneously inferred from a number of specific powers, including the powers to coin money, to regulate commerce, and "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing powers ...." (Article I, Section 8). In McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819), the Supreme Court considered whether Congress had the power to establish banks.

The court determined that Congress had this power and the power to give those banks the authority to issue currency. Congress used this constitutional power when it passed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, under which the Federal Reserve Banks issue currency. The constitutionality of the Federal Reserve System itself was addressed in Weir v. United States, 92 F.2d 634, 636 (7th Cir. 1937). The court in Weir v. United States found that "[t]here is no doubt of the power of Congress to establish the National Banking System, the System, and institutions in furtherance of the power ...." Id. at 636. The Federal Reserve Act (the "Act"), which was signed into law on December 23, 1913, provided among other things for "furnish[ing] an elastic currency." Specifically, Section 16 of the Act, 12 U.S.C. § 411, provided for the issuance of Federal Reserve notes. Section 16 currently states: 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. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve Bank. Shall is mandatory but try redeeming a phony Federal Reserve Note today. The bottom line is that clever men in black robes have told a plethora of white lies to protect the Banksters and we the people allowed the government to steal our lawful money system. But like all thefts there are consequences. The theft left us with no way to pay a debt. We are all lawful money paupers because of our being unable to acquire lawful money. With no money in our pockets we can only tender the debt with a promissory note. Happy tendering! Note No: COMMERCIAL PAPER PROMISSORY NOTE

I, Jaygoo Jones make this promissory note my unconditional promise to the order of

THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE and is redeemable if presented to Maker on or before,

(add in date at least 30 days from date of tender)

This note is tendered for settlement in full for debt of

JAYGOOS FABRICATION & REPAIRS INC for settlement of attached invoice or demand.

This security instrument is void if not presented to Maker within 45 days after due date and is void where prohibited by law.

Maker: ______Jaygoo Jones Presenters authgraph

Date

See back of note

See back of note

Back Instructions

Present this note No.1001 to Maker at 337-319-3189 or send a letter to 4624 Verot Rim Road Youngsville, PA 90592 to schedule a time and place. Maker will require the presenter to have identification and a letter of delegation of authority from: The Internal Revenue Service showing authorization to receive settlement.

Presenters endorsement ______

DATE ______.

IMPORTANT Advisement: The information and materials included here are only from the personal experience, knowledge or observation of the provider who is not a licensed legal professional and are not given by the provider or to be construed by the recipient as competent legal advise or assistance and the reader is encouraged to seek and maintain access to competent legal counsel to assist in all decisions concerning his or her situation. And any monetary exchanges between the parties to this email are to be understood as the non-contractual, voluntary contribution or gift of either party.