by Anna Von Reitz
Good morning, Campers.
As in, Internment Camp.
Because that is where you are and where you have always been.
I am republishing here the entire complete text of research on what really
happened at the end of the Civil War---- and I want everyone reading this to
note that there was never a formal Peace Treaty ending the Civil War, just
declarations by President Johnson proclaiming peace on the land jurisdiction.
(See below.)
It's time to force Congress to sign an official Peace Treaty ending the
American Civil War more than a 150 years after it actually ended, because this
is their excuse for all the crappola that they have perpetuated against us.
Now please read the well-researched facts and realize that these vermin
long ago used their successful abuse of the Southern States as an excuse to
abuse the Northern States as well. Read and share:
Research
Compiled by Geoffrey Jacob Caputo for State Nationals Association
I.
Constitutionally
Repugnant Reconstruction Acts Impose 14th
Amendment
via Martial Law Powers In Time of Peace
1861
--The object of the Civil from 1861 to 1865 was not for the Southern States to
be conquered or subjugated.1
1865
January
31 -
13th
Amendment
Proposed to the States
May
10 -
President Johnson Proclaimed the end of the Hostilities on land with the only
duty left to arrest the former insurgency’s vessels at sea.2
STATES
WHICH RATIFIED (the Original) 13th
AMENDMENT
February
9 –
Virginia ; February
17 -
Louisiana, April
7 – Tennessee
;
April 14 -
Arkansas, November
13 -South
Carolina , December
2
-
Alabama, December
4
-
North Carolina
December
4 - Renegade
members of the 39th Congress, at the inception of the 1st
session
on, 1865; suggested the denial of seats in the House and the Senate to the
Southern States on the baseless allegation that they had no legal governments
and were in rebellion. 3
December
6 -
Georgia ratifies 13th
Amendment
December
18 -
13th
Amendment
was declared ratified 4
December
28 –
Florida (Florida
again ratified on June 9, 1868, upon its adoption of a new constitution
)
1866
March
3 -
39th Congress resolves the denial of seats in the House and the Senate to the
Southern States in the house on baseless allegations of rebellion.5
April
2 -
President Johnson proclaimed the insurrection at an end in all the Southern
States except It was further proclaimed that each State’s civil authority was to
be restored and that they had shown sufficientevidence of loyalty to the Union
by conforming to Johnson’s policies of incorporating the 13thamendment
into legislation.6
June
16 -
14th
Amendment
(called Article XIV) was proposed by the 39th
Congress
Ist session by joint resolution 48 to “the legislatures of the several States”
.7
August
20 -
President Johnson further proclaimed Peace on and gave notice of the resumption
of civil government in the States which had seceded. 8
October
1866 to 1867 -
Southern and non-southern States reject 14th
Amndmt.
– Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Louisiana
Mississippi, and many non southern states.
1867
February
8 -
One
month before the first Reconstruction Act was colorably implemented, the
39th
Congress
introduced Bill 1143 entitled, “A
Bill To establish an additional article of war for the more complete
suppression
of
the insurrection against the United States”.
9
March
2 –
First Reconstruction Act colorably “enacted”10
;
President Johnson Vetoes The Act11
March
23 –
Second Reconstruction Act 12
;
President Johnson Vetoes The Act13
July
19 –
Third Reconstruction Act14
;
President Johnson Vetoes The Act15
1868
March
11 –
Fourth Reconstruction Act16
June
25 -
North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida are
colorably “re-admitted” back into the Union as a new body politic of a
14th
Amendment
citizentry due to adopting the 14th
Amendment.
17
July
9, 1868 –
14th
Amendment
COLORABLY IMPOSED due to 28 states’ alleged ratification.
II. Constitutional Violations of the
39th
&
40th
Congresses in Imposing The Reconstruction Acts & Amend(ment)
XIV:
1
House
Journal - July 22, 1861. p.123 / Senate Journal - July 25,
1861.p.92
2
13
STAT 757 Presidential Proclamation 35
3
Senate
Journal, starting @ p. 7
4
13
STAT. 774
5
House
Journal, March 3, 1866. Page 353
614
STAT 811 – 813
7
14
STAT 358
8
14
STAT 814
9
Committee
on Reconstruction Bill 1143
10
14
Stat. 428
11
House
Journal March 2, 1867 - Page 563
12
15
Stat. 2
13
House
Journal March 23, 1867 - Page 99
14
15
Stat. 14
15
House
Journal July 19, 1867 - Page 171
16
15
STAT 41
17
15
STAT 73
1.
Art.
V § 5 of The Constitution of The United States of America (CFUSA) “and
that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in
the Senate.”
Violation:
The
House Journal, March 3, 1866 - Page 353
1.
Art.
III § 3 CFUSA says, “Treason
against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in
adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort”
Violation:
The
Reconstruction Acts
1. The Reconstruction Acts were inconsistent with criteria for
martial law provisions as required in The Constitution for the United States of
America. See EX PARTE MILLIGAN 71 US 2 (1866)
39th
Congress
had no evidence of the states being in rebellion. Civil authority was restored
in that the courts of the Southern States were open and the slaves were free
pursuant to the 13th
Amendment.
The only Martial Rule which can exist during times of peace
according to the Constitution is the code of laws enacted by Congress for the
government of the national forces in which martial law could only apply to the
soldier and not to the citizen, then the Reconstruction acts were
unconstitutional because it applied military law only to the citizen and not to
the soldier.
1.
Art.
I §. 9 cl. 3 CFUSA: says “
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”
Violation:
Everyone
in the southern states was, in a blanket fashion, declared guilty of rebellion
and penalized via unlawful military rule.
1.
Art.
IV §. 4 CFUSA says “
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form
of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on
Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot
be convened) against domestic Violence.”
Violation:
The
39th
Congress
unlawfully denied the Southern States a republican form of government by acting
contrary to Art. IV §. 4
1.
Art.
1 §. 8 cl.17 CFUSA that the Congress is “To
exercise exclusive Legislation 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, dockyards and other needful Buildings . .
.”
Violation:
The
39th
Congress
exercised exclusive legislation (Reconstruction Acts) outside their District
unlawfully.
1.
Art
IV § 3 says that, “New
States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall
be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State
be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the
Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the
Congress.”
Violation:
The
39th Congress formed a new unlawful, defacto state within each of the several
dejure states without the consent of the Dejure state bodies
politic.
Additional Notes
DE JURE. Rightfully; lawfully; by legal title. Contrasted with de
facto 4 Bla. Com. 77
How a Dejure state, such as Florida, is formed:
[5
Stat. 742.] Statute II. Chap. XLVII.--
An
Act for the admission of the states of Iowa and Florida into the Union
.
. . whereas, the people of the Territory of Florida
did, in like manner, by their delegates,
on the eleventh day of January, eighteen hundred and thirty-nine,
form
for themselves a constitution and State government [Act
of March 3, 1845, ch. 75 and ch 76.], both of which said constitutions are
republican; and said conventions
having asked the admission of
their respective Territories into
the Union as
States,
on equal footing with the original States: Be it enacted by
the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States
of
America in Congress assembled ,
That the States of Iowa and Florida be, and the same are hereby, declared
to be States of the
United
States of America, and are hereby admitted into the Union on
equal footing with the original States, in all respects
whatsoever.
Florida’s original government could only be abolished by the
consent of the people:
Florida
Constitution of 1838 Article I Section 2 :
That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are
founded on their authority, and established for their benefit; and, therefore,
they
have, at all times, an inalienable and indefeasible
right
to alter or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may deem
expedient.
The
Reconstruction Acts were constitutionally repugnant war powers which abolished
The Southern States’ original governments against their consent and formed a new
state/nation/body politic composed of “14th
Amendment
U.S. Citizens”
15 STAT 73 (June 25, 1868) says , "WHEREAS the people of North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana,
Georgia, Alabama, and Florida have, in pursuance of the provisions of an act
entitled `An act for the more efficient government of the rebel States,' passed
March 2nd, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, and the acts supplementary thereto
[see note 4, post], framed constitutions ofState government which are
republican, and have adopted said constitutions by large majorities of the votes
[363 U.S. 121, 136] cast at the elections held for the ratification or rejection of
the same: Therefore, "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
That
each of the States of North Carolina, South Carolina,
Louisiana,
Georgia, Alabama, and Florida, shall be entitled and admitted to representation
in Congress as a State of the Union
when
the legislature of such State shall have duly ratified the amendment to the
Constitution of the United States proposed by theThirty-ninth Congress, and
known as Article fourteen upon the following fundamental conditions . .
.”
_______
De facto
government: One that maintains itself by a display of force against the will of
the rightful legal government and is successful, at least temporarily, in
overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government by setting up its
own in lieu thereof. Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition (1951) page
504.
Wortham v.
Walker, 133 Tex. 255, 128 S.W.2d 1138, 1145
As
a result, NEW DEFACTO STATES were formed, because new constitutions and new
legislatures were formed via the 14th
amendment:
Coleman
v. Miller, 507 U. S. 448, 59 S. Ct. 972 says: ”The legislatures
of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina had rejected the amendment in
November and December, 1866. New governments were erected in those States (and
in others) under the direction of Congress. The new legislatures ratified the
amendment, that of North Carolina on July 4, 1868, that of South Carolina on
July 9, 1868, and that of Georgia on July 21, 1868."
The object of the Civil from 1861 to 1865 was not for the Southern
States to be conquered or subjugated, and was not intended to impair the rights
of the states:
The
House
Journal - July 22, 1861. p.123 / Senate Journal - July 25, 1861.p.92 both read,
“Mr.
Crittenden submitted the following resolution, viz: . . .that this war is not
waged on their part in any spirit of oppression, or for any purpose of conquest
or subjugation, or purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or
established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the
supremacy of the Constitution, and to preserve the Union with all the dignity,
equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired;
and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to
cease.”
The
14th
Amendment
created a dual nationality status in which Federal Citizenship status was
conjoined with an inseparable State “resident/citizen” status. This formed a new
body politic which impaired the original body politic of those who possessed the
singular state national and [citizen] status by disenfranchising them from
voting. (see notes in III)
III.
Dejure
vs. Defacto Status
1.
Federal Citizenship Versus State Citizenship a. The term “citizen
of the United States” never referred to a unified National form of citizenship,
but that of a singular “state” citizenship status until the passage of the
14th
Amendment.
“The slaves
recently emancipated by proclamation, and subsequently by Constitutional
Amendment, have no civil status. They should be made citizens. We do not, by
making them citizens, make them voters,—we do not, in this Constitutional
Amendment, attempt to force them upon Southern white men as equals at the
ballot-box; but we do intend that they shall be admitted to citizenship, that
they shall have the protection of the laws, that they shall not, any more than
the rebels shall, be deprived of life, of liberty, of property, without due
process of law, and that “they shall not be denied the equal protection of the
law.”
And
in making this extension of citizenship, we are not confining
the breadth
and scope of our efforts to the negro. It is for the white man as well. We
intend to make citizenship
National.
Heretofore, a man has been a citizen of the United States because he was a
citizen of some-one of the
States:
now, we propose to reverse that, and make him a citizen of any State where he
chooses to reside, by
defining
in advance his National citizenship—and our Amendment
declares that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject
to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States
wherein they reside.” This Amendment will prove a great beneficence to this
generation, and to all who shall succeed us in the rights of American
citizenship; and we ask the people of the revolted States to consent to this
condition as an antecedent step to their re-admission to Congress with Senators
and Representatives.”
POLITICAL
DISCUSSIONS LEGISLATIVE,
DIPLOMATIC, AND POPULAR 1856-1886 § 61. The Reconstruction Problem- JAMES
G.BLAINE. NORWICH, CONN. THE HENRY BILL PUBLISHING COMPANY
1887
b.
Before
the passage of Amend. XIV the United States, for citizenship and nationality
purposes, was considered to be a plural collective of separate
nations.
1.
2
STAT 153 , An
act to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and to repeal the acts
heretofore passed on that subject, says
“Be
it enacted, &c, That any alien, being a free white person, may be admitted
to become a citizen of the
United
States, or any of them…”
2.
Amendment XIII. §1.
says “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment
for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within
the United States, or any place subject
to their jurisdiction.”
c.
After
the passage of Amend. XIV the United States, for citizenship and nationality
purposes, was considered to be a singular entity.
1.
8
USC § 1483 (a) says , “Except as provided in paragraphs (6) and (7) of §1481 (a)
of this title, no national of the United States can
lose United States nationality under this chapter while within the United States
or any of its
outlying possessions”
d. The language in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (14 Stat. 27) set
the premise for this aforementioned unified National Citizenship as decreed in
Amend. XIV.
1. CONGRESS'S POWER TO ENFORCE AMEND. XIV RIGHTS: LESSONS FROM
FEDERAL REMEDIES
THE
FRAMERS ENACTED by Robert J. Kaczorowski Copyright © 2005 by the President and
Fellows of Harvard College Harvard Journal on Legislation (JOL) - Volume 42,
Number 1, Winter 2005 says that : “Because
the
provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 are central to the
meaning and scope of the Amend. XIV , it is necessary to
examine
the
statute's provisions. In brief, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 conferred U.S.
citizenship on all Americans”
e.
There
is evidence that the several Union states had power to confer their respective
state citizenship before & around the time of the Civil Rights Act and the
“citizen of the United States” status written in the Civil Rights Act was only a
unified Federal citizenship.
1.
March
27, 1866 - Johnson’s Veto of the Civil Rights Act - Senate Journal, p.279:
says
that, “By the first section of the bill ; ‘all persons born in the United
States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are
declared to be citizens of the United States’. It
does not purport to declare or confer any other right of citizenship
than federal
citizenship. It does not purport to give these classes of persons any status
as citizens of States, except that which may result from their status as
citizens of the United States. The
power to confer the right of State citizenship is just as
exclusively
with the several States as the power to confer the right of federal citizenship
is with Congress.”
2.
Ex
Parte Knowles 5 Cal. 300 (1855) "A citizen of any
one of the States of the union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the
United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing. To
conceive a citizen of the United States who is not a citizen of some one of the
States, is totally foreign to the idea, and inconsistent with the proper
construction and common understanding of the expression as use in the
Constitution, which must be deduced from its various other
provisions.
The
object then to be obtained, by the exercise of the power of naturalization, was
to make citizens of the respective States”
3.
Sharon
v. Hill, (1885) 26 F 337, 343."Prior to the
adoption of this amendment, strictly speaking, there were no citizens of the
United States, but only some one of them. Congress had the power "to establish
an uniform rule of naturalization," but not the power to make a naturalized
alien a citizen of any state. But the states generally provided that such
persons might, on sufficient residence therein, become citizens thereof, and
then the courts held, ab convenienti, rather than otherwise, that they became
ipso facto citizens of the United States.
_____End of the Research
Report_____
Judge Anna's further comment:
Anyone who didn't agree to this cozy arrangement had
to expatriate from the presumption of "US citizenship"---- that is, prior to
this Unconstitutional and therefore unenforceable mess at the end of the Civil
War (which technically never ended because Congress never established a proper
Peace Treaty) nobody was presumed to be a citizen of the United States --- that
is, a "federal citizen" like someone born on Guam.
Afterward, everyone was "presumed" to be a "federal
citizen" unless they took action to rebut and overcome that presumption and
expatriate to the original natural jurisdiction of the people and the states.
All of the same arguments then apply now. What began
in force and fraud and unconstitutional action undertaken by the 39th and 40th
Congresses must be opposed in word and deed and challenged and put to rest once
and for all.
We have a contract with the United States and it is
not within the powers granted to the United States to violate our Constitution
by any claim in commerce or act by a corporate Board of Directors.
---------------------------------------
