Time: Fri Oct 03 13:30:49 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA18991;
	Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:30:43 -0700 (MST)
	by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA03435;
	Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:29:22 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 13:28:50 -0700
To: Jonas Squire <js1858@lab3.ca.boeing.com>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Title 26 Applicablity in Federal territories governed by
  Provisional Govt's (fwd)

Jonas,

Please read Gilbertson's OPENING BRIEF 
in the Supreme Law Library ("SLL"), and 
then read our excerpt from Dyett v. Turner
which is now the NINTH NOTICE AND DEMAND
FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE in the
case of USA v. Knudson in SLL.

The Southern states were restored to
full and lawful membership in the Union,
and the proof is in Dyett v. Turner.

You and I could have a very lively debate,
based upon the supposition that the moon 
is composed of green cheese, but I prefer
not to do so.  :)

/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://supremelaw.com

copy:  Supreme Law School


At 12:57 PM 10/3/97 PDT, you wrote:
>Hi Paul-
>
>As ever, I can not praise you enough for you work.  Now, the meat of my
>e-mail.
>
>Robert Wangrud has a web page 'Direct Simple and Incapable of Being 
>Mis-understood', dealing with the seccesion of the southern states, 
>the consequent dissolvement of the Congress sine die, and the follow-on
>declaration by Lincoln of an emergency, civil war, etc, etc.  Now, if 
>this emergency was never effectively concluded as asserted by Mr. Wangrud,
>AND all states made a state by proclamation of the president or congress
since
>then are technically NOT states, and that the sitting governments in each of
>those states is technically a provisional government of a federal territory,
>by virtue of the Articles of War issued by Lincoln, THEN - does Title 26 
>apply to inhabitants of those areas (Washington, Idaho, Montana, North
Dakota,
>South Dakota, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah,
>Nevada and West Virgina)? by virtue of their subjegation to federal law?
>
>And if Title 26 DOES apply to inhabitants of those areas, then obviously,
>the argument that Title 26 does not apply to sovereign states would not hold
>in those areas, because they were never sovereign states and not admitted
>to the Union per constituional process requirements.
>
>Just some superious thoughts...
>
>Keep up the effort.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>/s/ Jonas Squire
>
>

===========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris      : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01
B.A.: Political Science, UCLA;   M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02
tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04
website: http://supremelaw.com       : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best 06
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone 07
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this 08
_____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall 10
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11
======================================================================== 12
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] 13

      

Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail