Time: Sun Mar 09 04:14:09 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA12118; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 20:29:06 -0700 (MST) Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 03:31:40 -0800 To: "Richard C. Green" <patriotlad@WorldNet.att.net> From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: Missing 13th Amendment References: <3.0.1.16.19970308093053.3817bc60@mailhost.primenet.com> Dear Richard, Thank you for this terrific letter. I have just sent you an electronic copy of Dyett v. Turner. Begin reading where "General Lee had surrendered ...." This is the cat's meow concerning the so-called 14th amendment. I will send you the rest of the important historical cites on the failed ratification of this botched amendment. /s/ Paul Mitchell At 07:56 PM 3/8/97 -0500, you wrote: >Mr. Mitchell: > >Sir -- I have examined a copy of the "Laws ..." published by Bioren and >Duane in 1815, in the original, at Yale's Beinecke library. There is a >disclaimer in the early part of the manuscript, though, which is >replicated in the Gaunt reprint of 1989. That book is also in the Yale >Law Library. > >Your hands-on experience with the Colorado edition is the aspect that >most intrigues me. David Dodge and Brian March have, to my >satisfaction, demonstrated that this Amendment was properly ratified not >later than March of 1819, when Virginia took it up and passed it. The >fact that Virginia chose to publish a special edition of its revised >laws containing the U.S. Constitution (with the T.O.N. Amendment listed >as Article 13 and correct and proper in all regards), and apparently did >not "inform" the Secretary of State at that time, has led to the endless >wrangling over this section, since. The mainline legal publishers, all >private, in Philadelphia and Boston, apparently began conspiring to >suppress this section around 1828. But the huge number of State and >Territorial editions of the organic laws, with the Constitution, and the >Title of Nobility Amendment included, leads me to believe that we the >people "have been had." Jol Silversmith of Harvard argues vigorously >against this section being ratified and attacks anyone who counters his >arguments as "an extremist" or a right-wing radical. He apparently has >some measure of prestige in his circle of Quislings and fakirs. > >The literature of that era, including essays and orations given to >patriotic societies or college classes, is shot through with the concern >of those men over pure democracy and the virtues of republicanism and >limited self-government. There was a genuine fear of Bonapartism, with >special regard for the Emperor's ability to mint new Kings and Princes >most anywhere he went. Louisiana was admitted to the union more out of >regard for its commercial prospects than for its embedded, French-style >aristocracy. What I have read of Alabama's history indicates to me that >it could have easily been set up as a "free state," had the anti-banker >pioneer element prevailed there, but the cotton traders won the day. > >I have a degree in American History from Yale. In learning the truth >about this missing and suppressed Amendment, I have discovered how >little I really know of my country and its history, and that angers me >greatly. I am engaged in fighting for this Amendment as a way of >purging myself of years of Marxist lies and historical obfuscations. > >God bless all those who would fight to restore our Constitution, in the >correct and proper version represented by the Colorado Territory, 1868. >I will base all my judgements on the Constitution, from now on, using it >as a benchmark. I am very interested in arguing that the so-called >Fourteenth Amendment is actually a "contested" section, as the 1876 >Territory of Wyoming edition omitted that section, while publishing the >original Thirteenth, the anti-slavery "13th" as Fourteenth, and the >anti-slavery Fifteenth as the Fifteenth. The Fourteenth was not >recognized at all, for reasons that remain obscure. By 1890 Wyoming had >reformed its publications, and was "in line." But Colorado came into >the union (1876) with the original Thirteenth still on its books (the >1868 organic laws). > >Richard C. Green > > ======================================================================== Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. : Counselor at Law, federal witness email: [address in tool bar] : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU web site: http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this ========================================================================
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail