Time: Sat Mar 29 19:47:59 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA13553;
Sat, 29 Mar 1997 16:19:53 -0700 (MST)
by usr01.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA17742;
Sat, 29 Mar 1997 16:19:44 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 19:33:23 -0800
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: [TL] WHAT IS MONEY? [2/2]
<snip>
>
>> -=>>> Continued from previous message <<<=-
>>
>>72. Act of Dec. 23, 1923, Sec. 317: Upon the
>> deposit with the treasurer of the U.S. of
>> bonds so purchased, and Federal Reserve
>> bank making such deposit, shall be
>> entitled to receive from the comptroller
>> of the currency circulating notes in
>> blank. Such notes shall be the
>> obligations of the Federal Reserve Bank.
>> They shall be issued and redeemed under
>> the same terms as national bank notes.
>> (In the beginning the Federal Reserve
>> banks bought the bonds with money; they
>> issued notes in the amount of bonds
>> purchased. The Federal Reserve banks
>> bought bonds and deposited them with the
>> treasurer. The U.S. Treasurer had
>> possession of both the bond and the
>> money. The Federal Reserve banks issued
>> the notes. The notes were to be
>> obligations of the Federal Reserve banks.
>> The Federal Reserve banks loaned the
>> notes to the government, and in this way
>> the Federal Reserve banks got back all
>> the money they paid for the bonds; but
>> also, in the beginning, the notes were to
>> be used only for settling accounts
>> between the 12 Federal Reserve banks, and
>> for no other purpose were they
>> authorized.)
>> See:
>> 12 USC 411.
>>
>>73. The case of a State which pays off its
>> own debts with paper money, no more
>> resembles this than do those to which we
>> have already adverted. The courts have no
>> jurisdiction over the contract. They
>> cannot enforce it, nor judge of its
>> violation. Let it be that the act
>> discharging the debt is a mere nullity,
>> and that it is still due. Yet the federal
>> courts have no cognizance of the case.
>> But suppose a State to institute
>> proceedings against an individual, which
>> depended on the validity of an act
>> emitting bills of credit; suppose a State
>> to prosecute one of its citizens for
>> refusing paper money, who should plead
>> the constitution in bar of such
>> prosecution. If his plea should be
>> overruled, and judgment rendered against
>> him, his case would resemble this; and,
>> unless the jurisdiction of this court
>> might be exercised over it, the
>> constitution would be violated, and the
>> injured party be unable to bring his case
>> before that tribunal to which the people
>> of the United States have assigned all
>> such cases.
>> See:
>> Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wall 100.
>>
>>74. According to State v. Thomas money was
>> property but Federal Reserve notes are
>> only a claim on property and, Federal
>> Reserve notes shall be redeemed in lawful
>> money--not legal tender.
>> See:
>> State v. Thomas, 12 USC 411.
>>
>>75. Make the bank identify the thing loaned.
>> Certainly if the bank claims to have
>> loaned something they can identify it,
>> and according to the law of tender, the
>> tender must be kept good. If a judgement
>> could be settled with a tender, then the
>> litigation would never end. A Federal
>> Reserve note being a chose in action,
>> something to be sued upon (UCC), but
>> then, under state law, there can be no
>> "holder in due course" on an incomplete
>> instrument, and a fed note is an
>> incomplete instrument as it will not pay
>> to bearer. This amounts to a common law
>> cheat, which is the obtaining of money or
>> property by means of false tokens,
>> symbols, or device; this being the
>> definition of a cheat or cheating at
>> common law.
>> See:
>> State v. Renick, 33 Or 584, 56 p
>> 275, 44 L R A 266, 72 Am. St. Rep.
>> 758.
>>
>>76. What a triumph for the advocates of
>> despotism to find that we are incapable
>> of governing ourselves, and that systems
>> founded on the basis of equal liberty are
>> merely ideal and fallacious. In a word,
>> they are determined to annihilate all
>> debts, public and private, and have
>> agrarian laws, which are easily effected
>> by means of unfunded paper money which
>> shall be a tender in all cases.
>> See:
>> Gen. Knox.
>>
>>77. In order to constitute a loan, there must
>> be a contract whereby one party transfers
>> to the other a sum of money.
>> See:
>> U.S. v. Neifert White, 247 F.Supp.
>> 878.
>>
>>78. A loan may be defined as the delivery by
>> one party to, and the receipt by another
>> of a sum of money.
>> See:
>> Kirkland v. Bailes, 155 S.E. 2d 701.
>> (Yet the Federal Reserve Bank of
>> Chicago says in Modern Money
>> Mechanics that banks make loans by
>> promising to lend.) (However a
>> promise to lend cannot be enforced.
>> In order to constitute a loan, money
>> must be loaned, but banks make loans
>> by promising to lend, and promises
>> to lend cannot be enforced.)
>> 5 MRSA.
>>
>>79. The thing given or taken in exchange must
>> be specific and so distinguishable from
>> things of like kind as to be clearly
>> known and identifiable.
>> See:
>> Preston v. Keene, 14 Pet 133.
>>
>>80. The extension of credit is not the giving
>> of value.
>> See:
>> UCC 3-303:0;
>> Atkinson v. Englewood State Bank,
>> 141 Colo 436.
>>
>>81. A loan is the creation of debt by the
>> lenders agreement to pay MONEY TO THE
>> DEBTOR.
>> See:
>> Maine Consumer Credit Code 9-A, Sec.
>> 1.301 (23)(a)(1).
>>
>>82. Banks extend credit, not money.
>> See:
>> National Bank v. Atkinson, 55 Fed.
>> Rep. 571.
>>
>>83. Fair and reasonable value means the best
>> price to be at once in money -- cash
>> being the antonym of credit-- cash value
>> importing value in money.
>> See:
>> State v. Woodward, 93 SO 826, 208
>> Ala 31.
>>
>>84. A note given to town treasurer in payment
>> of a tax, being illegal as against public
>> policy, does not discharge the tax.
>> See:
>> Embden v. Bunker, 86 Me 313.
>>
>>85. There is a distinction between a debt
>> discharged and one paid. When discharged
>> the debt still exists though divested of
>> its character as a legal obligation
>> during the operation of the discharge.
>> Something of the original vitality of the
>> debt continues to exist, which may be
>> transferred even though the transferee
>> takes it subject to the disability
>> incident to the discharge. The fact that
>> it carries something which may be a
>> consideration for a new promise to pay so
>> as to make an otherwise worthless promise
>> a legal obligation makes it the subject
>> of transfer by assignment.
>> See:
>> Badger v. Gilmore, 33 N.H. 361, 66
>> Am. D. 729;
>> William R. Stank v. M.W. White, 172
>> Minn. Reports 390.
>>
>>86. Although it apparently was still
>> necessary in the 1790's to allege
>> fictionally that such bills were drawn
>> "according to the custom of merchants,'
>> Butter v. Ouchterloney, S SC, 3-68) all
>> agreed that an instrument executed by a
>> non merchant was negotiable if it
>> contained words of negotiability
>> customarily used by merchants, such as
>> "or order" in an appropriate place.
>> See:
>> Whitney v. Whitney, Quincy 117
>> (1765);
>> Laws and Usages Respecting Bills of
>> Exchange and Promissory Notes, by
>> John Tisdall.
>>
>>87. According to the Uniform Commercial Code
>> (UCC), "a debt can only be paid with
>> money or goods." The UCC, of course, is
>> state law which supersedes federal law.
>> "The Federal Government has no power to
>> impose on any state officer any duty
>> whatsoever, and compel him to perform
>> it."
>> See:
>> Commonwealth v. Dennison, 24 How.
>> 66.
>>
>>88. A judgement for money must specify the
>> amount in words or figures with some mark
>> or character to indicate what they
>> represent. Re
>> See:
>> Boyd (D.C. Or) Fed. Case No. l1746
>> (see also
>> United Glover Co. v. Harvey Steel, 3
>> F.2d 634.) (Figures in the absence
>> of dollar marks should be void as
>> there would be no figure or mark to
>> indicate what the numbers
>> represent.)
>>
>>89. In the absence of any provision of law
>> precluding payment in a particular kind
>> of coin specifically designated in a
>> contract, the general rule is that such
>> contract may be enforced by the rendition
>> of a judgement for the particular kind of
>> coin designated.
>> See:
>> The Emily Sounder, 17 Wall 666;
>> Trebilcock v. Wilson, 12 Wall 687;
>> Land v. Gluckauf, 28 Cal 288;
>> Gilman v. Douglas County, 6 Nev. 27.
>>
>>90. The support of the general rule by the
>> courts has been based not on the
>> difference in the kinds of money, but on
>> the ground that the party specifically
>> contracted for payment in a specific
>> thing.
>> See:
>> Thompson v. Butler, 95 US 694.
>>
>>91. The issuance of Federal Reserve notes is
>> not an attempt by the government to coin
>> money, it is a pledge of the government
>> to pay dollars.
>> See:
>> U.S. v. Ballard, 14 Wall 457.
>>
>>92. No payment is effectuated by the delivery
>> of a bill or note which is unenforceable.
>> See:
>> Lee v. Fontaine, 10 Ala 755. (A note
>> is unenforceable unless it is
>> negotiable.)
>>
>>93. Giving of a note does not constitute
>> payment.
>> See:
>> Echart v. Commissioners C.C.A., 42
>> F.2d 158, 283 US 140;
>> Noland v. Maryland Casualty Co.,
>> D.C. Md. 38 F.Supp. 497.
>>
>>94. When a decree provides for the payment of
>> money, that term imports constitutional
>> currency.
>> See:
>> Shackleford v. Cunningham, 41 Ala
>>203;
>> West Oliver Co. v. Bail & Crommelin,
>> 12 Ala 340. (Constitutional money
>> is not notes or checks.)
>>
>>95. For judgements payable in US funds.
>> See:
>> Shaw Savill Albion & Co. v. The
>> Frederickburg, C.A. N.Y. 189 F.2d
>> 952.
>>
>>96. Definition of funds: Money in hand;
>> assets; cash; money available.
>> See:
>> Galena Ins. Co. v. Kupfer, 28 Ill
>>335;
>> U.S. v. Jenks, D.C. Pa. 264 F 697;
>> Johnson v. State, 37 Ga. App 129.
>>
>>97. Money is property. Federal Reserve notes
>> are liabilities, not assets. Cash,
>> according to the book.
>> See:
>> "The Federal Reserve Bank; Its
>> Purposes and Functions," is coin.
>>
>>98. Current money: Whatever is receivable and
>> current by law as money.
>> See:
>> Henderson v. Farmers Savings Bank,
>> 199 Iowa 496.
>>
>>99. The precious metals alone are money, and
>> whatever else is to perform the functions
>> of money must be their representative and
>> capable of being turned into them at
>> will. So long as bank paper retains this
>> quality it is a substitute for money;
>> divested of this, nothing can give it
>> that character.
>> See:
>> 3 Websters Works 41;
>> Woodruff v. Miss, 162 US Reports
>> 307.
>>
>>100. A Note is only promise to pay.
>> See:
>> Fidelity Savings v. Grimes, 131 P 2d
>> 894.
>>
>>101. Legal tender notes are not good as lawful
>> money of the U.S..
>> See:
>> Rains v. State, 226 S.W. 189.
>>
>>102. Checks, drafts, money orders, and bank
>> notes are not lawful money of the U.S..
>> See:
>> State v. Nealan, 43 Ore 158.
>>
>>103. Where the Fed. Gov. is a party to
>> commercial paper, it is bound by same
>> rules which govern private persons.
>> See:
>> Continental American Bank v. U.S.,
>> C.C.A. La. (1947) 161 F.2d 93.
>>
>>104. The government assumes all
>> responsibilities of private persons when
>> it issues commercial paper.
>> See:
>> U.S. v. First National Bank, 138
>> F.2d 681.
>>
>>105. The term "dollar" means money since it is
>> the unit of money in this country, and in
>> the absence of qualifying words, it
>> cannot mean promissory notes or bonds or
>> other evidences of debt.
>> See:
>> Devenny v. Devenny, 74 Ohio St. 96,
>> 76 NE 688.
>>
>>106. Federal Reserve Notes are a first and
>> paramount lien on all the assets of the
>> issuing Federal Reserve bank.
>> See:
>> Moody's Bank & Financial Manual,
>> page 2105. (If Federal Reserve notes
>> are a lien on the banks, no wonder
>> they want to eliminate the use of
>> Federal Reserve notes and deal only
>> with computer entries.)
>>
>>107. Negotiable Instruments Law was designed
>> to cover commercial paper and U.S.
>> currency.
>> See:
>> LSA-R.S. 17;
>> 1 et seq LSA-C.C. art 2139.
>>
>>108. The public's use of demand deposits as
>> money is not based on authorization by
>> the Federal Government. Even today, legal
>> tender, the kind of money in which debts
>> are payable, does not include demand
>> deposits.
>> See:
>> An Introduction to Money and
>> Banking, by Colin and Rosemary
>> Campbell, Professors of Economics.
>>
>>109. U.S. Currency does not contain all of
>> essence of negotiable instrument under
>> Louisiana law. U.S. currency is the
>> object for which negotiable instruments
>> issue. The very first requirement of our
>> negotiable instrument law is that the
>> instrument be signed by the maker. The
>> signatures on paper money are made by
>> facsimile stamp put there by machine.
>> See:
>> Civil Code Art. 2139 La; 120 So. 2d
>> 845.
>>
>>110. We are involved in a confidence game;
>> there is nothing to our currency except
>> the confidence the people have in it.
>> See:
>
><<< Continued to next message >>>
>
>
>========================================================================
>To subscribe: send a message to the fwolist@sportsmen.net
>with the word SUBSCRIBE in the subject/topic field. Use UNSUBSCRIBE to
>remove yourself from the list. Questions/comments/problems?
> email: Not Moderated@sportsmen.net or listmgmt@sportsmen.net
>For info about this system and its lists email: info@sportsmen.net
>
>========================================================================
>via: Sportsman's Paradise~~Online 602-922-1639 - www.sportsmen.net
>
>
>
>
========================================================================
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