• Welcome!

    Welcome to 'Saving to Suitors' Club!

    I would like to share this audio interview now on 12/30/12.

    Now it is 11/16/14!

    Thanks and Welcome to StSC! I have been writing about religion lately but still take a look every day. The quality of posts is very encouraging.

    Now it is 10/6/2012!

    I have been satisfied with the Welcome introduction below for quite some time now. This forum is a very pleasing reading stop about American remedy. It has been very rewarding and enjoyable. Lately the number of guests has been picking up dramatically and many of the guests are registering and posting too.


    From before:

    I am honored to be able to participate in the formation of a website where we as Americans (Canadians too) can improve access to remedy and property rights in our lives. Just earlier this evening I received an email:

    Dear Mr Merrill, I have enjoyed reading your theory's and investigations of the Federal Reserve System and others, I just want to inquirer about additional information and participate or read other information, do you have a web sight? I'm interested in further education and knowledge, so if you have the time please write back, I have a great deal of information on the subjects that are "colourful " in there true nature thank you for your time.
    [Please note that I have updated this post below a week later and plan to continue updating it as time goes on.]

    While this website is not exactly mine, I have the opportunity to share my knowledge with readers on the Internet here; and am hoping to learn a lot as well.

    The term 'saving to suitors' comes from the Judiciary Act of 1789 as you see on the banner. It is because of such foundation in law that in 1913 when Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act it was required that they write the remedy from the new elastic currency into the Act. In context you should keep in mind that the charter for the Fed banks was for a twenty year term, so we found that the banks using Fed notes were preparing to run the Fed in 1933 and you have most likely already heard of this landmark year because of FDR's Bankers' Holiday, which opened the Fed to contracting in a new trust with the people in general. The 1913 remedy had to be amended to accomodate FDR's simultaneous gold seizure.

    All in all though, your remedy is still written into the law at Title 12 U.S.C. §411. To verify that, click here and also notice the Notes.

    Amendments

    1934—Act Jan. 30, 1934, struck out from last sentence provision permitting redemption in gold.
    There are other aspects and details to refining this remedy and through a brain trust of suitors, practical application of proper identity, evidence repository (record-forming) and redemption of lawful money we have increased our understanding of trusts (contracts) and improved our right to highest title. By and large though, the simplest interpretation is the best one:

    They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

    This means that the only action required by you is to make your demand.

    Many suitors and myself enjoyed a website that recently failed named SuiJurisClub. This website is of similar format and expected to surpass SJC for an entertainment and educational chat room. I suggest that you might want to explore my lesson plan posted here. I have started several threads that you might register and join in about, or just read the opening posts and decide if this is making sense to you.

    Enjoy!

    David Merrill.

    3/11/11
    This announcement thread is stuck to the top, and so I am updating it by edit.

    I was speaking with Admin this morning marvelling at the rate of growth here. I will definitely be relenquishing any responsibility for being able to read and properly respond to posts. I grabbed a lion's share of topical threads about remedy in America and now need to stay focused there to improve the Lesson Plan for those interested.

    Remarkably we began to understand how and why this Website is extraordinary and unique. The 'backbone' so to speak is not just my knowledge being an intelligence nexus between many suitors as sensory nodes, but that has now expanded in this forum as a place for the suitors and members to share experiences directly, plus my vicarious anecdotes and supporting images and documentation as well! As time moves forward, and communications technology develops, we took the time and expense to grab a state of the art medium that can be expanded and upgraded as we wish and need.

    I believe we are going to be witnessing a new creature educating people about the simplicity of remedy as it exists in the law.

    It might well be that language is falling short of what I am trying to say because I am trying to describe something I see forming before me - a work in process if you will. So look for a moment at a monument from several years ago that has helped me form my idea that I am trying to portray.

    Rethinking Boundaries in Cyberspace.

    That link should not be given without this one.
    Comments 12 Comments
    1. David Merrill's Avatar
      David Merrill -
      It has been three or four days now. For a day or two I felt like suitors had bought me a website. I am delighted that as people join in, I can no longer keep up with the conversations!

      Well, it was fun while it lasted - having a website to call my own. Now it is even more fun to see how many others are enjoying "my" website!
    1. martin earl's Avatar
      martin earl -
      Thank you to the suitors and to David for this site! Keep the faith and works because it is paying off!
    1. David Merrill's Avatar
      David Merrill -
      I just heard a report from a non-suitor waiting for his tax refund. He prepared a memorandum documenting all his non-endorsed paycheck demands for lawful money... Nothing! So he sent in a more detailed report and now he is getting his full Refund in the near future, as reported by the website.

      This is great!

      They were reluctant so that indicates that they were looking for a way around the law. Then upon continued and more detailed demand, they are refunding his withholdings. This shows a process of contention over the facts and law, and the IRS lost the argument.


      Regards,

      David Merrill.
    1. bigred's Avatar
      bigred -
      As I understand the concept, by redeeming lawful money, there is no income. Given there is no income, is it necessary to file a 1040?
    1. David Merrill's Avatar
      David Merrill -
      Quote Originally Posted by bigred View Post
      As I understand the concept, by redeeming lawful money, there is no income. Given there is no income, is it necessary to file a 1040?

      If you redeem lawful money it is never necessary to file a 1040 Form. You have excluded the Fed from your contracting and left all obligations exclusively to the US government by the signatures of the Treasurer and the Secretary on every bill.

      But I am addressing the majority of readers who are employed. If you want your Withholdings Refunded, that will require you file a 1040 Form it seems. I am importing yesterday's email by Crosstalk:


      Subject: This just in


      My friend has been making a demand for lawful money for about two years now. He had some trouble wrapping his mind around getting his withholdings back. So he decided to issue forth a memorandum with all the checks attached. He heard nothing. So he decided to fill out a 1040 and reference the memorandum that he previously sent. He attached copies of all checks again for their use.

      This just in: "By the way, I went online to the IRS site last Saturday and discovered that my refund will be sent out on or before April 5.
      The computer told me that."

      Details are coming.
      The protest to the Form is in the prefix. I have used the technique effectively over the years. First you Notify without the standard form and then you conform if needed. Therefore you get your protest to the Form (forum) on the record first. But you see that the IRS could not respond either way, without the proper Form.


      Regards,

      David Merrill.
    1. martin earl's Avatar
      martin earl -
      Quote Originally Posted by bigred View Post
      As I understand the concept, by redeeming lawful money, there is no income. Given there is no income, is it necessary to file a 1040?
      Just to make one clarification, there is "income" when redeeming lawful money, however, that income is from a "non-taxable" source and there is no reason to report it after the first year of redemption.
    1. David Merrill's Avatar
      David Merrill -
      Quote Originally Posted by martin earl View Post
      Just to make one clarification, there is "income" when redeeming lawful money, however, that income is from a "non-taxable" source and there is no reason to report it after the first year of redemption.
      I am not saying that is incorrect, only that it does not make sense to me. Let's say you start redeeming lawful money in March; you would report for January, February and March but you would not report any income after March. You would forfeit the Withholdings against your tax liability for the three months, but you would report all your Withholdings so that you would get a Refund for the remainder. This keeps your employer out of the thick of it. Your employer will see you as a normal taxpaying employee unless you or the IRS informs him otherwise.
    1. martin earl's Avatar
      martin earl -
      Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
      I am not saying that is incorrect, only that it does not make sense to me. Let's say you start redeeming lawful money in March; you would report for January, February and March but you would not report any income after March. You would forfeit the Withholdings against your tax liability for the three months, but you would report all your Withholdings so that you would get a Refund for the remainder. This keeps your employer out of the thick of it. Your employer will see you as a normal taxpaying employee unless you or the IRS informs him otherwise.
      I completely agree there is no need to file a 1040 after the first year of Lawful money redemption. I also agree with you that there is no "income" after the demand for lawful money and non-endorsement has been made.

      My issue has been explaining lawful money redemption to numerous IRS preparers and accountants (family members of mine make a good 'money' of their practices before the IRS), the ONLY way they can comprehend the issue is from a Taxable income source or a non-taxable income source. Since "Obligations of the US are not taxable income" they still maintain I have "income" but not from a taxable source.

      They see anything that has commercial value (even lawful money of face value) as "income". The very reason we keep a record of lawful money demand is to prove the fact we do not have "income from a taxable source" and our possessions (including labor) are not "first leaned" by the Federal Reserve.

      The taxable source would be the Federal Reserve and our (taxable event) endorsement of it.

      The non-taxable source would be the Treasury via lawful money demand.

      When explaining lawful money redemption to people who know IRS terms, it is nearly impossible to convince them I have no 'income'. But using their own definitions and regulations, I can show them my income remains an "obligation of the United States" and therefore, non-taxable, when I demand lawful money redemption and 12-USC-411.

      Does that make more sense?
    1. David Merrill's Avatar
      David Merrill -
      I did not make myself clear apparently.

      The main reason you would file, after redeeming lawful money is to have your Withholdings Refunded.

      There is even a good reason to file when you are self employed. Your several bosses will be reporting they paid you presumed taxable income usually by 1099 Form. Since you do not earn the minimum taxable income to bother reporting, it may be that the IRS agent will assess you based on the client reports.

      Therefore it could be wise to alert the IRS that you are not contracting with them by the form they understand. When they are considering assessment they will already be on notice that you have been redeeming lawful money.

      These circumstances are independent of 'a year after you begin redeeming' like you imply.


      Regards,

      David Merrill.
    1. David Merrill's Avatar
      David Merrill -
      'COLB' in the context with Birth Certificate I presume to mean Certificate of Lading/Billing (in admiralty). I am looking forward to this and hope that you will continue this fascinating exploration in the forums where we can participate without cluttering up the Welcome Thread.

      I like that you have invited people here though. If you want to pick this line up click here.

      You imply that a refund is a benefit and that means that the income tax refund is more complex than it appears. I disagree. A refund is due the taxpayer (the W-4, in order to procure employment initially designates the employee "Taxpayer", however the option to redeem is open until the paycheck is cashed - therefore it is not a benefit of statute or anything else.) The employer is compelled by the IRS Code to send part of your money elsewhere than your pocket and if you redeem lawful money, the IRS Refunds it by due course of law.
    1. Bentley's Avatar
      Bentley -
      Hello David,

      Where is a good place to start regarding your lesson plan?

      Thank you,
      Bentley
    1. xparte's Avatar
      xparte -
      NO PERSON SO EVIL BUT KNOWS SOME TOUCH OF PITY,BUT ME I KNOW NONE, AND THEREFORE AM NO PERSON .Shakespeare used the word beast . showing no respect to persons