Good deal :)
I got the information and mechanics, but have yet to implement. On that point, you have the leg up.
I look forward to my adventure with the State. I should make a lot of happy during its course :D.
Printable View
Thank you for taking the time to post this. So I take it coresource in light of what you posted would be approaching the occupation and one of redeeming your property from with in the trust to be seen as and known as a peaceful inhabitant rather than a enemy combatant?
Could trust also refer to the relation between parties with regard to such virtues as:
faith
fidelity
fealty
allegiance
???
This thread is moving rapidly.
I think it would be a great benefit to all if we clearly define the terms as well as if they descend from Roman Civil or English Common Law.
Both forms of law use similar terms, but the terms possess different meanings and scope.
Use in common law is very much different from use in civil law.
Book: A Manual of Roman Law by Daniel Chamier 1893
We are drawing from the pools of English Common Law and Roman Civil Law, in my opinion.Quote:
Pg.77 -78
CHAPTER IX.
THE LAW OF THINGS.
RIGHTS IN REM.
1. Unlimited: Dominium. - A right in rem is a right which a person may have to and over and to the enjoyment of a particular thing as against the world. It is usefully contrasted with a right in personam, which is a right against a particular person for a definite performance or forebearance. And a right in rem could be so extensive as to amount to a complete ownership over a thing - which was called Dominium; or it could be limited - when it was called a servitus.
2. Limited: Servitudes. - A right in rem could be limited so that the person entitled was restricted in his enjoyment of it. These fragments of ownership were called servitudes; ....
Look at the territorial laws where I stand - here on Colorado (last page).
Trusts are at International Law. If you want to create an International Trust = New State, then you can by exercising your right of Self Determination. Or you can create a domestic trust whereby it shall be a Person Domestic to another Trust. Or said another way, another trust shall adjudicate it and/or exercise control over the newly created Trust. To say that Trusts are subject to some law form over another depends on the Settlor and it depends on the Grantor. As the Rights of Use held in trust are subject to the Rights of Use that the Grantor was able to transfer.
Using a birth certificate as example:
Would the:
Settlor be the parents?
Trustee be you?
Beneficiary would be government?
Would a birth certificate be a franchise? The grantor is obviously government with the recipient as grantee.
If the birth certificate is, in essence, proof of the formation/registration of a trust "vessel" (CQVT), then the questions are:
By what right and assumption did the STATE-creating entity decide to form this "vessel"?
For what specific purpose was this formation/registration created?
For whom was it created?
Well, I know in Canada the mother "voluntarily?" completes a statement of live birth which is then mailed or sent to whatever vital statistics office and the "account" is created and a certificate (receipt) is sent back. The act of the mother creates the trust vessel -- maybe she is the grantor?