The only issue with the system is that it is now modeled around the money -- and protection of it.

It seems to me that when they constructed the Judiciary Act, they provided a clause for the common man. It seems to me that when the government had to turn to third-party money as a solution to their then problem, they included an opt-out clause - although they don't tell anyone. I want to believe it was done for the benefit of the common man/woman to exist in the system. Perhaps MYSTICONE is troubled by fear of the system. I know I certainly have that concern on my mind. In following the research here and doing as much double checking as I can, I come to the same conclusion as David regarding the intent and interpretation of the code sections.

If the Saving to Suitors clause is not there to provide remedy for the common man/woman -- incidently, to which I believe is the entire intent of the declaration, what is it there for?