Redeemed Lawful Money

[Michael Joseph]

P.S. Notice the young woman to BERNANKE's right enjoying what a crackpot that Ronald Ernest can be...

Ronald Ernest to me seems like a Magician for the FRS - look over here. Consider that the "Cestui Que Trust" in the Public Arena is the Bankers. I mean really, am I to believe that the members of Congress are sooooooo stupid that they themselves do not know what money is? Especially IF and I do mean IF the FRS is supposed to be Agent for Trustee. How absurd.

Why would Ronald Ernest be asking such a question of his Agent? If Congress truly is with the Power of Direction and/or Trustee, then Congress decides what is money and, as such, why again the "nasty" question regarding gold.

Perhaps it's just a show for the masses - good versus evil - or so it seems.

Notice what Ronald Ernest did not ask. In terms of Probate - why is the Public Arena - Mort? I mean Bernacke went straight to it like a tick on a hound dog, ASSET in TAIL risk.

And he [Bernacke] is right - In the Public - gold is just a rock. But in Private International Law - he [Bernacke] knows differently. I specifically write to the Public/Private face of State [Trust].

If Bernacke attempts CONVERSION, in equity, he must first prove his CLAIM.

[David Merrill]

Hvncb;



Assuming you are as new to studying this as your posting here on StSC, I really admire your retention and collection of related materials. Good mind there! You have spotted some of the most important cruxes of the matter. - Selected critical details among an elaborate mosaic.

I think MJ spots it also;

Ronald Ernest to me seems like a Magician for the FRS - look over here. Consider that the "Cestui Que Trust" in the Public Arena is the Bankers. I mean really, am I to believe that the members of Congress are sooooooo stupid that they themselves do not know what money is? Especially IF and I do mean IF the FRS is supposed to be Agent for Trustee. How absurd.

Why would Ronald Ernest be asking such a question of his Agent? If Congress truly is with the Power of Direction and/or Trustee, then Congress decides what is money and, as such, why again the "nasty" question regarding gold.

Perhaps it's just a show for the masses - good versus evil - or so it seems.

Notice what Ronald Ernest did not ask. In terms of Probate - why is the Public Arena - Mort? I mean Bernacke went straight to it like a tick on a hound dog, ASSET in TAIL risk.

And he [Bernacke] is right - In the Public - gold is just a rock. But in Private International Law - he [Bernacke] knows differently. I specifically write to the Public/Private face of State [Trust].

If Bernacke attempts CONVERSION, in equity, he must first prove his CLAIM.

I believe the word you should have used is CORRESPONDENCE, not CONVERSATION.

He was BRACKETED [captured under his oath/curse] and I agree that Ronald Ernest could have taken much, much more advantage about exposing truth. You make me wonder if I have also been swept up in a wonderful comedy act by a bankster puppet in the Senate too!

Wow!

You actually said something against Ron Paul?

I am letting that sink in...

With at least three bills to abolish the Fed, none of which survived his uttering it, maybe I am starting to see the sense of it all.

Such an honest face and sincere smile though, I am still pursuaded he is unaware of the strings manipulating him, or that there is a puppeteer above for the Bank and Fund laughing away at how much mileage they get from an obstetrician gone political.

I like to take a nap after such a thought.




Regards,

David Merrill.

[Michael Joseph]

I believe the word you should have used is CORRESPONDENCE, not CONVERSATION.

He was BRACKETED [captured under his oath/curse] and I agree that Ronald Ernest could have taken much, much more advantage about exposing truth. You make me wonder if I have also been swept up in a wonderful comedy act by a bankster puppet in the Senate too!

Wow!

You actually said something against Ron Paul?

I am letting that sink in...

With at least three bills to abolish the Fed, none of which survived his uttering it, maybe I am starting to see the sense of it all.

Such an honest face and sincere smile though, I am still pursuaded he is unaware of the strings manipulating him, or that there is a puppeteer above for the Bank and Fund laughing away at how much mileage they get from an obstetrician gone political.

I like to take a nap after such a thought.




Regards,

David Merrill.

CONVERSION, in equity, The considering of one thing as changed into another; for example, land will be considered as converted into money, and treated as such by a court of equity, when the owner has contracted to sell his estate in which case, if he die before the conveyance, his executors and not his heirs will be entitled to the money. 2 Vern. 52; S., C. 3 Chan. R. 217; 1 B1. Rep. 129. On the other hand, money is converted into land in a variety of ways as for example, when a man agrees to buy land, and dies before he has received the conveyance, the money he was to pay for it will be considered as converted into lands, and descend to the heir. 1 P. Wms. 176 2 Vern. 227 10 Pet. 563; Bouv. Inst. Index, h. t.


LAND. This term comprehends any found, soil or earth whatsoever, as meadows, pastures, woods, waters, marshes, furze and heath. It has an indefinite extent upwards as well as downwards; therefore land, legally includes all houses and other buildings standing or built on it; and whatever is in a direct line between the surface and the centre of the earth, such as mines of metals and fossils. 1 Inst. 4 a; Wood's Inst. 120; 2 B1. Com. 18; 1 Cruise on Real Prop. 58.

2. Land, as above observed, includes in general all the buildings erected upon it; 9 Day, R. 374; but to this general rule there are some exceptions. It is true, that if a stranger voluntarily erect buildings on another's land, they will belong to the owner of the land, and will become a part of it; 16 Mass. R. 449; yet cases are, not wanting where it has been decided that such an erection, under peculiar circumstances, would be considered as personal property. 4 Mass. R. 514; 8 Pick. R. 283, 402; 5 Pick, R. 487; 6 N. H. Rep. 555; 2 Fairf. R. 371; 1 Dana, R. 591; 1 Burr. 144.



CESTUI QUE TRUST, A barbarous phrase, to signify the beneficiary of an estate held in trust. He for whose benefit another person is enfeoffed or seised of land or tenements, or is possessed of personal property. The cestui que trust is entitled to receive the rents and profits of the land; he may direct such conveyances, consistent with the trust, deed or will, as he shall choose, and the trustee (q. v.) is bound to execute them: he may defend his title in the name of the trustee. 1 Cruise, Dig. tit. 12, c. 4, s. 4; vide Vin. Ab. Trust, U, W, X, and Y 1 Vern. 14; Dane's Ab. Index, h. t.: 1 Story, Eq. Jur. 321, note 1; Bouv. Inst. Index, h. t.


Commentary: An ESTATE held in Trust is interesting indeed. In light of mere PROPERTY. Estate being an assemblage of PROPERTY.

PROPERTY. The right and interest which a man [MJ's comment "or Person"] has IN lands and IN chattels to the exclusion of others. 6 Binn. 98; 4 Pet. 511; 17 Johns. 283; 14 East, 370; 11 East, 290, 518. It is the right to enjoy and to dispose of certain things in the most absolute manner as he pleases, provided he makes no use of them prohibited by law.

THINGS. By this word is understood every object, except man, which may become an active subject of right. Code du Canton de Berne, art. 332. In this sense it is opposed, in the language of the law, to the word persons. (q. v.)

2. Things, by the common law, are divided into, 1. Things real, which are such as are permanent, fixed and immovable, and which cannot be carried from place to place; they are usually said to consist in lands, tenements and hereditaments. 2 Bl. Com. 16; Co. Litt. 4 a to 6 b. 2. Things personal, include all sorts of things movable which attend a man's person wherever he goes. Things personal include not only things movable, but also something more, the whole of which is generally comprehended under the name of chattels. Chattels are distinguished into two kinds, namely, chattels real and chattels personal.

----------------------------

Regarding Ronald Ernest - People enjoy a good show - they love to Cut all they know Right in Two - Us and Them.

Most don't consider that they created their own Prison. with Words Darker than their Wings.

Now, back to our regular scheduled PROGRAMMING.