Originally Posted by
freedave
Thank you, David.
Is it correct that if I were to cash a check at a bank with that on the back, I would be demanding that I receive lawful money instead of Federal Reserve notes?
With the possible acception of the $1 and $2 FRN, there is a US Treasury note on the face of all currently issued Federal Reserve Note, on the right side, it even is titled and sealed as such.
And if I were given Federal Reserve notes, would they then become lawful money as a result of what I stamped and signed on the back of the check?
They do not "become lawful money" your NOTICE and demand simply tells the ISSUER what note on the face you are using and who is obligated to pay the debt created and evidenced by that note.
Or would what I would put on the back of the check convert only the check received by the bank to lawful money?
Again, you are simply notifying the issuer of the credit note who is obligated to pay that amount of debt, you are not taking that obligation on yourself by endorsing the debt.
And according to what evidence could what I put on the back of the check convert the check and/or the Federal Reserve notes to lawful money?
The Rickman case proved that paper fiat currency is lawful money via endorsement and use. if non-endorsed by the user, and a demand for use of lawful money is recorded, there is your proof of demand, it is up to the issuer to actually pay the $$ amount of the debt. The only question any court or IRS agent could ask is "To whom does the obligation to pay this debt remain with?" That is simple and spelled out in 12-USC 411, the issuer of the note, the US Treasury (who is the endorser, since their official signature endorsement is on the face of ever single FRN, redeemed or not.