Lawful Money and the Bank

[David Merrill]

If you look through the TABLE II—REVISED STATUTES 1878, you'll learn that 31 USC 452-454 is the codification of Sec. 3588-3590 of the Revised Statutes.

Now if you follow this link to the Library of Congress website, and then navigate to page 708 of the Revised Statues, you'll find the same text that is codifed in the ever elusive 31 USC 452-454.

Thank you for that very helpful explanation Rock.

[allodial]

So one wonders how in the world conditioning about finances has gotten so terrific that one could ever sign such an agreement and then walk out of the bank without a copy?

See also: "Over here the people are too well informed and there is therefore little opportunity to do anything." (May 1836, James ROTHSCHILD at Paris to Nathan/Nat ROTSCHILD at London. Source: The World of Private Banking, pp 27.)

United States notes shall be lawful money, and a legal tender in payment of all debts, public and private, within the United States, except for duties on imports and interest on the public debt.

A lot can be gleaned from really meditating on a piece of code like this. The part that reads"except for duties on imports and interest on the public debt" is telling. How can you pay interest with the principal? How can one pay the principal with the interest? It seems fair and equitable to pay principal in silver/gold and have the interest be in the form of credit.

Regarding redemption of FRNs. Could not one simply go to a notary, list the serial numbers of each FRNs that you wish to redeem and issue a "Bill of Redemption".

Bill of Redemption.
Redemption value: one thousand dollars in the lawful money of the United States in lawful Gold and Silver coin.
This regards notes # A12345678 and ... of the Federal Reserve System of the United States which shall hereinafter be referred to as "the Notes". I have the notes in my possession without prejudice to any of my rights. To avoid aiding or abetting any criminal conspiracy and to see to promote the stability, honesty and integrity of transactions associated with myself or the Notes, pursuant to 12 USC 411, I, ______________________________, hereby redeem each of the Notes for their face or apparent value in lawful money of the United States in lawful Gold and/or Silver coin.

...

Could not one record the original Bill of Remption and then send the original to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors or to a nearby federal reserve executive and appoint them fiduciary for the redemption. Get it? The following is of a US$1 Gold coin:



Its gold in color. The following is of a silver-colored or Silver one....


Pay close attention:

"The immediate bank deposit of $1 coins ordered through this program does not result in their introduction into circulation and, therefore, does not comply with the intended purpose of the program." U.S. Mint.

.

To encourage robust national circulation of $1 Coins (non-numismatic, circulation-grade coins), the United States Mint has introduced the Circulating $1 Coin Direct Ship Program. This program makes it easy for retailers, financial institutions, and other interested parties to obtain smaller quantities of $1 coins. The $1 Coin Direct Ship Program will only accept web orders.

The intended purpose of the Circulating $1 Coin Direct Ship Program is to make $1 Coins readily available to the public, at no additional cost, so they can be easily introduced into circulation—particularly by using them for retail transactions, vending, and mass transit. Increased circulation of $1 Coins saves the Nation money.

The immediate bank deposit of $1 Coins ordered through this Program does not result in their introduction into circulation and, therefore, does not comply with the intended purpose of the Program.

One Midwestern transit system gives out change only in the form of Gold/Silver dollar coins rather than paper dollars. Wonder why? They have done thusly for decades AFAIK.

[allodial]

Now imagine if we had instead of fractionalizing banks, "Coin Keepers" that served as places for us to store lots of Silver/Gold coin..Quarters and Dimes too in bulk without any authorization for lending. Only transactional fees. That it was prohibited to actually lend out the coins or to do anything but to store and protect. That the facilities were managed by honest folk. That we could get receipts for storing coins and that our coins would be back there. And that we could assign the rights to the boxes back and forth. Gee this might be do-able without a banking license. A notary can be kept on hand to certify the contents of storage bin. That we could issue notes payable against the contents of the boxes.

Notaries Public in Florida have the authority to take acknowledgments, administer oaths, solemnize marriage, certify the contents of a safe-deposit box, certify the Vehicle Identification Number of a motor vehicle, and certify copies of non-recordable documents.

Certifying the Contents of a Safe-Deposit Box

....The law authorizing notaries to perform this function became effective on July 3, 1992, and is found in section 655.94(1), Florida Statutes.

Procedure for the Notary Public
The notary must be present at the time the safe-deposit box is opened and may not be a director, officer, employee, or stockholder of the financial institution. An officer of the institution must also be present with the notary at the opening of the safe-deposit box.

When the safe-deposit box is opened, the notary should inventory the contents of the box and should complete a certificate reciting the name of the lessee, the date of the opening, and a list of the contents. Florida law does not provide a form certificate.

Once the certificate is completed, copies should be made. The notary should place the original certificate in a package with the contents of the safe-deposit box and seal the package. The notary must then write on the outside of the package the name of the lessee and the date of the opening.

The notary should leave the sealed package and a copy of the certificate with the financial institution.

Imagine.

[powder]

I like the coin keeper idea.

On the original post of the thread - getting a bank agreement with 'lawful money' - so what was the point? statues/rules stipulate they (bank/otherwise) can substitute FRNs...

[Rock Anthony]

I like the coin keeper idea.

On the original post of the thread - getting a bank agreement with 'lawful money' - so what was the point? statues/rules stipulate they (bank/otherwise) can substitute FRNs...

Funds that are born from fractional reserve lending are a form of intangible credit - it exists only as electronic book entries into the banks' computers. However, when John Doe withdraws $100 from an ATM, he has in his hand tangible Federal Resrve notes, not intangible credit.

Federal Reserve notes are already bonded by the the United States. Therefore said notes are obligations of the United States - the US is responsible for paying the principal and interest on the debt money.

However, that intangible Fed credit that is born from fractional reserve lending is not bonded by the United States. It's bonded by whomever gives signature endoresement to that credit. Therefore those that endorse this intangible Fed credit are responsible for paying the principal and interest on that debt money - not the US.

The point of amending a bank agreement, such that only lawful money of the United States is handled within whatever bank accounts, is to avoid using Fed credit altogether. If John Doe has such an agreement with Bank of America, then no funds created via fractional reserve lending (aka Fed credit) are ever bonded by John. John never obligates himself to the debt.

If John Doe never has a need or desire for Fed credit, then why should he bond himself to it? Well, he shouldn't! When John pulls $100 from an ATM, he receives FRNs that are obligations of the US. John is fine with not sharing in that obligation.

[Christopher David]

However, that intangible Fed credit that is born from fractional reserve lending is not bonded by the United States. [/B]It's bonded by whomever gives signature endoresement to that credit. Therefore those that endorse this intangible Fed credit are responsible for paying the principal and interest on that debt money - not the US.

What if this man (acting as beneficiary for trustee) signed for each check issued in full LEGAL NAME for cash? What would make the green bills in hand a bond? How would this man (with rights of use as holder) be responsible for paying the principal and interest on that debt money absent an acount (not eligible for lending upon)? Who has signed the notes away as bondage? Not this man. The signature, two forms of govt ID, and thumbprint serves as proof of "to the order of", no? The "value-less" green linen paper can still be exchanged for meat, milk, bread, gas, etc. - the time may come to the contrary.

IMHO: The demand for lawful money prevents fractional reserve lending. One absent an account who deducts from employee's acount in exchange for green bills is doing the nation a favor. Banks can't lend from the bills stuffed under the mattress. What if every "person" with an account were to close/cancel/stop doing business with bank and demand cash all at once? This would surely make the news. The other day, the bank didn't have enough $100 bills for exchange due to the "holiday" - had to settle for 50s - perhaps more green linen is being stuffed under the mattress these days.

Sad that the paper has come to replace the metal of yesteryear. The linen paper will burn, but is remarkably endurable and will stand the test of time if used in its original intent. Ever been to one of those bars with the green stuff stapled to the walls and ceiling for 20s of years? Try that with newspaper.

[Rock Anthony]

Good questions. I shall attempt to provide good answers based upon my comprehension of matters:

What if this man (acting as beneficiary for trustee) signed for each check issued in full LEGAL NAME for cash?

What is "cash"? That could be interpreted as lawful money of the United States or legal tender of the Federal Reserve districts. I would demand lawful money per 12 USC 411 as this would clear up any ambiguity. If not, surely they will use the interpretation that results in you sharing in the debt.

What would make the green bills in hand a bond?

The "green bills in hand" are not the bonds. Securities of the US Treasury are the bonds (in the case of Federal Reserve notes). This is why Federal reserve notes can be used as lawful money - they are bonded to lawful money (US Treasuries).

How would this man (with rights of use as holder) be responsible for paying the principal and interest on that debt money absent an acount (not eligible for lending upon)?

If there is an undisputed and prevailing presumption that you've bonded yourself to the debt via signature endorsement, you are responsible for the debt. Even if the presumption is false, it'll stand as truth if not properly rebutted. This presumption can exist absent you having any bank account. For example, perhaps someone filed 1099 or W2 information returns against you - from there the presumption is born.

Who has signed the notes away as bondage?

The Treasurer of the United States and the Secretary of the Treasury

Not this man. The signature, two forms of govt ID, and thumbprint serves as proof of "to the order of", no? The "value-less" green linen paper can still be exchanged for meat, milk, bread, gas, etc. - the time may come to the contrary.

Even still, the verbiage that I suggest includes the "demand for lawful money" and not simply "cash". You want to have good enough record to defeat presumption. I agree, however, that no matter the restrictive endorsement you use, the "green bills" are exchangeble for many things.

IMHO: The demand for lawful money prevents fractional reserve lending. One absent an account who deducts from employee's acount in exchange for green bills is doing the nation a favor. Banks can't lend from the bills stuffed under the mattress. What if every "person" with an account were to close/cancel/stop doing business with bank and demand cash all at once? This would surely make the news. The other day, the bank didn't have enough $100 bills for exchange due to the "holiday" - had to settle for 50s - perhaps more green linen is being stuffed under the mattress these days.

Sad that the paper has come to replace the metal of yesteryear. The linen paper will burn, but is remarkably endurable and will stand the test of time if used in its original intent. Ever been to one of those bars with the green stuff stapled to the walls and ceiling for 20s of years? Try that with newspaper.

[Christopher David]

Thanks Rock. I was blowing smoke last night. I agree with your replies. Lawful money when demanded has no bond. Unfortunately, the currency is loosing steam. The price of everything is increasing while wages are not.

[doug-again]

If you get any flack from the low-level employees regarding the novation, speak something similar to these "magic" words:

"You're saying that I cannot make such a novation to the signature card? Well, may you please consult your legal department? I'm certain that such a novation is both lawful and legal, but I can understand that you may be unsure. I am entitled to this privilege, and would hate to be illegally denied this privilege because you've decided to make a legal determination on behalf of the bank. Are you an attorney? Only licensed attornies may practice law, and only licensed attornies hired by the bank to represent the bank in legal matters may make legal determinations for the bank."

The manager at the bank called me within 24 hours of opening an (interest free checking) account, and claimed to have talked with a lawyer already. She wanted me to come and close the account, or fill out new paper work absent the redemption stamp on the sig. card, and absent the rights reservations i made on other docs.
To be clear, i did not include any reservation of rights in the sig. card. i just used the standard phrase you see around here.

She wouldn't even tell me its name. i asked her on the phone to have the attorner call me (since i obviously couldn't call it) and she said it wasn't any use. He'd just tell me the same thing she was. He's on contract with them after all, and can't really talk to me. [You know, like, i'm guessing he'd bill them for having to deal with me? They're already losing money having to ask him to review my stuff.]
"It's against bank policy. The stamp restricts the bank. We don't allow restricted endorsements. The reservation of rights alters the agreement. "

Anyway, i expressed my desire to her, to have the attorner prove his claim that the stamp is restrictive, or is included by me with intent to restrict the bank. i haven't heard from him. i thoroughly questioned her assumptions and nominalizations, and got no responsive answers; just subject changes.

If you know of a law that they might be violating, could charges be pressed against them? But, i'd like to find a way to gently persuade them to cash my checks for me, and maintain the account. i kinda like the place: small bank, free coffee, farm fresh eggs are sold there by a teller's daughter, nice people, convenient locations.

[David Merrill]

Continue to enjoy your banking relationship. You are rather a patron, not a customer. You are serving American in these troubled time by reducing the national debt.

She wanted me to come and close the account...

Is not it all right there?

Look at the post above yours!

Thanks Rock. I was blowing smoke last night. I agree with your replies. Lawful money when demanded has no bond. Unfortunately, the currency is loosing steam. The price of everything is increasing while wages are not.

I have been managing release systems on the confidence and security building measures of the highly compressed information infrastructures most people think of as "money". To put that bluntly the US Dollar is not by definition the Federal Reserve note. The bond is there, in the signatures but like I showed everybody yesterday PayPal will not put any confidence in the $23.80 on account until I put confidence in the Fed.

There is the evidence before you. Judge for yourself. You do not have to accept my interpretation but if you judge, please listen to the conversations. That is why I recorded them and am sharing them. What you think is helping to create the universe in my rendition of superstring theory I call advanced-resonance inductive plasma physics - where terrorist attacks in Afghanistan and Beijing in one day, hold equal weight with Congress voting today, on a Sunday.

America is in the painful process of delivering Iran to China.


So there it is.

Buy some eggs and enjoy the coffee. Compliment them all and let them know how much you like them and that particular bank. Explain about these two recent foreclosures.

Integra Bank NA.
BankMeridian.

Let them know that even though you will be using them only as a repository for safely storing your funds, that you are suggesting they do so interest-free. You are not getting anything from them for nothing. You are done contributing to a national debt and if they think about that, well, just let it sink in on its own...

Tell them you never really wanted any legal advice, and thinking about it, you never got any. The lady only relayed hearsay to you from what I hear (punny). Politely let them know that it is now time you advised the attorneys not to shut down your business with them. [Point being that you like them and you will not put them asunder by doing it yourself. Do not sign anything but your non-endorsement and tender your business. Keep a recorder, or bring a witness might be wise but if that does not feel right...]


Regards,

David Merrill.