Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Lawful money per US Code

  1. #1

    Lawful money per US Code

    Look what I found !!

    This has been repealed but ....

    Title 12, Chapter 2, Section 152 of the U.S. Codes

    -CITE-
    12 USC Sec. 152 01/24/94

    -EXPCITE-
    TITLE 12 - BANKS AND BANKING
    CHAPTER 2 - NATIONAL BANKS
    SUBCHAPTER IX - FORMATION OF ASSOCIATIONS TO ISSUE GOLD NOTES

    -HEAD-
    Sec. 152. Lawful money reserve of associations issuing gold notes;
    receiving notes of other associations

    -STATUTE-
    Every association organized under section 151 of this title shall
    at all times keep on hand not less than 25 per centum of its
    outstanding circulation, in gold or silver coin of the United
    States; and shall receive at par in the payment of debts the gold
    notes of every other such association which at the time of such
    payment is redeeming its circulating notes in gold coin of the
    United States, and shall be subject to all the provisions of title
    62 of the Revised Statutes: Provided, That, in applying the same to
    associations organized for issuing gold notes, the terms ''lawful
    money'' and ''lawful money of the United States'' shall be
    construed to mean gold or silver coin of the United States
    ; and the
    circulation of such associations shall not be within the limitation
    of circulation mentioned in title 62 of the Revised Statutes.

    -SOURCE-
    (R.S. Sec. 5186.)
    Found this from Franklin Sanders, the Moneychanger.

  2. #2
    Junior Member fishnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    on the Gulf Coast
    Posts
    21
    Since it has been repealed, does that mean the definition of "lawful money" has changed or is the definition still valid? "lawful money" is not defined anywhere else that I can find in the U.S.C.
    Fishnet

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by fishnet View Post
    Since it has been repealed, does that mean the definition of "lawful money" has changed or is the definition still valid? "lawful money" is not defined anywhere else that I can find in the U.S.C.
    Those are fantastic questions which I am unable to answer.

  4. #4
    what would put this issue to bed, would be a Tax Court case
    People may receive refunds for a while, based on their Verified testimony & Signature under Penalty of Perjury

    Now, I cannot see the Dept of Justice allowing this idea to prevail

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Binbokusai Yagyuu View Post
    what would put this issue to bed, would be a Tax Court case
    People may receive refunds for a while, based on their Verified testimony & Signature under Penalty of Perjury

    Now, I cannot see the Dept of Justice allowing this idea to prevail
    The IRS would have to initiate that tax court case as best I can tell. If you go in with a counterclaim or appeal then you carry the burden of proof.

    There is only one administrative letter threatening the $5K frivolous fine so far and it was Refused for Cause timely. Otherwise there are no pestering IRS agents about anybody who redeems lawful money; only dregs from before, mostly Pete's Cracking the Code victims. Even those cases are doing well.

    The letter should be explained though. This particular suitor is a great scientific endeavor. Much like you BY, knowing what you have gleaned here imagine you are a banker for a large international bank with a tax preparation license. You are at a co-worker's get-together and you hear his sister, who is an attorney for the IRS say in conversation, There is a group of people in Colorado who do not pay Income Tax; they are doing it right. You would likely recognize that she is talking about me and my suitors, albeit there are suitors all over the country. When he approached for more details she became nervous about talking too much too loudly in a social setting.

    He contacted me and we arranged for him to become a suitor and he began demanding lawful money a couple years ago; mid-2009 I think. Also he lives in NJ, and NY in a manner of working and living so that he files returns in both states. Everything went great with federal and state(s) and with $100K+ he was quite pleased with his new pay raise. Then NJ started billing him for about half of the refund back so he opened a Libel of Review in NY but his evidence repository ended up remanded to NJ. This last year he kept getting his federal refund delayed for this and for that reason.

    He is friendly with the IRS attorney but she is a little tight-fisted with the information. He did manage to get a comment about how she could no longer access his file anyway! So this indicates that the IRS is nervous about the scientific method and credentials of this experience. However, as we were waiting for the prize, a 2011 full refund it is disappointing to get a threat of a $5K fine instead. It was refused for cause timely and I suspect that is the last we will ever hear about it. They owe the suitor/banker a lot more than that in refund.

    However, since endeavoring to demand lawful money this particular suitor is probably around $40K in the black so far. He is not complaining.

    This is typical - just in today.

    With great joy we both went to the mail box today and opening up that envelope we saw the full return. I give praise to Yehovah because I prayed that a reasonable agent would receive our return. There are no giants.



    There are no giants.

    This particular suitor couple will not be taking the IRS to tax court.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by fishnet View Post
    Since it has been repealed, does that mean the definition of "lawful money" has changed or is the definition still valid? "lawful money" is not defined anywhere else that I can find in the U.S.C.
    Here is an idea.

    How about you self-define what lawful money is? Send it to proper authorities. Start a Libel of Review or miscellaneous case jacket.

    Where the legislature or courts are silent. Set the definition.
    The silence could be because it is already recognized by common law. You just need to claim it and use it.

    This is the quintessence of LAWFUL.

    >=]
    Last edited by shikamaru; 05-10-12 at 01:41 AM.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    Here is an idea.

    How about you self-define what lawful money is? Send it to property authorities. Start a Libel of Review or miscellaneous case jacket.

    Where the legislature or courts are silent. Set the definition.
    The silence could be because it is already recognized by common law. You just need to claim it and use it.

    This is the quintessence of LAWFUL.

    >=]
    That is so bold and forthright I want dearly for it to make sense.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    That is so bold and forthright I want dearly for it to make sense.
    We have lots of good elements here .

    Giving notice, evidence repository, issuing one's own opinion, etc.

    All you need are contracts specified with 'at law' and it would be really interesting.

    I predict if done, no court will really want to touch it with a 10 foot pole. There are those subjects that are still sensitive.

    Lawful money is one of them.

    We aren't doing this to be combative, but to assert ourselves.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 05-10-12 at 01:55 AM.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    We have lots of good elements here .

    Giving notice, evidence repository, issuing one's own opinion, etc.

    All you need are contracts specified with 'at law' and it would be really interesting.

    I predict if done, no court will really want to touch it with a 10 foot pole. There are those subjects that are still sensitive.

    Lawful money is one of them.

    We aren't doing this to be combative, but to assert ourselves.
    While waking from a good night's sleep your intriguing suggestion cogitated. I liked the idea of defining lawful money independently and collaterally but that simply will not do in common law unless I carried the authority of the de jure (pre-1861) Congress. Even if I did the definition is already understood to be fully bonded money. The bond on redeemed lawful cash is the signatures of the US Treasurer and Secretary on the face of the bills. The issue of private workers is when you have endorsed the practice of fractional lending which produces extra cash into the system. Lately though Bailouts, leading to Quatitative Easing have usurped that signature authority to a new level based apparently on over 99.9% of people endorsing private credit 100% of their personal transactions. To Save the Bankers - government (central banking on UN combinatorial mathematics) has found authority to inject hundreds of billions of $$$$ into the world economy keeping the US Dollar the Reserve Currency of the World.

    The easiest way to define lawful money is by simple substitution (1934).



    Gold and gold certificates are lawful money as intended in Section 16 of the Fed Act as it was codified in Title 12 USC 411 until 1934 when it was changed to:

    They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

    That simple substitution is the obvious definition in the scope of this application.

    I have explained the role of US notes as fiat currency between 1861 (beginning with Territorial Governor GILPIN's notes here in Colorado) many times so I am skipping that. I will presume that people understand that FRNs and US notes, neither one is redeemable in gold today. In fact, gold was removed as the standard for the exchange rate of the US Dollar (domestic & foreign) by around 1976 with the Amendments to the Bretton Woods Agreements. The point being that my definition, which I think is the correct definition is not functional. From the Senate Report linked we find something quite interesting:



    See that? The IMF Trust Fund has sealed the price of gold in anticipation that it might be put back into the system. That gold price is $42.22/troy ounce according to the assets of the Federal Reserve. Look at the Footnotes; and notice how interrelated the price of international gold as earmarked is to Special Drawing Rights.

    The audio link above to this morning's news, that the Spanish government is going to find the money (Quantitative Easing) to by up more than half of its biggest bank in order to save it indicates that crashing gold from today's Spot to $42.22/troy ounce is not yet being considered an option. It will take something a bit more draconian to finally quit this nonsense of considering government debt (conditioning of the citizenry - signature bond behind SDR's) as money.

    The solution is to shorten the time it takes to locate the two Prime Addends in the private key with Public Key Cryptography used in the banking system.



    Once this time/delay is defeated the Greed will execute what the bankers will not do also out of greed. Instead of TOO MANY SECRETS there will be NO MORE SECRETS. NO MORE ELECTRONIC VAULTS.

    Reducing the price of gold by 1/20 or better though, that is going to feel like a Crash.

    However that is the only reconciliation for the correct definition of lawful money - to reintroduce gold into the System.
    Last edited by David Merrill; 05-10-12 at 02:02 PM.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    While waking from a good night's sleep your intriguing suggestion cogitated. I liked the idea of defining lawful money independently and collaterally but that simply will not do in common law unless I carried the authority of the de jure (pre-1861) Congress. Even if I did the definition is already understood to be fully bonded money. The bond on redeemed lawful cash is the signatures of the US Treasurer and Secretary on the face of the bills. The issue of private workers is when you have endorsed the practice of fractional lending which produces extra cash into the system. Lately though Bailouts, leading to Quatitative Easing have usurped that signature authority to a new level based apparently on over 99.9% of people endorsing private credit 100% of their personal transactions. To Save the Bankers - government (central banking on UN combinatorial mathematics) has found authority to inject hundreds of billions of $$$$ into the world economy keeping the US Dollar the Reserve Currency of the World.

    The easiest way to define lawful money is by simple substitution (1934).



    Gold and gold certificates are lawful money as intended in Section 16 of the Fed Act as it was codified in Title 12 USC 411 until 1934 when it was changed to:

    They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

    That simple substitution is the obvious definition in the scope of this application.

    I have explained the role of US notes as fiat currency between 1861 (beginning with Territorial Governor GILPIN's notes here in Colorado) many times so I am skipping that. I will presume that people understand that FRNs and US notes, neither one is redeemable in gold today. In fact, gold was removed as the standard for the exchange rate of the US Dollar (domestic & foreign) by around 1976 with the Amendments to the Bretton Woods Agreements. The point being that my definition, which I think is the correct definition is not functional. From the Senate Report linked we find something quite interesting:



    See that? The IMF Trust Fund has sealed the price of gold in anticipation that it might be put back into the system. That gold price is $42.22/troy ounce according to the assets of the Federal Reserve. Look at the Footnotes; and notice how interrelated the price of international gold as earmarked is to Special Drawing Rights.

    The audio link above to this morning's news, that the Spanish government is going to find the money (Quantitative Easing) to by up more than half of its biggest bank in order to save it indicates that crashing gold from today's Spot to $42.22/troy ounce is not yet being considered an option. It will take something a bit more draconian to finally quit this nonsense of considering government debt (conditioning of the citizenry - signature bond behind SDR's) as money.

    The solution is to shorten the time it takes to locate the two Prime Addends in the private key with Public Key Cryptography used in the banking system.



    Once this time/delay is defeated the Greed will execute what the bankers will not do also out of greed. Instead of TOO MANY SECRETS there will be NO MORE SECRETS. NO MORE ELECTRONIC VAULTS.

    Reducing the price of gold by 1/20 or better though, that is going to feel like a Crash.

    However that is the only reconciliation for the correct definition of lawful money - to reintroduce gold into the System.
    I'm satisfied with specifying my intent in contract as 'at law' and tendering specie.
    Besides, the contract won't be reviewed unless someone complains to bring it before a court.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 07-06-13 at 11:55 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •