- His Britannic Majesty abrogated his signature with the War of 1812, didn t he? ff If He did abrogate it would not likely be retroactive as treaties wouldMessage 1 of 1 , May 20, 2007View SourceHis Britannic Majesty abrogated his signature with the War of 1812,
didn't he?ffIf He did abrogate it would not likely be retroactive as treaties would still obligate the Crown. Therefore, if the notion is correct that the Crown is the causation of the infractions, one must infer that the ones being accosted are not protected by said treaty, but are in actuality protected by the signer of the treaty or the abrogation is moot.Also, France did not change their position and as the third part arbitrator of the treaty it would be their signature, not England's, that maintains authority over the agreement. More importantly it is how our government deals with us regardless of other regimes doctrine. The agreement made between the other parties stands even if one party reneges. The parties are: the Crown, US gov't, Crown's subjects, US citizens, France, strangers protected by sovereigns, etc.Abrogate:Laymen definition: To abolish, do away with, or annul, especially by authority,Legal definition: as to remove sovereign immunity.Please note: using either definition still fails to invalidate the conclusion according to the following precedents:"The People of a State are entitled to all rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative." Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wendell 9, 20 (1829)
Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89
10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228;
37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.
NOTE: Am.Dec.=American Decision, Wend. = Wendell (N.Y.)
"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 @DALL 1793 pp471-472
SOVEREIGNTY UNDER THE GREAT SEAL
"The rights of sovereignty extend to all persons and things not privileged, that are within the territory. They extend to all strangers resident therein; not only to those who are naturalized, and to those who are domiciled therein, having taken up their abode with the intention of permanent residence, but also to those whose residence is transitory. All strangers are under the protection of the sovereign while they are within his territory and owe a temporary allegiance in return for that protection."
[Carlisle v. United States, 83 U.S. 147, 154 (1873)John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects
c/o postal service location
21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf
See what's free at AOL.com.