Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Osborn vs. Bank of US

Expand Messages
  • mobinem@aol.com
    If you ever question why the government created legal fictions I would advise reading this case. The first sentence is commonly used, but the paragraph, near
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 23, 2008
      If you ever question why the government created legal fictions I would advise reading this case. The first sentence is commonly used, but the paragraph, near the end of the original writing, should receive more attention.
       

      Osborn v. Bank of the United States, 22 U.S. 738 (1824),

       

      Chief Justice John Marshall believed that "The power to tax is the power to destroy."  

         

       But if the plain dictates of our senses be relied on, what state of facts have we exhibited here? Making a person, makes a case; and thus, a government which cannot exercise jurisdiction unless an alien or citizen of another State be a party, makes a party which is neither alien nor citizen, and then claims jurisdiction because it has made a case. If this be true, why not make every citizen a corporation sole, and thus bring them all into the Courts of the United States quo minus? Nay, it is still worse, for there is not only an evasion of the constitution implied in this doctrine, but a positive power to violate it. Suppose every individual of this corporation were citizens of Ohio, or, as applicable to the other case, were citizens of Georgia, the United States could not give any one of them, individually, the right to sue a citizen of the same State in the Courts of the United States; then, on what principle could that right be communicated to them in a body? But the question is equally unanswerable, if any single member of the corporation is of the same State with the defendant, as has been repeatedly adjudged.

       

      QUO MlNUS. The name of a writ. In England, when the king's debtor is sued in the court of the exchequer, he may sue out a writ of quo minus, in which he suggests that he is the king's debtor, and that the defendant has done him the injury or damage complained of, quo minus sufficiens existit, by which he is less able to pay the king's debt. This was originally requisite in order to give jurisdiction to the court of exchequer, but now this suggestion is a mere form. 3 Bl. Com. 46.

       


      John-Chester of the family Stuart
      sovereign; HIDC of JCS is YHWH


      623-206-4339
      mobinem@...
      c/o postal service location
      21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
      Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf
      I am not an attorney and do not give
      legal advice, all information is for
      education purposes only.
      Read Luke 23:2 &
      Ephesians 6:12




      Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.