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

Re: John Chester: Family of Stuart...pls answer

Expand Messages
  • rebel382003
    A CORPORATION DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME LEGAL STATUS AS A CITIZEN Virgil, continuing the thread of Stuart, has paraphrased a footnote or a headnote, perhaps by a
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 6, 2008
      A CORPORATION DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME LEGAL STATUS AS A CITIZEN

      Virgil, continuing the thread of Stuart, has paraphrased a footnote or
      a headnote, perhaps by a law clerk, in County of San Mateo v. Southern
      Pacific Railroad, 116 U.S. 138 (1885) (his uncertainty) to suggest a
      corporation has no different legal status than that of an individual
      pursuant to the 14th. Amendment.

      It is submitted that the case cited may grant the status of an
      individual to the corporation only for the issue at bar. It is not a
      statement that there is no difference between a corporation and of a
      citizen. But then again, it was not the words of the court.

      I offer the following two lengthy paragraphs from Hale v Henkel, 201 US
      43 (1906), as a clear and definitive declaration of legal differences
      between the two forms:

      "The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen.
      He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His
      power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his
      neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an
      investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such
      duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the
      protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by
      the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state,
      and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance
      with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate
      himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or
      seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the
      public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights."

      "Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the state. It is
      presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives
      certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to
      the laws of the state and the limitations of its charter. Its powers
      are limited by law. It can make no contract not authorized by its
      charter. Its rights to [201 U.S. 43, 75] act as a corporation are only
      preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is
      a reserved right in the legislature to investigate its contracts and
      find out whether it has exceeded its powers. It would be a strange
      anomaly to hold that a state, having chartered a corporation to make
      use of certain franchises, could not, in the exercise of its
      sovereignty, inquire how these franchises had been employed, and
      whether they had been abused, and demand the production of the
      corporate books and papers for that purpose. " id, 74-75.

      Quaker City Cab Co. v Pennsylvania, 277 US 389, was used for several
      years to contend corporations have the same rights as an individual.
      After numerous cases distinguished difference, Quaker City Cab Co. was
      held in disfavor by Lehnhausen v Lake Shore Auto Parts Co., 410 US
      356.

      Citizens have rights secured by the Constitution; corporations have
      privileges granted by legislators and judges.

      Reb

      ******************************
      "Virgil Cooper" <ultrac21@...> wrote:
      >
      > I think the question of how corporations are
      distinguished from
      > natural, living, human beings
      > was addressed disingenuously, that is, very stealthily and
      > underhanded in City of San Mateo v.
      > Southern Pacific Railroad. What the Supreme Court
      accomplished
      > by judicial fiat and without so much
      > as a shot being fired or a drop of blood being shed has
      gone
      > unchallenged for over one hundred years.
      > See County of San Mateo v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 116
      U.S.
      > 138 (1885).

      SNIPPED*********************.
    • Frog Farmer
      ... That s right! ... A corporation cannot vote at the polls, or plead the fifth, as just two examples! ... I love this quote and use it often! ... If only the
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 6, 2008
        rebel382003 wrote:

        > A CORPORATION DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME LEGAL STATUS AS A CITIZEN

        That's right!

        > It is submitted that the case cited may grant the status of an
        > individual to the corporation only for the issue at bar. It is not a
        > statement that there is no difference between a corporation and of a
        > citizen. But then again, it was not the words of the court.

        A corporation cannot vote at the polls, or plead the fifth, as just two
        examples!

        > I offer the following two lengthy paragraphs from Hale v Henkel, 201
        > US 43 (1906), as a clear and definitive declaration of legal
        > differences between the two forms:

        I love this quote and use it often!

        > "The individual may stand upon his constitutional
        > rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on
        > his private business in his own way. His power to
        > contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state
        > or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to
        > open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may
        > tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the
        > state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond
        > the protection of his life and property. His rights
        > are such as existed by the law of the land long
        > antecedent to the organization of the state,
        > and can only be taken from him by due process of law,
        > and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his
        > rights are a refusal to incriminate
        > himself, and the immunity of himself and his property
        > from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the
        > law. He owes nothing to the
        > public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights."

        If only the American people could know these facts during every moment
        of their waking day, and act upon them with confidence!

        > "Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of
        > the state. It is presumed to be incorporated for the
        > benefit of the public.

        It may not be, however, and when checked, many did not follow through on
        all the necessary steps in the process of incorporation. Only those
        with a stake or something to lose ever check that aspect out, and most
        of those people don't take the trouble either, thinking, "I saw their ad
        on TV; they MUST be legitimate!" Hahahaha!

        > It receives certain special privileges and franchises,

        As opposed to rights.

        > and holds them subject to the laws of the state and the
        > limitations of its charter.

        Unlike my rights!

        > Its powers are limited by law.

        My rights are too innumerable to be covered by law. As proof, just look
        at all the next year's legislation that will be written in attempts to
        take more of them away.

        > It can make no contract not authorized by its
        > charter.

        But who cares about THAT!? Hahahaha! People get whatever they permit.

        > Its rights to [201 U.S. 43, 75] act as a corporation
        > are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws
        > of its creation.

        Or so long as they go violating them unnoticed or unopposed.

        > There is a reserved right in the legislature to
        > investigate its contracts and find out whether it
        > has exceeded its powers. It would be a strange
        > anomaly to hold that a state, having chartered a
        > corporation to make use of certain franchises,
        > could not, in the exercise of its
        > sovereignty, inquire how these franchises had been
        > employed, and whether they had been abused, and
        > demand the production of the
        > corporate books and papers for that purpose. " id, 74-75.
        >

        "There is a reserved right in the toolbox of a Frog Farmer to
        investigate his contracts and find out whether anyone contending against
        him has exceeded their powers. It would be a strange anomaly to hold
        that a state citizen, having chartered a procedure (constitution) for
        elevating neighbors to officers to make use of certain franchises and
        powers, could not, in the exercise of his sovereignty, inquire how these
        franchises had been obtained and employed, and whether they had been
        abused, and demand the production of the corporate books and papers for
        that purpose. (certified copies of oaths of office and other required
        bona fide documentation required to be on file by law."
        - 1 FF 007; 2 PAM 51; MacDonald v. County of Sonoma.

        > Citizens have rights secured by the Constitution; corporations have
        > privileges granted by legislators and judges.

        This is why, if it's not a life-threatening emergency that requires the
        immediate orders of a magistrate to subdue a "just following orders"
        type goon, a "formal" "docketed" "administrative hearing" "on the
        record" is the preferable course of action (short of forgetting the
        whole thing and everyone going home), scheduled for the convenience of
        all parties to minimize wasted time and resources, and at that meeting,
        I will take the First Step of letting the record reflect my human nature
        and the SHEER IMPOSSIBILITY of mistaking me in any way to be a
        corporation or of partaking in any corporate privileges. This is a
        presumption rarely ever challenged (and rarely ever true for most
        Americans anymore). Once it has been done, one has a lot more leverage
        over his opponents, who most likely cannot rationally discuss any
        issues.

        "Don't ever change, people,
        Even if you can.
        You are your own best toy to play with;
        remote control hands
        Made for each other, made in Japan.
        Woman with a greasy heart,
        automatic man,
        Don't ever change, people,
        your face will hit the fan.
        Don't ever change, people,
        even if you can.
        Don't change before the empire falls;
        You'll laugh so hard you'll crack the walls"

        - Grace Slick, "Greasy Heart"

        Regards,

        FF
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.