_________________________________________________________________Please download MP3 Audio
Broadcast of this Blog > here
(34 min 12 Mb)_________________________________________________________________
Hello, this is Frank O’Collins for Tuesday 1st July 2014 and thank you for taking the time to read and listen to the Ucadia blog for this week entitled “The True Rule of Law defined: Any law that is against such truth, cannot be law”.
To begin, I do not intend this to be a long blog or audio. Instead, I wish for the words expressed tonight to be as clear as possible and to speak for themselves. Sometimes when you speak too long, or try to give too much information, it can make it harder for some folks to concentrate and absorb the key information.
Instead, I will share with you in just one hundred and thirty three verses, the key standards and measure by which you, or anyone with whom you share this audio may know the True Rule of Law and why any law that is against any of these one hundred and thirty three verses cannot be law.
The reason I am able to be so confident that the one hundred and thirty three verses I am about to share with you is the most concise, the most accurate and the only true Rule of Law is because these principles have existed in all higher civilizations since the time of the Sumerians, the Egyptians, the Hittites and Canaanites, the Assyrians and Babylonians, the Greeks and the Romans; as well as from the time of Emperors Hadrian, Antonius Pius, Marcus Aurelius and then later under Constantine and even up to the time of the Carolingians and Charlemagne in the 9th Century. In fact, the only times the true Rule of Law has been hidden, or defiled is the past few hundred years when greedy and mentally insane pirates and bankers have sought to take control of the world. About the same time we see the creation of fake religious texts, fake law and fake history all to control the world as slaves.
As for the reason I am doing this audio on the True Rule of Law it remains clear that many continue to be distracted and hurt by others who confuse, beguile, trick and entrap with all kinds of information and rituals claimed to be remedy in law, when none of it, absolutely none of it has anything to do with law, but stealing from people.
Another key reason is the fact that I have spent considerable time proving to you in the past few months of Ucadia Blogs that there is absolutely nothing lawful about common law or any form of law coming out of London or Washington or Rome for that matter. But without you or those with whom you choose to share this blog having a measuring stick – how can you discern what is true versus what is more disinformation?
Going to court is not easy. Being arrested is not fun. Having heavily armed para military breaking your door down and terrifying your children or your family is a trauma that few people ever truly overcome. So I don’t blame anyone who has read parts of Ucadia, or listened to some of these audios yet still does not get it. The legal system is extraordinarily complex and intimidating. I have spent nearly twenty years and read every statute since the time of Henry III of England to the 20th Century and I can tell you it is mind boggingly complex. So how could I or anyone really get angry at anyone who still is struggling to find their way and overcome the threat of losing their home, or custody of their children, or surviving in a sea of debt, or any other number of challenges?
It doesn't matter if I have explained the Rule of Law a thousand times like I did in a blog the same time last year – if it is not getting through then, there is no excuse not to keep trying to make it clear. So to all of you who have come to Ucadia and felt lost through the information, I apologize without reservation and hope that this audio and blog goes some way to make reparations for any confusion you may have felt.
Another apology I need to give is to all of you who are expecting me to start the 3 part series on the history of the law in America this week. Please be patient and let me address first the issue of what is the law, before we continue unmasking the fact that we have been living under the boot of a system without an inch of legitimacy or law for far too long.
So what is the true Rule of Law
So what is the true Rule of Law? Well, the Bible has but one, only one verse that summarizes the Golden Rule as found in all other higher civilizations under Matthew 7:12 saying “Therefore all things whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the Law of the prophets”. In other words, the Rule of Law is “All law is equal that no one is above it”.
This is the same rule we find in the Ancient Egyptian text Tales of the Eloquent Servant from 1800 BCE: "Do for one who may do for you, that you may cause him thus to do."
And the same rule again from the 6th Century BCE through Confucius Analects 15:23: "Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you".
From the Brahman Mahabharata, 5:1517 we have: "This is the sum of Dharma [duty]: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you".
In fact, there is no rational or reasonable or sane priest or judge or president or prime minister that would dare deny the existence of the Golden Rule of Law. Instead, they hope you would not speak about it or write about it.
Why? Because these people are the custodians of a system now totally operating on procedure with not an ounce of competence as to the origin of true law or the meaning of the law. In fact, there are numerous papers and books written over the past eighty years by so called legal experts who proclaim the law is whatever is necessary for the continuance of order – in other words, the “law is whatever I say it is”. What complete rubbish! What utter facile stupidity! As was proven last week, modern international law and commercial law is at its heart Admiralty law and the fact that these judges and legal experts have probably never read one single statute on Admiralty Law, yet continue to promote “legal realism” just goes to show how insane the system has become.
So when you are able to prove and see that in centuries and thousands of years past, everyone, absolutely everyone could learn what the true Rule of Law is and could even memorize it, you see why the existing system is absolutely desperate to keep you distracted, off balance and under stress.
So what is the best summary of the Rule of Law? Well, I am going to quote 133 verses from a most sacred and profound text called Lebor Clann Glas in the Age of the Nazarenes. If you have not read it, then I strongly suggest you do. In any event, in just one hundred and thirty three verses, this Chapter summarizes the whole structure of true law.
This is what you need to know before you send any document to any court, or before you seek to represent yourself, or before you listen to any remedy guru or follow any suggestion from your friends, or decide on any course of action in the existing system. This is the measure, the standard by which you will be able to see whether something is true or false, something is wisdom or disinfo. So lets start:
Chapter 16
12 There is, there was, there has only ever been One Law.
13 All law is equal that no one is above it,
14 All law is measured that all may learn and know it,
15 All law is standard that it may always be applied the same.
16 A law is a rule that prohibits or permits certain acts.
17 A rule is a norm, bar, maxim, measure or standard.
18 A rule may be derived by instruction, discovery, custom or consent.
19 The highest law is Divine being a rule given by divine instruction,
20 As nothing may contradict such a rule.
21 The second highest law be the reason of Mind,
22 Being an edict given by a great council of wise elders or jurists,
23 As nothing absurd and without good reason may be considered law.
24 The third highest law be the law of the people,
25 As the consent and will of the people is the source of true authority.
26 The weakest rule is that of a tyrant,
27 As any rule without authority or right of heaven but merely by force,
28 Cannot be sustained and the people shall eventually overcome,
29 And render such unjust rule and unjust laws as dust.
30 This be the law of all great civilizations from the beginning of time,
31 And no king or assembly or city has sustained in ignorance to such foundation.
32 These then be the foundations of Rule of Law:
33 All law be spoken as it is the spirit of the word that carries the authority.
34 Therefore all action under law be by word of mouth,
35 And writing be only for memory and trade and never be the law.
36 All are equal under the law,
37 All are accountable and answerable under the law,
38 All are without blemish until proven culpable,
39 Where there is a law there must be a cause,
40 Where there is a law there must be a penalty,
41 Where there is a law there must be a remedy.
42 An action in law cannot proceed without first a cause.
43 An action is not granted to one who is not injured.
44 The action of a valid law can do no harm (injury).
45 An action decided in law must reflect cause of such action.
46 No injury to the law means no valid cause for action by law.
47 No action through law can arise from a fraud before heaven and earth.
48 No action through law can arise in bad faith or prejudice.
49 An act does not make one culpable unless there be intent to do wrong,
50 For no one may suffer punishment by valid law for mere intent.
51 No one is punished for the transgression of an ancestor or another.
52 No one can derive an advantage in law from his own wrong,
53 For what is invalid from the beginning does not become valid over time.
54 No one is accused of the same exact cause twice.
55 No man be a judge over his own matter,
56 Nor a man possess the authority of heaven to be both judge and executioner.
57 No penalty may exist without a valid law.
58 The immediate cause and not the remote cause be the subject of law.
59 These be the foundations of Rule of Law.
60 As to justice it be the maxim that Justice never contradicts the rule of law,
61 For Justice be the lawful right of use of all that has been defined by law,
62 And Justice be the rights to adjudicate the law itself before heaven and earth,
63 And Justice be a judge under sacred oath and trust granted such rights,
64 As a right being a power or authority or privilege or benefit recognized by law.
65 Divine Law is the law that defines the Divine and all creation,
66 And demonstrates the spirit and mind and instruction of the Divine,
67 And the operation of the will of the Divine Creator through existence.
68 Therefore all valid rights and Justice is derived from Divine Law.
69 Natural Law is the law that defines the operation of the will of the Divine,
70 Through the existence of form and sky and earth and physical rules.
71 Thus Natural Law governs the operation of what we can see and name.
72 The laws of People are those rules enacted by men having proper authority,
73 For the good governance of a society under the Rule of Law.
74 The laws of People are always inherited from Natural Law.
75 A law of People cannot abrogate or usurp a Natural Law,
76 Nor is it possible for a Natural Law to usurp Divine Law.
77 These then be the foundations of Justice:
78 All possess the Right to be heard even if such speech be controversial,
79 All possess the Right of free will to choose our actions and destiny,
80 All possess the Right of reason that distinguishes them from lesser animals,
81 All possess the Right to informed consent or withdraw consent,
82 All possess the Right over their body that none may claim our flesh,
83 All possess the Right of our divine self that none may claim our soul.
84 Thus no man can make a blood oath on their flesh or vow on their soul,
85 Nor may any man claim servitude or obligation under such an abomination,
86 For such Rights are granted solely by heaven to all people,
87 And no man or body of jurists have the authority to usurp heaven or the gods.
88 Verily all true authority and power to rule is inherited from heaven,
89 And to only those men in good faith and good character and good conscience,
90 Who then make a sacred oath in trust and form an office,
91 Into which such Divine Rights are conveyed for only so long,
92 As they honor their oath and obligations to serve the people.
93 For whenever a man who makes an oath to form a sacred trust of office,
94 Then breaks such an oath through prejudice or unclean hands or bad faith,
95 Then all such authority and power ceases from them,
96 As the cord between heaven and earth is severed and the trust dissolved.
97 Verily no man may serve the people unless under sacred oath,
98 Nor may any man serve heaven unless under solemn vow.
99 Therefore guard your behavior and actions of office,
100 That though the heavens appear to fall, let justice always be done.
101 These be the foundations of Justice.
102 As to the administration of Justice these be the foundations of Due Process:
103 No valid action in law proceeds without first a valid cause,
104 And no valid cause exists until such claim is first tested.
105 Thus the birth of all action in law must begin with the claim.
106 If a claim be not proven as a valid cause then the accused has nothing to answer.
107 Yet if the claim be proved to have merit as a cause,
108 Then all valid causes in law must be resolved.
109 Thus, he who first brings the claim must first prove its merit,
110 As the burden of the proof lies upon him who accuses not he who denies.
111 A heavy obligation then on one who first brings the controversy.
112 For one who brings false accusation is the gravest of transgressors,
113 That it injures not one law, but all heaven and all law.
114 Thus a valid claim in part is one in which an accuser makes a complaint,
115 Bringing two witnesses as proof and petitions a forum of law for remedy.
116 If merit of a cause be proved, the one accused must appear to answer.
117 The one accused and any witnesses appear by summons.
118 When anyone be summonsed, he must immediately appear without hesitation.
119 If a man summonsed does not appear or refuses to appear to answer,
120 Then let him be seized by force to come and attend.
121 When anyone who has been summonsed seeks to evade, or attempts to flee,
122 Let the one who summons lay hands on them to prevent their escape.
123 One who flees fair judgment confesses his culpability.
124 The accused cannot be judged until after the accusations be spoken,
125 And then after the accused exercise or decline their three rights to defense,
126 The first being Prolocution and the right to speak as a matter of law,
127 And why the complaint and investigation should not continue,
128 The second being Collocution as to why the complaint and accusation is false,
129 And upon such proof why the burden should now be placed on the accuser,
130 And the third being Adlocution being a final speech in defense,
131 Against a complaint or accusation having been heard.
132 If illness or old age hinder the appearance of the one summonsed,
133 Let the one who made the summons provide a basic means of transport.
134 When men wish to settle their dispute among themselves,
135 Then they shall have the right to make peace.
136 If a dispute cannot be settled before seeking a judge,
137 Then both the accused and the accuser must be granted equal hearing.
138 An accused cannot be found culpable unless three pieces of evidence may be attributed.
139 Judges are bound to explain the reason of their judgment.
140 The setting of the sun shall be the extreme limit of time within,
141 Which a judge must render his decision.
142 These be the foundations of Due Process.
143 These be the foundations of Rule of Law and Justice.
144 Any law that is against such truth, cannot be law.
And just to quote six more versus from another chapter of Age of the Nazarenes in Lebor Clann Glas:
139 Verily the Divine Creator is love and heaven is love,
140 And the truth of all existence is the awareness of the love of life.
141 Be gentle then to one another and do not bear false witness,
142 For you are the rock upon which the kingdom of heaven on earth is built.
143 Therefore, whatever you seek men to do to you, do also to them,
144 For this is the Rule of Law and the Law of the Prophets.
The Rule of Law is that simple
So there you have it. In just 133 verses, the complete summary of Law, of Justice and Due Process. It is that simple and until you know this, until you see the wisdom of this – until this is the measure by which you measure all claims, all promises, all alleged remedies you will be at risk of trickery, lies, scam artists and government agents.
So when a politician gets up and says this or that is the rule of law, now you have the measure to know if they are speaking the truth or lying. And when a priest or rabbi or imam or any other religious person gets up and starts proclaiming the law, now you know the measure of whether they are speaking the truth or are false messengers.
You do not need to fear the law or be intimidated by the law. You have just heard what the law is – not what the law is not. The law is not common law. The law is not admiralty law. The law is not secret rituals, secret documents, secret ways of getting out of trouble. The law is the Golden Rule and all the maxims that follow it.
Now you know. Now there is no excuse. Either you re-listen and re-read this blog until you get it, or you do not. So if you ignore this knowledge you and you alone are responsible for what happens.
Good luck then in your reading and to all of you who continue to support Ucadia and the work I keep trying to do each day, thank you!
_________________________________________________________________Please
download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here
(39 min 16 Mb)_________________________________________________________________
Hello, this is Frank O’Collins for Thursday 26th June 2014 and thank you for taking the time to read and listen to the Ucadia blog for this week entitled “Admiralty Law – Proving once again, there is no Rule of Law or Justice under Western-Roman law”.
If you had the chance to listen to the Ucadia blog last week then you might have heard me say that we were going to start the three part series on the history of law in America. So some might be asking “what has Admiralty Law got to do with the law of America?”
Actually, it has everything to do with the origins and history of America. That is why on reflection I felt it critically important to return to discussing Admiralty Law, which we have discussed a few times in previous blogs. To put it simply – the only way to make sense of the history of the United States is through knowing the history of Admiralty Law.
So this is why we are discussing Admiralty Law first, before we get into the meat of the three part series on the history of the United States, beginning with its foundation and the period leading up to and just after the Revolutionary War, the Declaration of Independence, the formation of the Constitution and the recognition of peace by Westminster by an act of parliament in 1796.
Also on reflection, given the recent three part series on Common Law, particularly on sharing some of the references to the actual key statutes concerning the history of the laws of Westminster, I felt that following up with Admiralty Law was also a good follow up before we get into the detail of the history of the United States law and the law of the New World Order and the Global Economic System.
So lets start then and I hope that as a result of this blog and audio, you will have a better appreciation of the significance of Admiralty Law and its effect on us even today.
What is Admiralty Law?
To define what is Admiralty Law, lets go to the canons under Sovereign Law and article 190 Admiralty Law:
Canon 6804
Admiralty (Admiralty Law) refers to a organized pseudo - legal commercial (OPCA) form of law first formed in the early 18th Century, but falsely claimed of much older provenance, whereby the operation of the “law of the land” and “laws of nations” is suspended during times of controversy and belligerence in favor of a legal system based loosely around maritime themes and mimicking all other forms of law “on the land” for the exercising of jurisdiction over causes, both civil and criminal, commerce, navigation, capture and transfer of property and the conduct and behavior of public servants as if military personnel. As Admiralty Law is a pseudo - legal commercial (OPCA) form of law, based on fraud, deception, false pretences, theft, force, violence, fear, corruption, profanity, sacrilige, ignorance and piracy (literally), all forms of Admiralty Law issed by Westminster and subsequent parliaments and bodies are hereby null and void having no force or effect ecclesiastically, lawfully or legally.
Canon 6805
The word Admiral is an English military title first formed in the 16th Century from three (3) common Latin terms ad meaning “to”, mira meaning “wonderful, marvellous, amazing, surprising, awesome” and alis meaning “a wing of the military”. Hence, the original and literal meaning of the title Admiral was “to command a wonderful, marvellous, amazing, surprising, awesome wing of the military”. The claim that the title is a borrowed Arabic title amir-ar-rahl meaning “chief of the transport” is an absolute absurdity and clumsy insult to intelligence as for England under Henry VIII and his Venetian advisors to honor the Ottomans at the time by using an alleged title would have been an unthinkable and mortal insult against both nations.
So that is what Admiralty and Admiralty law means and is and we are talking about a fraud, a sham, a trick, a deception, a lie, a theft, a profane system that has not an ounce of true law connected to it but simply a means by which certain families, groups and people concocted a way to steal and control the world as if the world be stupid and ignorant slaves.
Lets be absolutely clear before we get into the detail of Admiralty Law, that nothing about it – absolutely nothing about it is lawful or moral or just or has any connection whatsoever to true Rule of Law and the Golden Rule. I want to make this clear because when we start to get into the history it is easy to get lost.
Why is Admiralty Law important to comprehend?
Now the next logical question is if Admiralty Law is a sham and a trick and a deception, why bother knowing about it? The answer is because this is the form of law in operation through almost 99.9% of courts around the world today.
Again, to make sense of this lets have a look at Canon 6807 under Sovereign Law:
Canon 6807
While the codes, laws and practices of Admiralty court rooms may vary slightly in different jurisdictions, the general elements of Admiralty law and courts are:
(i) Through the Statutes of Westminster, Admiralty Law and Courts have the same effective range of jurisdiction over traditionally “Common Law” areas such as (but not limited to) Trust Law, Estate Law, Property Law, Land Law, Tax Law, Judicial Law, Civil Law, Criminal Law and Company Law. However, in times of conflict (real or artificial), Admiralty Law now has effectively superiority under the Western-Roman model compared to “Common Law”; and
(ii) In Admiralty, the mere existence of controversy (i.e. its recording or filing) is sufficient for there to be a cause in law (to answer) whereas in Common Law, the claim must first be proven, before the cause of law is permitted to proceed. This is the primary test for the existence of Admiralty Law and is not subject to conjecture, denial or dispute; and
(iii) In Admiralty, the form of law carries with the issue in contest at any given time – as Admiralty Law is able to switch between Trust Law, Estate Law, Judicial Law, Criminal Law and back again as each issue is addressed; whereas in Common Law the form of law by tradition was associated with the specific jurisdiction and type of court. This is the second test for the existence of Admiralty Law and is not subject to conjecture, denial or dispute; and
(iv) In Admiralty, the existence of the controversy is paramount and the origin of cause is secondary; whereas in Common Law, the cause of action is primary and the procedural form is traditionally secondary to justice. Thus Admiralty is predicated on “style over substance of law” and is why Admiralty justice rests on procedural integrity rather than questions of law and true justice. This is the third test for the existence of Admiralty Law and is not subject to conjecture, denial or dispute; and
(v) As procedural integrity is paramount in Admiralty, the deliberate and willful breach of procedures by justices, magistrates, attorneys, clerks and law officers under Admiralty matters are the most grave of offences with severe punishment. These procedures are borne from Admiralty statute and not subject to judicial or clerical interpretation and not from “internal policies”; and
(vi) Admiralty Courts and Law principally deal with persons in one of two states: (1) as a seaman (In Propria Persona) or (private) agent (Sui Juris) (2) as a prize (thing and commodity as Legal Person). Unless otherwise stated, Admiralty Courts inevitably deal with the accused as a legal person and therefore as a thing and “prize” to be salvaged, secured and against which certain bounties, duties and fines may be levied. Therefore, in an Admiralty Court there is no such object as a “man” or “woman” only a “seaman” or “agent”; and
(vii) Agents must be bonded and an authorized certificate of the Bond duly registered and recorded in accord with Admiralty Law, otherwise they are not authorized to act for their principal. A Party acting as an Agent that refuses to produce their Bond or License Certificate (proving the existence of the Bond) automatically is in default and holding full liability. Under Admiralty Law, an Officer of the Court (such as a Justice) is forbidden to act as an Agent and to receive any interest in the salvage of prize money; and
(viii) In Admiralty Law, as the existence of the controversy is paramount (as a debt) compared to the offence that originated it, the controversy may be settled financially as compensation without admission of culpability or guilt to the originating offence in matters of fraud, negligence, trespass and waste except in matters of murder, violence, sexual abuse and treason; and
(ix) The only doorway to Common Law (in limited circumstances) is through a sworn affidavit where the statute is annexed to the affidavit and attached memorandum as prima facie evidence prior to any hearing or trial under Admiralty Law.
What is the legislative (statute) history of Admiralty Law?
So do you see the significance and importance now of comprehending Admiralty Law? OK, now I won’t get into the history part of Admiralty Law, but instead will go through the legislative history of Admiralty law under Canon 6809 with you. It is pretty long, so please bear with me and remember that you can click on the links and download the individual acts yourself, to become more acquainted and competent:
Canon 6809
The first laws of Admiralty were not properly codified until the middle of the 17th Century, focusing equally on the discipline and maintenance of duty of Navy officers and Navy personnel as well as the operation of courts of Admiralty and capture and management of property:
(i) The first laws of Admiralty were introduced
under Charles II through 13
Car c.9 (1661) which for the first time in history expressed clearly through
thirty six (36) articles the rules and conduct of Navy personnel, the operation
of courts of Admiralty and capture and management of property. The claim of legitimacy of the alleged
statute by King Richard III in 1391 (15Rich2
c.3) concerning Admiralty jurisdiction and by Henry 4th in
1400 (2Hen4.
c.11) as remedy against Admiralty actions are
almost certainly fraud, despite the limited remedy provided by both statutes;
and
(ii) In 1690, (2W&M_S2c2)
William and Mary introduced for the first time the concept of Commissioners of
the Admiralty to whom were vested the full powers of the Lord High Admiral, without adding to those
powers; and
(iii) In 1719, King George I introduced a new
concept within Admiralty Law through 6
Geo. I. c.19 whereby those persons in “sea service” who committed crimes
mentioned under 13
Car c.9 (1661) upon the shore in foreign parts were to be tried and punished
as if they had been committed on the “main sea”. This was the first application of Admiralty Law on
the land, in defiance of its alleged original purpose; and
(iv) In 1729, (2Geo2.
c.7) the powers of Greenwich Hospital as the site of Admiralty was again
expanded to include duties charged on vessels as well as the recovery of duties
unpaid, therefore the effective “salvage” of revenues for the Crown as debt and
tax collectors within the colonies and dominions of the British Empire; and
(v) In 1738, (11
Geo2. c.30) an extraordinary act saw the edict that the estates of all those
who had not paid fines, or failed to pay and perform their duties, or were
popish “recusants” were to be forfeited and transferred to the Admiralty for use
and benefit of the Greenwich Hospital; and
(vi) In 1740, King George II introduced through 13
Geo. II. c. 4 in Article II the concept of three (3) commissioners being
required to administer a properly constituted Admiralty court. The Act also
introduced for the first time in legal history the concept that owners of ships
taking commissions of letters of marque were to provide bail and security. Furthermore, in
Article III, the requirement for security to prosecute a case in Admiralty was introduced making
the entire administration of Admiralty courts commercial; and
(vii) In 1745, George II through 18Geo2.
c.35 the Commissioners and Lord High Admiral were granted the power to
commission lesser officers such as flag officers and captains to assist in the
calling of courts martial; and
(viii) In 1747, (20Geo2.
C.24), for the first time Greenwich Hospital became the central
administration for the payment of prizes to Admiralty by privateers (licensed
pirates as agents) in the service of the Crown and the central banks. In the
same year, a new fund (20Geo2.
c.38) was established under the guise of “widows and orphans” of injured and
lost seamen. However, in effect of the act in creating a fund, the Admiralty
became a private traded corporation of immense wealth and
power. In the same year again, the “sinking fund” (22Geo2.
c.23) was created as the public fund to which prizes and other valuables
received by the Admiralty were to be transferred to the use of the Crown. The
system was further refined in 1751 (24Geo2.
C.44) ; and
(ix) In 1749, George II through 22
Geo. II c.33 introduced a modified Admiralty Law and modified thirty six
(36) articles of the Code of Admiralty, repealing the 1661 act of Charles II.
Most importantly, the revisions to Admiralty Law made clear that those
administering it were to be officers under fiduciary obligations through formal
oath and that no agent or privateer was to hold any position of authority or
conduct proceedings within an admiralty court. Furthermore, the act made clear
that a valid court of Admiralty for court -
martial only existed when three (3) commissioners were duly sworn and present;
and
(x) In 1752, the macabre and bizarre act (25Geo2.
C.11) granted than an unspecified and unclear number referred as the body of
the dead could be deposited in the vaults of Admiralty at Greenwich Hospital,
demonstrating the conveyance of the poor. In the same year, an act (25Geo2.
c.42) made valid all contracts issued by Admiralty
through Greenwich Hospital relating to lands, tenements and hereditements and
that unlike Common Law, under Admiralty Law,
the Commissioners could force those who refused to entreat to be punished and to
enter into contracts – an extraordinary corruption of the most ancient principle
that an act through force cannot be lawful; and
(xii) In 1756, an act was introduced (29Geo2.
C.27) creating the county courts of the colonies of America being Admiralty
Courts. In 1757 (30Geo2.
C.8), the concept of lower Admiralty Courts administered by magistrates as a
form of martial law and the enforcement of injustice was introduced and then
refined in (30Geo2.
c.11); and
(xiii) In 1761, (2Geo3.
c.31) Admiralty Law was made perpetual for the Colonies and Plantations of
the United States, which remains in force up to the 21st Century; and
(xiv) In 1776, (16Geo3.
C.24), the public estates held in trust were converted to private use and
control of the Commissioners of the Admiralty Corporation; and
(xv) In 1793, King George III through 33
Geo.III. c.66. significantly altered and refined Admiralty Law to make clear
the taking of prizes by the Admiralty courts and officers of the Crown during
war as well as the procedural details of the issuing and administration of
Letters of Marque. The act also reinforced the principles of those accused or
“captured” requiring to provide security or “bail” in order to retrieve use of any
goods seized as a prize. Under Article XIV it made clear the need to make surety
under oath to obtain a valid Letter of Marque. Article XXXIV made
clear the absolute forbiddance of officers of the court of Admiralty acting as
an agent, or advocate or proctor in the same matter before the court. Article
LXX reiterated the requirement of three (3) or more Commissioners to present to
hear and adjudicate a valid case in Admiralty, while Article LXXI
permitted individual commissioner or justice of the peace to gather and
hear evidence, but not to rule. Article XXXIII made clear the independence of
the officers and judiciary of Admiralty from having any interest whatsoever in
prizes or acting as privateers or possess letters of marquee namely “ That no
Judge, Register, or Deputy Register, Marshall, or Deputy Marshall, or any other
Officer whomsoever, of or belonging to any Court of Admiralty or Vice Admiralty
in Great Britain, or in any of his Majesty’s Colonies and Plantations in
America, or in any other of his Majesty’s Dominions, nor any Person or Persons practicing either as
Advocate, Proctor or otherwise, in any such Court or Courts, shall be concerned
or interested, directly or indirectly, as Owner, Part Owner, Sharer, Adventurer,
in any private Ship or Ships, or Vessel or Vessels of War whatsoever,
having any Commission or Commissions, or Letter of Marque as aforesaid; and in
any case such Judge, Register, Deputy
Register, Marshal, Deputy Marshal, or other Office, Advocate, or Proctor
whatsoever, shall, notwithstanding this Act, be directly or indirectly concerned
or interested as aforesaid, such Judge, register, Deputy Register, Marshal,
Deputy Marshal, or other Officer respectively, shall for every such Offence
(being thereof lawfully convicted in any of his Majesty’s Courts of Record in
Great Britain or at any General Session of the Peace in any of his Majesty’s
Colonies in America) absolutely forfeit his Office and Employment in and
belonging to any such Court of Admiralty or Vice Admiralty, of what Kind or
Nature so ever such Office and Employment may be”; and
(xvi) In 1797, King George III through 38 Geo. III.
c.38 confirmed that subjects of America were permitted to appeal in
chancery from sentences of vice - admiralty courts confirming not only the
continuing function of the estates of the United States as the plantations and
property of Great Britain, but the
course of potential remedy against adverse action of the
vice - admiralty courts; and
(xvii) In 1801, whilst hostilities with France
continued, the prize (Admiralty) courts of the West Indies and America were
reorganized through 41.
Geo. III. c. 96 so that Admiralty Law would continue in light of possible
further conflicts, independent of the hostilities at the time. Most
significantly, the act reinforced the absolute division between officers of the
courts and agents under letters of marque whereby one could not hold a position
in such a manner. Furthermore, that judges of Admiralty were absolutely
forbidden to be concerned with the care of any property of estates, namely in clause
XVII “ And it be further enacted, That no person during the time he shall hold
the office of judge of any of the said courts, shall, either by himself or by
any person on his behalf, or for his
benefit, act as agent for any prizes that may be captured from the enemy, or
shall have any share or interest directly or indirectly in any privateer or letter of marquee, or shall be anywise
concerned in the care, management, or superintendence of any estates in any
island in the West Indies or on the continent of America”; and
(xviii) In 1801, through 41.
Geo. III. c. 76 King George III approved the extension of the system of
Letters of Marque to permit the rules of their issue and application of their issue to be
widened and applied as commissioners saw fit, providing within the general
bounds of the act. This coincided with the dramatic extension of the use of
Letters of Marque in the American plantations under the government of the United
States corporation to all branches of its
government as approved by Congress; and
(xix) In 1806, through 46.
Geo. III. c. 54 King George III reinforced clear the requirement of three
(3) or more duly appointed commissioners in order to constitute a valid Admiralty Court throughout all
dominions whether it be a court - martial or determination of prize; and
(xx) In 1810, an Act was passed being 50
Geo. III. c. 118 regulating the office of registrars of Admiralty Prize
Courts whereby the deduction of expenses from any “fees, dues, perquisites,
emoluments or profits” and incident to the duties of offices was confirmed as
lawful providing the remainder was carried to an account of the Consolidated
Fund controlled by the Bank of England. This confirmed the admiralty courts as
now purely organized “pseudo - legal” commercial agencies and not under any
pretence of justice; and
(xxi) In 1813, an Act was passed being 53
Geo. III. c. 151 regulating the financial handling of monies, bills of
exchange and various government securities associated with Admiralty Courts
including procedures and the obligation to deposit and report funds to the Bank
of England and for the Admiralty Courts to effectively act as an agency and
branch of the Bank in the management of all associated securities; and
(xxii) In 1816 through (56
Geo. III. c.31) and an Act entitled “An Act for transferring all Contracts
and Securities entered into with or given to the Commissioners for Transports to
the Commissioners of the Navy and Victualling”, with “victualling” being a
deliberately obscure word meaning food and simple agriculture as “small
estates”, whereby for the first time Employment Contracts, Sale of Land
Contracts and Tenancy Contracts were to be determined by the laws of Admiralty
and not land courts; and
(xxiii) In 1816, through an extraordinary act 56
Geo.III. c.82 the judicial acts of surrogates of vice - admiralty courts
appointed to act as judges of such courts during vacancies in those offices by
the said judges or by the governors of the plantations and colonies in which
such courts are were rendered valid, thus permitting for the first
time agents to act in such capacity through Admiralty (in direct defiance of
previous Admiralty law) providing such judicial offices were considered vacant;
and
(xxiv) In 1822, through 3
Geo. IV c.19, the minimum number of commissioners needed to convene a proper
Admiralty Court and execute valid judicial acts was reduced from
three (3) to two (2) where the number of commissioners in a particular court jurisdiction was less than six
(6). The most noticeable effect of this act is the present day magistrates
courts in Admiralty, compared to the District and Supreme Courts where the
existence of six (6) or more justices require a quorum of three (3) or more
for a valid Admiralty Court to be convened;
and
(xxv) In 1823, through 4
Geo. IV. c. 41 all “vessels” were required to be registered under admiralty
to encourage “shipping” and “navigation” as euphemisms for trade. The act made clear that no “vessel” may enjoy privileges unless
registered.
(xxvi) In 1827 through 7
& 8 Geo. IV. c.65 reinforced the powers of two (2) commissioners in
signing an official act under admiralty law, changing also the structure of the
board of Lord High Admiral to a council; and
(xxvii) In 1830 (1Will.
IV. c.68) and an Act entitled “An Act for the more effectual Protection of
Main Contractors, Stage Coach Proprietors, and other common Carriers for Hire, against the
Loss of or Injury to Parcels or Packages delivered to them for Conveyance or
Custody …etc” whereby for the first time, the liability of Agents or Brokers was
limited and indemnified against loss under circumstances, subject to the Agent
or Broker possessing a proper license and following proper procedures; and
(xxviii) In 1832 through 2
Will. IV c.40 Admiralty Law was further refined with the commercial
administration of the Navy and the extension of Admiralty Courts over the full
range of fiduciary duties of affairs of officers, marines and seaman, in
particular the determination of probate and will and testaments and the
adjudication of estate matters of as if land courts - a
significant historic event; and
(xxix) The concept of Contracts connected with the
simple delivery of goods as Letters and Packets for money between a sender and receiver was
first introduced in 1835 (5
& 6 Will. IV. c.25) through an Act entitled “An Act to extend the
Accommodation by the Post to and from Foreign Parts, and for other Purposes
relating to the Post Office” whereby for the first time certain Letters and
Packets were registered as a Contract, giving birth to the Simple
Contract; and
(xxx) In 1836 (6
Will. IV c.85) through an Act entitled “An Act for Marriages in England” for
the first time in history, marriages were reduced to Corporate Contracts under commercial
License, thereafter producing not living beings, but Things and commodities as
less than slaves. The only people excluded from such an abomination by §2 were
those who profess the nominally commercial Christian sects of Quakers or Jews as
all others thereafter were condemned to conversion to commercial chattel as “things”. In the same year
through (6
Will. IV c.86) all Births, Deaths and Marriages were required to be
centrally Registered; and
(xxxi) The creation of people into “vessels” by
statute was created with Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act of 1836
(c.
86) whereby all births were to be registered and sent to a General Registry
Office. The key word “Birth” directly implies a vessel. To ensure Admiralty was
connected to the procedures of “births, deaths and marriages”, several clauses
made clear the connection such as XXI. Being Registry of children born at sea.
In later decades, the introduction of “health acts” that required “births in
hospitals” meant that by the beginning of the 20th century almost 99% of infants
were born at sea by virtue of being born on board a british vessel being a hospital; and
(xxxii) In 1837 (7
Will. IV c.3) through an Act entitled “An Act transferring to the
Commissioners of the Admiralty all Contracts, Bonds and other Securities entered
into with the Postmaster General in relation to the Packet Service”, all Simple
Contracts validated by registration through a valid Post Office or court having Postal
powers, were now to be determined in any dispute by the laws of Admiralty and
not land courts. Thus from 1837, all determination of disputes concerning all
types of Contracts were now automatically subject to being determined by the
laws of Admiralty in any court with valid Admiralty powers; and
(xxxiii) In 1838 (1
Vict. c.10) through an Act entitled “An Act to make good certain Contracts
which have been or may be entered into by certain Banking and other
Copartnerships”, for the first time a Contract could be entered into by a
Spiritual Person in relation to Corporations,
Associations and Copartnerships without such a Contract being void, by virtue of
Contracts originally being designed for lesser persons and for voluntary
enslavement and servitude; and
(xxxiv) The Admiralty Offences Act 1844 c.
2 made clear the extraordinary power and transition of Admiralty to the land
by permitting a claimed crime on the “high seas” to then be transferred to a
specific location on land and to be treated in law as if it had occurred on the
land. Thus, providing the legal argument that the original crime occurred “on
the high seas”, the matter could be heard by an Admiralty court as if a matter
of common law on the land. This act
helped precipitate the creation of the absurdity of placing the “high water
marks” of various states and counties on the highest peaks so that “all alleged
crimes” were committed on the “high seas” and thus subject to Admiralty. The
accompany rules of “summary justice” were introduced later under
Act 11
& 12 Vict. c. 42 (1848); and
(xxxv) In 1845, by 8
& 9 Vict. c. 89 the registration of “vessels” was further refined to
identify them as British vessels under one of the largest acts in the 19th
Century (over 140 pages). The act reinforced in Article II that no “ship” or “vessel” as euphemisms for companies and
bodies may be entitled to any privileges of a “British - registered ship” unless
registered. This act is also the first time that "Birth" and "Birth
Certificates" associated with people are connected with "Ships" and "Vessels"
and openly to Admiralty Law; and
(xxxvi) The application of Admiralty law more
widely to criminal matters greatly expanded with the Act 11
& 12 Vict. c. 42 (1848) whereby the traditional rules of common law such as original writs
and right of reply and right to jury appeared to be “suspended” in preference to
a faster, less rigorous form of justice or “summary justice” (itself an oxymoron). This
act followed the act of Admiralty Offences Act 1844 c.
2 (1844) that placed common law and all previous
statute law in the administration of justice in the lowers courts with the
operation of Admiralty law; and
(xxxvii) In 1854, the act 17
& 18 Vict. c. 78 was significant in introducing for the first time the
use of stamps on legal documents in Admiralty – the first time stamps were
required on legal documents – in lieu of small fees for lodgement. This act is
the origin of the use of stamps on such documents and enabled judges, clerks and
courts of Admiralty to then recoup such fees from the Consolidated Fund, also
rendering it no longer necessary to publish such legal notices in the London
Gazette as the cancelled stamp denoted the proper “delivery” as well as
“publication” and “public notice” of the legal instrument; and
(xxxviii) In 1859, through the 22
& 23 Vict. c. 6 Act, for the first time in history, Serjeants,
Barristers - At - Law, Attorneys and Solicitors were granted permission to
practice in Admiralty Courts, thus moving closer to Admiralty courts being full
mirrors of land courts; and
(xxxix) In 1863, first through 26
& 27 Vict. c.24, the former “back door” through 56
Geo.III. c.82 whereby surrogates as agents could also act in the vacant
roles of offices was clarified. For example, under article 4, where the office
of a judge of Admiralty court is vacant, the Chief Justice or Principal Judicial Officer
becomes the ex officio Judge of the Vice - Admiralty Court until notification is
received and one is appointed to that vacant office. This act further reinforced
the technique and explanation for why some jurisdictions from 1863 failed to
duly appointed officers in the manner prescribed. Through 26
& 27 Vict. c.116 the concept of agents for prizes was reinforced with
clear identification in clause 10 that no person holding officer under the crown
may act as an agent; and
(xl) In 1864 and then in 1865, major changes to
Admiralty law were instituted through (27&28Vict.c.24)
and (27&28Vict.
c.25) in the key role of “agents” replacing notions of “privateers” and the
conduct of Admiralty Courts and procedures in time of war, particularly in
treating people as commodities via the 1845 act (8
& 9 Vict. c. 89) and the registration of people as vessels and
commodities. In the same year, previous prize acts then appeared to be repealed
by (27&28Vict.
c.34), but on the condition “only if their effects were no longer in
operation”. Thus, for the first time, a major historic section of Admiralty law
was removed from the public record and made secret via repeal, such as acts
pertaining to America and the United States, which remained technically still in
operation because of ongoing declarations of war; and
(xli) In 1865, Admiralty gained control of all property of alleged deceased (28&29Vict.
c.111) making any court claiming to be a "Probate Court" an admission of
Admiralty Jurisdiction. The Court of
Admiralty (Ireland) Act 1867 (30&31Vict.
c.114) while exclusively for the jurisdiction of Ireland is
nonetheless instructive as broader knowledge of Admiralty in demonstrating the
limited rights of Admiralty to those accused and its summary form and function
in one (1) act; and
(xliii) Further acts of Admiralty beyond 1865
included in 1868 the effective "end" of any operational Common Law courts with Admiralty
in operation in County Courts (31&32Vict.
c.71) and the Admiralty Suit Proceedings (31&32Vict.
c.78) which was followed up by Summary Jurisdiction Act 1879 (42&43Vict.
c.49) that established the framework of the modern Admiralty courts in
operation throughout the Western - Roman law operating pseudo - legal
form of admiralty, masquerading as common law; and
(xlv) Further acts of Admiralty beyond 1868 include
Admiralty and War Office Regulation Act 1878 c. 53 and Colonial Courts of
Admiralty Act (53&54Vict.
c.27).
Piecing it all together- what is means
There you have it, the legislative history of Admiralty law, minus a few acts concerning the handling of prizes in the 18th century. You can click on the links and you can see for yourself in black and white. It is not conspiracy, or assumption or conjecture, it is fact – prima facie evidence that under the rules of evidence is admissible in certain circumstances in their own courts.
So what then does all this mean? Simply, that there is absolutely no true Rule of Law or Justice whatsoever in Western-Roman nations, nor has there been for hundreds of years.
Furthermore, the system is deliberately designed to favor merchants and banks and particular groups of people who created a fake non-Christian religion between the 16th and 18th Centuries along with fake sacred texts and fake evidence to support purely commercial goals of superiority. If you want to know what I am talking about, then go and read Age of the Nazarenes under Lebor Clann Glas on One-Heaven.Org and you will see exactly what I mean. Everything about these people is a fraud, except for their violence, their inability to tell the truth, their perpetual need to keep people unbalanced and stupid – they are the only things that are real.
Furthermore, the point about highlighting Admiralty Law is to prove that many of the courts around the world have become so corrupt and so incompetent that they openly refuse to follow their own fake rules of fake law. So there can be no doubt- absolutely no doubt that you live under the tyranny of force, fear and lies – actively supported by religion.
A classic example is what is happening in the Northern Territory of Australia. Elders and talented indigenous leaders are being brutalized, tortured and in some cases murdered with the tacit support of the Commonwealth Government of Australia and with the Judiciary and often perpetrated by the Police with impunity – and absolutely not a single Jesuit Priest, or Jesuit legal scholar gives a damn about it because they are happy to see it continue. They want the genocide of the Australian Aboriginal People to succeed.
So when the Chief Magistrate of the Northern Territory laughs in the face of an indigenous man and tells lies that they refuse to accept properly constructed affidavits, when they send police in to bash and torment and intimidate indigenous people trying to save their land, when not a single Catholic Bishop, or Jesuit Priest or Legal Scholar anywhere in Australia sees a problem with the blatant corruption and arrogance and criminality of the Northern Territory Magistrates Courts and Courts in general – then you know there is absolutely no law whatsoever in Australia, except for the law of the traditional owners and those that stand in honor of the Golden Rule – that no one is above the law and all are subject to it and any law that contradicts such a rule cannot be law.
Thank you for taking the time to listen and to all of you who continue to support and continue to care what happens and are prepared to support Ucadia and see the work continue, I want to say thank you and I look forward to going through the 1st part of the series on the history of law in the United States from next week. Till then, please be well, thank you and good night.
