In increments and for close to one hundred years it has been torn apart, taken for granted, renounced and forsaken. There is no one to blame for your loss, except your own ignorance and your own desire to believe in an illusion handed to you in the form of truth. You have been led to believe in a lie, and it is your belief in an illusion that hides the truth. I cannot tell you that it is not too late to uphold the legacy, my only hope is that it is not.

For a while, set aside everything you know, everything you have been told or taught. For one minute consider you know nothing. There is a legacy hiding in the document called the Constitution For the United States of America, one that is not shown to anyone. The obvious is shown, talked about and supported. The obvious elements we are taught, falls within the realm commerce and many have speculated the whys of how you and I got entangled into the snare of the commercial laws. Of course we are not told that we are subject to commerce, but there is the overwhelming sense of it and many, many know it to be true. Our freedoms are being diminished in mass amounts of commercial-ality with more and more laws being piled upon each other.
 

How is it that we have become commercial entities? One will first pounce on it and blame the 14^th Amendment and all legislation that has occurred since its inception, and I cannot deny that to be the truth of the matter. But that Amendment is not the beginning, it is the ending. I am going to present to you that the Constitution is a document of dual nature, first a Trust instrument ,and secondly articles of Incorporation. The corporate aspect has been obvious to many of us for a very long time. We have been being subjected to this corporate aspect, expecting something other, like the freedoms mentioned and implied in the document, only to come up against brick walls. Injustice and un-justice. What is going on? They can't do that we say. I say unto you they most certainly can and I will tell you why.

We have heard it said there are supposed to be 3 sovereigns in America, the people, the state, and the federal government. The inheritance of sovereignty is not, nor has it ever been written down. One does not become a "Sovereign" through any kind of writing. A queen does not become a queen from her father's will, deed, grant or anything else. She becomes a Queen under the Laws of "Descent and Distribution". How is it that the people of this country claim to be sovereigns? Do you think the Constitution gave it to you? The people, or persons, of sovereignty in this country became so under the Laws of Descent and Distribution! So why is it that you do not know how these laws work upon your freedoms and sovereignty? Why is it that you think your Right to bear arms comes from a Constitutional Amendment? Or your Right to free speech? Where do you think your Rights come from and why can't you get them? How does the Law really work?

Your "RIGHTS" are derived from the land you stand upon (the Laws of Real Property) and your relation (status) to that land. Your "STATUS" is determined from the "Laws of Descent and Distribution". The Laws of this country revolve around these two hubs.
 

For example:

#2. If you own a piece of land, you pay taxes, have a deed (whether paid in full or not). You do not have an estate of freehold, but one of the many other defined estates of what is called lessor value. Your RIGHTS, your status, your rank, your citizenship, everything is determined by the land you hold.

In example #1 you received this land from your father, who would have died intestate in this day and age and they had no deed. In example #2 you received this land from your father, or mother who died and left you the property in a will, deed, trust, corporation, or grant. Under the Laws of distribution ANYTHING received from a relative in a WILL is considered PURCHASED.
 

If this be true

How is it that you are construed to have PURCHASED your freedoms, status, rights, rank, citizenship, etc.? Where is that Will, Deed, Grant that manifested your purchase?

The Legacy, Our Very Own 

The above medallion is the First Seal of the First Continental Congress of the United States of America.  It hides the real truth and secret behind the Revolutionary War. The words in Latin around the border state "On  This We Rely", "This We Defend".  Why are 12 hand apparently holding onto what seems to be an organ? Why is this phallic symbol setting on the Great "Magna Charta" of England? And why "Rely" and "Defend" what is represented here?  This medallion shows what the Founders of this country were willing to lay down their LIVES for, willing to lose their fortunes and give their sacred honor.  This symbol is not pornographic, or dirty.  It was SACRED, and therefore never brought before the eyes of an ignorant society to be laughed at and scorned.  Our Birthrights as native born Americans and  Indigenous people of this continent own what is symbolized here.  It is Ours and has been denied the true owners, first the Indigenous peoples later the Native born. Our ignorance has been thrown in our face and innocence has been taken advantage of.

Time is growing short, we are allowing it to slip away, soon it may cease to exist forever. It is ignorance not someone or something else, that prevents us from obtaining the inheritance that is found in our very own Magna Charta, the

Preamble

How many times have you looked at this portion of this document only to avoid noticing the Preamble? How may times have you looked at the Constitution only to find an Article, Section, or Amendment that you felt was being broken, or you wanted to uphold? How many times have you looked at the Preamble and saw absolutely no power residing there save what the document was supposed to be about? I want to inform you that the Power is in the Preamble, your power, the freehold, the power that came from God to you, is right there and I shall show you where that power is.

The Preamble is not just an announcement nor is it a collection of hollow words making something occur. It has a legal construction that is as old as mankind himself. It is THE Inheritance passed by Descent and Distribution, and as with all inheritances that are to be legally recognized and passed on, it is constructed and written just like a Trust Instrument would be, so that it would have the thrust of Ageless Law. As a Trust instrument the document itself falls under the jurisdiction of the "Statute of Uses, Wills, Enrolment, The Statute of Frauds, Statute Against Collusive and Fraudulent Conveyances and the Reinstatement of Trusts, the Laws of Real Property, and Descent and Distribution. These statutes will probably sound out of context to our problems but bear with us here. There is more to the illusion than meets the eye.
 

We are going to research Trusts in the remainder of this writing, so that when we finally get down to it, we are going to enforce this Grand Document, backed by all the power it carries with it, against those who dare to destroy, suppress and steal our rightful inheritance. We are not Essau, we are Israel⁽⁵⁾
 

We will be delving into Wills, because annexed to the Constitutional Trust is a will like structure. The will aspect of the Constitution are the amendments. The Trust existed BEFORE the Codicil; the Constitution with the Preamble and articles (Trust) was ratified and signed on September 17, 1787 and the Will/Codicil⁽⁶⁾ aspect was not added until December 15, 1791⁽⁷⁾ four (4) years after the Trust Instrument was created. Therefore these dates show that the Trust and Res was already in existence, which would be necessary in order for a Trust to be created. The Amendments are "Civil Rights", a "codicil", and an Independent Trust Res and Covenant. It is debatable whether they are a restatement of the Res or not. Fierce arguments between the representatives of the colonies ensued over whether they should be included or not, with great reason. The founding fathers knew the Constitution could be interpreted through the "Articles of Confederation", and "Declaration of Independence". Their INTENT was to pass on a "Trust", a trust that could not be changed. They knew and understood that a "Will" could and would be changed by codicil, constantly changing the intent of the document as was written. They also knew that legally they could not pass sovereignty of the people, to the people in a will. The Amendments are a summery or restatement rights. Please remember that the legal "Construction" of a document will be look at as one looks at a "Deed, Will, Grant", nothing more. This is Constitutional Law. Since the Founders did not want the Constitution to be constructed as in a "will" the amendments were argued upon and not added until four years later. Unfortunately, with the passing of the Fourteenth Amendment what they did not want to happen, happened.
 

The intent of the Constitution was to bequeath Freedom, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the 14^th Amendment changed the intent, under the disguise of offering a citizenship that never existed before, to be and intent of constriction upon the people, and first step in absolute control and complete loss of the legacy.
 

For those of you who are unaware, the Fourteenth Amendment was never duly executed. In order for it to be passed, half of the Legislatures of the, then established States, were thrown out office and replaced with military officials taking orders from above, to pass the Amendment. Upon its passing the President did announce, that the fourteenth Amendment was "illegal, null and void" due to the violation committed upon the Constitution.⁽⁸⁾ But what violation "upon the Constitution"? Was it the apparent replacement of the Legislators or something other? We have not had a lawful, Constitutional Government since then.
 

The Founding Fathers could not legally and non-discriminately manifest ANY document of legal force without existing law authorizing it. It just can't be done, not even today. Nothing conflicts under the law, it is most always an offshoot of something already in being, even though twisted.
 

A quote from the "Statute of Wills (St. 34 and 35, Henry VII, 1542-1543)
 

"Persons *** shall have full and free liberty, power and authority to give, dispose, "will" or devise to any person or persons (Except bodies politick and corporate⁽⁹⁾) by his last will and testament in writing, or otherwise by any act or acts lawful executed in his life".........
 

No Corporation could have been created by our government to pass on Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The Founding Fathers could only follow what they already knew as law.
 

Hereditaments could only be passed on to a "Body Politick", i.e. "We the People" and the peoples "posterity", by way of a Trust or as was then called "Use", as shown in:
 

The Statute of Uses (St. 27 Henry VIII (1536) Ch. 10)
 

" *** That where any person or persons stand or be seized, or at any time hereafter shall happen to be seized of...***... or other hereditaments, to the use, confidence or trust of any other person or person, or body politic.
 

Under the construction of documents the Constitution passing on an inheritance could only be created for a body politic, under Henry's statute of Uses. At the time, NOTHING could be passed on to an heir without falling under one of these two Statutes. It was one or the other not both.
 

Then, as today, instruments had to be filed somewhere, and under the "Statute of Enrollments" the Constitution had to be duly recorded:
 

(St. Henry VII (1536) Ch. 16) "Be it enacted... no manors, lands, tenement or other hereditaments, shall pass...***...except be made by writing, indented, sealed, and enrolled in one of the Kings, courts of record at Westminster, (2) or else within the same county or counties where the same manors, lands or tenements, so bargained and sold, lie or be......."
 

The "Statute Against Collusive and Fraudulent Conveyances" prohibited any underhanded intent behind a conveyance of inheritance.
 

(St. 27 Elizabeth I (1585) Ch 4) "The Queens most excellent Majesty, ....***.... and BODIES POLITICK, ....may have, incur and receive great loss and prejudice by reason of fraudulent conveyances, (By way of) ....(3) secret intent of the parties the same to be to their own proper use, and at their free disposition, (4) coloured never the less by fained countenance and shew of words and sentences, as though the same were made bona fide, ..." "Said former conveyance, ...shall be deemed, taken an adjudged to be void, frustrate, and of none effect, by virtue and force of this present act."
 

The Statute of Statute of Frauds included Wills and Corporations and any "devise in writing":
 

(St. 29 Charles II (1676) Ch. III) 1. For prevention of many fraudulent practices,....6. And moreover, no devise in writing of (ect.) Or hereditaments shall... be revocable, otherwise than by some other will or CODICIL, in writing, or other writing declaring the same.... (2) but all devises and bequests of lands and tenements shall remain and continue in force, until the same be burned, canceled torn or obliterated by the testator, or his directions or in manner aforesaid, or unless the same be altered by some other WILL OR CODICIL in writing, or writing of the divisor, signed in the presence of three or four witnesses, declaring the same; any former law or usage to the contrary notwithstanding.
 

7. ....All declarations or creations of trusts or confidences of..... hereditaments, shall be manifested and proved by some writing signed by the party who is by law enabled to declare such trust.
 

Number 7 is most important. Reflect that the Constitution is a Trust and that it passes an inheritance. It follows this law!
 

8. ...Provided always, that where any conveyance shall be made of any lands, or tenements by which a trust or confidence shall or may arise or result by implication or construction of law, or be transferred or extinguished by an act or operation of law, then and in every such case such trust or confidence shall be of the like force and effect as the same would have been if this statute had not been made: anything hereinbefore contained to the contrary notwithstanding.
 
 
 

THIS IS THE COMMON LAW, and number 8 is the statute being imposed upon us in this day and age. When we say the Constitution for the United States of America is "THE LAW OF THE LAND" we are not only saying it is the law of the country. It is the law of the dirt over which you are walking, and the rights you have are attached to that soil, and your status and relationship to it. This is the Common Law, and hopefully before you finish reading this you will understand that "all that is has always been, there is nothing new under the sun". You are and have always been within the realm of the Common Law, and that it is in full force and effect when it comes to the Constitution and yes even under the 14^th Amendment. Trust Laws gain authority from the previous Trust laws. The Common Law, does and shall prevail. Our problem has been that we have not understood that the Constitution was a Trust instrument from its inception.
 

Our Constitution derived its authority from the above Laws, it in itself did not create anything new in law with the exception of a unique Trust Res and Estate of Inheritance.
 

I don't think many if any of us have looked upon the Preamble as a writing establishing a trust, and if we have, the full legal meaning has never really struck home. Blacks Law 5^th Edition defines "trust" as:
 

"A right of property real or personal, held by one party for the benefit of another. A Confidence reposed in one person, who is termed trustee, for the benefit of another who is called Cestui Que Trust (Beneficiary) respecting property which is held by the trustee for the benefit of the Cestui Que trust. Any arrangement whereby property is transferred with intention that it be administered by trustee for another's benefit.
 

The written history of Trusts or Uses go back to Biblical times. Our particular laws regarding them were derived from English Law and the Restatement of Trusts. The "restatement" is imply a restatement of the English "Use" Statutes.
 

Restatement, Second Trusts Sec. 2 . . is a fiduciary relationship with respect to property, subject in the person by whom title to the property is held to equitable duties to deal with the property for the benefit of another person which arises as a result of a manifestation of an intention to create it.
 

Does not our Constitution hold certain rights in trust for us to be used exclusively by us? This is property. Rights are property, Rights are corporeal and incorporeal hereditaments. The Trustees are the Legislators, they were "granted" authority to maintain the Trust. The Trustees were also granted the authority to make money to maintain the Res in proper condition. They were not granted the Authority to Change the Intent of the Original Trust, except by written change. That is what the 14^th Amendment did. It created a new trust and trust res. It created a new Estate.
 

How do I recognize the Preamble and Constitution as a Trust? Let us look first at the requisites of an Express Trust.
 

1. It must have a competent settlor and trustee.

2. It must have an ascertainable Trust Res.

3. It must show sufficiently certain beneficiaries.

4. A trust comes into being only upon execution of an intention to create it by the parties having legal and equitable control of the subject matter of the trust.
 

Does the Preamble and Constitution show a competent settlor and define the trustees? Yes it does. The settlor is established as "We the People". And the body of the constitution, (Articles) establishes the trustees and their duties.
 

Does the Preamble and Constitution ascertain the trust res being passed on?⁽¹⁰⁾ Absolutely. "The Blessings of Liberty". Keep in mind the founding fathers had already defined the meaning of liberty prior to the establishment of the Constitution. If you require someone else to tell you what your liberties are and define them for you, then YOU ARE NOT FREE.⁽¹¹⁾
 

Does the Preamble show sufficient, certain beneficiaries? Absolutely! To "ourselves and our Posterity".
 

Did the founding fathers have equitable control of the subject matter discussed in the Preamble and Constitution? Absolutely!
 

Does the Preamble state an intention ⁽¹²⁾ for which the document was created. It certainly does. In Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, Insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".
 

Does it show an intention to manifest? Yes. "Do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America" In just a few words the Founding Fathers created a document of immense meaning.
 

An express trust or as they sometimes are called are "direct" trusts and are those trusts INTENTIONALLY created by the direct and positive act of the settlor by some WRITING, deed, OR WILL, or oral declaration.⁽¹³⁾
 

The Founding Fathers were not ignorant farmers, they were highly educated. They knew about Uses, Trusts, Hereditaments, Conveyances, Fraud, Uses, and Wills. In that day and age it was a requirement to know Latin and Greek to enter a College of higher learning.⁽¹⁴⁾ And they knew these languages at an early age. Their legal knowledge was implemented in the making of the Constitution. Why? Fraud, the founders did not want to commit fraud any more than we would and their writings were legal under the Statute of Frauds.
 

Can you see the Statutes of Henry VII, Elizabeth I and Charles II in the following American Laws?
 

"A writing not intended specifically by the parties to be used as an actual memorandum of trust, may never the less, be sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds" Restatement, Trusts 2d sec. 47
 

"A typical provision of the Statute of Frauds is that a writing required to create or manifest a trust be signed by the parties creating or declaring the trust."
 

"A Memorandum is sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds, it sets forth with reasonable degree of definiteness the trust property, the beneficiaries and th purposes of the Trust, Restatement 2d section 46.
 

Do you see that the Preamble qualifies under even the last quotation. Do you think George and the rest of the good ole boys wanted to be caught at FRAUD? Absolutely not! The Constitution was created in the form of a trust so as to stand under the Construction of documents and under the laws of the day. This document was not just thrown together without forethought and without complete knowledge of the then existing laws.
 

Just because the Preamble is called Preamble and not Trust does not mean it changes the character of the document. "The Test is not what the instrument is called but what the person executing it designed to have it accomplish".⁽¹⁵⁾
 

The Amendment do not constitute the trust in fact. They are annexed to the trust, perhaps as restatement to what was already known. They could be in fact be considered a "codicil" I firmly believe that is why the argument between the founders. A codicil would have diminished the value of the trust not enhance it. Under the law of the day beneficiaries and what they received were not discussed or mentioned since that would limit the property. It was taken for granted the Res was the largest one could receive, not the smaller one could receive. Once mention was made of the Res and who was to receive it a particular restriction was placed upon it, making it smaller and bringing the property into the realm of commerce. Under the construction of Wills anything received in a will has been purchased.
 

A trust, after it is completed and in force cannot be amended or altered without the consent of all parties in interest except under reserved power of amendment or alteration. An amendment of a Trust is ordinarily possible by parties "in interest" (the people, trustees) and against parties without VESTED interest. We, the 14^th Amendment Citizens of the United States do NOT have a vested interest in the Trust or trust res. The Trust cannot legally be changed without the approval of the SOVEREIGN STATE CITIZENS, but a will can!
 

Now stop and think about this. The parties in interest up until the 14^th Amendment was createdwere the citizens of the "states"⁽¹⁶⁾. The method of amending may only be asserted as defined in the Trust, and when the eleven legislatures of the southern states were kicked out of office and replaced by military representatives in order for the 14^th Amendment to be ratified , violated the original trust. But it could also stand under the Common Law, because it is republished now, as a codicil annexed to it; and turned the Amendments into an instrument that was against parties without vested interest. We now have a document with duality. We have two separate trusts, one for those who have a vested interest in it and one for those who do not have a vested interest in it. United States citizens can have no vested interest in the Original Trust as it is a creature of congress not nature.
 

Blacks Law Dictionary 5^th, Codicil; A supplement or an addition to a will; it may explain modify, add to, subtract from qualify, alter, restrain or REVOKE PROVISIONS IN EXISTING WILL.
 

The Common Law thus filters down toward us. The 14^th Amendment can be viewed as a codicil to the a Will, which republished the Constitution with new meaning, changed the intent behind it and turned it into a testamentary instrument, and instrument with capabilities of being used against the free born inhabitants through voluntary revocation. Without their knowledge or consent.
 

Testamentary paper or Instrument An instrument in the nature of a will; an un-probated will; a paper writing which is of the character of a will though not formally such, and, if allowed as a testament, will have the effect of a will upon the devolution and distribution of property.
 

Testamentary INTENT is never retroactive. ⁽¹⁷⁾ It must occur with the writing or it is of no effect. ⁽¹⁸⁾
 

In order to determine whether or not an instrument is a will, it is necessary to ascertain the INTENT with which it was executed. ⁽¹⁹⁾
 

The Government does not like to discuss the 14^th Amendment citizenship, in court or otherwise. Someone once mentioned that on the form 1040 in the address bar is asks to place "label" here. This word was looked up in a law dictionary only to find that it referred to a "codicil"
 

Blacks Law 5^th Edition: Label, Anything appended to a larger writing, as a codicil.
 

Does this make one wonder now what the connection between the Internal Revenue Code, Wills, 14^th Amendment and you really is? The 14^th Amendment is now THE SUPREME LAW. To repeal this amendment would destroy the codicil and the power of the Federal Government.
 

A will is restored to the form in which it stood before a codicil was executed, where the codicil is revoked by destruction of the instrument. ⁽²⁰⁾
 

A codicil plainly inconsistent with provisions of a will operates as a revocation of the will even in the absence of any express words of revocation and the inconsistent provisions of the will must yield to the codicil.⁽²¹⁾
 

OK, so you say, whoa, wait a minute, you keep talking about codicils and wills when you started out with the Constitution as being a trust. Now I say to unto you, If you understand how codicils and wills work you will understand how the construction of written instruments are viewed in the higher courts. There is really not much deviation. It was my contention long ago that law, real law was not so convoluted that it could not be understood. Life is simple, so is real law, it is the monopoly of law that makes it so mysterious.
 

Now this last quote is very important. The provisions of the "will" MUST YIELD to the codicil. In other words, the Civil Amendments 1 - 10 MUST yield to the 14^th Amendment. This is scary folks. This Amendment is not a freehold, and justice now lies in being "Subject to the Jurisdiction thereof."
 

When a person applied for a Social Security number and gave evidence of birth, and claimed to be a United States Citizen, a party with no vested interested in a Freehold, and a trust or its Res, that person literally genocided the Posterity that he once was. ESSAU! Giving up ones birthright for pottage! Security! Social Security! No wonder God has turned his back on us. You do so willingly and then you want what was promised to the Posterity. But what do we get? We get "equality" and it is not as equal as the "real thing".
 

A court is called upon to construe a "codicil" as consistent with a will is possible.⁽²²⁾
 

When a person places his/her name and address on that area of the 1040 that states, Place label here, he/she attracts to him/herself the codicil and republished the Constitution with the 14^th Amendment. You have literally declared on the 1040, that the Sovereign Citizen is deceased, the decedent retains no interest in the property and that you in your dual nature as a paper citizen are now the executor of the 'state. I know this is hard to swallow and hard to follow. The king is dead, long live the king.
 

If you don't think you can be a decent and an executor at the same time, here is an excerpt from Title 26, USC section 2041(b)
 

2041(b)(1) General Power of Appointment, the term "general power of appointment" means a power which is exercisable in favor of the decedent, his estate, his creditor, or the creditors of his estate; except that-

(A) a power to consume, invade or appropriate property for the benefit of the decedent which is limited by an ascertainable standard relating to the health, education, support or maintenance of the decedent shall not be deemed a general power of appointment.
 

Now if you could not follow me before how could you follow that? How could a standard relating to the health, education, support or maintenance of a decedent occur if the meaning of "decedent" means:
 

Blacks Law De Lux, fourth edition, A deceased person, especially one who has recently died.
 

The Sovereign Citizen, the citizen of the states are the decedents! You have renounced the Trust.
 

The Founding Fathers were the Testators and the "testator's purpose in making the codicil may be found in the codicil itself" Of course there was no codicil when the founding fathers created the Constitution, their evil counterparts did the dastardly deed.
 

Separate and several trusts may be created by the same instrument⁽²³⁾ and a question whether a single trust or separate trusts have been created by a trust instrument is important in connection with income taxes.⁽²⁴⁾
 

The Fourteenth Amendment created a dual natured Constitution, and to be truthful, it is necessary. There will always be those who prefer the safety and security of bondage. A society with slaves prospers. Fortunately some of us do not feel that way. These people are being taken care of because they are not capable of taking care of themselves. The Federal Government, literally, has taken away your ability to survive, and to make you TOTALLY dependent upon it, in order for you to give up your most valued possession, the Trust Res. All those wonderful plans created by the Federal Government, Old Age Benefits, Medical Benefits, Un-employment, workmens compensation, Bank Accounts, Credit, your Job, Your Mortgage, Etc., are aspects of the Testamentary 14^th Amendment codicil, and you want all of them.
 

Freedom is an aspect of the Soul, and I personally do not consent to sell my soul. I plan on leaving this realm with as much, if not more than what I came in with. The duality of the Constitution is absolutely necessary for the purposes of which it was designed for. To destroy one would be to go against the laws of God and Nature. So therefore the problem with America is;

we are out of balance; the scales are tipping to heavily to one side; and everything could go up in smoke .
 

The Trust may be terminated by the CONSENT of the Beneficiaries.⁽²⁵⁾ (Consent, a voluntary action, like filing an income tax return) There is no one mode of terminating a Trust. A trust may be terminated by contract, or agreement, a conveyance, by beneficiary renunciation or release, transfer or assignment to a third person, or consent. Pursuant to this, do you have any idea what your signature means on a legal paper trust in your face by your tax accountant, the State, the department of motor vehicles, the social security department, etc., etc. If you don't think it means termination of the trust, ask yourself just where did the Rights in the Constitution go/ Do you blame "THEM" for their disappearance. Sorry you are the one terminating the trust. When everyone in this country signs a document of termination and repudiation, what is left is an inferior Will, a Codicillus. That is where YOUR Rights have gone. You have exchanged them for protection and security. How insecure are you with your God or secure with your god? You are not a Sovereign Citizen even if you would like to think you are. A Queen does not become a Queen because a Will has made her one, and this country has become a nation full of sniveling cowards, afraid to claim their inheritance, but await someone to give it to them.
 

You, and all of you have been mislead by the trustees, you do not remember your inheritance as the founders of this country did. They were educated men, men who read. Today, the biggest past time is who will win the World Series, or some sports event. Have a bottle of beer and watch the news. News that continues the delusion of grandeur we are accustom to living in. Watch the bombs go off the children die while the news tell you why this is supposed to be. You have eyes and cannot see and ears that only hear what you are told to believe. How trusting you are, you the ignorant. The Trustees have breached the Trust and their duties for profit for themselves at your expense.
 

A breach of trust of duty by a trustee is a violation of correlative right of the Cestui Que Trust, and gives rise to a liability on the part of the trustee and a correlative cause of action on the part of the beneficiary for any loss to the trust estate. The rule is applicable in respect to both positive acts and omissions or negligence constituting a breach of duty by the trustee. ⁽²⁶⁾
 

A trustee liability for brach of trust is personal (there goes their immunity) in character with all th consequences and incidents of personal liability and is enforceable against his estate.
 

A trustee breaching his duty comes within the maxim that "equity will not aid one who comes into court with unclean hands (it's about time)
 

When the trustees have made acts of omission the beneficiary can question the proppriety of the trustees. The Beneficiary had to have had, full disclosure, full knowledge of all the material facts and circumstances. A beneficiary must have had knowledge of and understood their RIGHTS. ⁽²⁷⁾

And the Beneficiary is UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO SEARCH PUBLIC RECORDS. ⁽²⁸⁾
 

The old adage that you "knew or should have known" will just not work in the case of the trust. How could you have known when there were acts of omission, non-disclosure, lack of understanding of your Rights, and when everything you were told was done so in order to mislead and deceive you and coerce you into giving up your beneficial interest in the Trust. On the other hand ignorance of the Law is NO excuse for a Fourteenth Amendment citizen.
 

"Enforcement of a constructive trust (codicil trust) in favor or those named in a will which testator was prevented by fraud, duress or undue influence from executing, against those who have thus obtained decedents property, does not annul the Decedents Estate Law, The Statute of Fraud or the provisions of the Statute of wills as to the mode in which a testamentary disposition ⁽²⁹⁾must be effected."
 

With this in mind, I am of the opinion that the Trustees are attempting to repudiate the Trust. Why else would they go through so much trouble to cover up the facts to the beneficiary.
 

"The Beneficiary must have notice of the repudiation and one frequent expression of this rule is that knowledge of the repudiation must be "Brought Home."⁽³⁰⁾
 

Do you get it? Have you gotten it yet? Has it been brought home to you yet? How long must the message be sent to us. Have the trustees not gone out of their way to have us convey, transfer, contract, or assign our beneficial interest in the Res by way of threats. Have you not felt that Justice is missing? Justice resides in the Trust, Just-Us resides in the Will.
 

An action or proceeding to enforce a trust or to enforce the liability of a trustee for breach of trust can be brought only by one who ha a qualifying interest in the subject matter. The beneficiary or one in his right is ordinarily the proper party to bring an action to enforce the liabilities of the trustee for breach of trust.
 

The rule is followed in some jurisdictions that before a suit can be brought against a trustee for breach of trust he must have had notice of the duty that he is required to perform, and have had an opportunity to perform it. ⁽³¹⁾
 

This says that you have to demand that the Trust Res be handed over to you as a beneficiary of the Trust, and that you have to give the trustees time to do so. I think 24 hours should suffice, don't you? But by Statute, (not common law) they hav 60 days to make an account to you. Don't confuse this with accounting. Accounting falls in the realm of business, money, etc. To make an account to you means, disclosure of all the facts, such as "account for yourself, Buddy".
 

What I use in support of the Trust Res, is the Preamble, the Articles of Confederation and the Declaration of Independence, memorandums of the Trust which satisfies the Statute of Frauds. These memorandums define and describe the Trust Res sufficiently enough for me. The Law has always fallen back on the Articles of Confederation in order to find the INTENT of the founding fathers.
 

It is the Articles of Confederation that created the Sovereign States, not the Constitution.
 

It is the Articles of Confederation that created free inhabitants of the Soverign States, not the Constitution.
 

It is the Articles of Confederation that created the union, not the Constitution.
 

The Articles of Confederation ARE in FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.

It is the Magna Carta of England 1215 from whence we derive our birthrights restated in the Preamble of the Constitution for the United States of America.
 

It is from the Holy Scriptures whence the Magna Carta of 1215 gleaned those rights, that were attached to the land itself that God gave to Abraham and it is His covenant that we break when we sell our freedoms for security under the government of the United States. The wording used to transfer the land to Abraham from God was stated in specific words, these words were used in transferring freeholds until the 1800's. The words are still found in deeds, wills and other documents transferring property. They are the words of inheritance defining the size of the freehold. To Ourselves and our Posterity are those words of inheritance. In God we Trust does not only mean, in God I have faith.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

1. Posterity, New College Edition, The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Houghton Mifflin, 1. Future generation. 2. All of a p person's descendants. Blacks law contains no definition of posterity. 

2. Ordain, New College Edition, 2.a. To order by virtue of a superior authority, b. to decree as a part of the order of nature or of the universe, 3. To prearrange unalterably. 

3. Establish, New college Edition, 1. To make firm or secure, fix in a stable condition. 3. To cause to be a recognized and accepted without question. 4. To originate on a firm, lasting basis; to found 5. To create a state institution of....... 

4. Constitution, 1. The act or process of constituting. 2. The composition of something made of a number of parts of; make up; compose. 4. The United States Constitution. I believe it was called the "Constitution" because the founding fathers composed it of a number of parts. Webster's original dictionary referred to our Constitution as our Magna Charta. 

5. Periodically religious correlations will be placed herein, not because of a connection to any religion but because of the historical, truth and spiritual value of this matter. The story of Essau tells a story of a first born son that gave up his inheritance for security. 

6. The Virginia Bill of Rights, dated June 12, 1776, States in Section 2 "That all power is vested in and consequently derived from the people; that magistrates are their TRUSTEES AND SERVANTS and at all times amenable to them. Here we have explicit mention of the "trustees". The Amendments of the Constitution were fashioned after this document. 

7. These dates are taken from American Jurisprudence 2d Desk Book Item No. 1, U.S. Constitution. 

8. From the Congressional Record -- House of Representatives June 13, 1967, House Concurrent Resolution 208 of the Louisiana Legislature. 

9. Words of old English sections are not misspelled. 

10. Trust res: The property of which the trust consists. 

11. Freedom does not mean unrestraint, nor lawlessness. To the contrary, with true freedom comes heavy responsibilities, moral and ethical responsibilities. I do not condone blatant injury, disregard or disrespect for someone else or their property. 

12. The cardinal rule of construction is, of course, to determine the intention of the parties, where such a creation is a bilateral matter. Colton v Colton 127 US 300, 32 L Ed 138, 8 S Ct 1164. 

13. 76 American Jurisprudence 2d section 15 

14. The AVERAGE reading ability of a normal person, at the time the constitution was created, was equivalent to 17 years of formal education. Today's average reading ability is 7 years of formal education. The founding fathers had a formal education equivalent to a masters degree. They did not sit around the "tube" all night, they read and stimulated their minds with knowledge. 

15. 79 American Jurisprudence 2d Wills, Section 24 

16. Look up the definition for estate in Webster's dictionary of 1828 

17. The 14^th amendment manifested a testamentary intent for a specific class of persons, but it is not retroactive upon the Original Constitution, therefore, two independent covenants. 

18. Re Pagel's Estate 52 Cal App 2d 38, 125 P2d 853. 

19. Dixon v Dameron's Adm'r. 256 Ky 722, 77 SW2d 6 I claim the intent of the founding fathers was to create a trust in the Preamble, so just what was the Intent of the Legislators in the 14^th Amendment? 

20. Re Schnorr's Estate, 4 Cal 2d 590, 51 P2d 424 

21. Homer v Brown 57 US 354; Bosley v Wyatt 55 US 390 

22. Newcomb V Webster 113 NY 191; Price v Maxwell, 28 Pa 23 

23. United States Trust Co. V Commissioner 296 US 481, 56 S Ct 329 

24. See American Jurisprudence 2d, Federal Taxation 

25. Heifetz v Band of America Nat. Trust and Savings Assoc. 147 Cal App. 2d 776 "Restatement, Trusts 2d Sec. 337 (1). 

26. 76 American Jurisprudence 2d Trusts 

27. 76 American Jurisprudence 2d Trusts 

28. McAllister v McAllister 120 NJ Eq 407, 184 A 723, affd 121 NJ Eq 264, 190 A 52 afd 121 NJ Eq 249, 190 A 53. The Beneficiary is presumed to be reposed in innocence as in contradistinction to a citizen abiding in ignorance. 

29. American Jurisprudence - Wills 

30. American Jurisprudence 2d on Trusts 

31. Brent V Maryland 85 US 430 21 L Ed 777