Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 2
Page 1
Treatises by Byron Beers
Treatise on Introduction to Law Merchant  continued
villeins. For the merchants to reap wealth from their securities, the national resources must be out in the market place producing. Revenue can then be extracted from fees, taxes, licenses, permits, registrations, inflation -- recession and monetary cycles, statute penalties, insurance or bonds to cover down time while the producer is incarcerated, and payments on loans when no actual loan occurred in their banking system, etc.

The principles or rules of law merchant are generally known through the proceedings of medieval fairs conducted by the great merchants. Interestingly, these fairs in England were conducted in places where the inhabitants were villeins. Villeins owe obligations to a master in a slave relationship, but appear to be free to all others. I refer to villeins as quasi slaves, and "quasi slave" is a term used in Black's 7th edition in defining mancipation. To free a slave is called manumission, but the emancipation of a slave is merely a transfer, conveyance, or purchase of the slave. The emancipated slave was designated as a United States citizen subject to the superior political power of the government of the United States in its national (sovereign) character  The United States was the new master after the slaves were emancipated. The U.S. citizen has the characteristics of a villein, i.e. a quasi slave that appears to be free but is still a slave to that superior political authority from which it receives substantive duties, rights, and obligations that are enforced according to adjective or procedural law. The quasi slave in likewise subject to the political or special courts functioning under the so-called "political branch" of a national government. Congress called them freedmen, which is the same as villein or quasi slave.

A foundational element for the operation of the law merchant, substantive law, positive law, administrative law, etc. is SLAVERY, but deception is important because it must not appear to be based upon slavery. With that in mind, while the great merchants operate behind the scenes with their security interests and control over the national resources, it must appear that the ordinary de jure system of the country is continuing, even though changes are occurring. The governments become trustees for the great merchants overseeing or administering the assets or affairs of the security holders. This is known as administrative law, operated in large part by a level of trustees known as administrative agencies.

For some time, the sheer amount of law - the substantive rules that regulate private conduct and direct the operation of government - made by the agencies has far outnumbered the lawmaking engaged in by Congress through the traditional process... 'rule' is an agency statement 'designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy.' When agencies are authorized to prescribe law through substantive rulemaking, the administrator's regulation is not only due deference, but is accorded 'legislative effect.... and grant rights to and impose obligations on the public. In sum, they have the force of law." See INS v. CHADHA, 462 U.S. 919, 984 (1983). BOWSHER v. SYNAR, 478 U.S. 714, 752 (1986).

The constitutional independence of the administrative tribunal presupposes that it will perform the function of completing unfinished law.
The rise of administrative bodies probably has been the most significant legal trend of the last century and perhaps more values today are affected by their decisions than by those of all the courts, review of administrative decisions apart
Administrative agencies have been called quasi-legislative, quasi-executive or quasi-judicial, as the occasion required, in order to validate their functions within the separation-of-powers scheme of the Constitution. The mere retreat to the qualifying "quasi" is implicit with confession that all recognized classifications have broken down... FED. TRADE COMM'N v. RUBEROID CO., 343 U.S. 470, 487 (1952).

Do you get the impression that someone has taken control of the regular de jure government? Do see that an outside force is at work placing people in positions as heads of administrative agencies, which are now creating legislation and regulations through "substantive rulemaking" (commercial law-merchant law). Do you see that legislation "grants rights to and imposes obligations on the public"? Also, the true constitutional judicial power courts have little to do in this system, as they merely review substantive law or procedural law concerning the law merchants' administrative affairs.

The Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551(4), provides that a "rule" is an agency statement "designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy." When agencies are authorized to prescribe law through substantive rulemaking, the administrator's regulation is not only due deference, but is accorded "legislative effect." INS v. CHADHA, 462 U.S. 919, 984 (1983) - disc 25

Administrative law. The law governing the organization and operation of the executive branch of government (including independent agencies) and the relations of the executive with the legislature, the judiciary, and the public. Administrative law [includes] the statutes endowing agencies with powers and establishing rules of substantive law relating to those powers;    Black's Law Dictionary, 7th ed.

The Legislature could not, by adopting the Code of Criminal Procedure, change the substantive law of the state because no such authority was conferred by the Constitution. In the Rodosta Case we pointed out the difference between "substantive" and "procedural" law, and said that, "as relates to crimes, substantive law is that which declares what acts are crimes and prescribes the punishment for committing them. Procedural law is that which provides or regulates the steps by which one who violates a criminal statute is punished." ...A statute relating to criminal procedure is a law, but not substantive law. The term "law" includes "substantive law" and "adjective law" or the law of procedure. Substantive law, speaking broadly, is that which creates duties, rights, and obligations. It orders and permits and forbids and announces rewards and punishments. As relates to crimes and offenses, it declares what acts are crimes and prescribes the punishment for committing them. Adjective or procedural law is that which provides a method of enforcing and protecting such duties, rights and obligations as are created by substantive laws. As relates to criminal prosecutions, procedural law includes within its meaning whatever is embraced by the three technical terms "pleading", "evidence", and "practice".   State v. Elmore, 155 So. 896, 897-8 (1934)

In those words, do you see the statements as addressing free people, or do they sound like a system of commands and prohibitions for slaves? Free people do not choose to have a servant legislative body "adopt" a code that will grant rights and obligations to the free people.  This is the law merchant and how the merchants control nations.


In the last section we found a number of commercial tenns that all work together regarding an environment where the people appear to be subservient to a political superior or corporate sovereign acting as a government, and we have seen how it is possible for the great merchants of the earth to obtain control of a nation. For the great merchants to work their magic in controlling as much of the earth as possible, they need to create the proper conditions. It is like leveling the ground so the foundation can be built. It would seem all aspects of the de jure American system have changed, but all these items will not be addressed here. One thing that is obvious is the great merchants prefer democracy, rather than a true republic where the highest authority remains with the people. The point is, however, to make it appear as though nothing has changed.

If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal.    Emma Goldman.

It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.  Joseph Stalin

A free America... means just this: individual freedom for all, rich or poor, or else this system of government we call democracy is only an expedient to enslave man to the machine and make him like it.   Frank Lloyd Wright


The following case will provide a microcosm scenario of how creditors can control a government by having a security interest, but yet they are outside the government, and possibly above the government directing its legislative and executive acts. As shown in the following case, courts of equity are the principle and preferred tribunals for the merchants.

[My comment: The city, which had issued bonds to bring in money to benefit manufacturing, had certain property deeded to it as security for the bonds.] The bill alleges that the deed of trust to the city was executed for the purpose of securing the holders of the bonds and coupons, and they are the parties beneficially interested in the same, and the city is a trustee of all the property mentioned in the deed, for the holders of the bonds that the city was bound to care for the property and protect the title to it for the benefit of the cestuis que trust, and especially as it had induced them to purchase the bonds, as well in reliance on the deed as on the credit of the city that the city was, as trustee, bound to interpose to prevent the sale of the chattels that the owners of the bonds are entitled to the interposition of a court of equity for the care and protection of the property, and to a decree for the sale of such of it as remains upon the premises mentioned in the deed to the city, and for the sale of the real estate... CITY OF PARKERSBURG v. BROWN, 106 U.S. 487, 496, 497 (1883)
If we replace the word city with the word government, we can more easily see how this scenario can apply to many more situations, like a State or a Nation. The monetary system operated by the Federal Reserve as well as Federal Reserve Notes are based upon debts, including bonds and other securities. What is the collateral? What is backing the debt instruments and digits used as money? It must be freedmen, quasi slave U.S. citizens and their property. There will be remarks on this later.

In the simple example above we find a deed of trust on real estate is the security for the bondholders. When bonds for raising revenue are issued by a government, the government becomes a trustee for the bondholder or creditor. The bondholder is a cestui que trust meaning he or it has a beneficial or security interest in whatever is backing the bond. In the example above, the security was a deed of trust, which relates to real estate, and it says "on the credit of the city" which means other items of value the city has an interest in or sources of revenue may also be used to satisfy a claim by the bondholder. The bondholder can make demands on the government, perhaps propose legislation for the legislature to adopt, respecting the care for said property and for protecting the title to said property. In the case above, some movable items were being taken from the structure on the land represented by the deed of trust. A bondholder, as a cestui que trust, believing these items being removed were a part of his security or collateral, went to a court of equity to enforce his moral and equitable right. Technically, the bondholder is not the owner of the real estate, does not have legal title, and does not have possession (the bond is a "chose in action") but the city has a moral obligation to the cestui que trust bondholder as explained above. The rights and remedies of bondholder were not within the jurisdiction of a court of law, but a court of equity deals with beneficial interests, securities, and collateral regarding equitable rights and equitable remedies. It is possible that courts of equity are an invention of the great merchants.

This case was 1883, the City of Parkersburg is a corporation, and the inhabitants could be viewed from a legal perspective as freedmen, villeins, quasi slaves, a.k.a. U.S. citizens, and as such, subservient to the corporation (city). As actual or potential taxpayers of the corporation, the bondholder could view them as potential sources of revenue for the debt, depending upon the local laws in existence at the time and the terms of the agreement regarding the bonds.

That the legislature may lawfully authorize municipal corporations to subscribe to the capital stock of railroad companies and that such authority may be given to the corporate authorities, or it may be made to depend upon the assent of a majority of the incorporators. ... the authority may rightfully extend to the issuing of corporate bonds for the payment of the subscription, the interest and principal of which, if necessary, to be paid by taxes assessed upon the persons and property of the taxable citizens of the corporation, whose faith is pledged for the redemption of the bonds thus issued. SHARPLESS v MAYOR OF PHILADELPHIA, 20 Pa. 147, 187 (1853)

Does a municipal corporation fit into the plan of republican forms of government? No, but they fit the needs of the law merchant and sovereign rulers. The corporate authorities of the municipal corporation may issue bonds to raise money to pay for the subscription of the capital stock of the railroad company, and then assess the "persons and property" of the taxable citizens of the corporation (which the people still refer to as a city or a government), so the corporate

Click here to continue
Byron Beers