"Thosewhosayitcannotbedoneshouldnotinterferewiththoseofuswhoaredoingit"S.

Hickman
Home Againstthe GrainPress LossofLiberty Revealed Working TommyC. LividLeigh Boilin'Ed D.Tom TheInformer Knowledgeis Freedom Privacy Links CourtCase ContactUs

TheInformer
CITIZEN=SUBJECT
AMERICAN=ENGLAND ByTheInformer BeforegettingintothecaseathandyouMUST understandalittleknownconceptinEnglishwriting andthelegaltermanduseofcertainwordsbythe court.Failuretounderstandwillresultinapoor readingofthecase.And,infactallothercasesyou read.Thatiswhythereissomuchmisunderstanding amongstpeoplewhentheyreadacase.Icanreada caseandgetanentirelydifferentsetoffactsthat mostallpeopledonotsee.Mostpeopleareaftera specificthinginacasetoproveapointandmissa lotofgoodmaterial. Commasareaveryimportantpieceofunderstandinga sentence. COMMA.n.Asegment,tocutoff.Inwritingand printing,thispoint[,]denotingtheshortestpause inreading,andseparatingasentenceintodivisions ormembers,accordingtotheconstruction.Websters 1828AmericanDictionary RULESOFPUNCTUATIONCOMMASTHATSETOFF. 4.1.1Commasusuallysetoffwords,phrases,and othersentenceelementsthatareparentheticalor independent.Itemsofthissortarecontrasting expressions.<Work,notwords,iswhatisneeded.> 4.1.2Commasusuallysetoffappositionalormodify words,phrases,orclausesthatdonotlimitor restrictthemainideaofasentence.<Weleaveat threeOclock,whenthebellrings.> 4.2.2WheneverinspokenEnglishthereisan enumerationofitems,arisingorsustainedpause separateanddistinguisheseachmemberofaseries. Inwriting,acommalikewiseseparateswords,phrases orclausesthatoccurinaseries.<Heopenedthecan, removedthecontents,andreplacedthelid.> 4.4.2Itisequallyimportanttoinsertacommato preventmisreadingorambiguity.<Asthecarstruck, theutilitypolefellwithacrash.> WEBSTERSSEVENTHCOLLEGIATEDICTIONARY,1970 PUNCTUATION Soyoucanseejusthowimportantcommasareand wheretheyareplacedinasentence.Youmaywantto refertothiswhenreadingthecase. Nowwecometoanallimportantwordthatwhenin lawmeanssomethingentirelydifferentthanwhatyou thinkitmeansandthecourtsarewellawareofthis whentheyreadlegalbriefsorwritedeterminations. Somethingtheaveragewritwriterhasnoclueasto howheisusingtheword.Thatwordisthesimple word"OR".DidyouknowthatthewordORmeansAND

19942009 AgainsttheGrain

Nowwecometoanallimportantwordthatwhenin lawmeanssomethingentirelydifferentthanwhatyou thinkitmeansandthecourtsarewellawareofthis whentheyreadlegalbriefsorwritedeterminations. Somethingtheaveragewritwriterhasnoclueasto howheisusingtheword.Thatwordisthesimple word"OR".DidyouknowthatthewordORmeansAND unlessaspecificwordisusedinconjunctionwithit inLAW? StandarddefinitionWebstersDictionary. OR.Conj..Usedasafunctionwordtoindicatean alternative. Soitisaconjunction. CONJUNCTION.Thestateofbeingconjoinedoccurrence togetherintimeorspaceconnective. Therefore,itcanmeanthewordoneithersideof "or"areoneandthesame. BallentinesLawDictionary3rdedition.1969 OR.Aconjunctionnormallyinthedisjunctive.A conjunctionproperlyusedwith"either"instatinga propositioninthealternative. BLACKSLAW4thED OR, conj.. Adisjunctiveparticleusedtoexpressan alternativeortogiveachoiceofoneamongtwoor morethings.Itisalsousedtoclarifywhathas alreadybeensaid,andinsuchcases,meansinother words,towit,orthatistosay.Oris frequentlymisusedandcourtswill construeitto mean andwhereitissoused.However,wherethe wordorisprecededbythewordeither,itis nevergivenaconjunctivemeaning. Nowyouaregoingtoseehowimportantthat littlewordis,aswellasthecomma.HereIjust gaveyouaprimeexamplethatthecommainthe precedingsentenceseparatedtwoindependentthings, wordandcomma.Lookatpunctuationrule4.2.2and 4.4.2.Applyittoallotherlawandyouwillbe shockedthatyouhaveprobablymisreador misconstruedeverylawandcasethatyouhaveseen. NowIhavegivenyouasecondexampleinthe precedingsentencewhereIusedthewordORtomean AND.SinceIdidnotusethewordeitherinthe sentencethewordmisread,ORmeansAND.Andyou wonderwhythesekidsfromage35backtoage18have noconceptofwhattheyreadandcantunderstanda thingabouttheworldtodaywhenitcomestoasimple contract?AndyouwonderwhyIandonlyafewother researchersseewhatyoudontseeinlaworcourt casesandsaywearewrongbecauseyoudont understandpunctuationorthewordOrmeansAND? HopefullyIwillnothavetoexplainafteryou readthecase.Youwillpickuponthefactthatthe termcitizenoftheUnitedStateswasusedwell beforethe14thAmendmentwaseveradopted,likepre 1824.YouwillseethatthewordeitherNEVER appearsinthedecision.Howeveryouwillseethe wordneitherusedtwice.Remembersentence constructionfrom6thgradewherethe"neithernor" ruleappliedlikethe"eitherorrule?"Howmany rememberbeingtaughtthatlikeIwas? Youwillseethatcitizensubjectisoneinthe sameandiswhatIhavebeensayingsince1990.So youarenotandneverwereasovereign.Alsoyouwill seethatthey,thesovereigns,yourrulers,can naturalizeeverymanwomanandchildwhenanarea joinstheUnioninonefellswoop.Thepeopledidnot jointheUnionasonlyfictionscalledStatescan jointheUnion. Thiscaseshowswhereonecanbeasubject (citizen)ofastateandstillnotbeacitizenof

seethatthey,thesovereigns,yourrulers,can naturalizeeverymanwomanandchildwhenanarea joinstheUnioninonefellswoop.Thepeopledidnot jointheUnionasonlyfictionscalledStatescan jointheUnion. Thiscaseshowswhereonecanbeasubject (citizen)ofastateandstillnotbeacitizenof theUnitedStatesdespitethe14thAmendment.Allthe 14thdidwastoputallunderthemilitaryruleand wasdesignedforcorporationsasevidencedbythe factthefirsttimeitwasusedtodefendablackman wasintheearly1930's.Comeonnow,from1868to 1933thatnocaseeveruseditforaman,either whiteorblack,shouldtellyousomething.Inhere youwillseethatthosesovereignsgivesubjects (citizen)onlyprivilegesanditisconsidereda GIFT.Yesyouwillcatchitwhenreading.Keep searchingforthewordRIGHTSasyoureadthecase. Aretheynaturalorconferred?Also,ifalltheso called"Christians"usethedefinitionasafollower of"Christ,"thentheyarenot"Christians."Whenyou readwhatyouhavetogiveuptobecomeaSUBJECT (citizen)ofanothersovereignandrenounceall allegiance,Idaresaywehaveno"Christians"in Americawhatsoever,saveavery,very,few.Itisall hypeastheyareallfencesitters.Andtheywonder whytheLordAlmightydoesntcomedownandcleanthe messup?Becausetheyareabigpartofthemess. LookhowmanycallthemselvescitizensoftheUnited Statesoracitizenofthepoliticalsubdivisionof thecorporateUnitedStates,namelyaState?Lookfor thedates April14,1802 &March3,1863,(12Stat. 731,) andseewhattheydeclaredwaybeforethe14th Amendment.Yesdearreader,readthiscasewell especiallysinceIhighlightedthosewordsand punctuationforclarity.Nowafterreadingthis,do youthinkallthosetonsofcasesyoureadhavetobe rereadbecausethecourtsarenottakingthemwith anyseriousnessbecauseyoumisreadthem?Iwonder whattheyreallysaidinallthosecases?Especially sinceafterreadingthiscaseyouwillimmediately seewhereyouplacedyourself,byclaimingthe Constitutionisyours.Andyouprobablysaid ,Itook anoathtodefendit,eventhoughitisnot protectingmelikeIthoughtitsaidandbygolly,as acitizenofthisgreatstateoftheUnionIamnota UnitedStatescitizen,eventhoughIvotedeitherfor oragainstClinton.Nowlookwhatthecourtstatedit hadclaimingjurisdictionoverthisalienbecauseof whathedid,notwhomhesaidhewas.Makesureyou findtheword"contract"inthedecision.Everytime yousee "or" replaceitwith" AND". AsIhavesaid allalong,especiallyinmyNewHistoryofAmerica, wearenothingbutslavesonthePlantation,never werethesovereignsyouthoughtyouwere,andhaveno controloveranyStateofficerofthecorporation althoughtheylikeyoutothinkyoudo.The Constitutiontheyspeakofisallrhetoricand meaningless.Plantationdoesnotmeanafarmeither. SowithallthisknowledgeofEnglishandpunctuation letsreadwhatIscanned.

THE FEDERALREPORTER. VOLUME56. CASESARGUEDANDDETERMINED INTHE CIRCUITCOURTSOFAPPEALSANDCIRCUIT AND.DISTRICTCOURTSOFTHE UNITEDSTATES. PERMANENTEDITION, JULYOCTOBER,1893,

AND.DISTRICTCOURTSOFTHE UNITEDSTATES. PERMANENTEDITION, JULYOCTOBER,1893,

WITHTABLESOFFEDERALREPORTERCASESPUBLISHEDIN VOLS.3,C.C.A.REPORTS4,U.S.APPEALSREPORTS

ATABLEOFSTATUTESCITEDANDCONSTRUEDIS GIVENINTHEINDEX ST.PAUL: WESTPUBLISHINGCO. 1893. Pg576FEDERALREPORTER,vol56. CITYOFMINNEAPOLISv.REUM. (CircuitCourtofAppeals,EighthCircuit.May29, 1893.) No.211

1.ALIENSWhoAreEFFEC'TOFSTATELAWS. AforeignbornresidentoftheUnitedStates,whohas merelydeclaredhisintentiontobecomeacitizen, buthasnevercompliedwithanyotherprovisionof thenaturalizationlaws,isnonethelessanalien becauseofthefactthattheconstitutionandlawsof Minnesota,whereinheresides,haveconferredthe electivefranchiseandotherprivilegesof citizenshiponforeignsubjectswhohavedeclared theirintentiontobenaturalized,andthathehas actuallyvotedformemberofcongressandstateand countyofficers. 2.SAMENaturalizationLaws. Norishisstatusalteredbyreasonofthefactthat, whenhesodeclaredhisintention,hewasentitled, byreasonoflengthofresidence,tobenaturalized, underRev.St.2167,forthatsectionmerely dispenseswiththetwoyeardelaybetweenthe declarationofintentionandtheactualadmissionto citizenshipwhichisprescribedbysection2165. InErrortotheCircuitCourtoftheUnitedStates fortheDistrictofMinnesota.Affirmed. StatementbySANBORN,CircuitJudge: OnOctober7,1891,FrederickReum,thedefendantin error,broughtthisactionagainstthecityof Minneapolis,theplaintiffinerror,forapersonal Injurythatresultedfromitsnegligence.He recoveredJudgment,toreversewhichthiswritof errorwassuedout.Inhiscomplaintheallegedthat hewasanalien,andasubjectoftheKingofSaxony, andthisallegationwasdeniedbythedefendant.The evidencedisclosedthesefacts:Theplaintiffwas borninthekingdomof'Saxonyin1859.Hisfather andmotherwerenativesofthatkingdom,andthe formerresidedthereuntilhedied,intheInfancyof theplaintiff.In1863,afterhisfather'sdeath,the Plaintiffandhismothercametothestateof Minnesota,wheretheyhavesinceresided.In1885he wasmarried,andhassincethattimeownedand occupiedafarminthatstate.OnOctober25,189O, hemadeadeclarationofhisIntentiontobecomea citizenoftheUnitedStatesinthecircuitcourtfor thedistrictofMinnesotabuthehasneverbeen admitted,orappliedtobeadmitted,tocitizenship underthesecondandthirdparagraphsof.section 2165oftheRevisedStatutesoftheUnitedStates,or

wasmarried,andhassincethattimeownedand occupiedafarminthatstate.OnOctober25,189O, hemadeadeclarationofhisIntentiontobecomea citizenoftheUnitedStatesinthecircuitcourtfor thedistrictofMinnesotabuthehasneverbeen admitted,orappliedtobeadmitted,tocitizenship underthesecondandthirdparagraphsof.section 2165oftheRevisedStatutesoftheUnitedStates,or underanyprovisionsoftheactsofcongress.The stateofMinnesotahasconferreduponallforeign subjectsresidentwithinitsborderswhohave declaredtheirintentiontobecomecitizensthe electivefranchise,theprivilegeofholdingany officewithin itsgift ,andpracticallyallofthe privilegesofcitizenship inthepowerofthatstate toconfer.InNovember1890,theplaintiff votedfor amemberofcongress andforstateandcounty officersinMinnesota.Atthecloseoftheevidence thedefendantmovedthecourttodismisstheaction forwantofJurisdiction,onthegroundthatthe evidencefailedtoestablishtheallegationthatthe plaintiffwasanalien.Thecourtdeniedthemotion, andthisrulingisthesupposederrorassigned. DavidF.Simpson,(RobertD.Russell,onthebrief,) forplaintiffinerror. JohnW.Aretander,fordefendantinerror. BeforeCALDWELLandSANBORN,CircuitJudges,and THAYER,DistrictJudge. SANBORN,CircuitJudge,(afterstatingthefactsas above.)InLanzv.Randall,4Dill.425,Mr.Justice Miller,whowasthenpresidinginthecircuitcourt forthedistrictofMinnesota,heldthatastate couldnotmakethesubjectofaforeigngovernmenta citizenoftheUnitedStates,andthataresidentof Minnesotawhowasbornasubjectofthegranddukeof Mecklenburg,haddeclaredhisintentiontobecomea citizenoftheUnitedStatesmanyyearsbeforehe broughthissuit,hadresidedinthestateof Minnesotafor15years,hadseveraltimesvotedat electionsheldinthatstatewheretheconstitution ofthestateauthorizessuchresidentstodoso withoutnaturalization,buthadneverappliedtobe orbeenadmittedtocitizenshipunderthefederal naturalizationlaws,wasstillanalien,anda subjectofthegranddukeofMecklenburg.This decisionhasbeenfollowedbythecourts,and acquiescedinbytheprofession.Itisnowvigorously challengedbycounselforplaintiffinerror. Section2,art.3.oftheConstitutionofthe Unitedstates,providesthatthejudicialpowerof thenationshallextendto"controversiesbetweena stateorthecitizensthereofandforeignstates, citizens,orsubjects"andtheactsofCongressof March3,1887,(24Stat.552,)andofAugust13,1888, (25Stat.433,)conferjurisdictionofallthese controversiesincasesinvolvingover$2,000uponthe circuitcourts.Everypersonathisbirthis presumptively acitizen or subjectofthestateof hisnativity,andwhere,asinthecaseatbar,his parentswerethenboth subjects ofthatstate,the presumptionisconclusive.Tothelandofhisbirth heowessupportandallegiance,andfromitheis entitledtothe civil and politicalrights and privilegesofacitizen or subject.Thisrelation, imposedbybirth, ispresumedtocontinueuntila changeofnationalityisproved.Minorv.Happersett, 21Wall.162,167Vatt.LawNat.p.101Morse,Nat. 61,125.Achangeofnationalitycannotbemadeby theindividualatwill.Eachnationhastherightto refusetogranttherightsandprivilegesof citizenshiptoallpersonsnotbornuponitssoil, and,ifitdeterminestoadmitthemtothoserights andprivileges, itmayfixtheterms onwhichthey shallbe conferred uponthem.Naturalizationisthe admissionofaforeignsubject or citizenintothe politicalbodyofanation,andthebestowaluponhim ofthequalityofacitizen or subject. ThefourteenthamendmenttotheConstitutionof theUnitedStatesprovidesthat"allpersonsborn or naturalizedintheUnitedStates,andsubjecttothe jurisdictionthereof,arecitizensoftheUnited

admissionofaforeignsubject or citizenintothe politicalbodyofanation,andthebestowaluponhim ofthequalityofacitizen or subject. ThefourteenthamendmenttotheConstitutionof theUnitedStatesprovidesthat"allpersonsborn or naturalizedintheUnitedStates,andsubjecttothe jurisdictionthereof,arecitizensoftheUnited Statesandofthestatewhereintheyreside."Asthe plaintiffwasborninthekingdomofSaxony,of parentswhoatthetimeofhisbirthweresubjectsof thekingofSaxony,heisnotacitizenoftheUnited Statesunlesshehasbeennaturalizedtherein.The UnitedStates,intheexerciseoftheirundoubted right,haveprescribedtheconditionsuponcompliance withwhichanalienmaybecomeacitizenofthis nation.TheactofCongressof April14,1802,(2 Stat.153, c.28,1Rev.St.2165,)provides that"analienmaybeadmittedtobecomea citizenof theUnitedStates inthefollowingmanner,andnot otherwise.First.Heshall,twoYearsatleastprior tohisadmission,declarebeforeapropercourthis intentiontobecomeacitizenoftheUnitedStates, andto renouncehisallegiancetothe potentateor sovereignty ofwhichhemaybeatthetimeacitizen or subject.Second.Heshall,atthetimeofhis applicationtobeadmitted,declare,onoath,before someoneofthecourtsabovespecified,thathewill supporttheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates,and thathe absolutelyandentirelyrenouncesandabjures allallegiance andfidelitytoeveryforeignprince, potentate,state,orsovereigntyandparticularly, byname,totheprince,potentate,state,or sovereigntyofwhichhewasbeforea citizenor subject, whichproceedingsshallberecordedbythe clerkofthecourt.Third.Itshallbemadetoappear tothesatisfactionofthecourtadmittingsuchalien thathehasresidedwithintheUnitedStatesfive yearsatleast,andwithinthestateorterritory wheresuchcourtisatthetimeheldoneyearat leastandthatduringthattimehehasbehavedasa manofagoodmoralcharacter,attachedtothe principlesoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates, andwelldisposedtothegoodorderandhappinessof thesamebuttheoathoftheapplicantshallinno casebeallowedtoprovehisresidence." BytheactofMay26,1824 ,(4:star.69,c.186, 1Rev.St.2167,)itisprovidedthat: "Anyalien,beingundertheageoftwentyone years,whohasresidedIntheUnitedStatesthree yearsnextprecedinghisarriving,atthatage,and whohascontinuedtoresidethereintothetimehe maymakeapplicationtobeadmittedacitizen thereof,may,afterhearrivesattheageoftwenty oneyears,andafterhehasresidedfiveyearswithin theUnitedStates,includingthethreeyearsofhis minority,beadmitteda citizenoftheUnitedStates , withouthavingmadethedeclarationrequiredinthe firstconditionofsectiontwentyonehundredand sixtyfivebutsuchalienshallmakethedeclaration requiredthereinatthetimeofhisadmission,and shallfurtherdeclareonoath,andprovetothe satisfactionofthecourt,that,fortwoyearsnext preceding,ithasbeenhisbonafideintentionto becomeacitizenoftheUnitedStatesandheshall inallotherrespectscomplywiththelawsinregard tonaturalization. Thereisnootherprovisionoftheactsof congressunderwhichthisplaintiffcouldhavebeen naturalized.Thecounselforplaintiffinerror, however,allegesthathebecameacitizenofthe UnitedStates(1).becauseatthetimehedeclaredhis intentiontodosohemighthavebeenadmittedto citizenship,undertheprovisionsofsection2167 (2)becausevariousactsofcongresshaveconferred certainprivileges,andsomehaveconferredallthe privileges,ofacitizen uponforeignbornresidents whohaddeclaredtheirintentiontobecomecitizens and(3)becausethestateofMinnesotahasgrantedto suchresidentspracticallyallthe privileges of citizenshipinitspowertobestow. Beforethisplaintiffcouldbecomeanaturalized citizen, thecontractofallegiance andprotection

privileges,ofacitizen uponforeignbornresidents whohaddeclaredtheirintentiontobecomecitizens and(3)becausethestateofMinnesotahasgrantedto suchresidentspracticallyallthe privileges of citizenshipinitspowertobestow. Beforethisplaintiffcouldbecomeanaturalized citizen, thecontractofallegiance andprotection thattherelationofacitizentohisnationimplies mustbemadebetweenhimandtheUnitedStates.The UnitedStateshaveprescribedtheconditionsunder whichsuchanalien maymakethiscontract, theplace where,andthemannerinwhich,itshallbemade,and havedeclaredthatitcanbemadeonthose conditions,andinthatmanner,andnototherwise. Rev.St.2165.Theconditionsarethatheshall declare onoath ,thathewillsupportthe Constitutionthathedoes renounceallallegianceto every foreignprince,potentate,state,or sovereignty ,andparticularlytothatoneofwhichhe wasasubjectthatitshallbemadetoappeartothe courtthathehasresidedintheUnitedStatesfive years,andinthestatewherethecourtisheldone yearthathehasbehavedasamanofgoodmoral characterduringallofthistime,attachedtothe principlesoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates, andwelldisposedtothegoodorderandhappinessof thesame.Theplacewheretheseconditionsmustbe compliedwithisinoneofthecourtsofrecordnamed intheactsofCongress,andthe methodbywhichthe contractistobemadeisbyplenaryproof tothat courtofacompliancewiththeseconditions,which mustbeevidencedbyitsjudgment.Theplaintiffhas compliedwithnoneoftheseterms.Hehasnoteven appliedtoanycourttobeadmittedtocitizenship. Hehasnotconsentedtobecomeacitizenofthe UnitedStatesonthetermstheyoffertohim,oron anyterms,buthestillinsistsheisnotacitizen, andthatheisstillasubjectofthekingofSaxony. Ontheotherhand,theUnitedStateshavenot consentedtoaccepttheplaintiffasacitizen,on anyterms,muchlesstowaivealltheessential conditionswithoutacompliancewithwhichCongress hasdeclaredanaliencannotbenaturalized. The mindsofbothpartiesmustmeettomakeacontract, and,whereneitherpartyconsents,therecansurely benoagreement. Thattheplaintiff,onOctober25,1890,had residedinMinnesota,asboyandman,longenoughto qualifyhimtobecomeacitizenundersection2167, isnotmaterial.Theconclusiveanswertothe argumenthereurgedisthatthedeclarationofan intentiontoenterintoanewrelationforwhom partiesarequalifieddoesnotestablishthe relation.Amanandwomanwhodeclaretheirintention tobemarriedatsomefuturetimedonotthereby becomehusbandandwife.Ontheotherhand,a declarationofintentiontoenterintoarelationor todoanactatsomefuturetimeisverypersuasive evidencethattherelationwasnotenteredupon,and theactwasnotdone,atthetimethedeclarationwas made.Itmustbeborneinmindthattheonlyeffect ofsection2167wastorelievetheplaintifffrom waitingtwoyearsafterfilinghisdeclarationbefore beingadmittedtocitizenship.Thatsectionexpressly providesthatinallotherrespectsheshallcomply withthelawsinregardtonaturalization.The plaintiff'sdeclarationonOctober25,1890,whenhe wasqualifiedtobenaturalized,thatheintendedat somefuturetimetobecomeacitizen,coupledwith thefactthathedidnotthenapplytobeadmittedto citizenship,norcomplywithanyoftheconditions prescribedbylawforhisnaturalization,compelsthe conclusionthathedidnotthendenationalize himself,butthathestillremainedaforeign subject.ThatCongress,invariousacts,has conferredcertainprivilegesandimposedcertain burdensupon"personsof'foreignbirthwhoshall havedeclaredtheirintentiontobecomecitizens,"at thesametimethatitconferredlikeprivilegesor imposedlikeburdensuponourowncitizens,asinthe actofMarch3,1863,(12Stat.731,)whereallable bodied malecitizensoftheUnitedStates ,and "personsofforeignbirthwhoshallhavedeclared theirintentiontobecomecitizensunderandin

burdensupon"personsof'foreignbirthwhoshall havedeclaredtheirintentiontobecomecitizens,"at thesametimethatitconferredlikeprivilegesor imposedlikeburdensuponourowncitizens,asinthe actofMarch3,1863,(12Stat.731,)whereallable bodied malecitizensoftheUnitedStates ,and "personsofforeignbirthwhoshallhavedeclared theirintentiontobecomecitizensunderandin pursuanceofthelawsthereof,"betweencertainages, aredeclaredtoconstitutethenationalforces,and asinthepatentlaws,(Rev.St.4904,)thepre emptionlaws,(Id.2259,)andinthemininglaws, (Id.,2289,)wherecertain privileges areconferred oncitizensoftheUnitedStates,and"thosewhohave declaredtheirintentiontobecomesuch,"innoway militatesagainst,butstronglysupports,the correctnessofourconclusion,because,ifforeign bornresidents,bydeclaringtheirintentionto becomecitizens,couldipsofactobecomesuch,it wouldhavebeenfutiletonametheminallofthese actsasaclassdistinctfromourcitizens.That Congresshas,byvariousspecialacts,manyofwhich arereferredtointheopinionofChiefJustice FullerinBoydv.Nebraska,143U.S.158,12Sup.Ct. Rep.375,naturalizedcertainclassesofpersonswho hadnotcompliedwiththetermsofthegenerallaws onthissubject,isnotimportanthere,becausethe plaintiffisnotamemberofanyclassthus naturalized. NoristhedecisioninBoydv.Nebraska, supra,inpointinthiscasebecauseGov.Boydwas thereheldtobeoneofaclassofforeignborn residentsthatwasnaturalizedbytheactsof CongressadmittingthestateofNebraskaintothe Union.Theseactsconferredtherightsofcitizenship uponforeignbornresidentsofNebraskawhohad declaredtheirintentiontobecomecitizens.The plaintiffwasaresidentofMinnesota. Asingleargumentremainstobenoticed,andthat isthatthestateofMinnesotahasconferredon plaintifftheelectivefranchise,therighttohold anyoffice initsgift, and,inreality,allthe rightsandprivilegesofcitizenshipinitspowerto bestowandthereforeitissaid heisacitizenof thatstate,andnotaforeignsubject ,andthe federalcourthasnojurisdictionofthisaction.It maybeconcededthatastatemayconferonforeign citizens or subjectsalltherightsandprivilegesit hasthepowertobestow,but,whenithasdoneall this,ithasnotnaturalizedthem.Theyareforeign citizens or subjectsstill,withinthemeaningofthe ConstitutionandlawsoftheUnitedStates,andthe jurisdictionofthefederalcourtsovercontroversies betweenthemandcitizensofthestatesisneither enlargednorrestrictedbytheactsofthestate.The powertonaturalizeforeignsubjects or citizenswas oneofthepowersexpresslygrantedbythestatesto thenationalgovernment.Bysection8,art.1,ofthe constitutionoftheUnitedStates,itwasprovided that"thecongressshallhavethepowertoestablish auniformruleofnaturalization."Congresshas exercisedthispower,establishedtherule,and expresslydeclaredthatforeignbornresidentsmaybe naturalizedbyacompliancewithit,andnot otherwise.Thispower,likethepowertoregulate commerceamongthestates,wascarvedoutofthe generalsovereignpowerheldbythestateswhenthis nationwasformedandgrantedbytheConstitutionto theCongressoftheUnitedStates.Itthusvested exclusivelyinCongress,andnopowerremainedinthe statestochangeorvarytheruleofnaturalization Congressestablished,ortoauthorizeanyforeign subjecttodenationalizehimself,and becomea citizenoftheUnitedStates,withoutacompliance withtheconditionscongresshadprescribed. Dred Scottv.Sandford,19How.393,405SlaughterHouse Cases,16Wall.36,73Minorv.Happersett,21How. 162Boydv.Nebraska,143U.S.135,160,12Sup.Ct. Rep.375, Inlikemanner,thestatesgrantedtothe judiciaryofthenationthepowertodeterminea controversybetweenastate or citizensthereofand foreignstates,citizens, or subjects,(Const.U.S. art.3,2,)andCongressconferredthatpowerupon thecircuitcourts.Theextentofthejurisdictionof

Rep.375, Inlikemanner,thestatesgrantedtothe judiciaryofthenationthepowertodeterminea controversybetweenastate or citizensthereofand foreignstates,citizens, or subjects,(Const.U.S. art.3,2,)andCongressconferredthatpowerupon thecircuitcourts.Theextentofthejurisdictionof thosecourtsismeasuredbytheConstitutionandthe actsofCongress.Aforeignbornresident,whohas notbeennaturalizedaccordingtotheactsof Congress,isnota"citizen"oftheUnitedStates or ofastate,withinthedefinitiongivenbythe fourteenthamendmenttotheConstitution,butremains aforeignsubject or citizenandanycontroversy betweenhimandacitizenofastatewhichinvolvesa sufficientamountisthusclearlywithinthe jurisdictionofthecircuitcourts,underanyfair constructionoftheConstitutionandlawsofthe UnitedStates. Thejurisdictionthusconferreditis notinthepowerofanystate,byitslegislativeor otheraction,totakeaway,restrict,orenlarge,and theactionofthestateofMinnesotaregardingthe citizenshipoftheplaintiffwasnotmaterialinthis case .Tolandv.Sprague,12Pet.300,328Cowlessv. MercerCo.7Wall.118RailwayCo.v.Whitton,13 Wall.270,286Phelpsv.Oaks,117U.S.236,2396 Sup.Or.Rep.714O'Connellv.Reed,56Fed.Rep. 531. TheresultisthatthepowergrantedtoCongress byArticle1,8,oftheConstitutionoftheUnited States,toestablishauniformruleof naturalization,isexclusiveandthenaturalization lawsenactedbyCongressintheexerciseofthis powerconstitutetheonlyrulebywhichaforeign subjectmaybecomeacitizenoftheUnitedStates or ofastate,withinthemeaningofthefederal Constitutionandlaws.Itisnotinthepowerofa statetodenationalizeaforeignsubjectwhohasnot compliedwiththefederalnaturalizationlaws,and constitutehimacitizenoftheUnitedStatesorofa state,soastodeprivethefederalcourtsof jurisdictionoveracontroversybetweenhimanda citizenofastate,conferreduponthembyarticle3, 2,oftheconstitutionoftheUnitedStates,and theactsofCongress. Aforeignsubjectwhoisqualifiedtobecomea citizenoftheUnitedStates,undersection2167of theRevisedStatutes,doesnotbecomesuchbyfiling hisdeclarationofintentionsotodo.Thatsection requiresthatheshall renounceallegiancetothe sovereigntyofwhichheisasubject ,taketheoath ofallegiancetotheUnitedStates ,andcomplywith theotherconditionsprescribedinthesecondand thirdparagraphsofsection2165oftheRevised Statutes,inordertobecomenaturalizedanduntil hedoessoheremainsaforeignsubject. Thecourtbelowwasrightindenyingthemotion todismissthisactionforwantofjurisdiction,and thejudgmentbelowisaffirmed,withcosts. WellIhopedyoulearnedsomethingfromreading thiscasewiththecorrectunderstandofpunctuation andthewordOR.KarlGransegavemethiscasewhen wewereresearchingcitizenshipwaybackin93or so.IjustdecidedtodigthisoutwhenIsawthis typeargumentpostedontheinternetthefirstweek inFebruarythatwasclosetothis.Wow,justthink, theword"either"neverappearedonceinthedecision thereforeeverytimetheword"OR"wasuseditisa conjunctionmeaningAND.Sinceallcitizensofthe UnitedStateshaverenouncedallegiancetothe SovereignLordAlmightyandgivenupHiscitizenship, Eph.2:19,foranotherking/sovereigntheyare neitherChristiansfortheygaveupfollowingthe Lordnorsovereignwithanyunalienablerights,only conferredrightsbythepoliticalestablishment.It isthatsimple.NoticethatnowherewereTheLords unalienableRightsevermentioned,onlyconferred politicalRightswhicharealwaysinferiortoNatural rightsandistheonlyreasonthecountryruns,on politicalrights.Everheareithertheterm "politicallycorrect"or"thiscourtcannotdecide yourtaxcaseargumentbecauseitisa`political issue?"

isthatsimple.NoticethatnowherewereTheLords unalienableRightsevermentioned,onlyconferred politicalRightswhicharealwaysinferiortoNatural rightsandistheonlyreasonthecountryruns,on politicalrights.Everheareithertheterm "politicallycorrect"or"thiscourtcannotdecide yourtaxcaseargumentbecauseitisa`political issue?" Nothingisanunalienablerightbecausethe CrownscorporationofEnglandstillrulesAmerican "citizens"asitdidits"subjects"inEngland.Only thetermchanged,i.e.westillareslavestothe feudal(federal)system. Sincerely, TheInformer