Replies

Excerpted from The History of American Constitutional or Common Law With Commentary Concerning : Equity and Merchant Law

All law in America is based on the status of the individual. All legislation, judicial actions, and administrative policy is based on status, for there are different classes of citizens and subjects. (For example, under the 14th Amendment, "equal protection" is applied to corporate "persons" as "citizens," even though, strictly speaking, they are simply subjects.) Though a law be termed "general" and not special, it must be decided by the court as to whom it will apply. The application of laws, or statutes (as they really are only expressions of the law) is basically unknown as to the fullest extent of their range. Only in individual cases can it truly be determined according to the facts surrounding the respective case.

Therefore, the status of the party must be determined before the Court should proceed and before the Court can make an intelligent decision. How can status be determined if it is not pleaded? How can it be pleaded except by statements of fact, and of the constitutional application and intent of the particular statute in the case? The way to determining law is to plead all the facts in a case in such a way as to show the status of the parties, and therefore, the rightful scope of the statute. "Where fundamental rights are in question, there shall be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." (Miranda vs. Arizona) Among the most important rights the people hold are those protected by the Bill of Rights, but these are only a scant few of all the capacities, abilities and potentials of any one human being. The Bill of Rights was only a statement, brief and definite, that the Founders considered the Constitution to be a strictly expressed grant of political power by the people to a governmental structure designed to protect their rights first and foremost, and never, under any pretense, to violate any right held by the people.
Perhaps the right of greatest importance, of greatest value to the free citizen of these United States in his association with his fellow man and his government, is the absolute ownership of property.

From this absolute dominion, said Thomas Jefferson, flows all free society, and without it, of course, comes dictatorship and oppression. If the owner of the property shall not have unconditional control and use of it --- who shall? If the owner shall not reap the profits of the use of property, who shall? Who shall have the fruits of labor? Should it be the man whose right it is to labor? Who, but a freeman, can claim this right?

---------------------------Read roscoe, and weep for your ignorance.