Communist Agenda Exposed

The American Civil War commenced in the year 1861. This was just thirteen years after the Communist Manifesto was fine-tuned in 1848. Claims that Marx invented Communsim are just flat out false, he merely adjusted it to be less visible. Its working great. Unknown to most the final outcome of the so-called Civil War instituted a new quiet war on Americans by way of the Fourteenth Amendement.

To set the premise of this blog, the definition of a Manifesto is as follows:

MANIFESTO: A formal written declaration, promulgated by a sovereign, or by the executive authority of a state or nation, proclaiming its reasons and motives for declaring a war, or for any other important international action. Public declaration or proclamation of political or social principles.

WAR DECLARED
A manifesto puts forth political and/or social principles and a motive for WAR. In a broad sense, the Fourteenth Amendment is a manifesto: It is the Communists Declaration of War.

Pursuant to the Communist Manifesto, Marx calls forth the workingmen of the world to join in the fight against Capitalists. As a question of common sense, how can the lower class workingman have the power to create this power presence? They cannot: it is the World Elite who are behind this quiet war. The secret societies, along with the labor classes, are the tools of the World Elite Capitalists; the ones who pull the strings. “THEY” are the “Puppet Masters”.

The Fourteenth Amendment is actually a declaration of war, and will be proven herein. Accordingly, the amendment creates Quiet Wars on the de jure constitutional governments of the American republics, which are all foreign to each other and the United States. This means that all political jurisdictions are separate ( under the rules of international law).

The excuse for these ” Quiet Wars” can be found in the preamble of a congressional act referred to as the Expatriation Act (so-called). This instant Act was remarkably approved the day before the Fourteenth Amendment was announced ” Puportedly ” ratified. The purpose for these wars;

“….whereas it is necassary to the maintainance of public PEACE that this claim of foreign allegiance should be promptly and finally disavowed.”

Pursuant to measures of covert takeover, the insurgent governmental system–while not openly admitting to it–has currently defined itself in title 8 of the United States Code. here it is below:

Title 8 USC: 1101(a)(37). Definitions. The term ” totalitarian party” means an organization that advocates the establishment in the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship or totalitarianism. The terms ” totalitarian dictatorship ” and ” totalitarianism” mean and refer to systems of government not representative in fact, charaterized by:

A) The existence of a single political party, organized on a dictatorial basis, with so close an identity between such party and its policies and the governmental policies of the country in which it exists, that the party and government constitute and indistinguishable unit, and

B) The forcible suppression of opposition to such party.

BASIC AUTHORIZATION DEFINITIONS

The placement of title 8 USC-1101(a)(37) appears to be a clandestinely placed definition, i.e. it is secretive bragging. Of course, there will be no admission that the above definition applies to the de facto governmental system; you must employ applied facts to prove it. Pursuant to this: listed below are its main definitional characteristics. The specific particulars are as follows:

1. TOTALITARIANISM

2. DICTATORSHIP

3.GOVERNMENT NOT REPRESENTATIVE IN FACT

4. FORCIBLE SUPPRESSION

These factors will now be applied to the federal government of the {U}nited States now in place.

A. Study the definition of TOTALITARIAN from the American Heritage Dictionary:

Totalitarian. adj. 1. Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed.

B. Study the definition of DICTATOR from the American Heritage Dictionary:

DICTATOR. n. 1.a. An absolute ruler. b. A tyrant; a despot. 2. An ancient Roman magistrate appointed temporarily to deal with an immediate crisis or emergency. ( In our case it was freedom)

C. Study the definition of NOT REPRESENTATIVE IN FACT from Blacks Law Dictionary:

IN FACT. Actual, real; as distinguished from or inferred. Resulting from the acts of parties, instead of from the act or intendment of law.

D. Study the definition of FORCIBLE SUPPRESSION from Blacks Law Dictionary:

MARTIAL LAW. A system of law, obtaining only in time of actual war and growing out of the exigencies thereof, arbitrary in its character, and depending only on the will of the commander of an army, which is established and adminstered in a place or district of hostile territory held in belligerent possession, or sometimes , in places occupied or prevaded by insurgents or mobs, and which suspends all existing civil laws, as well as the civil authority and the ordinary administration of justice. See also Military government; Military law. ( see also government de facto; Lieber Military code).

In other words put a Confederated Republic down subliminally over time after installing your Communist declaration, the Fourteenth Amendment. In affect stealing a Nation right out from under the noses of the Sovereign De Jure Nationals who own it out right. ( you and I).

Some may say a square peg is being jammed into a round hole. Nevertheless, in a broad sense all four of these particulars can be applied to the de-facto governmental system that is currently in place in America. This will be directly proven hence forth with the applied evidence.

Totalitarian Examined

Today, because the Marxist system and falsehoods are so widespread, you generally cannot get employment and do any banking without a Social Security Number. Congress has made no public effort to make it known that social security is optional, which it is. Ergo: One cannot work unless they have the “federal” number. If you cannot work or bank you suffer!!! Conclusion: you are subordinate to the federal government!!! ( the state).

The statutory system (both federal and state) has replaced the de jure civil law America. The common law was the law of the people, i.e. natural law, usages and customs. Simply put: The law of God. The common law is defined by Blacks Law Dictionary as follows:

COMMON LAW: As distinguished from statutory law created by enactment of legislatures, the common law derive their authority solely from usages and customs of immemorial antiquity, or from the judgements and decrees of the courts recognizing, affirming, and enforcing such usages and customs. The ” commons Law” is all the statutory and case background of England and the American colonies before the American Revolution. It consists of those principles, usage and rules of action applicable to government and security of persons and property that do not rest for their authority upon any express and positive declaration of the will of the legislature.

Under usages and customs, people of each country in the Union are governed by what they do and wish; such being under a system of self-government that is under the guidance of scripture; they are not governed by law, i.e. general legislative law based on the whim of the legislature. This is law that is ordained by someone who believes they know better: the people of station or the Elitists in the current de facto governmental system–THE RULERS! ( example being a small town council thinking they know better what we the populance should do or not do with our very own private property, it is of course of my personal opinion that anybody wanting to be on described councils are nothing more than complete and utter twits. Thus I will never run for any kind of governmental seat ever). Nor will I ever rely on said twits to be my deciders about anything ever.

The statutory system of law does not allow people to govern themselves by their usages and customs. All such dictated law generally comes from the decree of the federal government. Said government is not supposed to have interaction with the states that is outside the stipulations of Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution. Also, understand the 9th and Tenth Amendments.

It appears that: TOTALITARIAN is applicable to the de facto system. Federal, State, and local, being county, and city. Their all Marxists.

DICTATOR EXAMINED

Below are two appropriate definitions that are taken from the American Heritage Dictionary that will set up the premise of the dictator:

1. DESPOTISM. 1. Rule by or as if by a despot: absolute power or authority. 2. The actions of a despot; tyranny. 3a. A governmental or political system in which the ruler exercises absolute power. b. A state so ruled.

2. AUTOCRACY. 1. Government by a single person having unlimited power; despotism. 2. A country or state that is governed by a single person with unlimited power.

Do you imagine the above definitions are appropriate? You question AUTOCRACY do you? Do you think since “Americans” hold a presidential election actually precludes us from being under an autocratic government? Well, the de facto President of the United States can write an order referred to as an Executive Order. As Congress has nothing to do with such Orders, this usurps the purpose and protection of the Seperation of Powers as set forth by the Constitution. One should note that thousands of these Orders have been written the past several years. Some are being enforced; some are just sitting there waiting to be used and enforced. Understand that the de facto Congress can invalidate these Orders, but generally it chooses not to. please see and understand the definition of totalitarianism in title 8 USC;1101(a)(37).

In conclusion to the above, the facts that were evidenced may be translated into a government that is administered by a single person having unlimited power–Ergo: DICTATOR.

It appears that: DICTATOR is applicable to the de facto system.

NOT REPRESENTATIVE IN FACT EXAMINED

Title 8 USC:1101(a)(37). This one is so easy to prove, again, the current sitting governments are not real governments. They are imposters that have seated the state governments under Terms of War via the operations of law set forth by the Fourteenth Amendment. Moreover, the real constitutional apportionment of conngressional representation ( i.e. de jure) in Article 1 of the organic Constitution. These apportioned parameters have never been repealed; wherefore they are even now in full force and effect. Therefore, all state and federal governments are not representative ” in Fact”.

The legal definition of “in fact” from Blacks Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition Deluxe, states;

IN FACT: Actual real; as distinguished from or implied or inferred. Resulting from the acts of parties, instead of from the act or intendment of law.

Moreover, the current state government{s} are seated in violation of the organic (i.e. the original) Constitution of the federation, the real ” Intendment of Law”. Accordingly, to further prove this usurpation and fraud, see this text that is found in title 8 USC : 1101(a)(37):

” The existence of a single political party, organized on a dictatorial basis, with so close an identity between such party and its policies and the governmental policies of the country in which it exists, that party and government constitute an indistinguishable unit”.

Comformably–pursuant to the forgoing congressional definition Franklin Delano Roosevelt may be Quoted as saying: ” There’s not a dimes worth of difference between the Republicans and Democrats.” ENOUGH SAID about the current governments not being representative in fact!

It appears that NOT REPRESENTATIVE IN FACT is applicable to the de facto system, Federal state local levels. Blaine county in particular.

FORCIBLE SUPPRESSION EXAMINED

To prove a point; Go to Washington D.C. or even our State Capital in Boise with a group of people. Tell them you know that they are imposters and that you can prove it with legal and documented evidence. Insist you want them to leave so that the government de jure can be seated: be commanding. Without a doubt, you will see some Forcible Suppression take place. Moreover, can you recollect any time where something was forced on the people of a state. I can think of thousands, like wolf programs for example.

Furthermore, for proof of the terminology of force being a factor of the insurgent governmental system that causes meddling from the foreign organization: the United States, look at most of the constitutional amendments past number twelve; the last section or clause states;

“CONGRESS shall have the power to ENFORCE this article by appropriate legislation.”

In other words : the forcing of communist/totalitarion doctrines.

It appears that: FORCIBLE SUPPRESSION is applicable to this de facto system.

Without a doubt the sitting federal government, the sitting state governments, all countys, and towns and or city councils fits into the definition parameters of title 8 USC : 1101(a)(37). which defines a Totalitarian Dictatorship. However, with some due respect it has been a somewhat benevolent federal one. It appears to rule with a Velvet Glove instead of an Iron Fist. FOR NOW THAT IS! They could not be too forceful or people would catch on to what is going on. You must note that it has taken over 139 years to get to this point ” THEY” are at.

The MARXISTS ARE “THEY”, and they are running the show. I’ve shown that COMMUNISM is very alive and well indeed and we are it. Welcome to AMARXISMA, Land of the indoctrinated, and Home of the afraid to see reality.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “Communist Agenda Exposed”

  1. Michael Smith Says:

    URGENT URGENT – please respond ASAP here & hopefully ALSO to my e mail address: bigclaim@aol.com There is a paragraph above that has a sentence that makes no sense and understand the sentence in relation to the whole paragraph is crucial.

    FIRST – I post the paragraph and SECOND I post the sentence in that paragraph AFTER the paragraph to show that it is an “incomplete” sentence and it is not possible to understand its meaning – here:

    THE PARAGRAPH FROM ABOVE: “Title 8 USC:1101(a)(37). This one is so easy to prove, again, the current sitting governments are not real governments. They are imposters that have seated the state governments under Terms of War via the operations of law set forth by the Fourteenth Amendment. Moreover, the real constitutional apportionment of conngressional representation ( i.e. de jure) in Article 1 of the organic Constitution. These apportioned parameters have never been repealed; wherefore they are even now in full force and effect. Therefore, all state and federal governments are not representative ” in Fact”. ”

    From the above paragraph:
    “Moreover, the real constitutional apportionment of conngressional representation ( i.e. de jure) in Article 1 of the organic Constitution.”

    OK – the immediate above sentence removed from the above paragraph is an incomplete sentence. After the last word in the above sentence, “Constitution”, one is waiting for the sentence to be completed…”is what” after the word Constitution. The sentence was not completed. This breaks the logic of the whole paragraph and leaves one wondering what exactly is the point. And it is an extremely crucial point. I can’t guess, presume or assume, I NEED TO KNOW THE WRITER’S INTENTION OR POINT of the paragraph.

    I hope someone will answer soon. Thank you. Michael Smith

    • g888 Says:

      Moreover, the real constitutional apportionment of conngressional representation ( i.e. de jure) in Article 1 of the organic Constitution has been suspended. Suspended by Whitings Leiber code. Suspended by Reconstruction. Replaced with an inorganic militarized constitution, post Civil War. During all of this congress was suspended, not in attendance as the southern congressional members were not present, considered to be rebels. If you can get yourself a copy of Whitings War Powers Act, I’ll see if I can find the link, and a hard copy of “Encyclopedia of American History” edited by Richard B Morris, Columbia University, that might be helpful. As well a few Supreme Court Cases bear this evidence out. We have not enjoyed a representative government for over 150 years.

    • g888 Says:

      They tell you that YOU the private person are NOT a party to their constitition in this case:

      Padelford, Fay & Co. v. Mayor and Aldermen of City of Savannah, 1854
      “*55 But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain.”

    • g888 Says:

      The constitution under the War Powers
      https://books.google.com/books?id=YgkAAAAAYAAJ&dq=William+Whiting&pg=PP7&hl=en#v=onepage&q=William%20Whiting&f=false

    • g888 Says:

      Have you studied the, The Law of Nations by Emer De Vattel 1750, if NO you need to. Have you read the Paris Treaty of 1783 where the International Community agreed to allow the signatories the right of self determination concerning taking over this new nation, where those signatories agreed to repay the debt owed the King of France/England, The King of England owned France. Eighteen Million “dollars”, which to this day has never been repayed? Do you understand what that means according to international law? Are you aware that International Law was then and still is today the Supreme Law of the land? Treaties are the Supreme Law of the land because they are based upon international law as verified by the compact contract constitution. The Supreme Court has also verified this many times in this nations history.

      We were never free from the British Crown, because we do not have allodial title, never have, could not, we never had it, never conquered it, were never granted it, nor was it ever ceded to us. You can claim you are free till hell freezes over, but if you do not have allodial title to your land, meaning it cannot be taken from you under any situation, it is an empty declaration. You cannot have one without the other, it would be like trying to have water without the wet. You are not a Freeman by definition, if your land can be taken from you.

      The treaty of peace of 1783 between the United States and Great Britain was a mere recognition of PRE-EXISTING rights as to TERRITORY, and NO TERRITORY WAS THEREBY ACQUIRED BY WAY OF CESSION FROM GREAT BRITAIN. Hello, the rights to territory, never changed, they remained just as they were, pre-existing; from what? The king’s Charters of course, the original grants, while we were still admitted subjects of the king, leasing the land from him. At the end of the Revolutionary War and with the signing of the 1783 Paris Peace Treaty, no territorial change took place, nor did the status of Americans.

      The 1783 Paris Peace Treaty was a mortgage agreement concerning a DEBT. All property in this country is the collateral for the still unpaid debt. Fee simple is tenant status only.

      If your land can be taken through the none payment of taxes, or through eminent domain, you are not sovereign, you are not possessing land by allodial title.

      The signatories of the constitution considered themselves the sovereign over the government they had created, the government was subject to them, and down the road their Posterity. Those not signatory of those agreements nor of that Posterity were and still are today subjects of the government those people created. They did grant the subjects natural rights which later became civil rights because of the 14th Amendment. Slaves with granted liberties. Slaves cannot own property, and the slaves have been used to repay the international debts of the government. So these sovereign citizens, which is a legal impossibility because you cannot be both, are claiming they have constitutional rights they in fact do not have. You can not use the Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a party to it. (Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Alderman of The City of Savannah 14 Georgia 438, 520)

      It really doesn’t matter what we as individuals believe in or think we know. What matters is what the world leaders believe in, and who they are subservient of. And they all recognize this, the Pope is the King of the worldly system. Now some of them may not like it. But they know better than to go against it. John Kennedy tried that. Now this is the deal. The Pope can abolish any law in the United States. (Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol.1 53-54) The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. (Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493) The Pope has ordered the genocide and enslavement of millions of people.(Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493) The Popes laws are obligatory on everyone. (Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix., c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844)(Syllabus, prop 28, 29, 44) If you’re a world leader, Monarch, Queen, president you obey them or else. What ever the subject slave class believes, thinks, is irrelevant. We are slaves and own absolutely nothing not even what we think are our children.(Tillman v. Roberts 108 So. 62, Van Koten v. Van Koten 154 N.E. 146, Senate Document 43 & 73rd Congress 1st Session, Wynehammer v. People 13 N.Y. REP 378, 481) Military Dictator George Washington divided the States (Estates) into Districts. (Messages and papers of the Presidents Vo 1, pg. 99. Webster’s 1828 dictionary for definition of Estate.) The People” does not include you and me. (Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S. 243) The United States Government was not founded upon Christianity. (Treaty of Tripoli 8 Stat 154.) Now thats what they think. You’re all just collateralized HUMAN RESOURCES.

      How? By registering them (all United States Citizens and Americans) into international commerce, and selling bonds on them. The person becomes the surety on the bonds, or the “pledge” for the “faith” to build the “credit of the United States”. The asset bonded (the personal collateral) is the “energy” or the future labor of the people which is payable at some undetermined future date. Thus, the people become the “utility” for the “transmission” of energy, which is your labor and intellectual property over time.

      When a baby is born in the United States, a birth certificate is registered with the Bureau of Vital Statistics in the state of birth. The keyword here it is “registered”; as in, “gifted with a certificate” that is given by the parents of the child to the “virtue of the government”, and then registered in international commerce through the DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. We are Human Resources [Executive Order 13037 Sec. 2(b)] WILLIAM J. CLINTON Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 8:45 a.m., March 5, 1997

      : Now you know what a “human resource” is. Your energy and intellect are “resourced”, meaning taken from the “source” (i.e. You) and “sourced” to something else (i.e. The U.S. Government’s monetary system of “good faith” (belief) and credit. The baby becomes the surety, whose energy is due at some future date. When the Birth Certificate is registered in the U.S. Department a Commerce, the Department of Treasury issues a bond on the Birth Certificate and the bond is sold at a SECURITIES EXCHANGE as a “Derivative” (meaning a derivation on the Name….in ALL CAPITAL LETTER NAME See Blacks sixth edition dictionary) and bought by the Federal Reserve Bank through the Deposit Trust Corporation (aka: DTC) at 55 Water Street, in New York City, about two blocks down the street from the FED.

      “The ultimate ownership of all property{public and private} is in the state; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; {Designated Multiple use – fee simple tenant-NO Allodium Title} and use must be in accordance with and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” —Senate Document#43;Senate RESOLUTION NO. 62 {Pg 9, Para 2} April 17, 1933.

      They’ve gotten away with it, and they’re going to keep getting away with it.

      [Padelford Case of 1854 page. 35] *41
      “Now the principle at the bottom of all these propositions is this: The States have no power, by the exercise of which, they can defeat all the ends of Government-the General Government, or any of those ends. But the States, by the exercise of the taxing power, can take from their inhabitants every cent the inhabitants can spare, and live. According to the principle of this decision, therefore, the States have no power to lay any tax on their inhabitants; and if they have no power to tax, it follows that they have no power to enable them to keep up their State Governments; and without State Governments, they have no power to keep themselves alive, as States. The principle comes to this: that the States, in making the Constitution, intended to give up the power of selfpreservation (sovereignty).” [Padelford Case 1854 pg. 35]

      The constitution was/is a contractual agreement. You and I were never a party to it. We did not sign it, and we are not of the Posterity of those who did sign it.

      “We The People” is a Capitonym: A capitonym is a word that changes its meaning (and sometimes pronunciation) when it is capitalized… Definition – Homonyms that have the same spelling but which have different meanings and, perhaps, different pronunciations when capitalized. [The Online Dictionary of Language Terminology]
      Example – (1) The proper noun Polish (as in “someone from Poland”) is pronounced ‘poh – lish, whereas(2) the verb polish (as in “making something shiny”) is pronounced ‘pah – lish.

      “The People” does not include you and me. “The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual States. Each State established a constitution for itself, and in that constitution provided such limitations and restrictions on the powers of its particular government as its judgment dictated. The people of the United States framed such a government for the United States as they supposed best adapted to their situation and best calculated to promote their interests.” [Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S. 243]

      The Definitive Treaty of Peace 1783 Article 4

      Stated: “It is agreed that creditors on either side shall meet with no lawful impediment to the recovery of the full value in sterling money of all bona fide debts heretofore contracted.”

      Article XI section I of the U.S. Constitution

      Keeps the loans from the King valid it states; “All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.”

      14th Amendment, Amendment XIV Section 4 U.S. Constitution

      States that “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

      The Articles of Confederation Article XII

      “All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed and considered as a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged.”

      The treaties are drawn out for signature: giving precedence to the Crowned Head. The American Ministers never had a thought of disputing the priority or equality of rank and therefore I have had no occasion to mention the subject.” [British-American Diplomacy Treaty of Paris – Hunter Miller’s Notes]

      Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol. 1 53-54 you will find the following:

      “The Holy See and civil governments may be annulled by the Pope. Again, it seems to be commonly admitted that in all agreements entered into by the Sovereign Pontiff this condition is understood: Nisi aliud exigat causa gravis et extraordinaria propter bonum commune ecclesiae. (In other words, unless you show cause of extraordinary evidence that you are not ruled by the Pope you’re presumed to be ruled by The Holy See.)

      Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol. 1 53-54 goes on to say: “no national law can become legitimate except by at least the tacit or legal consent of the Pope. Again, the jus particulare of a nation always remains subject to the authority of the Holy See in such manner as to be repealable at any time by it. Hence, the jus nationtie, or the exceptional ecclesiastical laws prevalent in the United States, may be abolished at any time by the Sovereign Pontiff.”

      (Matthew 23:9) And call “no man” your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Pontifex Maximus: Supreme Pontiff (god-man) on earth Vicar of Christ Holy father/papa Joseph Ratzinger (81) assumed the Mantle “Pontifex Maximus” (High Priest of this Luciferean System of SUN worship) on 4-19-2005 – a title which began in 46 BCE! He was “Head” of the Inquisition for 14 years!

      ECCLES LAW Vol _1 52 PDF
      http://www.thinkorbeeaten.com/informer/ECCLES%20LAW%20Vol%20_1%2052.pdf

      ECCLES LAW Vol _1 53 PDF

      http://www.thinkorbeeaten.com/informer/ECCLES%20LAW%20Vol%20_1%2053.pdf

      ECCLES LAW Vol _1 54 PDF

      http://www.thinkorbeeaten.com/informer/ECCLES%20LAW%20Vol%20_1%2054.pdf

      RESPUBLICA v. SWEERS – 1 U.S. 41 (1779)
      http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/1/41/case.html
      Penhallow v. Doan’s Administrators – 3 U.S. 54 (1795)
      http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/3/54/case.html
      Delovio v. Boit (1815)
      http://freedom-school.com/admiralty/delovio-v-boit-2-gall-398.pdf
      Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore – 32 U.S. 243 (1833)
      http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/32/243/case.html
      Paddleford, Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Adlderman of the City of Savannah (1854)

      The Jurisdiction and Practice of the Court of Admiralty by John Elihu Hall (1809)
      http://books.google.com/books?id=x3M9AAAAIAAJ&dq=Practice%20and%20Jurisdiction%20of%20the%20Court%20of%20Admiralty&pg=PR1#v=onepage&q&f=false
      War Powers under the Constitution of the United States by William Whiting (1864)
      http://books.google.com/books?id=YgkAAAAAYAAJ&dq=William%20Whiting&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q&f=false
      William Whiting was Solicitor of the War Department (1862-1865) under Lincoln.
      The American Admiralty …. by Erastus C. Benedict (1850)
      http://books.google.com/books?id=1FI9AAAAIAAJ&dq=Benedict%27s%20on%20Admiralty&pg=PR1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: