Guest Speakers and Call Contributors Info Information | John Stuart | David Clarence | Lynn Schmaltz

We strive to learn, therefore we shall not perish

Info from Hailstone Episode 196 January 10, 2013

I just got the Calif. General Revenue Act 1857 as amended 1859 about

sixteen pages or so. Thanks to Russ for his credit card!!!

Remember we were talking about this... I think it will be well

worth your peoples time if they have any extra to read this and find their

states equivalent.

The 1857 Calif. General Revenue Act authorized a excise tax stamp on

notes or negotiable instruments.,

The 1857 General Revenue Act as Amended 1859 is where they created

property tax of all kinds owned by corporations… the State by this Act

started collecting property tax on FICTIONS, person, corporations,

company's, property of all kinds furniture animals property and owned

land and instruments....

The 1857 Act is on the first page of the act, the stamp tax… its

required on negotiable instruments, it is a stamp tax on paper and

look at the date its pre 14 amendment...

person!!! NOT Natural persons or their property!!!!

We have to remember this as we read this, and look at those little

side notes!!!!

Some may think this is not current law but the on line manual for the

California Board of Equalization states in one of its first paragraphs

In its current online manual that it derives its authority from the

1857 as amended 1859 Calif. General Revenue Act...and I’ve seen it

quoted in other places as well.

And I have that case Site from that 1920 Calif Code book that

mentions... People v Mcreery, that stated property tax as related to

private property is not constitutional and then sites the Calif 1857

as amended in 1859 General Revenue Act.

As you will in the 1859 Amendment they applied the tax on the backs of

the corporate

interest...and negotiable paper, the stamp tax on paper instruments...

Of special interest, see the first page bottom on the 1857 Act… Attorney License

tax....I’m sure you will find the same application in your state...

Why did your fiduciary trustee real estate agent/broker Title

Company, Real Estate Attorney fail to properly transfer the land with

a proper Acceptance and Acknowledgment in the original deed and never

accepted the patent or land grant...this is why the county applied

property tax because they assumed because of the omitted A & A on the

Deed that you

were registering corporate owned property...and also left it open so

the bank could steal the real estate.

The Acceptence and Acknowledgement for Deeds for corporations and

private people are diffrent.

Now also you may need to look at all your mortgage paper work to see

if in fact they did not pay this Excise Tax... it may be in certain

cases they included the tax in all the fees associated in the

transaction.

I think people need to think about making a affidavit of status, this

shows that you are a real live Natural person man, not a corporation

fiction subject to taxation, with an acceptance and acknowledgement of

the patent/land grant and a acceptance and acknowledgement Grant

Deed Allodial Title Free of Fee.

The Excise Tax is only if you bought the land by a negotiable

instrument, a note.

The trustees failed to inform you that you were reasonable for this

Stamp Tax, surely the montage instrument stated you were responsible

for the taxes, but did they mention this excise tax.?

Now plan on a little trouble at the County Recorders Offices, be kind,

be polite they are not going to want everyone to correct the title...

they stand to lose all the revenue on all this private property Tax

they have been getting for a very long time.

Why this fella Paul in the Washington State just by paying the excise

tax did his lender remove the lien? He stated it was about two weeks

after paying the excise tax that he recived two letters from his

lender romoving the liens... and I assume he was able to record a new

deed as that was what started his quest at the county clerk/recorders

office.

What do you think?

Ben

California 1857 General Revenue Act with 1859 amendment pdf

Reference Desk

Sacramento County Public Law Library

609 9th Street, Sacramento, CA 95814

916.874.6012

Hours of Operation

8am - 8pm Monday - Thursday

8am - 5pm Friday

9am - 4pm Saturday

www.saclaw.org

Starve the Beast into submission!!!

I also have a book link to a book I have from 1914, Common Law Pleading, Cases on Procedure, Annotated.

I've been talking to some people about this excellent book! I emailed a link to Bill Thornton and asked him also the following question...

I think possibly, the problem we have been having, is that we have been demanding a Common Law Court of Record in the Wrong Form of

pleadings...Yes the Courts were combined Law and Equity however the

two are like night and day apart.

So, in FORM, we have still been using Equity Civil Legislative

Pleadings, Demanding Common Law Court of Record. When in Common Law you only use in FORM of Pleadings, "Declarations" and depending on the classifaction of the action, the injury, determinded what Form of action filed. such as Tresspass, Case, etc. And then all the proper elements required in a proper Common Law Pleading Declaration, the Elements/Substance of the claim, such as, date, injury, whos involved, where the injury took place, the damages sustained, the restutition. The whole Common Law Action is in the Declaration.

So when we plead and demand a Common Law Court Of Record... we must use the proper FORM of pleadings and the proper SUBSTANCE..."the elements" of a proper pleading by Declaration. I think that the problem is that we have been demanding Common Law Court of Record Claims in Equity Civil Legislative in FORM Pleadings which make them "unintellagable" to the Equity Legislative Court, and they proceed in Equity Civil Legislative Law in FORM and not Common Law Court of Record. as Demanded and promised in the Constitutions to the People

Of course the Attorney are Statute Merchants, so they need us to stay

in the equity civil legislative form and substance of pleading side as

they would have no Statutes/Bonds to sell !

I've brought this issue up and sent the link to the book to several

people that do pleadings... and they are very intrigued. I think you may want to post the link to this book. look at the Table of Contents, its spilt into the Forms of Common Law Actions and then Chapter 4 is the Elements Required in the Declarations. Very Interesting. and all shown by example, case law up to 1914

Thank you for your time, energy, the web site, talkshoe call and all you do.

Ben