Theron Jay Marrsyour Natural Name: I. Law of The Case
Theron Jay Marrsyour Natural Name: I. Law of The Case
Theron Jay Marrsyour Natural Name: I. Law of The Case
BC000000________________
COURT OF RECORD - STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS ARE AND HAVE CAPACITY TO BE
COURTS OF RECORD.
Page 1 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
COURT. The person and suit of the sovereign; the place where the
sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, wherever that may be.
Page 2 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
Gardina v. Board of Registers 48 So. 788, 169 Ala. 155 1909: "There
are two classes of citizens, citizens of the United States and of the
State. And one may be a citizen of the former without being a citizen
of the latter";
"A Sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception
or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there
can be no legal Right as against the authority that makes the law on
which the Right depends." Kawananakoa v. Polyblank, 205 U.S. 349, 353,
27 S. Ct. 526, 527, 51 L. Ed. 834 (1907).
Statutes at Large take precedence over any code, because the code is
an opinion of what the Statutes at Large say; “The Code is only prima
facie evidence of the laws of the United States. 1 U.S.C. § 204 (a).
Where an inconsistency between the United States Code and the Statutes
at Large appears, the Statutes at Large prevail over the Code. Stephan
v. United States, 319 U.S. 423, 426, 63 S.Ct. 1135, 87 L.Ed. 1490
(1943).” Peart v. Motor Vessell Bering Explorer, 373 F.Supp. 927, at
928 (April 12, 1974).
“[1] It is well settled that “the Code cannot prevail over the
Page 3 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
GEOGRAPHIC JURISDICTION
“The term “United States”, when used in a geographic sense, means any
State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, any possession of the
United States, and any waters within the jurisdiction of the United
States.” 6 USC § 101 (17) (A).
"State citizens are the only ones living under free government, whose
rights are incapable of impairment by legislation or judicial
decision." Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 97, 1908
Page 4 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
Page 5 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
His majesty in the eye of the law is always present in all his courts,
though he cannot personally distribute justice. (Fortesc.c.8.
2Inst.186) His judges are the mirror by which the king's image is
reflected. 1 Blackstone's Commentaries, 270, Chapter 7, Section 379.
Page 6 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
a sovereign, Aggrieved Party does not rely on these issues, but may in
another venue is needed:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be
made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be
made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme
Law of the Land; and the Judges in every state shall be bound thereby;
any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary
notwithstanding. [Constitution for the United States of America,
Article VI, Clause 2.]
Section 17. Jury trial in civil cases. In all civil cases the right of
Trial by Jury shall remain inviolate.—
Page 7 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
America, and the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the
land. [California Constitution, Article 3, Sec. 1.]
In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the
public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies
in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's
business....The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to
the agencies which serve them. [California Government Code Section
54950.]
Page 8 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
Page 9 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
and have very limited arrest authority (they can only arrest
other U S Government employees ), and only on 27 CFR issues, for
alcohol, tobacco, and firearms, and 28 CFR issues for criminal
violations of other Federal statutes. Any person who says they
are with the IRS who cannot present a commission as a Special
Agent, and is carrying a firearm should be immediately arrested
for carrying a prohibited weapon under (most state) statutes. No
person with the IRS has any authority to trespass onto private
property without a warrant or court order. U. S. Marshals serve
U.S. District Court orders and warrants. IRS agents who would
enter onto private property as part of a group, and attempt to
seize records, documents, computers, or any property without a
(lawful) court Order of Seizure are violating the 28 CFR 241
laws. Any Texas Peace Officer who is present and allows this
activity can be sued in civil court, and possible criminal
actions charged under violation of the persons civil rights. A
Texas Peace Officer cannot be charged with interfering with a
Federal agent if they order any IRS persons to leave the private
property, and refuse to permit the removal of a Citizens property
by IRS employees. The IRS persons are not Police Officers, and
are attempting to violate the Texas laws and Federal laws. There
can be no obstruction of justice when they are violating the law
in what they are attempting. Threats or intimidation by IRS
agents violate 28 USC 241.
Page 10 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
Page 11 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
merely act as an extension as an agent for the involved agency -- but only in a “ministerial” and
not a “discretionary capacity...” Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579, 583; Keller v. P.E., 261 US
428; F.R.C. v. G.E., 281, U.S. 464.
"...judges who become involved in enforcement of mere statutes (civil or criminal in nature and
otherwise), act as mere "clerks" of the involved agency..." K.C. Davis, ADMIN. LAW, Ch. 1 (CTP.
West's 1965 Ed.)
"It is the accepted rule, not only in state courts, but, of the federal courts as well, that when a
judge is enforcing administrative law they are described as mere 'extensions of the
administrative agency for superior reviewing purposes' as a ministerial clerk for an agency..." 30
Cal 596; 167 Cal 762, and further,
10. These wrongdoer Wrongdoers named herein and those who wish
to join them, each know that all United Nations Clerks
masquerading as Judges have no immunity and are fully liable, in
their personal capacity for their actions
“Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a constitutional right, for they are
deemed to know the law.” Owens v Independence 100 S.C.T. 1398 (Ezra 7:23-26)
“...where any state proceeds against a private individual in a judicial forum it is well settled that
the state, county, municipality, etc. waives any immunity to counters, cross claims and
complaints, by direct or collateral means regarding the matters involved.” Luckenback v. The
Thekla, 295 F 1020, 226 Us 328; Lyders v. Lund, 32 F2d 308;
“When enforcing mere statutes, judges of all courts do not act judicially” (and thus are not
protected by “qualified” or “limited immunity,” - SEE: Owen v. City, 445 U.S. 662; Bothke v.
Terry, 713 F2d 1404) - -
“but merely act as an extension as an agent for the involved agency -- but only in a “ministerial”
and not a “discretionary capacity...” Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579, 583; Keller v. P.E., 261
US 428; F.R.C. v. G.E., 281, U.S. 464.
Immunity for judges does not extend to acts which are clearly outside of their jurisdiction.
Bauers v. Heisel, C.A. N.J. 1966, 361 F.2d 581, Cert. Den. 87 S.Ct. 1367, 386 U.S. 1021, 18
L.Ed. 2d 457 (see also Muller v. Wachtel, D.C.N.Y. 1972, 345 F.Supp. 160; Rhodes v. Houston,
D.C. Nebr. 1962, 202 F.Supp. 624 affirmed 309 F.2d 959, Cert. den 83 St. 724, 372 U.S. 909, 9
L.Ed. 719, Cert. Den 83 S.Ct. 1282, 383 U.S. 971, 16 L.Ed. 2nd 311, Motion denied 285 F.Supp.
546).
“In arriving at our decision in this matter we do not depart in any way from our holding in
Huendling v. Jensen [*300] that the doctrine of judicial immunity extends to courts of limited
Page 12 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
jurisdiction. But, when a minor magistrate acts wholly without jurisdiction, civil liability attaches
for his malicious and corrupt abuse of process and his willful and malicious oppression of any
person under the pretense of acting in his official capacity. See Huendling v. Jensen, 168
N.W.2d at 749 and authorities cited.”188 N.W.2d 294; 1971 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 863; 64 A.L.R.3d
1242, and further,
11. These Wrongdoers named herein each know that when Judges
become United Nations Clerks, everything they do is a fraud,
because they have said hundreds of times that they must have “the
appearance of justice” which means the color of justice,
“Colour of Law – Mere semblance of a legal right. An action done under colour of law is one
done with the apparent authority of law but actually in contravention of law.” Barron’s Canadian
Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 51 [emphasis added]
"Color" means "An appearance, semblance, or simulacrum, as distinguished from that which is
real. A prima facia or apparent right. Hence, a deceptive appearance, a plausible, assumed
exterior, concealing a lack of reality; a disguise or pretext. See also colorable." Black's Law
Dictionary, 5th Edition, on page 240. [emphasis added]
“Colour, color. Signifies a probable plea, but which is in fact false…” Tomlin’s Law Dictionary
1835, Volume 1
which is a fraud, and they even dismiss court cases that “are not
colorable enough”, which means there is not enough fraud in the
pleadings, and everything they do is a fraud and a lie, which is
further proof their seditious conspiracy as described herein, and
further,
12. These Wrongdoers named herein each know that all United
Nations Clerks masquerading as Judges are holding a kangaroo
court;
“Kangaroo court. Term descriptive of a sham legal proceeding in which a person's rights are
totally disregarded and in which the result is a foregone conclusion because of the bias of the
court or other tribunal.” Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, page 868,
Page 13 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
13. These Wrongdoers named herein each know that all United
Nations Clerks masquerading as Judges are using their Uniform
Commercial Code which is controlled and regulated by their
UNIDROIT Treaty (International Institute for the Unification of
Private Law), which the United States, Inc., has been a signatory
to for over 30 years, which is unconstitutional, because the
Treaty power can ONLY be used externally,
“but Madison insisted that just “because this power is given to Congress,” it did not follow that
the Treaty Power was “absolute and unlimited.” The President and the Senate lacked the power
“to dismember the empire,” for example, because “[t]he exercise of the power must be
consistent with the object of the delegation.” “The object of treaties,” in Madison’s oft-repeated
formulation, “is the regulation of intercourse with foreign nations, and is external.” Bond v United
States 572 US ____ (2014) case number 12-158 [emphasis added]
“Today, it is enough to highlight some of the structural and historical evidence suggesting that
the Treaty Power can be used to arrange intercourse with other nations, but not to regulate
purely domestic affairs.” Bond v United States 572 US ____ (2014) case number 12-158
[emphasis added]
“The government of the United States . . . is one of limited powers. It can exercise authority over
no subjects, except those which have been delegated to it. Congress cannot, by legislation,
enlarge the federal jurisdiction, nor can it be enlarged under the treaty-making power” Mayor of
New Orleans v. United States, 10 Pet. 662, 736 [emphasis added]
and all United Nations Clerks masquerading as Judges know that they
have no obligation of obey an unconstitutional law
“No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." 16th
American Jurisprudence 2d, Section 177 late 2nd, Section 256
Page 14 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
14. These Wrongdoers named herein each know that all United
Nations Clerks masquerading as Judges are NOT representing the
government
“An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government”.
Brookfield Const. Co. v. Stewart, 284 F. Supp. 94.
15. These Wrongdoers named herein each know that all United
Nations Clerks masquerading as Judges are NOT competent to do
anything judicial, and if they attempt to do anything judicial
like issue warrants, or subpoenas, or anything else judicial, it
is a nullity, therefore the Warrant that they were operating in
this case was a fraud and a nullity
"Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their
acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities" Burns v. Sup., Ct., SF, 140
Cal. 1, and further,
"It is one of the fundamental maxims of the common law that ignorance of the law excuses no
one." Daniels v. Dean (1905), 2 C.A. 421, 84 P. 332.
“Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a constitutional right, for they are
deemed to know the law.” Owens v Independence 100 S.C.T. 1398.
Page 15 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
“A “citizen of the United States” is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-
beneficiary of the PCT (Public Charitable Trust), the constructive, cestui que trust of US Inc.
under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc.” Congressional
Record, June 13 1967, pp. 15641-15646
". . . (E)very taxpayer is a cestui qui trust having sufficient interest in the preventing abuse of the
trust to be recognized in the field of this court's prerogative jurisdiction . .” In Re Bolens (1912),
135 N.W. 164, and further,
3. These Wrongdoers named herein each know that under their Federal
codes, anyone who has a Social Security Number is a “government
employee”, and the Aggrieved Party is NOT a government employee by any
express contract known,
“(13) the term “Federal personnel” means officers and employees of the Government of the
United States, members of the uniformed services (including members of the Reserve
Components), individuals entitled to receive immediate or deferred retirement benefits under
any retirement program of the Government of the United States (including survivor benefits).” 5
USC § 552a.(a)(13) [emphasis added]
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” Section 1, 14th Amendment
Page 16 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
[emphasis added]
"Chap. LXXI. - An Act prescribing the form of the enacting and resolving Clauses of Acts and
Resolutions of Congress, and Rules of construction therefore." which was approved on Feb 25,
1871, in Volume 16, Forty-First Congress, Session III, under Sec. 2., at 16 Stat. 431, says;
"And be it further enacted that in all Acts hereinafter passed…; and the word "person" may
extend and be applied to bodies politic and corporate…", [emphasis added]
“Person The term “person” shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust,
estate, partnership, association, company or corporation.” 26 USC 7701 (a) (1)
“(2) the term “individual” means a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for
permanent residence;” 5 USC § 552a.(a)(2)
Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind
only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither
actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The
legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc.
can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts
between them. Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters 3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54, (1795),
"...it might be correctly said that there is no such thing as a citizen of the United States. ..... A
citizen of any one of the States of the Union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United
States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing." Ex Parte Frank Knowles, 5
Cal. Rep. 300
"After the adoption of the 14th Amendment, a bill which became the first Civil Rights Act was
introduced in the 39th Congress, the major purpose of which was to secure to the recently freed
Negroes all the civil rights secured to white men... (N)one other than citizens of the United
States were within the provisions of the Act.” Hague v. C. I. O., 307 U. S. 496, 509. [emphasis
added]
Page 17 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
"Therefore, the U.S. citizens [citizens of the District of Columbia] residing in one of the states of
the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an "individual
entity." Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773.
"...the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all
the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal constitution against the powers
of the Federal government." Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 455;
"The only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to residence within the
territorial boundaries of the United States," US vs. Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957, and further,
4. All of these Wrongdoers named herein each know that the Aggrieved
Party is a State citizen and NOT assuming to be a US citizen, which
again indicates their acts exceeded jurisdiction,
“No white person born within the limits of the United States and subject to their jurisdiction, or
born without those limits and subsequently naturalized under their laws, owes his status of
citizenship to the recent amendments to the Federal Constitution.” Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43
Cal 43.
"...that there was a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of the states, which were
distinct from each other, depending upon different characteristics and circumstances in the
individual; that it was only privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States that
were placed by the amendment under the protection of the Federal Constitution, and that the
privileges and immunities of a citizen of a state, whatever they might be, were not intended to
have any additional protection by the paragraph in question, but they must rest for their security
and protection where they have heretofore rested." Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 451
"One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States. Thomasson v State,
15 Ind. 449; Cory v Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R. 738); McCarthy v. Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re
Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443." McDonel v State, 90 Ind. Rep. 320 at pg 323;
"Privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects only those rights
peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; it does not protect those rights which
relate to state citizenship. 14,§ 1."
Jones v Temmer, 829 F.Supp. 1226 (D.Colo. 1993),
Page 18 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
"And while the Fourteenth Amendment does not create a national citizenship, it has the effect of
making that citizenship "paramount and dominant" instead of "derivative and dependent" upon
state citizenship." Colgate v Harvey 296 US 404 at p 427
“Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States,
ratified in 1868, creates or at least recognizes for the first time a citizenship of the United States,
as distinct from that of the states;”
and State citizens are talked about in the Constitution for the United
States of America, which says;
“The citizens of each State [State Citizens] shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of
citizens in the several States [US citizens].” Constitution for the United States of America, Article
IV, § 2, Clause 1, [emphasis added] 1 Stat. 18, and,
“citizens in the several states” as described in the Constitution for the United States of America,
Article IV, § 2, Clause 1, are US citizens, as differentiated from State citizens as described by
“citizens of each State”, and the Petitioner is a State citizen as described in the Northwest
Ordinance;
“An Ordinance for the government of the Territory of the United States north-west of the river
Ohio.” which was “Done by the United States in Congress assembled, the thirteenth day of July,
in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, and of their sovereignty,
and independence the twelfth.”, at 1 Stat. 51.,
Page 19 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
“The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the
different States in this Union, the free inhabitants of each of these States, [State Citizens]
paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and
immunities of free citizens in the several States [US citizens]; and the people of each State
[State citizens] shall have free ingress and regress to and from any other State,....” Articles of
Confederation, Article 4. § 1., [emphasis added], at 1 Stat. 4,
“2. The requirement of payment for such licenses is only a mode of imposing taxes on the
licensed business, and the prohibition, under penalties, against carrying on the business without
license is only a mode of enforcing the payment of such taxes. 5. The recognition by the acts of
Congress of the power and right of the states to tax, control, or regulate any business carried
on within its limits is entirely consistent with an intention on the part of Congress to tax such
business for national purposes.” License Tax Cases 72 U.S. (5 Wall.) 462 (1866), and further,
6. These Wrongdoers named herein each know that licenses and taxes
work together
“License, contracts, is a right given by some competent authority to do an act, which without
such authority would be illegal. The instrument or writing which secures this right is also called a
license. Vide Ayl.Parerg. 353; 15 Vin.Ab 92; Ang. Wat. Co. 61, 85. A license is express or
implied. An express license is one in which in direct terms authorizes the performance of a
certain act; as a license to keep a tavern by public authority. An implied license is one which
Page 20 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
though not expressly given, may be presumed from the acts of the party having the right to give
it.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 1843 Edition, Volume 2, page 53 [emphasis added],
and they are attempting to impose one of their quasi contracts on the
Aggrieved Party
"Both in Roman and English law there are certain obligations which were not in truth
contractual, but which the law treats as IF they were. They are contractual in law, but not in
fact, being the subject-matter of a FICTITIOUS extension of the sphere of contract to cover
obligations which do not in reality fall within it." Salmond, Salmond on Jurisprudence, p. 642
(9th Edition, 1937, Sweet & Maxwell, Ltd. England).
"A quasi contractual action presupposes acceptance and retention of a benefit by one party with
full appreciation of the facts, under circumstances making it inequitable for him to retain the
benefit without payment of its reasonable value." Major-Blakeney Co. v. Jenkins (1953), 121
C.A.2d 325, 263 P.2d 655, hear den.; Townsend Pierson, Inc. v. Holly-Coleman Co. (1960), 178
C.A.2d 373, 2 Cal. Rptr. 812.
"Constructive/quasi contracts are based solely upon a legal fiction or fiction of law." Hill v.
Waxberg, 237 F.2d 936, [emphasis added]
and they are using their color of law statutes to facilitate the
violation of the Demandant’s rights,
"...it becomes essential to distinguish between what is and what is not "income," according to
truth and substance without regard to form. Congress cannot, by any definition it may adopt,
conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation, alter the Constitution, from which it derives its
power to legislate, and which within those limitations alone, that power can be unlawfully
Page 21 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
exercised... [Income is] Derived -- from -- capital -- the -- gain -- derived -- from -- capital, etc.
Here we have the essential matter -- not gain accruing to capital, not a growth or increment of
value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value ... severed from
the capital however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived," that is received or
drawn by the recipient for his separate use, benefit and disposal -- that is the income derived
from property. Nothing else answers the description...." [emphasis is in the original] Eisner v
Macomber, 252 U.S. 189
And they have no right to tax or assume a duty to statutes on the Aggrieved Party …
"The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The
corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but
the individuals' rights to live and own property are natural rights for the enjoyment of which an
excise cannot be imposed.“ Redfield v. Fisher, 292 P. 813, 135 Or. 180, 294 P.461, 73 A.L.R.
721 (1931),
"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of
constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946
"If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee
and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity."
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham Alabama, 373 US 262,
and they are compelling the use of their Federal Reserve Notes to
setoff their tax, and they have no authority to compel the use of
their private money system that is intended for internal use of the
government ONLY, thus a private set off instrument was offered and not
refused within the time frame required, thus indicating acceptance,
Page 22 of 23
Theron Jay MarrsYour Natural NameEXHIBIT “A”Case No. BC000000________________
“Sec. 15. As used in this Act the term “United States” means the Government of the United
States…the term “currency of the United States” means currency which is legal tender in the
United States, and includes United States notes,…Federal Reserve Notes…”
“Sec. 16. The right to alter, amend or repeal this Act is hereby expressly reserved…”
“Sec. 17. All Acts and parts of Acts inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act are hereby
repealed.” Gold Reserve Act of 1934, 48 Stat. 337,
SUMMARY
The singular includes the plural and the plural the singular.
The present tense includes the past and future tenses; and
the future, the present.
Page 23 of 23