Time: Sat Mar 29 07:18:50 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA05694
for [address in tool bar]; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 06:46:13 -0700 (MST)
Delivered-To: liberty-and-justice-outgoing@majordomo.pobox.com
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 07:14:30 -0800
To: liberty-and-justice@pobox.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: L&J: IRC 7851(a)(6)(A) [correction]
><snip>
>
>> Those of you who are in the know, will realize that
>> I have selected this particular statute -- 7851(a)(6)(A) --
>> for a very important reason. It reads in pertinent part:
>>
>> "General rule. The provisions of subtitle F shall
>> take effect on the day after the date of enactment
>> of the title ...."
>>
>> The term "title" here refers to Titles 1 thru 50.
Do you agree with this statement, or
do you not agree with this statement?
Can you back up your definition, if not?
>
>That's strange, because my copy that I got from The
>United States Code online reads, "...this title ...."
>NOT "...the title ...." If you have a hard copy that
>says 'the' then I'd believe it. Makes a BIG difference.
If you are trying to argue that "title"
here means something other than one of
the categories of United States Codes
(Title 1, Title 26, etc.), what is your
authority for this definition? The term
"title" is not defined in 7701(a) et seq.
See also the qualifier at the start of
section 7701: "Where not otherwise distinctly
expressed or manifestly incompatible with the
intent thereof ...." Did I quote it okay?
A term which has a fluctuating meaning must
be defined "for purposes of this section,"
or some comparable language, which confines
the definition to a given scope. Please provide
a specific statutory definition of "title" in
the IRC, and/or a court case which has defined
it as something other than _Title_ 26.
Until then, doubt should be resolved in favor of
those upon whom the tax is sought to be laid.
But, then, the tax is not sought to be laid upon
Citizens of Arizona state, so maybe we should
resolve this in favor of your construction,
provided that YOU are one of those upon whom
the tax is sought to be laid. Are you? :)
I am standing by.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
========================================================================
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. : Counselor at Law, federal witness
email: [address in tool bar] : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU
web site: http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
========================================================================
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with
"unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject)
Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman <whig@pobox.com>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail