Time: Sun Mar 09 04:14:09 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA12118;
Sat, 8 Mar 1997 20:29:06 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 03:31:40 -0800
To: "Richard C. Green" <patriotlad@WorldNet.att.net>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Missing 13th Amendment
References: <3.0.1.16.19970308093053.3817bc60@mailhost.primenet.com>
Dear Richard,
Thank you for this terrific letter.
I have just sent you an electronic
copy of Dyett v. Turner. Begin reading
where "General Lee had surrendered ...."
This is the cat's meow concerning the
so-called 14th amendment. I will send
you the rest of the important historical
cites on the failed ratification of this
botched amendment.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
At 07:56 PM 3/8/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Mr. Mitchell:
>
>Sir -- I have examined a copy of the "Laws ..." published by Bioren and
>Duane in 1815, in the original, at Yale's Beinecke library. There is a
>disclaimer in the early part of the manuscript, though, which is
>replicated in the Gaunt reprint of 1989. That book is also in the Yale
>Law Library.
>
>Your hands-on experience with the Colorado edition is the aspect that
>most intrigues me. David Dodge and Brian March have, to my
>satisfaction, demonstrated that this Amendment was properly ratified not
>later than March of 1819, when Virginia took it up and passed it. The
>fact that Virginia chose to publish a special edition of its revised
>laws containing the U.S. Constitution (with the T.O.N. Amendment listed
>as Article 13 and correct and proper in all regards), and apparently did
>not "inform" the Secretary of State at that time, has led to the endless
>wrangling over this section, since. The mainline legal publishers, all
>private, in Philadelphia and Boston, apparently began conspiring to
>suppress this section around 1828. But the huge number of State and
>Territorial editions of the organic laws, with the Constitution, and the
>Title of Nobility Amendment included, leads me to believe that we the
>people "have been had." Jol Silversmith of Harvard argues vigorously
>against this section being ratified and attacks anyone who counters his
>arguments as "an extremist" or a right-wing radical. He apparently has
>some measure of prestige in his circle of Quislings and fakirs.
>
>The literature of that era, including essays and orations given to
>patriotic societies or college classes, is shot through with the concern
>of those men over pure democracy and the virtues of republicanism and
>limited self-government. There was a genuine fear of Bonapartism, with
>special regard for the Emperor's ability to mint new Kings and Princes
>most anywhere he went. Louisiana was admitted to the union more out of
>regard for its commercial prospects than for its embedded, French-style
>aristocracy. What I have read of Alabama's history indicates to me that
>it could have easily been set up as a "free state," had the anti-banker
>pioneer element prevailed there, but the cotton traders won the day.
>
>I have a degree in American History from Yale. In learning the truth
>about this missing and suppressed Amendment, I have discovered how
>little I really know of my country and its history, and that angers me
>greatly. I am engaged in fighting for this Amendment as a way of
>purging myself of years of Marxist lies and historical obfuscations.
>
>God bless all those who would fight to restore our Constitution, in the
>correct and proper version represented by the Colorado Territory, 1868.
>I will base all my judgements on the Constitution, from now on, using it
>as a benchmark. I am very interested in arguing that the so-called
>Fourteenth Amendment is actually a "contested" section, as the 1876
>Territory of Wyoming edition omitted that section, while publishing the
>original Thirteenth, the anti-slavery "13th" as Fourteenth, and the
>anti-slavery Fifteenth as the Fifteenth. The Fourteenth was not
>recognized at all, for reasons that remain obscure. By 1890 Wyoming had
>reformed its publications, and was "in line." But Colorado came into
>the union (1876) with the original Thirteenth still on its books (the
>1868 organic laws).
>
>Richard C. Green
>
>
========================================================================
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
========================================================================
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail