:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

We hope you enjoy your experience here.

We hold free conference calls every Monday through Thursday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time).
Call: (857) 232-0158; use the Conference Access Code: 110045.

Join us on, and invite your friends to, our conference calls;

Use this Forum to contact Team Law;
use this link for more: contact information.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:

State Corporations

This forum is for topics not listed below.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

BClr

State Corporations

Postby BClr » Thursday June 16th, 2005 8:09 am MDT

I called the Secretary of State of Texas recently to discuss Corp Texas. The Corporations Department said Texas is not a corporation. Then I talked with the Legal Department. When I told the gentleman that states had incorporated between 1962 and 1968, he appear shocked that such a thing could occur. He said individual corporations have been created only to serve specific needs of government. This, of course is not the same. The question is… where do states incorporate? DC? Home state? We are looking for the articles of incorporation. If states are sub-corps of Corp US, where is the documentation on that? Is it true that there must be a law from the state legislature to authorize incorporation? Thanks.

Where is Corp US incorporated?

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1569
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Postby Admin » Saturday June 18th, 2005 12:28 am MDT

Hello BClr
Whether some person answering the phone in some STATE OF TEXAS office knows that it is a corporation or not has no bearing on anything. The fact remains, that entity is not the original jurisdiction State of the name "Republic of Texas". We are not going to address the details of that incorporation here, because that response would take more time than we have to respond here. It is not difficult to find court cases recognizing the corporate nature of the Corp. State. When you talked to the legal dept. rep. it sounds like their response was reasonably accurate though off point. It is irrelevant to the Corp. State’s formation that they also create separate individual corporations for whatever needs it may express. Still, the response is off point. When they reference such, they are likely relating to something that was created more in the general market place as most standard business incorporations are formed. That is neither what most states did nor what Corp. U.S. did.
:co: It is no great surprise that attorneys educated in a system designed to support its own mythology would teach its attorneys that which would support their myths. It is also no surprise that attorneys are taught to practice the art of misdirection and deception. This being how they are taught it is no great surprise that some of them may have been deceived.
BClr wrote:where do states incorporate? DC? Home state?
There is no specific place where such formations are made; though the pattern for such creations was exemplified by the United States of America’s original jurisdiction Congress when they formed their own private corporation of the name District of Columbia in their District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871. The first paragraph states,
Fourty-First Congress Sess.III, Ch.62 wrote:Be it enacted…That…the District of Columbia be…created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes…and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation
which proves the fact that Congress created the corporation. It does not prove the fact that the corporation was separate from the actual constitutionally set government itself as it was originally constituted. Most attorneys respond to this issue with the allegation that this was simply the municipal incorporation of the government. The problem with that theory is that the municipality was formally incorporated in its District of Columbia Organization Act (U.S. Feb. 27, 1801, c.15, 2 Stat. 103) which fact is confirmed by many United States Supreme Court cases. In law it is impossible to have two separate original acts of organization or incorporation. Following its original organizational act, there was no reformation act or act ending the original incorporation of the District of Columbia between that time and the time when the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 was passed and ratified; which means, they were two separate acts organizing two distinctly different things. Further, no one contested this unprecedented construct and the deliberations in Congress indicated the necessity of setting such a body in place in view of the aftermath of the Civil War. The historical facts and evidence prove beyond a shadow of doubt that this new private corporation was formed under and in accord with the 1863 instituted war powers of martial law by its creators Congress and President Lincoln.

Therefore, the facts indicate the answer to your question in the case of the District of Columbia is, “in Congress”; and, one may extrapolate that when investigating the same matter for each individual Corp. State, the answer would be in the original jurisdiction state legislature.
BClr wrote:We are looking for the articles of incorporation. If states are sub-corps of Corp US, where is the documentation on that?
As we already showed, these entities did not do what most businesses do, that is form “Articles of Incorporation”; why should they? The formers were the actual original jurisdiction States themselves in their State Legislatures. They had no reason to form such a business document. They simply legislated the Corp. States into existence, because that is exactly what Legislatures do. We have found most such incorporations either in acts (like Colorado’s Administrative Organization Act of 1968, which was limitedly covered in our Independence Day article in the WARN newsletter Vol. 1 Issue 1) or in a new constitutions generated during that period (1962-1972).
BClr wrote:If states are sub-corps of Corp US, where is the documentation on that?
Again, one would not expect States to act like common businesses in such matters, so to discover this fact one must follow the funds and the controls executed over the controlled. In that search you will find many supporting documents showing the relationship. For example, most people will remember the 55 mph nationwide speed limit. It was controlled by offering and restricting Corp. U.S. funds from supporting Corp. State activities. A study of the Annual State Governors Conference in Lexington, Kentucky will also reveal these controls and their effect on the Corp. States.

At this point, the answer to your last question seems a bit obvious and interestingly verifies what we just related regarding conventional business documents of incorporation having no need when the legislature is doing the job itself:
BClr wrote:Is it true that there must be a law from the state legislature to authorize incorporation?
Obviously, the State Legislatures did legislate the Corp. State creation, and that has nothing to do with how common business corporations are formed. What happens there is the Corp. State Legislature grants itself authority to oversee that which it authorizes the creation of in commerce, then under such acts they oversee that the acts, business dealings and contracts of such business entities. Again, it seems more than obvious that the Corp. State entities operate at a different level than that which they create or authorize the creation of.

We hope this information is helpful to you. :thumbright:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Virginia Gent
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 7
Joined: Friday October 9th, 2009 11:00 pm MDT

Re: State Corporations

Postby Virginia Gent » Thursday December 10th, 2009 2:09 am MST

I have a question or two about this as well. I have been searching long for Virginia's documents showing their formation of a corporation. However, I noticed you said that some states did it by way of a new Constitution between the years of 1962-1972. Virginia redid our Constitution in 1971, having it ratified in 1972. So my question, or one of them is, in order to pass a new Constitution, they must first repeal the one in play correct? I ask because at the end of our Constitution here, there is a section "SCHEDULE" where every sub-section in it refers to it as the "Revised Constitution" and then in Section 5, it states:
"The General Assembly shall be vested with all the powers, charged with all the duties, and subject to all the limitations prescribed by this Constitution except that this session shall continue as long as may be necessary; that the salary and allowances of members shall not be limited by Section 46 of the Constitution of 1902 as amended and that effective date limitation of Section 53 of the Constitution of 1902 as amended shall not be operative."

Why would they mention the Constitution of 1902? This "Revised" Constitution is suppose to supersede that one, is it not? My guess is because the Constitution of 1902 is still in play (Thus proving Corp. VIRGINIA is in existence). So could it be possible that the Constitution of 1902 was never repealed and that the Constitution of 1972 is, thus, the Charter for the creation of THE STATE OF VIRGINIA? I base this off of the Organic Act of 1871 creating Corp. US as they never repealed the Organic Act of 1801.

I ask this because Team Law said: "To be sure you are right it is always wise to confirm all information from at least two or three competent sources before acting upon it." so I am asking a competent source ... Team Law :D
"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
- Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1569
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: State Corporations

Postby Admin » Thursday December 10th, 2009 2:38 pm MST

:h: Virginia Gent:
If the State was simply forming a new corporation to handle the business needs of the State, then the answer to your first question is: “No.” We see no reason why an original jurisdiction State would need to do anything at all to its Constitution in order to form a private corporation to carry out their business needs. If they followed the pattern of creating that new corporation with a charter document like a “Constitution”, then that Constitution would be an organic (original) act; having no predecessor document. That constitution would simply be the document that formed the corporation; accordingly, it would have no effect on the State’s Constitution.

However, if the State would have been amending its original jurisdiction constitution, then the answer to your question is: “Yes.” You are correct; the State would have had to provided some form of instrument for the change, like an “Amendment in the Entirety” or a Repeal followed by the placement of the new constitution.

Your guess is correct. The original jurisdiction constitution remains in full force and effect over the actual State government; and, the new corporate state constitution controls only the corporate state.

Finally, you stated that you are asking this question of Team Law as if we were a source for confirming historical facts. However, we have from the beginning made it clear that our purpose is to help people awaken to the truth and learn how to self-educate so that they can go to original sources to confirm the truth of what they learn. Accordingly, though we can help our beneficiaries learn how to confirm what they learn, we are still a third party source for history and law; thus, though we are a firsthand source for learning how to self-educate, the only firsthand sources for confirming law and history are the law and the history itself.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.


Return to “Miscellaneous Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest