When the Sheriff of Bristol County, Massachusetts established a program to charge prisoners for their custody, the inmates sued the Sheriff in, Richard Souza & others v. Sheriff of Bristol County, Supreme Judicial Court-10508 January 05, 2010. In deciding against the Sheriff, the court referred to an old volume that described the character and origin of the office of sheriff.
The office of the sheriff is one of considerable antiquity. The origin and earliest duties of the office is set forth in L.E. Hitchcock, Powers and Duties of Sheriffs, Constables, Tax Collectors, and Other Officers in the New England States § 4 (2d ed.1904), as follows:
“The office of Sheriff dates back to the early days of English history. Indeed it is sometimes claimed that it became a part of the government of England from the Roman law. As the people of England came gradually under one government the territory became divided, more or less arbitrarily, into counties; over each of which was placed an Earl, or Alderman; and this Earl, or Alderman, was supposed to be the ruler-subject of course to the King-over his county. But this Earl, from the privileges which he possessed and the duties which he was under in reference to his attendance upon the King, gradually ceased to exercise his powers himself, and they were in time delegated to an under-officer, called, in the Roman law, Vicecomes; in the Saxon tongue, Shire-reeve; or in the more modern terms, Sheriff. At first this under-officer, or Sheriff, was to administer the affairs of the county as the representative of the Earl; but in time his duties became more defined, and seem to have been fourfold,-as a Judge, as a Keeper of the Peace, as a Ministerial Officer, and as the King’s Bailiff.
“First, as a Judge. He held court and determined causes between parties wherein the value in dispute was not more than forty shillings, and also heard certain other civil causes. He was also the Judge of certain elections, and of the qualifications of voters.
“Second, as the Keeper of the Peace. Both by common consent and by special commission he became the first man in the county, and superior to all others while he continued in office. He had authority to apprehend persons for the commission of crimes or for breach of the peace, and it was his duty also to defend the county against all enemies of the King, and for this purpose he had power to summon all the people of the county to attend him. This summons every person over fifteen years old and not a peer was bound to obey upon warning.
“Third, as a Ministerial Officer. He was bound to execute all processes issuing from the King’s courts of justice. In the commencement of civil proceedings he had power to serve the writ, arrest and take bail, and, when the cause came to trial, to summon and return the Jury, and after the judgment to see that the same was carried into effect. In criminal matters, he had authority to arrest and imprison, to return the Jury, to have custody of the delinquent, and to execute the sentence.
“Fourth, as the King’s Bailiff. He was required to see that the rights of the King were preserved in his county, or bailiwick.”
All the sheriff’s power’s vanished when King George III was no longer the government in America.
The English common law didn’t vanish because the common law is firmly and permanently imbedded in the English language.
The word “Sheriff” survived the passing of the king although the sheriff was as much a part of the nobility as the king and queen.
The ghost of sheriffs past has been putting families out of their homes for far too long. A little learning is all it takes to put the sheriff in his place and out of yours. Enroll. Become a serious Student of the law and government. Ask me how at firstname.lastname@example.org
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Ask a sheriff to describe the origin of his territorial jurisdiction and he will tell you the entire county has always been his territory, but if you ask him about any federal property located within that county’s perimeter and he will deny any jurisdiction over that land. The States of the second Union the United States identify the counties within a State by name and draw boundaries called county lines, by metes and bounds. None of the States identify or describe the territory within the county lines as federal lands owned by the United States of America. Where can the legal division of legislative power between State and federal government be found?
Title 1, Section 2 of the United States Code defines a county as, “The word ‘county’ includes a parish, or any other equivalent subdivision of a State or Territory of the United States.” The phrase “of the United States” means belonging to the United States of America, the Confederacy. States of the 50 State Union must accept the federal definition of a county as consisting of all the territory belonging to the United States of America, as the Constitution of the United States and the laws made pursuant to that Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Upon close examination, all State and federal written legislation will be found to be applicable only to government and to lands owned by the United States of America.
The Congress of the United States is recognized as having complete legislative power over lands owned by the United States of America and, as for the States, there is the popular belief that the State legislatures somehow get legislative power from the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of September 17, 1787.
The Posts on this site have explained in detail that the legislative power over the lands owned by the United States of America is derived from the proprietary power every owner possesses over property. All that proprietary power is granted by the first nine ratifying States of the United States of America. When all thirteen have ratified the Constitution of September 17, 1787
All government legislative power in America is derived from the proprietary power over lands owned by the “United States,” the Confederacy, the United States of America.
Before the Constitution of September 17, 1787 was ratified by nine States of the Confederacy, the United States of America, English common law, without the procedural and administrative power of the English monarchy, was the law in America. The sheriff was the elected common law officer, who was popularly recognized to have the power to assemble common law juries.
After the Constitution of September 17, 1787 was ratified by nine States of the United States of America, the States of the new Union, the United States, began the process of replacing the procedural and administrative power of the former English monarchy with legislated procedural law.
This is, in a very simplified form, how the territorial jurisdiction of the sheriff is limited to the lands owned by the United States of America within the county lines. Does the county sheriff know the territorial limitations of his or her office? Can you explain to the sheriff, why your property is not within his territorial jurisdiction? If you can’t, you need to enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government. Contact me at email@example.com for enrollment information.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
The Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 did more than sever the political bands that had connected Americans with Great Britain, the mother country. Independence freed men and women in America from all government not just the British King George III.
The English common law was not something they could get rid of even if they wanted. The English common law is embedded in the language itself. The administration of the common law was not automatic, because all government power was exercised through the king.
The king controlled justice by controlling the various writs that enabled the county sheriffs to enforce common law judgments.
Today, county sheriffs enforce court orders by a writ system that causes everyone to believe the English common law is still part of the written law system. Use of the writs of possession and replevin, for example, is just a ploy to fool the legal profession that somehow English common law and written law are united.
English common law and written law are like oil and water immiscible. The government’s written law has just appropriated the common law writ nomenclature for a seamless transition from freedom to what we have today—complete government control.
Writs with funny names do not mean justice. Writs are no more than court orders to a sheriff limited to the territory owned by the United States of America. To get the whole story, enroll in the Basic Course in Law and Government, by contacting me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
In “merrie olde England,” the sheriff enforced the English common law through the “no writ, no right no remedy” idea of civil procedure. The common law belonged to the people, but to get your jury verdict satisfied you had to have the proper writ issued by one of the king’s judges.
The sheriff in England got his power not from the people, for they had none to give, but from the sovereign, the king.
In America, when the power of the English King George III, the power of the local sheriff also vanished, “no writ, no right, no remedy.”
In the United States, that is the lands owned by the United States of America, all sheriffs obtain their power through the President of the United States of America and President of the United States.
As for foreclosure, there was none under common law, so how could a sheriff act to evict a homeowner, if there was no such writ.
Even if you have not received a notice of default you want to tell everyone about what you know about the county sheriff. Don’t think you know enough? Contact me to enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government: email@example.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
There widespread belief is that written law applies to the land under your house, so it is commonly believed that both the judicial and non-judicial foreclosure processes may be brought against you and your home. Unless you live in Louisiana, the English common law is the law, so the easiest way to avoid the severest consequence of foreclosure is to limit law enforcement to its lawful territorial jurisdiction.
President of the United States of America and President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama, who was speaking about law enforcement, as President of the United States, said about a year ago, they “acted stupidly,” in regard to the arrest of Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates at his home by a Cambridge Police officer, because law enforcement is limited to land owned by the United States of America. President of the United States Obama knew Professor Gates could not be arrested at his home, because the Cambridge police lacked territorial jurisdiction. This information couldn’t get out ,so a diversion was created by the White House.
You won’t be having a “beer summit” with the local sheriff, but if you do an investigation of his or her authority you will confirm that it is limited to the land owned by the United States of America.
Unless your home is in a national forest, no sheriff has the authority to put you off your home. Do they “act stupidly”? They sure do, but you shouldn’t. Enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government by contacting me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
The common law is so named because it is so much a part of the community that is also part of the oral language. Do not fall for the Wikipedia/government propaganda that the common law was made by judges. English common law had a history heavily influenced by the English monarchy’s administration of all legal matters in England, which accounts for the misconception that judges royally appointed made the common law. If an act is so detrimental to the wellbeing of a community, it will be designated a crime and it will be given a name. The people made an act a crime by giving it a name. Similarly, merchants created contract law by custom and usage of the English language to fashion valid agreements.
The common law crimes were named long before the first colonists brought the English language and English common law to America. Common law has continued to be the unwritten law in America, even as the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 announced the dissolution of the Political Bands, which once connected America with Great Britain.
Modern legal education has bastardized the teaching of law into an examination of the quirks of the judge’s mind rather than the proper separation of law into what is written and unwritten law. Any student of the law must decide at the onset of his or her education, if a full examination of written and unwritten law will be made or if the student will follow the herd and examine only the law made pursuant to the Constitution of the United States.
You can start your common law education by looking in the a’s of any dictionary to find “abduction,” “arson” and “assault.” Exhausting the a’s the student can go on to the b’s and then all the way to the end of the dictionary. For the student in a hurry to learn the common law, I recommend the index to any book on the common law.
The dictionary approach to learning basic law teaches the student that law has a very sensible and universal basis and what it isn’t basic and sensible is written law. I teach my Students how to confine written law to government and the land owned by the United States of America. To become one of those Students, contact me at email@example.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
According to Glenn Beck, he never met a Founding Father he didn’t like. Beck gushes over these men like school girls swoon over the latest music celebrity. Beck may never end his love affair with these bewigged silk stockinged part time citizen statesmen. We, however, can take them exactly for what they were savvy men of business.
As leaders of American commerce, the so-called Founding Fathers hitched or rigged what passed for government in America to the rising star of American business enterprise, by taking the United States of America public. The assets of the United States of America were incorporated in the United States Inc. All went well until government started to be the rising star and that proved to be quite a drag, since it is a dead or dying star going nowhere but down.
The Constitution of September 17, 1787 was hyped to Americans as a panacea for the kind of economic downturn we would call a recession. Such recessions are part of the business cycle, but now they are the basis for governmental intervention. Up to the time of the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, the government of the United States of America was as close as any government has come to being libertarian then George Washington found himself leading the secret Constitutional Convention of May 25, 1787.
The official story of the historians who work at the Library built by Congress is that the Constitution of the United States replaced the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 on March 4, 1789, the date the Congress of the United States first convened. No other historian disagrees with the historians at the Library of Congress. No attorney I know has ever read the Articles of Confederation, so they would not know why the Articles of Confederation were replaced and not repealed.
The hype has always been that the Articles of Confederation were repealed, but that lie had to be modified because the Articles are still part of the four Organic Laws. The Articles formed a Confederacy of sovereign, free and independent States so the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 wouldn’t do for the United States, which were not sovereign, free or independent.
The Articles of Confederation were replaced by the Constitution of the United States, because the Union of United States is much less than the United States of America and that’s not hype.
Veneration of the Founding Fathers violates the principle of not elevating men above law. With the Founding Fathers out of the way of our research and investigation, we can reconstruct the crime scene, when the smartest men in the Constitutional Convention ended freedom in America. Glenn Beck can’t teach you what he doesn’t know. This is the only place in the world where you can learn the truth about law and government came to be what they are. To become a Student contact me, for a good laugh watch or listen to Glenn Beck.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
George Washington was elected President of the United States of America on February 4, 1789, by Article II Section 1 Clause 2 Electors, who are today known collectively as the Electoral College. Article II Section 1 Clause 1 of the Constitution of September 17, 1787 vests the executive Power in “a President of the United States of America.” George Washington took the oral oath to the Office of President of the United States on April 30, 1789.
Article I Section 1 vests “All legislative Powers herein granted” in “a Congress of United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Article I Section 7 imposes legislative duties on the President of the United States, making him an employee.
George Washington’s solution to combining executive and legislative powers? Just call Mr. President.
Once a Student masters the Constitution of September 17, 1787, reading the law is child’s play, but why bother, if all law is written for the government or the land owned by the United States of America. Want limited government? Don’t bother voting Libertarian, forget about voting all together. Enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government and learn the law that limits the federal government to what it owns and the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
A constitution is made of words, which many be very common such as “a,” “the,” “this,” and “all.” The combination of simple words with the more complex words of any constitution will present us with complete English sentences, which can be subjected to grammatical analysis to discern their meaning.
How would a scientist examine the phenomenon of the Constitution of the United States and constitutional law? Any scientist would use the scientific method to answer any question about the Constitution or this Constitution.
Let’s take some known facts about this Constitution, which can be called observations and see if we can reach a scientific conclusion. It is a provable fact that this Constitution expressly provides the exact oath to be taken by only one Officer: the President of the United States. Another fact: George Washington was the first person elected to the Office of President of the United States of America, which is vested with the executive power in Article II Section 1 Clause 1. On April 30, 1789 George Washington set the precedent for all future Presidents of the United States of America of taking orally the oath of Office of at President of the United States: “I, George Washington, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” “So help me God.”
How can we prove the hypothesis that the Office of President of the United States of America and the Office of President of the United States are separate offices? Article I Section 7 of this Constitution describes the duties of the Office of President of the United States as legislative and Article I Section 1 vests all legislative Powers in a Congress of the United States.
While we may not have proven here absolutely that these two Offices of President are executive and legislative, the value of the scientific method has been demonstrated. Countless observations remain to be made by my Students, to get in on the fun, you need to enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government and to do that you must contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
No matter what the English common law might be in Great Britain, what it becomes in America, after the British lose the American Revolution, is completely told in the English language.
Common law crimes, for instance, like statutory crimes, consist of elements each of which must be proven in any prosecution. In the common law, the definition of the word that describes the crime identifies the elements that constitute that common law offense. Two kinds of thefts, robbery and embezzlement are easily distinguished by consulting a dictionary. Did the accused use a pen to commit an embezzlement or a robbery? How difficult will it be for the new law student to remember robbery involves force or fear?
The English common law in America becomes even more common after Americans get rid of King George III. While he was king, George III controlled by his appointment of a Chancellor to do equity. No king no equity.
American English common law didn’t have a chance to take hold before George Washington took over law and government on the strength of his verbal promise to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Law is complex and government remains broken, because most of us are not aware of the fraud committed by the so-called Founding Fathers. We don’t have to dig deep to find the deception it is right where true masters of deceit would leave it, where they could use it if the need arose.
The English common law is as common as the language we all use to communicate. What is not common is a necessity for the truth. If George Washington never told a lie, he seldom told the truth. He beat the British with deception and he ruled America the same way.
You won’t learn the law at any other place and you certainly won’t learn all you need to know about Washington and the government in any other way. To enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government, contact me at email@example.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera